Labour is sitting out today's Covid 19 lockdown vote.
It would be wise of the SNP to do the same. This is an English vote.
Plaid Cymru could use the same logic, as could Northern Ireland parties.
The logic is easy to identify: as the Tories propose action that may well lead to a third wave of coronavirus that goes against scientific advice and the actions of other countries, let them take responsibility for their decisions.
Perhaps more importantly, let their divisions be seen. The electorate needs to know they are not united.
But is there an important precedent in this? Should Labour also be indicating to Johnson that he cannot rely on Labour to get him out of a mess of his own creation when it comes to Brexit?
The possibility of a Brexit deal remains. I have no idea whether it is likely. The UK negotiators are so crazy that anything is possible. But suppose they choose not to sell fisherman out, after all, and do a deal that lets them sell the fish they catch (which will be the excuse offered that, conveniently, happens to be factually accurate), then what does Labour do?
Whatever deal there might be will be bad for the country. Surely Labour cannot support that?
But a deal will be better than no deal. Surely Labour cannot suggest it prefers the no deal option and vote a deal down?
This is a big question for all the opposition parties and it seems that the answer that they should give today is the one that they will also have to deliver on a Brexit deal. They have to make the Tories own the mess, having made very clear why they will not vote for it, whilst not voting it down. Abstention may be the only option to make clear that the mess to come is not of their making.
I am not sure there is another option.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Labour voted for Article 50 notice with no preconditions on a three line whip. Whatever follows is very much of their making.
They can’t just walk away now. Blood all over their hands.
The world has changed
Come on…no one expected no deal
Abstention seems a rather weak position to me, if in reality one has a view for or against a proposition. An abdication of responsibility. Labour, SNP, Plaid really don’t care if there is a Brexit deal or not? Well.
Anecdotally I am hearing about a large number of schools with several year groups working from home due to coronavirus infections among pupils and teachers. Some closed entirely. The number of infections seemed to pick up in September, just as schools were reopening, not in August when people were eating out to help out, and this seems to me to be entirely the wrong time to loosen the coronavirus restrictions. We may be just past the peak but there is a long way to go before it returns to a low level.
The main reason to relax restrictions now is the annual retail extravaganza popularly known as “Christmas”. Even now it will be too late for some of the high street, and I expect many people will sensibly opt to stay at home anyway.
Lots of schools have many year groups closed
But re the politics – it is not ideal
But what is better?
I am not a politician, but the opposition need to get off the fence. Either they support something in principle or they don’t; and if they do they need say so and then work on the detail. Throwing their hands up and saying “I don’t know what to do” is not a position anyone can get behind.
If I were king of the world, I’d keep the lock down for at least another week, possibly two, to push the numbers down further. And any post-Brexit trade deal will be better than no deal.
As was pointed out on the radio this morning, in terms of jobs and turnover, just Debenhams and Arcadia together make up a similar chunk of the UK economy to the whole of the fishing industry. In 2009, about 12,000 UK fishers landed sea fish worth approaching £1 billion, with about the same number of jobs again in fish processing. Fish exports were about £2 billion, mostly salmon, mackerel and herring. It seems Debenhams and Arcadia each employ about 12,000 people, and had turnovers of over £2 billion and over £1.5 billion respectively.
I am nit saying Labour days nothing
I am saying it does not support Brexit
And should not oppose a deal either as it will want one
Typo before – the figures are from 2019 (not 2009).
Much to my regret, the Brexit ship has sailed. We had a general election on the issue last December, we formally left in January 2020, the time provided for extending the transitional period has passed, and there is not really any time left now to arrange an emergency extension for another year. Opposing Brexit now would be like opposing German reunification, or opposing Biden’s election as US president. It has happened, the eggs have been scrambled and the omelette made, and we need to move on. Most importantly, we need a deal, any deal, with the EU, to mitigate the inevitable damage. It would be extraordinary if the opposition’s failure to support a deal meant it was voted down. And then we will have some time to work on a better deal, perhaps eventually even rejoining the EU, but that is easily a decade away, not least rebuilding the bridges and trust we have burnt.
Starmer should be working back from the next general election, trying to build a broad enough coalition with wide enough support to win – or at least stop the Conservatives winning – in 2024 or before. It could be as soon as next year if the government opts to repeat the trick used for the Early Parliamentary General Election Act 2019, although they will probably want to hold until 2023 or 2024. There is still time to let the Conservatives make more mistakes into early 2021 (if we thought 2020 was bad, we ain’t seen nothing yet – third Coronavirus peak, Brexit chaos, I could go on) but at some point Starmer needs to start setting out his own stall, and he will struggle to do that through abstaining.
Apropos: just published today: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/draft-fixed-term-parliaments-act-repeal-bill
I cannot recall any other act that has purported to revive a prerogative power as if an intervening act of parliament had never happened, let alone to make the new/revived power non-justiciable. (Because what any functional democracy needs is more powers vested in one individual holding executive office or another as unelected head of state, and not subject to any democratic accountability or judicial review!)
Some prescient analysis here – https://ontheconstitution.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/dissolution-and-the-revival-of-the-prerogative/
Grim
And your 1,000th comment
Thanks
Gosh! Sorry to bore people about this – the Fixed-term Parliaments Act is far from perfect, and we have already seen two ways it can be circumvented – but this repeal is a very clear example of the executive arrogating power to itself – in this case from our elected representatives Parliament – and trying to insulate itself from the scrutiny of the courts.
More analysis here: https://publiclawforeveryone.com/2020/12/02/repealing-the-fixed-term-parliaments-act/
It is not an Enabling Act, but just another example of our elected dictatorship in action. Once they have this constitutional notch carved, you can be sure that further steps to increase executive power and decrease scrutiny will be next. Could the Human Rights Act be repealed?
Re your last, I am sure they have it in their sights
I believe abstention is the correct option to take on a deal. It’s not obvious what Starmer has decided yet, but he should consider the future, not the past. To vote with the government will prove disastrous, especially once the effects of Brexit become clear. Labour will be unable to avoid being blamed. Furthermore, it would be seen by those in the fabled red wall seats, who know full well Starmer is a Remainer, as an unprincipled pivot to win back their vote. Labour should shift the narrative to explaining why a closer relationship with the EU is better, and should certainly not reinforce the Tory notion of the UK somehow recovering its empire. Abstention is safe. It cannot lead to an accidental no-deal (a Tory revolt will not be large enough) and it puts the Tories in the position they would least like to be, one of having total responsibility for their actions. Abstention can be spun against Labour of course, but so would any position they take. In the longer term it will give them the platform they need to more robustly oppose this hideous government.
Making the Tories wholly responsible for this seems key to me
I agree.
It might be tempting for Labour to vote for the deal – any deal – and then say they have done so to end the uncertainty and it is the Tories that own what happens next. But we all know that UK politics does not work like that as much will be made by the right wing media that Labour voted for the deal, that they are in no position to complain when things go wrong. Far better for all those opposed, Lab, Lib Dems, SNP, etc to simply abstain and say this is a Tory Brexit decision, they should take full ownership on what happens next.
Re UK fishing, if there is no deal who exactly do UK fishing sell to? I believe the majority of their catch is sold to the EU as it is fish that Brits tend not to eat? Try getting it past the French fishing union and others who will most likely blockade the ports? Is it not also the case that without a deal fish caught by the UK will not have the required documentation to be sold in the EU? Then of course there is those large “Australian” sorry, WTO tariffs to consider. I think fishing is the biggest red herring, pun intended, out there. I believe that about half of the UK fishing fleet is foreign owned and there is a large number of EU nationals that work in it – a little bit like UK farming, they might just go home I suppose.
The Tories are playing fishing as a sovereignty card, but there are so many reasons why no deal would be bad for UK fishing. The only people who can’t see those reasons are the Brexiteers and amazingly many Brits who work in the fishing industry. No deal for them could be the biggest economic suicide note in history, unless Brits change their fish eating habits.
I think the fishing ports are beginning to regret ever listening to Farage
Official stats on the fishing industry in 2019 here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fishing-industry-in-2019-statistics-published
For trade see pages 49 to 54. We import lots of salmon, tuna, and shrimp and prawns, mainly from outside the EU. We export a lot of salmon, mackerel and herring, mainly to the EU.
The fishing industry can sit at the bar with the agriculture industry and drown their sorrows together, or go into the land and property industry. There will be plenty of farmland and retail assets for sale with a no-deal/disaster departure.
Personally; I always considered that was “the plan”.
Abstention sends a message. It says, “we understand that COVID19 measures are needed but to get our support you need to engage with us – and you have not!”. For this strategy to work at a political level we need to see a full opposition benches that do not move during the division. It says “we are here, we care…. but you need to listen to us to get our support”.
This would not be correct for Brexit. Of course, there has been no engagement here either but the opposition HAS put forward all sorts of plans over the last 4 years which have been dismissed. The opposition should oppose whatever “skinny deal” is proposed.
If a deal is bad enough that may be true
Right now I am presuming the EU would not let it be that bad…
From what little I understand HMG do not need to put whatever deal they do to Parliament. I guess they will do to try to score political capital from the opposition.
I have to agree that abstention is the least worst option for Labour.
But if the deal is as bad as we think it will be, then it would perhaps make sense to vote against and make Johnson go back to the negotiating table.
It’s a great idea – but there is no mechanism for going back ad=fter 31/12
All things are possible and if Johnson goes after 31/12 there is a remote possibility of something.
But then I am assuming there is at least one Tory MP with some brains and backbone……
Labour should be clear that Brexit is bad for the country and bad for its own voters even if some of them don’t believe that. History will prove that in the end. The Tories promised an oven ready deal and that they would deliver something that would deliver mighty prosperity to Britain. Labour should abstain on the grounds that it is for the Tory Party to deliver on its promises. Labour should not be seen to be actively supporting something that it knows will be a disaster for Britain. It is very important that in this instance the decisions as to what Brexit is delivered and the consequences are carried by solely by those who have manufactured it. Labour needs to be clear it is freeing the Brexiters to deliver whatever relationship with the EU they wish. Only once this has happened can that relationship start to be repaired.
There is a danger in Labour voting for a deal, if there is one. If there is a deal then there will be a section of the Tory party that votes against it as it will not meet their impossible demands. Once the Tories drop Johnson it’s possible that one of the no-dealers wins the leadership. The next election would then be between a Tory party led by someone who opposed the deal and Labour who supported it.
We could end up with a scenario where the no-dealer attributes all the chaos, the empty shelves, medicine shortages, border chaos, job losses, to Labour. If only we hadn’t surrendered to the EU and accepted an inferior deal none of this would have happened. If we had just stood up for ourselves we could have avoided all of this. All of this that we see across the country is the kind of Brexit that Sir Keir supports, we know because he voted for it, vote for me at the election and I will tear it all up and do it properly and show you how great this country can be when we get our independence back, if you let someone in who isn’t prepared to stand up the EU bullying like Sir Keir then this the result. All Tory candidates standing at the election must repudiate the deal, and it will be quietly forgotten that most of the sitting Tory MPs voted for it, with the right wing press helping in this forgetting.
I am being a facetious, but only a little bit, because of the electorate and press that we have. It wouldn’t happen as distinctly as this but this scenario could play out in subtle ways to a certain extent. We live in a country where the electorate gave an 80 seat majority to a leader who was twice sacked for lying, said F*** business, refused to release the Russia report, made numerous racist comments, conspired to have a journalist beat up, unlawfully prorogued parliament, doesn’t know how many children he has, compared the EU to Nazis, went all the way to Kabul just to avoid having to vote in Parliament, hid in a fridge, put a journalist’s phone in his pocket rather than look at a picture of a sick child, wasted money on things like the garden bridge and illegal water cannons as London Mayor, insulted various countries and religions, imperilled a British citizen by hurting her case for release from jail in Iran, refused to back our ambassador Kim Darroch, and won the Tory leadership by differentiating himself from Hunt primarily by promising that we would leave the EU by the end of October and under no circumstances would there be a delay, and then did what Hunt said we should do that cost him in the leadership and delayed anyway. And yet still 14 million voted for him.
And we have section of the media that is prepared to say black is white. The internal market bill reminded me of the part in 1984 where there is a demonstration against Eursasia, with whom we have always been at war, alongside out allies Eastasia. Midway through a sentence the speaker was handed a piece of paper and without breaking his speech he suddenly flipped and now we have always been at war with Eastasia, and Eurasia are out allies. There was some commotion in the crowd as they realised this, and saw that all of the posters and placards denouncing Eurasia had the wrong name on. The spies must have switched them so they were against our allies. The crowd then tore them up as they denounced Eastasia.
It was just like this with the way history was rewritten about the withdrawal agreement with the internal market bill. This withdrawal agreement is a great deal that will give us our independence and get Brexit done, if you oppose this you cannot stand to be a Tory MP, anyone who opposes the withdrawal agreement is siding with the EU against the UK, this withdrawal agreement is a terrible deal that is constraining our sovereignty and dividing our kingdom, if you support it you cannot be a Tory MP, if you support the withdrawal agreement you are siding with the EU against the UK. It was the most surreal episode in British politics I have ever witnessed, the way a section of the press and public just flipped 180 degrees without pause or self awareness is something I still can’t comprehend.
So while my future election scenario is farfetched, it is not as farfetched as ought to be.
I agree
And that’s why Labour can only abstain
I take it as a given that the majority right-wing media will try, no matter what, to blame Labour for the post Brexit chaos.
1. If Labour abstain and whatever paltry deal passes then I think you are correct that the Tories own it and it is impossible to blame Labour.
2. If Labour abstain and sufficient hardline “No Deal” Tories rebel such that the deal does not pass. Then “No Deal” will ensue and the media will blame Labour for enabling it by not voting for the deal.
3. If Labour vote for the deal claiming it is better than the alternative “No Deal”, it will be quietly forgotten by the media why Labour voted for it ( for the good of the country, it being better than the only alternative of “No Deal”) and Labour will be tarred with shared ownership of the Deal.
I would prefer scenario 1 but I can’t discount scenario 2 so, maybe, scenario 3 is the only real choice that Labour has and hope that they can overcome the media narrative and push the message that it was necessary for the good of the country.
On the basis that it is good to differentiate yourself from the government and force the rebels to line up with the government I think Labour should present a motion of no confidence if the Deal is unsatisfactory.
This is not just posturing but putting the responsibility more clearly in the lap of the government party.
I don’t see a limit on how opposition parties can consider voting on any Tory deal offered and its details. Voting against is certainly the clearest possible statement that the opposition view the country as being misled and wrongly advised. Opposition parties would actually be opposing not acting as a rubber stamp and actually be representing the half of the country who deplore the tissue of lies that got us into this position. If it is seen to rebound in electoral terms in the future, at least they all stood up for what they, mostly, individually believe. That principle is worth having in our politics as so much has been thrown under the bus in pursuit of “herd” democracy.