Labour MPs in Leave seats warn Jeremy Corbyn against backing second referendum

Support us and go ad-free

Labour MPs in pro-Brexit seats have warned Jeremy Corbyn that backing a second referendum would be “toxic” to the bedrock of the party’s supporters.

Twenty-six MPs have signed a letter urging the Labour leader to “put the national interest first” and back a deal before October 31. They also warned that a no-deal outcome would “alienate” many who supported the party at the last general election.

Rother Valley MP Sir Kevin Barron, Burnley’s Julie Cooper, Don Valley’s Caroline Flint, and Rotherham’s Sarah Champion are among the signatories to the letter.

 

They wrote:

A commitment to a second referendum would be toxic to our bedrock Labour voters, driving a wedge between them and our party, jeopardising our role as a party of the whole nation, and giving the populist right an even greater platform in our heartlands…

Labour has a vital role to play fighting for a Brexit for the many, not the few. But this is a battle best fought in stage two, after the UK has left…

Rejecting any Brexit in the hope of securing a perfect deal risks the worst outcome – a no-deal Brexit. This would further alienate many who backed Labour in 2017…

We urge the party to put the national interest first, to back a deal before October 31.

The letter comes after reports that Corbyn may be about to change his party’s Brexit policy. A Labour Party spokesperson said:

As Jeremy said after the EU election results, he’s engaging in a process of consultation on our Brexit position

Support us and go ad-free

We need your help to keep speaking the truth

Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.

Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.

We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.

In return, you get:

* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop

Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.

With your help we can continue:

* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do

We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?

The Canary Support us
  • Show Comments
    1. In the interests of democracy for both leave and remain voters, I think that parliament should come to an agreement on the best deal that would be accepted by the EU and then put that to the people against remain. Saying what you were promised is unattainable, this is the best we can get. Do you still want it or do you want to remain. No deal should not be a choice as it was never considered during the referendum it was always said that getting a deal would be easy and it was only May’s ridiculous posturing over ” No deal is better than a bad deal” which brought it into play and parliament agree it would be disastrous. If necessary lock parliament in say these are the choices and don’t let them out until they’ve come to an agreement. A customs union and alignment over goods would seem to be a good choice as it would solve the problem of the hard border. All this talk over a time limit on the backstop is just waffle as it is time limited on when the equipment necessary to make it work is available.

    2. Outside the EU the UK will be too vulnerable to implement any of JC’s policies anyway. That is why many Labour voters will not vote Labour unless they promise a second EU referendum. I will not vote Labour until they promise a second EU referendum, and I am not the only one.
      Most Brexiters voted Brexit for reasons that have nothing to do with the EU, and the Labour leadership should “lead” and point that out!
      It would be undemocratic to push through with Brexit when the nation has changed it’s mind. There should be no Brexit without a second referendum.

    3. I’m note giving my vote to a party which promises to ignore one of my earlier votes. The way to get turkeys to vote for Christmas is to promise them they can open their presents after dinner, but if this is true about a second referendum (and it’s not clear that it is), then Labour is telling this turkey I’m the dinner.

      Those who want to overthrow a referendum result can never again call themselves democratic, and if Jeremy doesn’t stop prevaricating over the referendum result he’ll lose too many Leave voters to form the next government. Then we’ll just have to wait for the unrest and riots and fires to get things changed.

      1. “Unrest and Riots”? to push through something that no longer has public support? I would call that fascism. There must be a second referendum. The results of the first was not a clear mandate, the result was too narrow, and no one knew what they were voting for. Of course there will be plenty of riots when the effects of Boris’s No deal Brexit become apparent.

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.