![](https://static.standard.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2019/04/30/11/labour-brexit45676.jpg?crop=8:5,smart&quality=75&auto=webp&width=1024)
The Brexit wars have produced few outright victories and lots of losers but that doesn’t mean there are no winners. As things stand, Labour is having a far better Brexit than the Government. Consider it from Camp Corbyn’s point of view: the Government has tacitly given up on getting its deal through the Commons on a simple vote and is now trying to get “something across the line”, by way of indicative votes on options, which makes it hostage to what the Opposition might support.
For all the talk of more “upbeat” meetings this week, the likely outcome is sure to benefit Corbyn more than Theresa May. As a former Cabinet minister observes tartly, “whoever looks nicer wins”. So May’s team grit their teeth and make spending commitments. So far so doable — it’s not a million miles from May’s crusade to alleviate hardship for “just about managing” Britain but it will be packaged by Corbyn as a palliative for Tory austerity.
More devil is in the detail of the clause on environmental protection and workers’ rights, which are by nature elastic and subject to trade-offs. This will give Labour another opportunity — if there is a miraculous breakthrough — to claim it “won” the negotiation.
The whole exercise is a deft rebranding one for Team Corbyn. It has allowed a hardline Leftist shadow chancellor the chance to stake out ground as a grizzled veteran and his protégé, shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey, a chance to hone her slight experience in negotiations and raise her profile in an area dominated by shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer. And while Number 10 needs a solution by May 22 to forestall the need to hold European elections which would be dominated by the Brexit Party and Labour, there is no such pressure on the Opposition.
All in all, if you were at the helm of a party whose major disadvantage is that you are seen as a bunch of radicals on the wilder fringes of mainstream political thinking, the opportunity to appear like a sober and necessary counterweight to an ailing Government in the country’s hour of need is indeed an opportunity.
![](https://static.standard.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2018/03/13/10/anne.mcelvoy.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp&width=960)
One side-effect of Labour being drawn closer into the search for solutions to Brexit is that it opens a divide at the top of the party on the status of its second referendum pledge. This has been wrung out of the Corbyn leadership — it is never unequivocally uttered in his name (and always in the tetchy tone the Labour leader adopts for “do I have to say this?” topics). His most trusted aide, Seumas Milne, is opposed, so the leader’s office often speaks several tongues at once.
An internal row over tonight’s NEC meeting follows pressure from three of the four big trade unions for the leadership to adopt a less coy position on a referendum, and therein lies the conflict. The leadership’s pledge so far is only for a “confirmatory” vote on a “damaging Tory Brexit” (a way of signalling that even if it miraculously promised sunlit uplands, Labour would still find reasons to oppose it).
"The Opposition has a chance to see off a Tory PM and still not have to bind itself to any clear future course of action"
People’s Vote advocates, led by Tom Watson , Corbyn’s pugnacious deputy, are now calling a bluff on the semi-referendum offer. Where, for example, would it leave matters in the event that either the Tories (improbably) or a Labour government embraced staying in a customs union while still leaving the EU? A senior shadow cabinet member says he believes the best strategic outcome, quietly supported by Corbyn and John McDonnell , is to gain enough of a majority to offer the EU such a relationship, deliver a semi-Brexit to please Labour Leavers and watch the Tories get embroiled in suicidal strife for a few years over their failure to deliver on the 2016 referendum result.
Strong pro-Remain opinion has not penetrated deeply into the Corbyn citadel. Long-Bailey says she is not “hugely prescriptive” on the issue, while usually outspoken shadow justice secretary Richard Burgon is part of a group which sees itself as ”pragmatic” on the issue (they would not oppose a vote) but says little in its favour.
Read More
McDonnell talks up a “confirmation referendum” but nothing beyond that. This leaves thin top-table representation for Labourites who are natural People’s Vote advocates and believe any form of leaving the EU should be put before the public. One fellow shadow cabinet member notes that Starmer, a strong proponent of a second vote, “starts out in the shadow cabinet laying out his position on a second referendum. A lot of people disagree and Keir concludes by saying, ‘So we’re all aligned’.” Shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry also backs another referendum (a stance many colleagues think is part of presenting herself as the “healing” candidate in a future leadership race).
Given that May is unlikely to survive any major shift on her withdrawal agreement, the Opposition has a remarkable chance to see off a serving Tory PM, have a major policy changed to reflect many of its preferences and still not have to bind itself to any clear future course of action. So for all the pressure on Corbyn at tonight’s meeting, he can lean on his backers from Unite and argue that it is better to flirt with a referendum pledge than define it too closely.
This will satisfy many Labour Remainers who think they are finally making progress towards another plebiscite, whatever their doubts about Corbynism. Crucially, it keeps up the pressure on a Tory party unable to agree on Brexit and doing a more professional job of dismembering itself than any Labour attacks could have achieved.
Of course, it does not live up to the leadership’s claim to be guided by the membership, which is overwhelmingly in favour of not leaving the EU. But as former East German leader Walter Ulbricht replied when someone asked what “democratic socialism” looked like: “It must look democratic but we must have everything in hand.” That is still a fundamental tenet of Corbynism — and a reason why its declarations on a new Brexit vote should be treated as a flexible weapon in a wider battle for power.
- Anne McElvoy is senior editor at The Economist