Last weekend, Labour party members queued outside the premises of Trinity, a school in the southeast London borough of Lewisham, where the hustings for the party’s candidate for a forthcoming by-election was due to take place. Among the groups campaigning there was People’s Vote, a cross-party group pushing for a public vote on any final Brexit deal reached with the European Union (EU).
The choice of candidate
Optimism was high among those campaigners about the potential signal that the by-election, triggered by the resignation of Heidi Alexander, the constituency’s popular anti-Brexit MP, could have. Initially the loss of Ms. Alexander had been mourned by many seeking change in the party’s approach to Brexit, but that soon gave way to hope as Janet Daby, a candidate who supports remaining in the European single market as well as the customs union, won the internal party contest by a large majority later that day.
In the days running up to the by-election, the internal party contest had come to be seen as a reflection of the tensions within Labour. The choice of candidate was crucial: the party had won the seat by a comfortable majority in the general election last year, so the person chosen will, excepting a major upset, end up as the MP.
The party put up three candidates, all ethnic minority women, reflecting different positions in the party. Ms. Daby, a centrist, supports maintaining very close ties with Europe, and has even in the past endorsed a second referendum. Sakina Sheikh, the candidate fielded by the left-wing Labour campaign group Momentum, has stuck firmly to the party’s official line, insisting that remaining in the single market would mean “taking rules but having no power to make them”. A third candidate, supported by unions and said to be close to the Labour leadership, also stuck closely to the party line.
“Hugely significant that Janet Daby, sensible and strongly anti-Brexit, won,” said Andrew Adonis, a Labour member of the House of Lords and a vocal anti-Brexit campaigner, following the result.
Contradictory pulls
While the by-election has reignited debate within the party about the direction of its strategy on Brexit, it has also highlighted the contradictory pulls on the party. Since the referendum, Labour has insisted that it had to abide by the decision of voters. “Labour respects the result of the referendum and Britain is leaving the EU,” Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said in a speech earlier this year.
While 61% of those who voted Conservative in the 2015 general election voted to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum, according to an analysis by YouGov, the choice that Labour was faced with was far more complex. About 65% of those who had voted Labour in 2015 voted to remain. However, while boroughs such as Lewisham voted heavily in favour of remaining, a number of northern Labour constituencies voted heavily to leave (despite, in many cases, having Labour MPs who campaigned to remain).
From the early days after the referendum, Mr. Corbyn himself faced criticism over his approach, with some suggesting that more vigorous campaigning in favour of remaining from the Labour leadership could have yielded a different referendum result. Mr. Corbyn has shrugged off such suggestions. He said that despite being critical of the EU, he continued to believe that remaining in Europe was in Britain’s best interests. However, the party’s commitment to respecting the vote had led to it on occasion to vote against attempts to thwart Brexit legislation. Just earlier this month, 83 members of the House of Lords defied a party whip to not vote for an amendment requiring the government to negotiate membership of the single market (the Labour Party is officially against remaining in the single market but wants some form of customs union membership).
Many have also pushed for clarity on the party’s position on Brexit. Alongside uncertainty on what the party means by customs union membership, Labour has faced criticism over what its commitment involved in holding the government to account for its promise to deliver the same benefits outside the EU as it had inside of it. Would it be willing to oppose Brexit if those criteria were not met?
The uncertainty has offered space for the resurgence of some of the older, centrist voices of the party, such as former leader Tony Blair, who in a blog warned that the party risked alienating voters, with its stance that offered the “worst of both worlds” convincing neither Remainers nor Leavers that it was taking up their fight.
Adding to the pressure have been the growing questions over the referendum itself and the spending of various Leave campaign groups. Earlier this year Leave.EU, one of the main campaign groups, was fined over £70,000 for breaching spending limits by Britain’s Electoral Commission, while its CEO was referred to the police by electoral authorities. Vote Leave, the official leave campaign, supported by senior members of the cabinet, is also under investigation over its adherence to spending limits. The investigations have heartened a number of campaign groups that have sprung up to fill a political vacuum left by the two main political parties’ stance on Brexit.
Many concerns
Last week, four northern Labour MPs joined forces to demand the party’s support for a second referendum. “Whatever you think of Brexit, there’s no denying that it’s a big deal, and it is only now that the full implications of any Brexit deal are becoming apparent. People are therefore entitled to have their say on the deal before irrevocable steps are taken,” they wrote in a letter to Mr. Corbyn. A poll of Labour party members earlier this year found that over three-quarters wanted Britain to remain in the single market and the customs union, while leaders of Labour students and Young Labour came together to urge the party leadership to hold a vote on Brexit at a forthcoming conference. How much these concerns will be heeded remains to be seen.
vidya.ram@thehindu.co.in
