Forum menu
Every other significant player will enter discussions without preconditions. Swinson will only enter discussions with the precondition that Corbyn is ousted.
Very principled and shows her true right wing colours. She is saying she would rather have Brexit than Corbyn as PM.
Every other significant player will enter discussions without preconditions.
So is Corbyn being the interim PM a precondition or not?
She is saying she would rather have Brexit than Corbyn as PM.
Is Corbyn saying he would rather have Brexit than have someone else as PM calling the election he has been calling for since 2017?
Look, everyone is playing awkward buggers for the gallery, for sure, eapecially Swinson, but asking for the caretaker PM to be someone other than Corbyn should be no surprise to anyone. And Labour have no real reason not to put forward someone else for the short term role, leaving Corbyn free to campaign openly to try and win the election, rather than doing the very measured balancing act the interim PM will need to perform.
Bugger me, I agree with Blackford, and Sinn Fein, and broadly (except in some specific areas) TJ.
Thoughts and prayers please everyone.
One comment though: Its a wee bit rich for labour types to be accusing the lib dems of "playing politics for their own advantage" at this stage.
After 3 years of handwaving, doublespeak and prevarication I can get why the lib dems are a bit untrusting and would like a bit of a chat about firming up any details.
Makes sense. So no need for it to be Corbyn then? So that’s not going to be a pre-condition for any talks? Good.
Sigh. He is the leader of the official opposition. He is the default PM if the government collapses. So the anti-corbynists will need to set out why they propose to disregard our constitutional conventions and how they plan to get the numbers for a different leader to win in a VONC.
Someone remind me how many labour MPs there are compared to Lib Dems? Why does Swinson think she gets to choose? Parliamentary convention is clear on this. Only the leader of the opposition can call a VONC, and if the govt falls the leader of the opposition gets the opportunity to try to form a govt. Corbyn has been crystal clear that the terms of that will be temporary to extend A50 and call an election. At that point Swinson will have to put her money where her mouth is about how serious she is about avoiding a no deal, for if a VONC fails or a new govt cannot be formed, that is what we will get.
Kelvin - nope. Everyone else is going into open talks without preconditions. Of course labour will push for Corbyn and of course the tory rebels will balk at that - but only one player is refusing to talk until Corbyn agrees to go.
Given this plan (however late and contrived it may be) is about the only hope now of avoiding a no-deal Brexit then if Swinson/Lib Dems cause it to fail I'll certainly not be voting for them in a GE.
So is Corbyn as the interim PM a precondition for Labour or not when it comes to talks? I’m genuinely confused.
Agreed that all parties should enter talks without preconditions. Pleased how many (and Rebel Tory MPs) have said that they will.
Given this plan (however late and contrived it may be) is about the only hope now of avoiding a no-deal Brexit then if Swinson/Lib Dems cause it to fail I’ll certainly not be voting for them in a GE.
Quite. They seem to have forgotten that they're not even the third party. If Labour, SNP, PC and Greens are all whipped to support this proposal then it's difficult to see how the Lib Dems could oppose it and avoid no deal.
So is Corbyn as the interim PM a precondition for Labour or not when it comes to talks? I’m genuinely confused.
It's a condition of the constitution. But you've already been told that twice so I'm at a loss as to why you find it confusing.
Great.
Previously we had
Red Brexit
Blue Brexit
Brexit Brexit
Vs
Lose coalition of SNP/Green/Lib Dems who were organising (sort of) to not oppose eachother and dilute the pro-remain vote.
Now we have
Blue Brexit
Brexit Brexit
Vs
Complete shambles.
If I thought Corbyn had the wit, I'd think this was a masterstroke by a man who wants out of the EU at all costs, wait until it's too late to switch sides, and the wheels are coming off of the hard brexit party bus in the face of reality, then switch sides and cause carnage, thereby enabling hard brexit...
It’s a condition of the constitution.
Which constitution? And what does it say? I presume it doesn’t mention Corbyn by name. Can Labour not put forward anyone they want to be a caretaker PM, and ask as many MPs across the house to support them as possible? Where does it say it must be the leader of the largest party and no one else?
Which constitution? And what does it say?
FFS stop being so facetious. Yes, we get it, you don't want Corbyn as PM. Whether you like it or not all parliamentary convention results in the leader of the opposition being the person to challenge the government on issues of confidence. You want to rip up all the rules and precedents now when there is no time? Or do you want to stop no deal? Which is more important?
So is Corbyn as the interim PM a precondition for Labour or not when it comes to talks? I’m genuinely confused.
Clearly you are confused. I haven't seen any preconditions from Corbyn or anyone on the labour side.
Swinson is just showing her political naivety and incompetence along with her right wing viewpoint
So it isn’t a pre-condition of talks that Corbyn would be have to be interim PM? Good. If that’s the case, the LibDems need to get into talks pronto and not grandstand then.
Rebel Conservative MPs have agreed to meet Jeremy Corbyn to discuss how to stop Boris Johnson pursuing a no-deal Brexit, without committing to backing him as a caretaker leader.
So why won't Swinson do the same?
She is saying Harman or Clark
It is understood Harman would back a Corbyn-led temporary government as a first option, but could be open to other possibilities if this did not garner enough support.
Swinson’s refusal to back a Corbyn-led government was condemned by Labour as “childish”, with the SNP and Greens also urging her to reconsider.
All in todays Grauniad
Which constitution? And what does it say? I presume it doesn’t mention Corbyn by name. Can Labour not put forward anyone they want to be a caretaker PM, and ask as many MPs across the house to support them as possible? Where does it say it must be the leader of the largest party and no one else?
Again, Corbyn is the Leader of the Opposition. He gets to call the VONC and no-one else. As I said earlier, if the Lib Dems wish to set out a different arrangement, then they will need to explain why, and how they will get sufficient votes to succeed.
The starting pont is of course as Ransos and Dazh outline - that the official leader of the opposition gets first go at forming an alternative government. thats how the rules go. If they cannot then anyone else who fancies it can have a go.
Obviously the tory rebels will not stomach Corbyn but they are astute enough to not say this before talks.
Only the leader of the opposition can call the VONC (a convention behind upheld by the speaker, not a written rule)… that doesn’t stop Labour putting someone else forward to lead a replacement government, does it? If they think that person has a better chance of putting through business? Our “constitution” is pretty fluid… if the house backs someone to be PM, they can be.
Only the leader of the opposition can call the VONC (a convention behind upheld by the speaker, not a written rule)… that doesn’t stop Labour putting someone else forward to lead a replacement government, does it?
So you think Labour should nominate somebody who isn't their elected leader?
Yes, for a government that needs the backing of many non-Labour MPs, with the sole intention of delaying our exit from the EU, and calling a general election. Just get those steps put in place, then campaign to win.
So it isn’t a pre-condition of talks that Corbyn would be have to be interim PM?
Why the obsession with preconditions? It's about facts, and the fact is that Corbyn is HM Leader of the Opposition. That isn't a made up or honorary title, it's a formal role for which he is paid with responsibilities, duties and requisite powers attached. One of those is the ability to call a VONC and form a new govt if successful. No one else can do it. Time is very short, and there are few other options. If MPs don't support either a VONC, or the temporary govt which might result, then we will leave the EU with no deal. It's a very simple and straightforward situation.
It should also be noted that for months all the Corbyn-obsessives on here have been howling about his 'lack of opposition'. Now he's actually doing that and there is a straightforward and sensible path to stopping no deal with no conditions attached other than having an election, you're all complaining that you don't want him to do it. Do you want to stop a no deal or not?
Swinson may well be right that a differnt leader would find it easier to command the support of other parties - however its stupid politics to make it a precondition.
The SNP leader, Nicola Sturgeon, said her party was “willing to work across party lines and explore all options to stop a no-deal Brexit”. She tweeted: “Jeremy Corbyn’s suggestion is not the only possible option – but given the circumstances, nothing should be ruled out at this stage. Jo Swinson should rethink.”
Caroline Lucas, the sole Green MP, tweeted a video message appealing to Swinson to change her mind. She said: “Jo, we need to stop Boris Johnson. We need a people’s vote. Please join us in engaging with Corbyn to see if we can find a way forward.”
Out of these talks a different interim PM may well emerge.
you’re all complaining that you don’t want him to do it
I’m happy for it to be Corbyn that is the caretaker PM, personally… but if Labour are more likely to be given the chance by the house to delay Brexit and call the election they want with someone else leading the short lived special case government, then that should happen.
Yes, for a government that needs the backing of many non-Labour MPs, with the intention of delaying our exit from the EU and calling an election.
Right, so the elected leader should step aside for an unelected leader, why is this? As I keep saying, if you wish to pursue an alternative to the default arrangements, then you need to make a case for it. Of course, Swinson can't do this because it would mean admitting that she rather have no deal than Corbyn as temporary PM.
I'd like to stop no-deal, please.
Has Corbyn stated in an irrevocable manner that he and thus the entire Labour Party will do VONC then interim gov then election then second ref is going to happen?
Has Corbyn stated in an irrevocable manner that he and thus the entire Labour Party will do VONC then interim gov then election then second ref is going to happen?
It's a proposal to the other parties. There's no point calling a VONC if they won't support it, so the ball's in their court.
Has Corbyn stated in an irrevocable manner that he and thus the entire Labour Party will do VONC then interim gov then election then second ref is going to happen?
Corbyns letter to the other parties is here:
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1161751909788782594/photo/1
Has Corbyn stated in an irrevocable manner that he and thus the entire Labour Party will do VONC then interim gov then election then second ref is going to happen?
He asking for their support in a VONC, and then to support a govt with him as it's leader. In return he's promised that he will be in post only long enough to agree an extension to A50 with the EU and then to call a general election. He's also said labour will stand at that election on a promise to offer a second referendum on brexit with a remain option. So in answer to your question, yes, absolutely.
Right, so the elected leader should step aside for an unelected leader, why is this?
Because making the Labour Party Leader PM will be seen by many in the country as if all those who support the act support him. Where as an actual caretaker PM, who will not be leading any party into the election that follows, can be backed by the house without the non-Labour MPs then being open to the same accusation of backing Corbyn come the election. In many ways it would be best if someone outside the main parties was the caretaker… but Labour are big enough to insist on them being a Labour politician… but trying to go beyond that and force Corbyn (or any other Labour Leader) on the house makes it much harder to get cross party support. And the country needs a short term cross party backed government to delay our exit date… and call a general election and/or referendum to try and move us on.
Because making the Labour Party Leader PM will be seen by many in the country as if all those who support the act support him. Where as an actual caretaker PM, who will not be leading any party into the election that follows, can be backed by the house without the non-Labour MPs then being open to the same accusation of backing Corbyn come the election.
Which may be fine for the Lib Dems, but likely disastrous for Labour in a GE. The idea of trying to canvas support for a leader who didn't step up to be caretaker PM in a crisis is laughable.
but trying to go beyond that and force Corbyn (or any other Labour Leader) on the house makes it much harder to get cross party support.
Again, he is not being forced on the House, because he is proposing the default position.
Doublespeak. Labour can propose anyone they want to be the caretaker PM… pretending they have no choice in the matter isn’t credible. It’s like Brexit cheerleaders saying the “default position” is leaving the EU without a deal… pretending that inaction, or failing to propose an alternative, isn’t a choice. It is.
He asking for their support in a VONC, and then to support a govt with him as it’s leader. In return he’s promised that he will be in post only long enough to agree an extension to A50 with the EU and then to call a general election. He’s also said labour will stand at that election on a promise to offer a second referendum on brexit with a remain option. So in answer to your question, yes, absolutely.
With the important caveat that a VONC won't happen unless the opposition parties unite to support it.
Given that Corbyn is offering everything that Remainers wanted (election and second ref with remain on the paper) this thread is ample evidence that there is nothing he can do that will satisfy them.
Doublespeak. Labour can propose anyone they want to be the caretaker PM… pretending they have no choice in the matter isn’t credible.
Strawman. No-one is pretending that so stop making up an argument to suit your purposes.
For the umpteenth time, Corbyn is acting in accordance with the constitution and parliamentary convention. He is also acting in a way that is likely to strengthen Labour in a GE, which is his duty as its leader.
Others are free to propose alternatives but they need to set out why and how. It's not at all surprising that they seem reticent on this issue.
this thread is ample evidence that there is nothing he can do that will satisfy them
Hey, I’m a “Remainer”, I’ve said the letter was a good move, that I’m happy with it, and will now be voting Labour with Corbyn as Leader again, as I did in 2017. But to get that general election will take a cross party supported caretaker PM, and that is more likely if someone other than Corbyn is put forward by Labour.
Given that Corbyn is offering everything that Remainers wanted (election and second ref with remain on the paper) this thread is ample evidence that there is nothing he can do that will satisfy them
They are just constantly splicing the logic up.
Well, that's straightforward, or not.
Is he for Brexit or not? Seems like that shows he'd still quite rather like a super smashing new fantasy Labour version of Brexit.
Just to be clear, if Corbyn can genuinely do this, I'm voting for it.
But to get that general election will take a cross party supported caretaker PM, and that is more likely if someone other than Corbyn is put forward by Labour.
I don't think we have any way of knowing that. An alternative pathway is for the Lib Dems to grow up.
Is he for Brexit or not? Seems like that shows he’d still quite rather like a super smashing new fantasy Labour version of Brexit.
All three options on that diagram give you a referendum with remain as an option. So what's the problem?
Because making the Labour Party Leader PM will be seen by many in the country as if all those who support the act support him.
For god's sake man give it up. He's been very clear, stop no deal, hold an election, commit to holding a referendum with remain on the ballot. You've got what you said you wanted. You won. Take the bloody prize! If you and the rest of the haters refuse, we leave with no deal. And I promise you those of us who want to avoid that at all costs will make sure we remind you of that at every opportunity.
Its totally depressing, but I still feel no more confident than I did yesterday that No Deal can be avoided.
I think it's a dead cert now that we'll be crashing out. This will all just fall apart. It's doing so before our eyes already in amongst the factional infighting and party interest.
Our entire political system has proved itself not fit for purpose. There's not a single one of this shower of ****s who seem willing to put the future of the country before their own narrow party interest.
We need to take the French approach and start wrecking and burning stuff!
Well, that’s straightforward, or not.
As long as all branches of that tree now result in a public vote with Remain as an option, then I’m happy to vote Labour. To be honest, I don’t want Corbyn, or any other MPs, to be pressed into supporting Remain if they think we should Leave anyway.
If you and the rest of the haters refuse, we leave with no deal.
Who do I hate?
Anyway, hopefully compromise will happen… the LibDems have to get involved with the talks, whatever their grandstanding so far, and Labour have to accept that a truly cross party approach might require a different caretaker PM.
Kelvin - yes you are right that a different caretaker leader is more likely to gain the support of the house. However its really bad politics to make this a precondition and to keep shouting it loudly. this is why no other player is shouting "Corbyn must go" only Swinson.
What she is doing is grandstanding not actually trying to prevent no deal. My guess is she does not want an election at all as she knows all the new lib dem mps are likely to lose their seats adn she is as well.
All three options on that diagram give you a referendum with remain as an option. So what’s the problem?
Well, it's straightforward enough - thankfully - on the immediate issue of No Deal.
Thing is, if VONC passes and I then vote for Labour in a GE, they promise to fanny about as much as they can, trying for a different flavour fantasy deal, as in they are "pro brexit". If they lose that same GE, they promise to do the opposite and call for a referendum and say they are "pro remain". They can't be both, that position is not credible, and I have no confidence he actually is or will be "pro remain". He's still essentially punting the line that he is the man to achieve to a bright new Labour way to leave the EU.
Why must he be “pro remain”, as long as he solidly backs the commitment to hold a referendum with a Remain option?
I don't think it is a tenable position to have Pro Remain and Pro Brexit as possible Labour positions, with Jezza in charge in all of them.
Jeremy would like Brexit. A Labour Brexit. That makes him ultimately Pro Brexit.
He can't campaign for Labout Brexit, fail, and then next day announce "nope, I'm Remainy McRemainFace".
Maybe you think different.
And yes, stopping no deal is more important than any/all of the above.
Why must he be “pro remain”, as long as he solidly backs the commitment to hold a referendum with a Remain option?
He's got to win a VONC first - I think Swinson was rash but I also think she's got a point, how many moderate tories would vote against thier own party knowing it would put Corbyn in power? The numbers may well not be there, especially taking into account any abstensions or abscences from non tory MPs, a less divisive figure would need to head the interim government to ensure a successfull VONC.
Mattyfez - you are correct in one way but its really bad politics for Swinson to make it a precondition. NOne of the tory rebels have done. All Swinson is doing is making no deal more likely by making a national unity government less likely by her posturing.
Like I say, I think she was rash, she should have kept her gob shut, and with the other recipients of his proposal, pressurised Corbyn to field someone else to secure thier support.
It may not matter anyway as the tory rebels will be thinking (but not saying, unlike Jo) that they won't put Corbyn in power.
What I hope happens is Jo comes back to the table and then Corbyn compromises by agreeing a more middle of the road temporary head of government to increase the chancese of a successfull VONC.
Intersting comment piece in the Grauniad.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/15/remainers-stop-brexit-install-corbyn-pm
One thing that jumped out at me is this
"Swinson dismissed Corbyn’s letter swiftly last night, largely on the basis that others would surely do so too"
If thats the case she misjudged badly as every other player has accepted it as a starting point for discussions and the SNP and Greens have asked her to reconsider
Swinson issue is Dunning Kruger - she does not realise how poor a player of the political game she is
a less divisive figure would need to head the interim government to ensure a successfull VONC
Agree.
Oh, and agree Swinson rushed… perhaps she thinks things need rushing towards something that can get cross party support? Remember, Labour front benchers appeared on current affairs programmes to rule out any kind of “government of national unity” when others suggested it… perhaps immediately knocking any counter offer seemed like the best move to get things towards the middle ground… rather than weeks of talks. And that middle ground seems to be obvious… not a “government of all the talents”, as it won’t wash with the Labour top team, but a short term Labour government with a Labour PM who isn’t also going to be heading up the Labour election campaign that follows.
I think her approach was wrong by the way. But quietly letting Labour set the direction and hope that in talks they move quickly towards something that feels more “cross party”, that enough MPs can back, might be equally misguided though.
These are unusual political times, as everyone keeps saying , so if the opposition to No Deal can unite and get their sh*t together,get a VONC and it succeeds then why not get a non MP to lead the "government of national unity" for the short period that it is required until a general election? Someone from the Lords or maybe an academic or business person or even a celebrity with no party affiliations?
I’d agree with that (and would suggest past minister no longer an MP) except that the “undemocratic” charge will he used to full effect by the Leave team now running the Tory Party, no matter how the Johnson government is toppled (despite him having no mandate of his own, and his party not having a majority anyway), so keeping this to currently elected MPs might we wise.
I think Swinson wants to lead the unity government.
My choice would be Starmer. Clarke at a pinch. someone suggested Hillary Benn as someone who commands respect from all sides. Can I have a bit of what they have been smoking?
Whats paddy pantsdown up to these days? He did OK managing the former Yugoslavia - surely he could bang a few heads together?
I have to admit I do find it hard to see a non divisive figure. Starmer might be the best bet.
I think Swinson wants to lead the unity government.
LoL !
I agree with everything else in your post.
I suspect she does. She considers herself a towering political figure and inoffensive to all. I think that maybe part of her reasoning for her position - that she could be the compromise candidate.
TJ - Paddy would have been an awesome choice but for one slight problem - you do know he died last year don't you?
TJ – Paddy would have been an awesome choice but for one slight problem – you do know he died last year don’t you?
And that makes him less capable/palatable than the rest because???
I think Swinson wants to lead the unity government.
She has actually suggested Harriet harman (labour) or Ken Clark (tory) would be suitable.
AD -just remembered that. Oops! Still he couldn't do much harm.
We need someone with stature and respect from all sides, preferably with government experience. I am struggling to think of anyone. Clarke makes me uneasy - I think he is basically honest but some of what he has done in the past I would find hard to accept.
I really rate Starmer - but he is rather inexperienced. One of the few on either front bench to have any brains. I suspect he has ambitions for the future so may not want it.
Matty I know Swinson suggested them but I still think she wants to do it. I think thats what she is angling for.
Can We have Merkel? She talks a lot of sense!
Harman, Clarke or Starmer … whatever … whoever … let’s hope they get on with it … the last few years have lowered my expectations as regards MPs doing what needs doing though.
Aye - been talking to my other half and we are really stuggling to think of someone with brains, who is not tainted in some way - too close to Corbyn, part of the coalition or neo fascist
What happened to politicians of stature?
We need someone with stature and respect from all sides, preferably with government experience. I am struggling to think of anyone
I'm sure Mr A. Salmond could be persuaded.
Swinson on C4 news has said that she will speak with Corbyn and team (and nowhere in the links posted here did she ever say she wouldn’t). She repeated that she still doesn’t back Corbyn as the interim PM, and says a plan that includes another Labour MP would be supported. Says there is no point her supporting a plan that includes Corbyn being the caretaker PM, because there is no chance that it would win enough support in the house. Harman mentioned again.
If there's no promise of a full "Remain" option in a future referendum, I don't think the EU would even consider an extension to Article 50. It's clear they're not going to consider any more negotiations for Leave options.
Of course it makes the most sense for Corbyn to be stand-in PM. Swinson ruling it out is pure nonsense on her part.
Well if TJ's allowed Paddy Ashdown, I nominate Zombie John Smith. Well the Tories have had actual vampires as leader...
Of course it makes the most sense for Corbyn to be stand-in PM. Swinson ruling it out is pure nonsense on her part.
But… he wouldn’t be seen as a “caretaker PM”… representing the interest of all MPs supporting him… and the country as whole, he’d be seen as Labour winning power… with support from others… which will go down very differently with voters come that next election that would follow on very soon.
Scotroutes - there is - that is 100% clear now - see the flow chart above!
Scotroutes – there is – that is 100% clear now – see the flow chart above!
Yep. I think that's why it's been included in his letter.
Not from the EU’s point of view … as it still depends on the make up of Parliament after the next election. Hopefully the promise of an election, which might result in a referendum with a Remain option (if Conservative+Brexit+DUP don’t get enough seats to block one) will be enough for them. I still think an exit date of May 2020 is as far as their patience can be pushed.
There's one problem with this. Labour won't win a majority in an election. Not with Corbyn at its head.
An interim government could hold a referendum.
It could hold a referendum, but it won’t. PC & ChangeWhatever have already suggested this… but they have no chance of getting it agreed by Labour… would love to be wrong.
It’s a bit of a Catch 22
The only person who can call a VONC is Jeremy Corbyn.
The one MP who most definitely won’t get enough defectors onside to win a VONC with him at the helm is Jeremy Corbyn
He must be aware of this.
Chris Pattern summed it up perfectly tonight when he pointed out that a government of national unity behind Corbyn is as preposterous an idea as a government of national unity lined up behind Boris Johnson
So far tonight on the news, I’ve seen Tony Lloyd (that’s desperation!), Angela Rayner and Rebecca Long Bailey defending Corbyn’s proposal
If he’s got something to say, maybe he should consider coming out of hiding and making a pitch to the country
As invisible as ever
He might be like one of those old Soviet leaders who was issuing press releases, then it turns out they've actually been dead for a year
#wheresjeremy?
Vince Cable- just to piss Jo Swinson off
Given labours position on a referendum if everyone else makes it the price of co operation that the order of events is VONC, Referendum. GE then I see no issue with Labour doing that - however it would mean a lot longer caretaker government 'cos for some reason we seem to need a 3 month referendum campaign evn tho a GE campaign is only 4 weeks. maybe it could be truncated as we all know the issues now
Lol
Edit - sorry, that was at ctk and binners
#wheresjeremy
Can only see #joswinsonisatory trending currently.
I see no issue with Labour doing that
Very few people do. One is leader of the party though. He wants to try and get a Brexit agreement of his own to be the other option in a referendum. So it’s election and then referendum.