Not really, mate. Conference is just an internal Labour Party debate with the possibility of some internal rule changes, it doesn’t make policy. A big internal fight over Brexit is the last thing Labour needs right now. What good would the debate serve? - clarity for the voting public? Division hardly provides that. Best just stay on message, and straddle both camps, which is actually the best course anyway. I was chuffed to bits when conference decided to avoid that utter bore-fest. And it’s not as if it doesn’t get debated. It gets debated in public every day.
Agreed. All you can do is to make plans for a post Brexit, but since we don’t even know what that means yet, it’s useless to speculate during conference.
I think it’s embarrassing and cowardly the opposition failed to formulate proper and consistent party policy on the biggest challenge facing the UK WW2 other than repeatedly calling for a “jobs first brexit” which is essentially empty phase that means nothing in reality.
We all know what the Labour leadership wants. A soft Brexit, basically Brexit in name alone (which is what I want too or Brexit canceled) They just haven’t got the balls to confirm it party wide for fear of alienating large sections of their support base.
It’s playing politics pure and simple. That sort of behaviour should be frowned upon by Labour’s supporters and voters. They owe a duty to the voting public to properly enunciate their view on such a major issue not to withhold their policy in order to self preserve.
I don’t know why the Lib Dems aren’t gaining more traction tbh
Yeah I’ve got no idea why people don’t view them as a credible alternative
Genuine question: Why hasn’t the Lib Dems got your support.
You must have been in your early 20’s during the coalition. Did that government sour any potential support of the Lib Dems for you?
I’m left wing, not a centrist. I don’t say that as if centrist is a poisonous term, I’m just not one, so I’ve never much liked them really.
Fair enough, did you remain distant form the Labour party during the years of Brown & Miliband?
Lib Dems were (relatively successful) as a party that never governed. They came close to being the second largest party at times in1983/4 where their vote share was close to Labour’s. Since 2010 however they’ve been tarnished with being in office (albeit in a small role) which ruined their reputation as being a party that offers an alternative to the two leasing parties
Regarding Labour and Brexit, it’s so obvious that the leadership is split on what they want. They want to stay in the single market, but they can’t say so because it means the continuation of free movement. They have an awkward balance of remain and leavers that surely can’t last, although they might not have to worry about this if come 2019 the process has been a disaster.
Yeah pretty much, Blair before too, although I was literally a child then lol
The last thing this country needs is the completely useless, clueless Tories running amok and fucking up Brexit beyond imaginable terms (which is what they’re doing). The labour parties strategy is to let them do precisely that so they can rule the ashes of the UK afterwards. As someone who has no political allegiance its immensely frustrating. Possibly the worst example of opposition I can remember.
In my eyes Labour choosing to have no real plan for themselves, to be completely hypocritical and straddle as many possible voters as possible without actually offering a solution to solving any of the problems brexit presents us just so they can mop up the voters when everything has gone to shit is in my eyes no different to Boris Johnson doing whatever he can just to get into power.
Where are Labours position and solution papers on Ireland, Customs, Trade, EU nationals, security, aviation, exit bill etcetc etc ? Or papers addressing the governments recent proposals and the gaping holes in them?
They’re either just as clueless and incompetent at the Tories on how to get us out this mess (likely) or they are happy to let everything fail and just pick up the mess at the next GE (also likely).
Either way no fanfare from me.
Unless May calls an election before 2019 then there is nothing Labour can do to influence Brexit. The Tories will just plough on without having a clue what it wants, broken into two camps, either scared secret remainers, or Brexiteers so driven by the ideology of Brexit, that even a UK turned into a tax haven and destroyed economically will be worth it.
The only course Labour can sensibly take is to remain a viable opposition, whilst pushing for a period of status quo transition, which is what it’s doing the last time I looked. Basically then, they are hoping to enter government with the deal still to be essentially made. That’s quite smart really, considering that the only pro’s to Brexit - being able to rewrite our own laws etc. so that they are more humane, or get through legislation for renationalisation of energy etc need a government that will not wreck the economy, i.e. take the investment approach over the austerity and tax haven approach.
The only chance this country has is for a Labour government IMO, and that means being smart. Hence, you don’t give the anti-Corbyn wing another platform to draw their knives, which is what happens if you debate Brexit at conference, and conference ends up deciding something either a) that the leadership doesn’t want, or b) something the voting public will despise, which given the nature of the issue would be any decision at all.
Conference just isn’t the place for the debate. Even Momentum falls out over Brexit. Why bother?
I for one would like to thank The Telegraph for publishing this handy guide to the least bad Tories.
If any of the labour activists mind waking up at some point and give their fucking party a rollicking the country would really appreciate it.
Why have labour turned into a hard brexit party hell bent on taking us to the dark ages.
Unless I’m thick could someone please explain how this would have kept us in the customs union and / or single market?
I may have facts wrong as I haven’t looked the details up but:
- Without a deal and trading under WTO rules, we couldn’t give the EU anything different to what we give everyone else so I’m assuming this amendment wouldn’t even be enforceable
- Even if we can say that we don’t want to apply customs to the EU, that’s not staying in a customs union. As far as I can tell they’ve no obligations whatsoever to treat us differently without a separate trade agreement.
I was under the impression that Murray’s amendment would have potentially caused great economic harm to Britain by making it impossible for the UK to apply import tariffs or quotas on products from anywhere in the world, while all other countries could continue to apply import tariffs on the UK. That sounds like a very bad idea to me and something that could cause the effects of Brexit to be felt even more harshly.
We already have a trade deficit, how much worse would that get if other countries were allowed to flood our market with their imports without any tariffs applied, whilst our exports are subject to tariffs as per normal WTO rates?
Pretty much echoing what you have said
Honestly, you should just take it all back. Reverse brexit