@stonemuse and @MuttleyCAFC , I think Labour's position over Brexit is vague and vague for a reason, they are the party of opposition and Brexit will seriously damage the Tories. They are very much (imo) playing a waiting game, whilst this is frustrating I think it is designed to squeeze the Tories more and win the next election.
My belief is that the Tories got us into Brexit and they are the party of government it is they we should be expecting some kind of grand plan from, what have Labour got to gain from laying all cards on the table now?
They have some broad stroke differences to the Tories which have been mentioned by Muttley and others before, this includes wanting to protect jobs and civil rights, being less adversarial and they also of course believe a negotiated plan is better than no plan. Labour are also much more likely to support the ECJ and they do of course want to guarantee EU citizens rights in the UK. They have also said that they will bring any deal back to Parliament for approval (taking back control!).
Other areas where they have a different approach to the Tories are being less closed to some kind of controlled free movement. This would allow more chance of retaining something similar to the single market (which of course we have to leave as we are leaving the EU).
These two things would of course then make staying in the Customs Union more likely or retaining some kind of 'membership' (but I don't know what that will look like). Finally and importantly Labour will oppose the great repeal bill if it allows individual cabinet ministers the chance to pick and choose rights without recourse to Parliament.
The text in bold perfectly illustrates my, and many others, frustration.
The Labour party, at this key juncture in our history, should not be playing a waiting game. They themselves should be bold and set out how they see the future and plan to take us forward.
There is not exactly that much time to waste in a waiting game. It is all fence-sitting - let's see which way the wind blows and we will choose that direction. Not exactly helpful is it!
I am, by inclination, a Labour voter - however, there have been times when I refused to vote for them. I have read two Corbyn biographies, both interesting, but both re-inforcing the point that Corbyn has, from the beginning, been generally anti-EU.
Is it too much to ask that the leader of the 2nd biggest political party in this country outline to us, even in broad terms, his strategy?
The fact is, he won't. Just like May played the waiting game when Cameron left and did not provide us with anything solid in respect of her policies, Corbyn is playing the same game.
@Cordoban Addick has set out some important policy differences between Labour and the government's inept, confusing and vague approach. They are not in power so aren't in a position to do much more than that in reality.
As for playing a waiting game and doing the best for Labour we could point to pretty much any Tory policy of the last 40 years and make the same allegation. The Tories went chasing UKIP voters and ended up lumbering us with this mess, why should their political opponents assist them and end up sharing the blame? Look at the way the Lib Dems ended up carrying the can for the coalition policies.
The Tories made their bed and all that...
As for playing a waiting game and doing the best for Labour we could point to pretty much any Tory policy of the last 40 years and make the same allegation.
I agree but this issue is too important to the country to play political blame games. I would expect the leader of the opposition to be stating his broad outline of the way forward.
You've moved from being ironic to being nieve.
I will admit to one element of naivety - I have always seen Corbyn as a principled politician and expected him to remain so since he became leader.
I am aware that leaders have to change and adjust, that is what leaders have to do, fair enough.
But he cannot be described as a man of principle if he does not carry principles through. And just to clarify, I am only talking about EU/Brexit issues here.
Anyway, I can't add any more so will leave it there.
@stonemuse and @MuttleyCAFC , I think Labour's position over Brexit is vague and vague for a reason, they are the party of opposition and Brexit will seriously damage the Tories. They are very much (imo) playing a waiting game, whilst this is frustrating I think it is designed to squeeze the Tories more and win the next election.
My belief is that the Tories got us into Brexit and they are the party of government it is they we should be expecting some kind of grand plan from, what have Labour got to gain from laying all cards on the table now?
They have some broad stroke differences to the Tories which have been mentioned by Muttley and others before, this includes wanting to protect jobs and civil rights, being less adversarial and they also of course believe a negotiated plan is better than no plan. Labour are also much more likely to support the ECJ and they do of course want to guarantee EU citizens rights in the UK. They have also said that they will bring any deal back to Parliament for approval (taking back control!).
Other areas where they have a different approach to the Tories are being less closed to some kind of controlled free movement. This would allow more chance of retaining something similar to the single market (which of course we have to leave as we are leaving the EU).
These two things would of course then make staying in the Customs Union more likely or retaining some kind of 'membership' (but I don't know what that will look like). Finally and importantly Labour will oppose the great repeal bill if it allows individual cabinet ministers the chance to pick and choose rights without recourse to Parliament.
The text in bold perfectly illustrates my, and many others, frustration.
The Labour party, at this key juncture in our history, should not be playing a waiting game. They themselves should be bold and set out how they see the future and plan to take us forward.
There is not exactly that much time to waste in a waiting game. It is all fence-sitting - let's see which way the wind blows and we will choose that direction. Not exactly helpful is it!
I am, by inclination, a Labour voter - however, there have been times when I refused to vote for them. I have read two Corbyn biographies, both interesting, but both re-inforcing the point that Corbyn has, from the beginning, been generally anti-EU.
Is it too much to ask that the leader of the 2nd biggest political party in this country outline to us, even in broad terms, his strategy?
The fact is, he won't. Just like May played the waiting game when Cameron left and did not provide us with anything solid in respect of her policies, Corbyn is playing the same game.
As @Bournemouth Addick says, I have laid out some pretty clear broad strokes and tried to explain why the rest might be vague. To be honest I didn't expect it to be good enough for you because I don't think that was what you were looking for.
I have emboldened 11 areas from my post (which was off the top of my head) where Labour has made some kind of statement on Brexit where they will be different from the Tories, what do you think of these? I think that is a broad strategy, whether you agree with or not is a different matter.
No problem with most of those but how does Corbyn intend to handle them? Without detail, they are just soundbites.
I guess I will leave it there. Personally I expect the leader of the opposition to provide more detail on the implementation of any policies when we are discussing the biggest issue in decades. The responses I am receiving are that he does not need to.
Fair enough, we will agree to differ.
Above you ask for a broad perspective from Labour, now you want detail (which is a reasonable ask). I suggest that you will get a detailed response from Labour when they see the detail of the Tory plan. At the moment the only Tory 'detail' seems to be fingers crossed and hope for the best.
@seth plum I expect nothing from many of the Tory politicians, most are incapable of doing so.
My point on starting this particular conversation is that I hoped Corbyn had more to offer on the subject. Thus far, I am not convinced.
I think that's entirely reasonable but as @seriously_red has posted the major concern for Corbyn is to see Labour win the next general election. At present that aim is best served by watching and waiting. The outcome of Brexit will be just as divisive as Brexit itself. 50% of the country at least will be disapointed. They will look for someone to blame. In the box seat for that blame are the Conservative party. It's a mess entirely of their own making and the only way I see them mitigating any of the mess they've made is to let May trundle on and replace her just before negotiations conclude. She takes the major flak and the Tories hope whoever replaces her can get a clean slate. That imho is their only plan. I also believe it's not going to work.
The conservatives actually could have a small chink of light should they have the foresight to use it but they won't because like all governments they are drunk on power and ego. They could invite Corbyn into the negotiations and let him take some of the flak when it enevitably all goes wrong. Corbyn could hardly be seen to refuse the offer.
I've said all along this should be cross-party and cannot believe that it is not so.
Cross party? I can see why people want this, especially the Tories, but it smacks me as a cry for help. It is entirely the fault of the Tory party that we had the referendum. It may even be that the influence of only a couple of dozen Tory politicians brought this whole mess about. The election was fought by the Tories on the Brexit issue, they are the ones holding the baby, but now they want some others to change the nappies. It is for the nutters in the DUP to be cross party with the Tories, not for Labour or anybody else. It isn't even about putting the country above politics because despite the referendum the intention of the country is a mystery. Didn't Hammond say recently that the country didn't vote to be poorer? Yet another politician putting his own interpretation on things. As a man of principle I expect Corbyn to stay clear of this Tory Brexit, the best the Tories can hope for is to believe that in this cliffhanger something might turn up and with one leap they will be free.
Sometimes things have to be done cross-party for the national interest, where an issue transcends party politics. The national government during World War 2 is an example of that.
Brexit, however, is nakedly political and as such the Tories ought to face frustration as every turn from all quarters for their distrastrous handling of it. If they cannot handle it, and they can't, then it ought to be halted and they should step aside and allow another party to take control, even if that means that party decides to not enact what a third of the electorate voted for.
Labour's promise: scrap tuition fees for future students.
Labour also said they would ideally like to look at ways of reducing the debt burden on those who had already paid fees but did not make any promises on that.
He said that there was a manifesto commitment to abolish tuition fees going forward, and there would be an effort made to see if anything can be done in the future about the mountain of graduate debt. There was never any promise or assurance and nothing to U-turn from or to apologise for. No re=writing of history going on.
The last thing they want is for young people to be voting so let's try to frame it as Labour ditching their promises to students and oh look they're all the same again and there's no reason to bother voting next time.
Meanwhile the Tories continue to pander to their core demographic and get away with ignoring us.
Don't order tea in coffee shops because they don't boil the water, they use the heated water from the coffee machine which is lower than boiling point, which fails to activate the tea properly.
The Tories have no policies that people want. Their recent manifesto proved that. The Brexit negotiations have so far been exactly what critics of Brexit said it would be. A British government with no idea what Brexit actually looks like. They have a lame duck leader and from a position of being significantly ahead in the polls just weeks ago they now find themselves behind. All they have at the moment is to attack Labour and Corbyn. I fully expect this to be ramped up over the coming months both by Conservative party HQ and the Tory press.
Labour/Corbyn never committed to wiping the debt completely, however Corbyn in particular gave indications that he would do 'something about it'.
“Yes, there is a block of those that currently have a massive debt, and I’m looking at ways that we could reduce that, ameliorate that, lengthen the period of paying it off, or some other means of reducing that debt burden.”
“And I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.”
So it was quite clear he was making noises that he would do something about it or more specifically he would 'deal with it' if not be exact as to what that meant,
There are some improvements that can be made with regard to graduates currently saddled with huge debt. The interest rate is out of synch with rates in the outside world. If rates were 1% in line with the manky pay deals offered to public sector workers it would help. Also the understanding was that repayments start once you earn over a certain amount. That amount was supposed to increase with average earnings, but now it is fixed at about 21,000 I believe. Such initiatives would be a start. To my mind it seems reasonable to ask for that.
The Tories have no policies that people want. Their recent manifesto proved that.
Did their increase in votes not show that maybe they do have, at least some, policies people want?
I can't remember them offering up many policies to be honest.
I think their vote share was more people voting against Corbyn rather than for the Conservatives.
Might be wrong though.
I still believe there's a large proportion of the country (I don't have numbers but just a gut feel) who will vote for the same party almost regardless and all through their lives.
It's the floating majority who sway the result to red or blue winners.
No doubt people voted conservative so as to not to vote for Corbyn and vice versa with May.
On fees and wiping debt although Corbyn didn't state this and therefore the conservatives were wrong he strongly indicated he would do something about it and cleverly let the voters make up their own minds as to what that may mean.
Comments
I am aware that leaders have to change and adjust, that is what leaders have to do, fair enough.
But he cannot be described as a man of principle if he does not carry principles through. And just to clarify, I am only talking about EU/Brexit issues here.
Anyway, I can't add any more so will leave it there.
I can see why people want this, especially the Tories, but it smacks me as a cry for help.
It is entirely the fault of the Tory party that we had the referendum. It may even be that the influence of only a couple of dozen Tory politicians brought this whole mess about.
The election was fought by the Tories on the Brexit issue, they are the ones holding the baby, but now they want some others to change the nappies.
It is for the nutters in the DUP to be cross party with the Tories, not for Labour or anybody else. It isn't even about putting the country above politics because despite the referendum the intention of the country is a mystery. Didn't Hammond say recently that the country didn't vote to be poorer? Yet another politician putting his own interpretation on things.
As a man of principle I expect Corbyn to stay clear of this Tory Brexit, the best the Tories can hope for is to believe that in this cliffhanger something might turn up and with one leap they will be free.
Brexit, however, is nakedly political and as such the Tories ought to face frustration as every turn from all quarters for their distrastrous handling of it. If they cannot handle it, and they can't, then it ought to be halted and they should step aside and allow another party to take control, even if that means that party decides to not enact what a third of the electorate voted for.
I thought you all supported everyone in society having a voice?
Anyway, we should stop here because we have a separate Brexit thread and we should not hijack this one as well.
There is no UTurn and nothing to apologise for.
So what did he allegedly say then?
Labour also said they would ideally like to look at ways of reducing the debt burden on those who had already paid fees but did not make any promises on that.
No re=writing of history going on.
The last thing they want is for young people to be voting so let's try to frame it as Labour ditching their promises to students and oh look they're all the same again and there's no reason to bother voting next time.
Meanwhile the Tories continue to pander to their core demographic and get away with ignoring us.
...and breathe.
“Yes, there is a block of those that currently have a massive debt, and I’m looking at ways that we could reduce that, ameliorate that, lengthen the period of paying it off, or some other means of reducing that debt burden.”
“And I don’t see why those that had the historical misfortune to be at university during the £9,000 period should be burdened excessively compared to those that went before or those that come after. I will deal with it.”
So it was quite clear he was making noises that he would do something about it or more specifically he would 'deal with it' if not be exact as to what that meant,
So don't see it as a u turn,
The interest rate is out of synch with rates in the outside world. If rates were 1% in line with the manky pay deals offered to public sector workers it would help. Also the understanding was that repayments start once you earn over a certain amount. That amount was supposed to increase with average earnings, but now it is fixed at about 21,000 I believe.
Such initiatives would be a start. To my mind it seems reasonable to ask for that.
I think their vote share was more people voting against Corbyn rather than for the Conservatives.
Might be wrong though.
Corporation TaxCapital Gains TaxIt's the floating majority who sway the result to red or blue winners.
No doubt people voted conservative so as to not to vote for Corbyn and vice versa with May.
On fees and wiping debt although Corbyn didn't state this and therefore the conservatives were wrong he strongly indicated he would do something about it and cleverly let the voters make up their own minds as to what that may mean.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/liam-foxinator/neighkpnbclgljfgdmijhabhgifdhabn?authuser=3
newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/07/corbyn-personally-fireproof-his-manifesto-could-be-torched-brexit-blaze
Hardly his fault.