Thread by @tony_nog

1) Thread - Corbyn, #Brexit & Labour democracy - let's just be honest, it's dead

Saddened but not surprised by this reversal by Labour Leadership.

Labour members overwhelmingly support a People's vote, and they have been comprehensively overridden

#LabourConference2018

2) so, full disclosure, I'm not a Corbyn fan but I was absolutely prepared to "lay down arms" if something approaching a pro people's vote motion came out of last night's horsetrading. It didn't. A fudge came out, and that fudge was hardened into a pro brexit position

3) so what happened, and what does it mean? Quick summary
Well, clearly there is a growing pro remain/people's vote position in Labour - 9 out of 10 members support it & 150 CLPs sent in pro vote motions.

That's a staggering number and shows the concern of members

4) we should also remember that Corbyn was elected on a party democracy ticket, he would let the members decide policy as part of a general move towards wider & deeper democracy. This is a key point, deeper democracy is supposed to be at the heart of Corbyn's psyche

5) it's also important to point out that a People's Vote may or may not be tactically unsound for Labour, a Blairite plot or a gift for UKIP, in the end you either trust the democratic process & the wishes of the members, or you only want democracy when you like the outcome

6) it *does not matter* if the People's Vote is a bad idea (it's not, it's the most likely way to reverse Brexit), if the overwhelming majority of Labour members support it at conference, it should be policy, period, no ifs or buts. If it isn't, Labour is not a democracy

7) So what happened? Last night there was a 6 hour session to thrash out a "composite motion" between the members motion & the Leadership's
The 1st point should be - why any debate at all? Why wasn't the deeply supported #peoplesvote simply polished up and published?

8) if the voice of the members is supreme why was the (narrowly supported) Leadership #Brexit position given the same priority as the members one (as we'll see, even that didn't happen)?
Why was Starmer debating for 6 hours something so clearly supported?

9) in any case a "compromise" was reached, though it wasn't really a compromise. The Leadership position of pushing for a pro brexit election was made the priority, and then if that GE didn't happen, a #PeoplesVote would be an option on the table

10) crucially, the original text said "a vote on the #Brexit terms" meaning no Remain option. In the late hours the #PeoplesVote campaigners got this removed, the implication being it would now be a full vote with an option for Remain.
Unfortunately, it was only an implication

11) now, being honest, this was still a weak & fudged motion.
A GE would take priority, and Labour would fight that GE on a *pro brexit* ticket, this is absolutely clear from McDonnell. Only if a GE didn't happen would a people's vote be considered.
All in the next 6 months(?)

12) this is an important point.
We have 6 months then we crash out of the EU, deal or no deal. This is a legal certainty
The only options are we get a deal, revoke A50 or get an extension, which will be hard to get.
There's no time for gameplaying

13) but in any case McDonnell removed this morning even that sliver of hope for a #PeoplesVote - there would be *no* option to remain on the ballot, the implication that there would be was just that. The Labour Leadership had taken the final steps to override the members

14) now, of course, there'll be a debate in conference, and perhaps the option to remain will prevail. And there has been a shift in policy. But the fact remains that to all intents & purposes the wishes of the members are being ignored by the Labour Leadership

15) McDonnell was doing the rounds again saying "what we want is a GE so people can debate the options on #Brexit"

Who is "we" in this sentence? Not the members, they want a people's vote & an option to remain. What McDonnell should be saying is "What I & Jeremy want..."

16) apologies for the length of this thread but here is the summary. The following is what we can without any doubt glean from these events, it's grim reading for Labour supporters

17) I) Corbyn & McDonnell are firmly fixed in a pro-#brexit position. They want the option to negotiate their own "cake & eat it deal" but have absolutely no interest in any pro remain option & will fight it by any means necessary.
Many of us knew this already

18) ii) the Labour Leadership is not interested in party democracy or the wishes of its members unless those wishes align with its own. It pays more respect to Leave Voters (who are mostly Tory) than to its own members

19) iii) the Labour Leadership is contemptuous of the party process. There was a lengthy debate in the formal composite forum to take out a "no remain option" vote clause, and then McDonnell toured the studios to put it back in again.
This is simply shocking.

20) IV) the Labour Leadership is, again,opting out of #Brexit. You cannot "campaign" for a GE & it's unlikely to happen. If it does Labour will offer largely what the Tories are offering & which the EU will also reject
But most likely Labour will continue to play a passive role

21) v) any attempts by the membership, MPs or others to force Labour into an active #Brexit role will be quashed by the Leadership, by any means necessary, even if that means being publicly dismissive of those members

22) vi) there is *no* remain position in the Labour Leadership. This needs to be emphasized. Even if it is shown that Labour seats are not at Risk, that members overwhelmingly support Remain or that any Brexit will damage it's voters there is zero appetite for Remain

23) now, the above is harsh but fair. Labour Leadership is, or at least aspires to be, a semi dictatorship.
Corbyn & McDonnell are authoritarians at heart.
The membership position is not supreme or even equal to their position in their eyes

So much for a new kind of politics