Current Affairs The Labour Party

[davek]

True but at least they have actually addressed and spoken about the issue instead of pretending nothing happened. If they lose votes because of it then so be it.

Well the issue would have cropped up at a GE because the Tories know he was an arch Remainer and would remind everyone of that.

I suppose what Starmer is attempting to do is to neutralise the issue by getting it out front well before the next GE and maybe head off criticism that he's a flip flopper who completely u-turned on Brexit.

However, it's a big gamble that the public in those red wall seats will be switched on to the difference between tweaking Brexit to get gains for the UK and edging the UK back toward Brussels. IMO the Tory media will have a field day over that and tangle the 'Labour' Party up in knots with it.

 

[woomy]

Surprised he’s even mentioned it to be honest. Must have calculated the time was right. Can’t imagine it doing much harm as he was probably the most prominent pro Europe face of the opposition at the time.

Probably thinking, most of the country knows it was a mistake. So he is playing to that.
I mean I know we voted for it as a country (not me), but pretty sure most realise we didn't vote for this.
It's not a bad hand to play, But he better actually be holding a decent pair in the hole. Cause Europe could easily say, nah mate, you're all right. Then he would be screwed. So he must have had some productive conversations already.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Well the issue would have cropped up at a GE because the Tories know he was an arch Remainer and would remind everyone of that.

I suppose what Starmer is attempting to do is to neutralise the issue by getting it out front well before the next GE and maybe head off criticism that he's a flip flopper who completely u-turned on Brexit.

However, it's a big gamble that the public in those red wall seats will be switched on to the difference between tweaking Brexit to get gains for the UK and edging the UK back toward Brussels. IMO the Tory media will have a field day over that and tangle the 'Labour' Party up in knots with it.

The red wall is largely lost for a generation to labour I reckon. The NE is a right wing breeding ground these days unfortunately. Don’t be surprised to see labour lose Newcastle and Sunderland seats in the future.

 

[davek]

The red wall is largely lost for a generation to labour I reckon. The NE is a right wing breeding ground these days unfortunately. Don’t be surprised to see labour lose Newcastle and Sunderland seats in the future.

Those people have been let down by right wing labour during the Blair-Brown years.

I think they'll largely swing back to so called 'Labour's' way at the next GE but they could be mobilised by a neo-Leave Party easily enough to allow the Tories to cling on to many of them. I wouldn't rule anything out between now and early 2025.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Those people have been let down by right wing labour during the Blair-Brown years.

I agree to some extent but public services, council funding and welfare was significantly better for communities in these areas during those years. After years of Tory cuts, they chose to vote them in after a common enemy had been identified.

 

[davek]

I agree to some extent but public services, council funding and welfare was significantly better for communities in these areas during those years. After years of Tory cuts, they chose to vote them in after a common enemy had been identified.

I cant forgive them voting Tory. That was beyond contempt and a treachery to their families of generations past.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

On a serious note though, the current Brexit agreement is up for review in 2025, and while I don't think it will be changed wholesale, and certainly not in the sense of rejoining, it will almost inevitably be modified whether due to a change of approach from the government or simply by applying the inevitable feedback that will have been gathered as to how it's working between now and then. If anything, he's saying he'll do what any government would do.

 

[davek]

On a serious note though, the current Brexit agreement is up for review in 2025, and while I don't think it will be changed wholesale, and certainly not in the sense of rejoining, it will almost inevitably be modified whether due to a change of approach from the government or simply by applying the inevitable feedback that will have been gathered as to how it's working between now and then. If anything, he's saying he'll do what any government would do.

Here's what Labour's plans to turn back Brexit have prompted from the think tank 'UK in a Changing Europe'...

Assuming Labour’s position holds, it will need to persuade the EU to undertake an expansive TCA [trade and cooperation agreement] review. Its current proposals focus on UK priorities (trade easements), and it would have to refine its offer to address key EU interests, which are likely to lie in improving mobility arrangements for young people and enhanced cooperation on security and defence.

The kinds of agreements Labour is seeking often entail long, technical negotiations which can take years to conclude. They would demand significant administrative resources at a time when the party would have many other priorities. There could also be political costs to signing up to agreements which require continuous, ongoing alignment with EU regulations over which the UK will have no say. The EU would also have to trust that future UK governments, which could be far more Eeurosceptic, will uphold such agreements.

While these kinds of agreements would have clear benefits for certain sectors, they would not address the bulk of the overall economic cost of Brexit for the UK, as it would remain outside the single market and customs union. Labour would have to think carefully about whether the benefits of a maximalist TCA review justify the administrative and political capital it would have to expend.

 

[sbbefc]

Well the issue would have cropped up at a GE because the Tories know he was an arch Remainer and would remind everyone of that.

I suppose what Starmer is attempting to do is to neutralise the issue by getting it out front well before the next GE and maybe head off criticism that he's a flip flopper who completely u-turned on Brexit.

However, it's a big gamble that the public in those red wall seats will be switched on to the difference between tweaking Brexit to get gains for the UK and edging the UK back toward Brussels. IMO the Tory media will have a field day over that and tangle the 'Labour' Party up in knots with it.

I think the question is, do red wall voters still actually care for brexit anyway? Or at least the hard brexit we got? Living standards have clearly dropped since 2016.

 

[davek]

I think the question is, do red wall voters still actually care for brexit anyway? Or at least the hard brexit we got? Living standards have clearly dropped since 2016.

Fair question too.

But dont be surprised if people who set their hearts on a thing happening see it happen and then double down on it regardless of it's effects in order to back their own idiot decision.

If the Tories can weaponise this it's potent.

 

[davek]

These type of photo ops the 'Labour' Party leadership thinks make good optics will be used against them by the official Tory Party at the GE when they try and make it another Brexit election:

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Here's what Labour's plans to turn back Brexit have prompted from the think tank 'UK in a Changing Europe'...

Assuming Labour’s position holds, it will need to persuade the EU to undertake an expansive TCA [trade and cooperation agreement] review. Its current proposals focus on UK priorities (trade easements), and it would have to refine its offer to address key EU interests, which are likely to lie in improving mobility arrangements for young people and enhanced cooperation on security and defence.

The kinds of agreements Labour is seeking often entail long, technical negotiations which can take years to conclude. They would demand significant administrative resources at a time when the party would have many other priorities. There could also be political costs to signing up to agreements which require continuous, ongoing alignment with EU regulations over which the UK will have no say. The EU would also have to trust that future UK governments, which could be far more Eeurosceptic, will uphold such agreements.

While these kinds of agreements would have clear benefits for certain sectors, they would not address the bulk of the overall economic cost of Brexit for the UK, as it would remain outside the single market and customs union. Labour would have to think carefully about whether the benefits of a maximalist TCA review justify the administrative and political capital it would have to expend.

What has Anand said there that disproves what I said? It's not rowing back on Brexit but trying to make the current agreement better. Check out the EU thread and you'll see a host of problems.

Your hatred is tying yourself in knots Dave.

 

[davek]

What has Anand said there that disproves what I said? It's not rowing back on Brexit but trying to make the current agreement better. Check out the EU thread and you'll see a host of problems.

Your hatred is tying yourself in knots Dave.

It was entirely relevant.

That think tank correctly states that for 'Labour' returning to this issue in any meaningful way is both unworkable AND toxic to its own objectives.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

It was entirely relevant.

That think tank correctly states that for 'Labour' returning to this issue in any meaningful way is both unworkable AND toxic to its own objectives.

I'm not sure you really know who they are, do you?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Indeed, you may recall my mentioning the levelling up report the Fabian society put together alongside Labour a month or so ago? At the launch event for it, Anand was literally on the panel discussing it next to Lisa Nandy. He's not the enemy of Labour you seem to think he is.