This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/20/labour-break-endless-brexit-deadlock
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Labour must do its bit to break this endless Brexit deadlock | Labour must do its bit to break this endless Brexit deadlock |
| (6 months later) | |
| It has always been about control. Sweep aside all the baffling language, the arcane procedure, the boring technicalities of Brexit’s long and painful grind through parliament; it all comes down to the one thing Vote Leave understood with absolute clarity: that control is what matters. Brexit was originally about who has control over borders, money and decision-making, but it’s increasingly about who controls the controllers, and that’s what Wednesday’s vote was really about. | It has always been about control. Sweep aside all the baffling language, the arcane procedure, the boring technicalities of Brexit’s long and painful grind through parliament; it all comes down to the one thing Vote Leave understood with absolute clarity: that control is what matters. Brexit was originally about who has control over borders, money and decision-making, but it’s increasingly about who controls the controllers, and that’s what Wednesday’s vote was really about. |
| Are the people in charge, and politicians just their servants, or are those servants entitled to say something when the people seem hellbent on shooting themselves in the foot? Is the prime minister in charge of her own negotiating strategy, or is she the prisoner of a warring party and a tiny majority? And who controls what happens if she fails and can’t get a Brexit deal, or gets one parliament won’t accept? | Are the people in charge, and politicians just their servants, or are those servants entitled to say something when the people seem hellbent on shooting themselves in the foot? Is the prime minister in charge of her own negotiating strategy, or is she the prisoner of a warring party and a tiny majority? And who controls what happens if she fails and can’t get a Brexit deal, or gets one parliament won’t accept? |
| EU withdrawal bill: how did your MP vote on the 'meaningful vote'? | |
| Asking that question isn’t about subverting the “will of the people”, since in the event of a cataclysmic negotiating failure that will would be unclear; if leavers were presented with a Brexit that doesn’t remotely resemble what they were promised, it’s unlikely they would unite as one in response. Some would still want to leave, regardless, while others might want to go back to the negotiating table, or even retreat. Without a clear mandate, it would be for MPs to do what we elected them to do in the first place, namely use their best judgment in the national interest. Wednesday’s showdown in the Commons was really about who programmes the Maybot, in the event of serious malfunction; whether parliament would take charge, or whether yet again we’d all be at the mercy of the internal politics of the Conservative party. | Asking that question isn’t about subverting the “will of the people”, since in the event of a cataclysmic negotiating failure that will would be unclear; if leavers were presented with a Brexit that doesn’t remotely resemble what they were promised, it’s unlikely they would unite as one in response. Some would still want to leave, regardless, while others might want to go back to the negotiating table, or even retreat. Without a clear mandate, it would be for MPs to do what we elected them to do in the first place, namely use their best judgment in the national interest. Wednesday’s showdown in the Commons was really about who programmes the Maybot, in the event of serious malfunction; whether parliament would take charge, or whether yet again we’d all be at the mercy of the internal politics of the Conservative party. |
| And after a week-long game of chicken, it was the Tory rebels who blinked first. Dominic Grieve withdrew his amendment, that would have given MPs the power to block a “no deal” Brexit, accepting May’s assurances that parliament would have a meaningful vote on it despite widespread scepticism on the Labour benches; although six of his fellow rebels held out, that wasn’t enough. Thus has last week’s hasty fudge, which put the row off for a week, hardened into a fudge that could last for months. | And after a week-long game of chicken, it was the Tory rebels who blinked first. Dominic Grieve withdrew his amendment, that would have given MPs the power to block a “no deal” Brexit, accepting May’s assurances that parliament would have a meaningful vote on it despite widespread scepticism on the Labour benches; although six of his fellow rebels held out, that wasn’t enough. Thus has last week’s hasty fudge, which put the row off for a week, hardened into a fudge that could last for months. |
| As he backed down, Grieve issued a characteristically polite rebuke over the current climate of hysteria over Brexit. The death threats, vilification and bullying simply made both sides dig in, he observed. People are afraid to compromise for fear of everyone crowing that they’ve lost a battle, when it shouldn’t be about losing and winning; it should be about doing the right thing. | As he backed down, Grieve issued a characteristically polite rebuke over the current climate of hysteria over Brexit. The death threats, vilification and bullying simply made both sides dig in, he observed. People are afraid to compromise for fear of everyone crowing that they’ve lost a battle, when it shouldn’t be about losing and winning; it should be about doing the right thing. |
| Brexit 'meaningful vote': May wins after rebels accept compromise | |
| He’s right, of course. And yet it expresses remainers’ problem in a nutshell; they are so endlessly reasonable, up against people who are beyond reasoning with. For hardline Brexiters (including some Lexiters), it really is about losing and winning, so much so that they’d rather crash out of the EU without a deal, regardless of what that unleashes, than back down. Remainers, however, tend by temperament, as well as ideology, to moderation. They’re uncomfortable going right to the wire, inclined to seek consensus, respectful of the feelings of people who disagree. The Tory rebels wanted to believe May last week, when she told them that she was listening, only for No 10 to row back, and they still want to believe her. | He’s right, of course. And yet it expresses remainers’ problem in a nutshell; they are so endlessly reasonable, up against people who are beyond reasoning with. For hardline Brexiters (including some Lexiters), it really is about losing and winning, so much so that they’d rather crash out of the EU without a deal, regardless of what that unleashes, than back down. Remainers, however, tend by temperament, as well as ideology, to moderation. They’re uncomfortable going right to the wire, inclined to seek consensus, respectful of the feelings of people who disagree. The Tory rebels wanted to believe May last week, when she told them that she was listening, only for No 10 to row back, and they still want to believe her. |
| So what now? The failure of the Grieve amendment doesn’t in practice put “no deal” back on the table, because the cabinet has peered over that particular abyss and shuddered. But it does turn a spotlight back on Labour. There is almost certainly a parliamentary majority for a soft Brexit, and a mandate in the country for a Brexit that doesn’t hurt. But it’s clear that will not be achieved by leaving it to a few agonised Tory rebels, and still less by Corbyn loyalists furiously slagging off anyone on the Labour side trying to bring about a soft Brexit, whether it’s centrist MPs or the People’s Vote movement (currently under suspiciously concerted attack from Corbyn outriders). | So what now? The failure of the Grieve amendment doesn’t in practice put “no deal” back on the table, because the cabinet has peered over that particular abyss and shuddered. But it does turn a spotlight back on Labour. There is almost certainly a parliamentary majority for a soft Brexit, and a mandate in the country for a Brexit that doesn’t hurt. But it’s clear that will not be achieved by leaving it to a few agonised Tory rebels, and still less by Corbyn loyalists furiously slagging off anyone on the Labour side trying to bring about a soft Brexit, whether it’s centrist MPs or the People’s Vote movement (currently under suspiciously concerted attack from Corbyn outriders). |
| Rather than carping at what they’re getting wrong – and there is plenty they’re getting wrong – Corbynites should bring their own undoubted campaigning skills to the table, recognising that this is the one cause that should trump all other grievances and ideological differences because of the risk a bad Brexit poses to Labour’s own programme for government. It’s time for the broader Labour movement to do what it did in many places on the ground during the last election, but could not do during the referendum, and unite against a common enemy. You could even call it taking back control. | Rather than carping at what they’re getting wrong – and there is plenty they’re getting wrong – Corbynites should bring their own undoubted campaigning skills to the table, recognising that this is the one cause that should trump all other grievances and ideological differences because of the risk a bad Brexit poses to Labour’s own programme for government. It’s time for the broader Labour movement to do what it did in many places on the ground during the last election, but could not do during the referendum, and unite against a common enemy. You could even call it taking back control. |
| • Gaby Hinsliff is a Guardian columnist | • Gaby Hinsliff is a Guardian columnist |
| Brexit | Brexit |
| Opinion | Opinion |
| Dominic Grieve | Dominic Grieve |
| Conservatives | Conservatives |
| Theresa May | Theresa May |
| Labour | Labour |
| Jeremy Corbyn | Jeremy Corbyn |
| comment | comment |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |