Re: The EU referendum
Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2016 8:42 pm
Newcastle: you say 'My whole argument is that it should never have been put to a referendum in the first place.'
My understanding is that his party was so split that he could not have put it to a Parliamentary vote without relying on Labor votes for remain.
He and a majority of his cabinet believed in remain. A minority of his cabinet was Brexit and he could not remove them for this.
Labor was split on the issue but a majority of its votes would be for Remain. Under the cardigan one cross party deals were hard to do and he could not rely on Labor to back him.
His political problem was that a large minority of his party did not agree with him or cabinet.
What to do. Put it to a vote and succeed on unsecure labor floor votes and be publically revealed as not a master of his own house on the major issue of the day or go over the heads of his Brexit backbenchers and appeal to an electorate that recently said he was sliced bread.
It was always possible that remain labor voters would have deserted him just to bring his cabinet down and replace him with a harder right leader that labor would find easier to defeat.
Say he had succeeded on the cross party vote. He would have split his party, sided with most of the enemy and made (?) 140 conservative party enemies as well as facing resignations from half his cabinet. In politics having divisions and enemies is everyday - having it exposed in public on a major vote is altogether another and irremediable thing. Maybe that would have been better for the UK.
My understanding is that his party was so split that he could not have put it to a Parliamentary vote without relying on Labor votes for remain.
He and a majority of his cabinet believed in remain. A minority of his cabinet was Brexit and he could not remove them for this.
Labor was split on the issue but a majority of its votes would be for Remain. Under the cardigan one cross party deals were hard to do and he could not rely on Labor to back him.
His political problem was that a large minority of his party did not agree with him or cabinet.
What to do. Put it to a vote and succeed on unsecure labor floor votes and be publically revealed as not a master of his own house on the major issue of the day or go over the heads of his Brexit backbenchers and appeal to an electorate that recently said he was sliced bread.
It was always possible that remain labor voters would have deserted him just to bring his cabinet down and replace him with a harder right leader that labor would find easier to defeat.
Say he had succeeded on the cross party vote. He would have split his party, sided with most of the enemy and made (?) 140 conservative party enemies as well as facing resignations from half his cabinet. In politics having divisions and enemies is everyday - having it exposed in public on a major vote is altogether another and irremediable thing. Maybe that would have been better for the UK.