Labour MPs have a duty to avert economic disaster by voting against article 50, argues Christabel Edwards
Much water has flowed under the bridge since the European Union referendum on 23 June last year. Now, after months of waiting, we have a clear indication of what the Tory Brexit will look like, and it is not pretty.
It will be about as hard a Brexit as it can be. Britain outside the single market, and outside the customs union too. We also know, that thanks to the supreme court judgement last Tuesday, parliament will get a vote on whether to enact article 50.
These two factors make the course of action for Labour members of parliament both more urgent, and more complicated. The understandable temptation might be to go with the flow, and support the government’s plans. That is what the Labour leadership believes to be the right course, and were it a soft Brexit, that would be very difficult to argue against. After all, the public voted for Brexit, and not to respect that may be deemed undemocratic. But this is not soft Brexit, and that is what has led a group of members to form Labour Against Brexit.
The rationale behind the group is this: Labour campaigned vigorously to Remain in the EU last year. It was, and remains, party policy, and most of us were passionate in our belief that to leave would result in an unprecedented economic disaster for the United Kingdom. We lost. The question is, does losing a popular referendum automatically invalidate our arguments? Does it mean we were wrong? We believe not.
It was seductive messages about sovereignty and taking back control that won out, while those with the fullest opportunity to explore the implications, including the bulk of parliamentarians across all parties, and the majority of those much-maligned experts, argued otherwise. So now we have a situation where the vast majority of expert opinion was overruled by simplistic, inaccurate and emotionally charged messages put forward during a short campaign.
We can understand the unease at seemingly overturning a popular vote, but when it is in the clear and present interest of the country to do so, surely this is a responsibility any elected politician should be prepared, and allowed, to take?
Would it not be better to try and avert this catastrophe, while taking to heart those concerns most forcibly raised by the referendum? Did people really vote to surrender their affordable holidays in the sun, their jobs, and their buying power? What about the vast numbers of European born tax payers who were not even permitted a vote on their futures?
We do not believe that the government has sufficient mandate to inflict what we know will be a disastrous outcome on the country, the most devastating results of which will fall on those least able to bear them. It is, in our view, imperative on our elected representatives to act in the best interests of the country based on the more complete knowledge and information to which they have access.
For the Labour party too, there are sound political reasons to reject article 50. Right now, Labour are in bad short-term electoral territory. Leave voters have more committed pro-Brexit options in Tory, and United Kingdom Independence party candidates, candidates who campaigned to leave before June. So why would they risk voting Labour? Yet, if Labour do not stand against Brexit, much of our Remain support (something like 70 per cent of Labour voters nationwide) will be tempted away to the Lib Dems, Greens or SNP. Not a happy situation.
And there is the problem. We overwhelmingly backed Remain during the campaign. We did it based on our belief and judgment that to leave would be courting inevitable economic disaster. When that disaster becomes obvious, voters will want to know why we were complicit in it, why we changed our minds and enabled it to happen without a fight. When that day comes Labour MPs need to have an answer.
So let us be unashamed in those beliefs. We opposed breaking away from our European partners at the referendum, and we still oppose it now. We oppose it because we live in a joined up world. A world where we know that by the strength of our common endeavour, we achieve more than we achieve alone. Being explicit in this is the only chance the Labour party has of salvaging something from this calamitous situation.
———————————
Christabel Edwards is a Labour party activist. She tweets @Christabel321
———————————
Labour’s MPs should stick two Remain fingers up at voters in two uber-Leave constituencies ahead of the upcoming by-elections, right?
If I were an MP, then I would vote to repeal the European Communities Act regardless of whether or not there had ever been a referendum, never mind the result of any such crude device. That would be my judgement, and the exercise of judgement is what MPs are for. Moreover, MPs are responsible for and to all of their constituents, and in no constituency did everyone, or even just everyone who voted, vote the same way. MPs who will vote against Article 50 are, in my view, mistaken. But they are perfectly within their rights. As is the Official Opposition, and it is correct, to impose a three-line whip. MPs are always free to break the whip. So long as they are prepared to take the consequences, as Jeremy Corbyn always was.
“Labour MPs have a duty to avert economic disaster” – a duty to whom? And who has determined there will be an economic disaster? That is just our current belief – not a fact.
We had our chance to pursued the voters of our views. We failed. The voting public of the UK has the right to make decisions – right or wrong. That is fundamental and basic democracy. When it all goes wrong, you can say “I told you so” and call for a referendum to re-join. But for now this sort of crass political elitism can only help UKIP. The people who voted out expect this to be delivered. We can argue the detail, but if we don’t deliver (or if Labour openly opposes delivery) then we will lose their votes. Period. Even in the seats where the majority voted to remain I bet any opinion poll would now show a majority saying we have to accept the decision of the referendum.
It says it in the article – You lost. Hard as it is, you have to accept it. I didn’t like the NE referendum result in 2004 or the vote against voting reform. By the way, the significant majority of Labour MPs voted for the 2015 EU Referendum Bill – including folk like Abbott, Corbyn Bryant – it was the people’s choice then. Better to come forward with constructive ideas for the UK outside the EU than fighting yesterday’s battle.
Labours stance is pathetic. Their first duty should be to protect the country and the vulnerable in it . By accepting Brexit and not fighting against it they are harming everyone and helping to create a Fascist world . Those communities that voted Leave because of the rehetoic of nincompoops and racists obviously felt they were left behind. They made a big error in voting that way and wouldn’t the 50 billion be better spent on non thriving communities rather than feed this ridiculous notion that Britain is ‘taking back control’ when we are all now going to be governed my multinationals with a budget far greater than Belgium who dictate to us overiding our laws? And they don’t even give us a representative. We are now reduced to begging from dictators , what sort of Parriotism is that. The bottom line isn’t ‘ the people have spoken’ ( in countries that have referenda the margin has to be greater) the bottom line is if something is dangerous and daft don’t do it! Unless Labour on mass join forces with other anti Brexit groups and promise to listen to the Brexiteers fears but reject Brexit they too will be dangerous and daft .
Labour campaigned to remain in the EU, I voted to remain, I belong to the Labour party, I have been a fervent supporter of Mr. Corbyn, TILL NOW…what the hell am I supposed to do after this? Confused does not even come close! I categorically believe that it will be disastrous for the UK to leave the EU, the people who voted to do so will be the worst affected…we will be under the thumb of the neo liberal elite, the Tories and the corrupt tax avoiding corporations whose tunes the government dance to…ARTICLE 50 should NOT be implemented!
It’s tough for labour right now liberal minded want labour to vote against article 50 that won’t do as I see it no one is iradeemable to vote for then against it’s not straight forward as that they need a balanced not to upset 1 side and another side for me as a resource provider respect the will of the people paramount for this otherwise the northern vote won’t come to us but ukip
Completely agree with the article.
The ~50% who voted Remain knew what they were voting for (it was a simple retention of the status quo), whereas the ~50% who voted Leave didn’t have the faintest idea whether they were voting to leave the single-market, or for some other nuanced Brexi, and moreover were lied to comprehensively.
The idea that there is in any way some sort of overwhelming mandate for any form of Brexit is unsupportable, and the idea that there is any sort of mandate to leave the single-market is quite ludicrous.