EU referendum aftermath

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Pleased that Cameron mentioned the upcoming Somme centenary at PMQ.

"He says the subject came up at the EU leaders' dinner last night and it's notable that the focus on keeping "peace and unity" on the European continent is at the forefront of everyone's minds at this time."

[Michael Farthing]

The right of the party has had its day. They proved unelectable ...

well hang on, you may dislike them but I seem to remember them winning three consecutive general elections rather comfortably?

But herein is the heart of the matter.

Do you want a party that:

(a) heartily believes in for what you believe in and campaigns for this consistently and clearly even at the expense of votes

or

(b) considers the important thing is to be in power so that, even though the things it believes in cannot be achieved, the worser* opposition will not be able to do nasty things.

This is essentially what the issue is about with the Corbyn obviously being for (a). What is depressing is that the media and most of the political establishment simply cannot understand this viewpoint and therefore come out with the line that Corbyn is risking the existence of the Labour Party. A similar division (though less deep) affected the Liberal Party** in the 1970s and I regret that at that time I was in their equivalent of (b). The settling of the Lib Dems into camp (b) led, of course, to the total humiliation they suffered as a result of their disastrous Tory coalition.

*The use of this word is by design. Please do not correct.
**The name of this party is also by design and in this case totally accurate. It was the Liberal Party then.

[Leonard Barden]

Chessplayer Angela Eagle's odds drifting, with about half the quotes now showing Tom Watson as favourite to be next Labour leader after Jeremy Corbyn.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... our-leader

[Jonathan Rogers]

The right of the party has had its day. They proved unelectable ...

well hang on, you may dislike them but I seem to remember them winning three consecutive general elections rather comfortably?

But herein is the heart of the matter.

Do you want a party that:

(a) heartily believes in for what you believe in and campaigns for this consistently and clearly even at the expense of votes

or

(b) considers the important thing is to be in power so that, even though the things it believes in cannot be achieved, the worser* opposition will not be able to do nasty things.

This is essentially what the issue is about with the Corbyn obviously being for (a). What is depressing is that the media and most of the political establishment simply cannot understand this viewpoint and therefore come out with the line that Corbyn is risking the existence of the Labour Party. A similar division (though less deep) affected the Liberal Party** in the 1970s and I regret that at that time I was in their equivalent of (b). The settling of the Lib Dems into camp (b) led, of course, to the total humiliation they suffered as a result of their disastrous Tory coalition.

*The use of this word is by design. Please do not correct.
**The name of this party is also by design and in this case totally accurate. It was the Liberal Party then.

Happy to engage with this, though it is a different matter. Nick said that the right part of the Labour Party "proved unelectable" and I simply pointed out that this is about as wrong as it is possible to be.

Your question is whether we want parties to be electable at the cost of important principles. Well ... there is no short answer to that. But I do wonder whether the Lib Dems ever fell into your camp (b). They had no shortage of principled and progressive ideas (decriminalising possession of drugs, human rights, commitment to Europe etc) which were clearly aimed at their core supporters but which could be expected to cost them votes among the broader electorate.

[NickFaulks]

Even if Tom Watson is chosen as the only candidate with the heft to win against Corbyn, expect a handover, most likely to Angela Eagle, before long.

[NickFaulks]

It does annoy me that Labour continues to allow Cameron to get away with his "yah, boo, sucks" approach, all he knows, at PMQ time. He has made a complete horlicks of everything and should be squirming.

[Matthew Turner]

Even if Tom Watson is chosen as the only candidate with the heft to win against Corbyn, expect a handover, most likely to Angela Eagle, before long.

There is no chance whatsoever of this happening; If Watson becomes the labour leader he will be just as hard to prise out of the position as Jeremy Corbyn.
Watson, Eagle, Benn, presumably Cooper and Burnham and possibly McDonnell all want to be leader, so difficult to see how they can agree on an anti Corbyn candidate. Normally there would be a stalking horse such as Margaret Hodge, but there isn't a stalking horse who commands union support, so they would almost certainly lose. Bizarrely, Corbyn might have as much support in the PLP as any other candidate. It is a mess.

[NickFaulks]

There is no chance whatsoever of this happening; If Watson becomes the labour leader he will be just as hard to prise out of the position as Jeremy Corbyn.

I'll stay with my view that he really doesn't want the job, but of course I don't know and in any case the idea might grow on him if he got it.

[pauldhatchett]

This has nothing to do with the European Referendum and is a fight to decide who runs the Labour Party - MPs or members. As I am in the latter group I have my views but:

1. Corbyn did not run the Labour EU referendum, Alan Johnson did. Why is he not being sacked instead? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/ ... referendum

2. I have been told this was coordinated by Watson from Glastonbury by phone and was planned for some time - the MPs just needed an excuse.

3. In my view, Corbyn will win a leadership election with probably this consequence

http://www.brunchnews.com/huffington-po ... te-4780082

Hence, the MPs are desperate for him to resign rather than challenge even to the point of trying to get lawyers to say he cannot stand in any contest. Some democracy!

4. If they force Corbyn out, there will be a mass resignation from the party and more Unions will cease funding: end of party.

Deselect the lot and go back to a party that "heartily believes in for what you believe in and campaigns for this consistently and clearly even at the expense of votes"" as stated above. Actually, if you had a party that stuck to its principles it would get even more votes.

[Angus French]

On your point 1, Paul: Wasn't the Remain campaign run jointly by Johnson and Hilary Benn? Also I think it's worth pointing out that Lord Ashcroft's polling had Labour voters voting 63% for Remain and that was with 10 Labour MP supporting Leave (and in some cases actively campaigning for Leave). By comparison the SNP figures were 64% and 0. So perhaps not a bad result for Labour.

I can't picture your point 2 as it would seem impractical.

Has there been a miscalculation of the support for Corbyn from the members (including the CLPs) and the unions? If not, what is going on? Was the idea to try to break Corbyn with a backup plan of splitting off to form a new party?

[pauldhatchett]

On your point 1, Paul: Wasn't the Remain campaign run jointly by Johnson and Hilary Benn? Also I think it's worth pointing out that Lord Ashcroft's polling had Labour voters voting 63% for Remain and that was with 10 Labour MP supporting Leave (and in some cases actively campaigning for Leave). By comparison the SNP figures were 64% and 0. So perhaps not a bad result for Labour.

I can't picture your point 2 as it would seem impractical.

Has there been a miscalculation of the support for Corbyn from the members (including the CLPs) and the unions? If not, what is going on? Was the idea to try to break Corbyn with a backup plan of splitting off to form a new party?

Yes, valid correction. The point is the same. I do not see Benn taking any of the discredit for the EU result.

If the MPs break off they won't be representing the Labour Party and the majority are very likely to lose their seats. It is likely they will split the vote.

Not to worry though. The country will soon have Boris, as it perhaps deserves. Perhaps, the media will then dig up the classic:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iv- ... 47356.html

[MartinCarpenter]

You can't reselect nearly the entire parliamentary party. That's insanity too, as perhaps, is too much of this for comfort

I really don't think the Tories will go for Boris. Definitely doubt they'll do it automatically. They're traditionally thoroughly ruthless in such matters and backstabbing a sitting PM like this doesn't get forgiven easily.

[Nick Burrows]

The only people who don't agree are 170 MPs and a heavily biased media.

What do you think of the bid by the SNP to become the official opposition? Not yet, IMO, but if the Labour rebels all withdrew from the Labour whip or (even more nuclear) crossed to sit on the government benches (which doesn't bear thinking about, really, they would never be forgiven for that), then in actual fact Corbyn would have to be replaced by the SNP. To then be replaced by whoever the 176 elect to lead them... (if they were accepted as the official opposition). Farcical, really.

Nothing could be done if they chose to do that. It would last until the next election when I believe they would be wiped out and all lose their prized jobs. I doubt this will be there choice.

[Nick Burrows]

The right of the party has had its day. They proved unelectable ...

well hang on, you may dislike them but I seem to remember them winning three consecutive general elections rather comfortably?

...and then lost 3 million members. Times have changed.

[Nick Burrows]

The latest is Corbyn has been confirmed to be on the Ballot.

Newsnight contacted all the Constituency Part Chairs and 45/50 support Corbyn.

All trade unions support Corbyn.

13,000 new members joined this week. 60% gave the reason: Jeremy Corbyn.

Meanwhile Watson & Eagle rule themselves out. No other candidate forthcoming. With the Chilcot report out next week, they don't have a candidate who voted against the Iraq war!!

I suspect they believed all this nonsense would force him out, and they don't have a plan B.