Labour’s Brexit policy was too complicated for the doorstep

It must be simpler and more up-to-date.

While I was disappointed last weekend at Labour’s European Union Elections Results, I can’t say I was surprised.

I knew Labour was set for a bad night in London, but I hoped it would be better outside the M25. It wasn’t to be.

A bad policy on Brexit, and a lack of campaign funding led to the worst national election result in over a century.

Across London, a small army of volunteers campaigned tirelessly. From editing twitter videos in our lunch break to leaving work early to race across town and canvass, a group of strangers came together to work for some excellent London candidates.

But despite our best efforts, we kept coming up short on the doorstep by failing to answer the same question.

That question, people’s primary concern, was about Labour’s stance on Brexit.

Ninety seconds in front of busy parents or a sleepy student is not enough time to restate our conference policy.

It’s not enough time to explain the caveats and the conditions in which Labour backs another referendum and it’s not enough time to counteract whatever bollocks they heard on the radio from Len McCluskey last week.

We tried to provide a condensed and precise answer to our three paragraph policy – but it wasn’t enough to convince people on the doorstep to vote for a pro-European Labour candidate.

The results are conclusive. They show the importance of a clear Brexit policy.

It was simply not enough to reheat policy that was made back at September’s conference.

So much has changed since then. We’ve had three votes on the withdrawal agreement, two rounds of indicative votes, two new political parties formed and one prime-ministerial resignation.

No one in that composite meeting back in Liverpool could have foreseen the crisis we find ourselves in now; the composite motion is not fit for purpose. It needs updating.

As a result of our inaction and indecision, the Liberal Democrats gained more votes and seats in London than Labour. There’s no way to spin this one as anything other than a disaster.

London is a stronghold for the Labour party; filled with Labour councillors, Labour MPs and a Labour Mayor. All of these seats are now under threat.

Going into future elections, the Liberal Democrats now know they have an active and passionate base, one deeply behind their flagship policy on the issue of the day – something we can no longer rely on.

An issue of even greater concern is the percentage of university students that voted for the Liberal Democrats last week.

Almost one in three votes cast by those in major student cities, a useful proxy for students, were for a party that betrayed them nine years ago by trebling tuition fees. Labour can no longer take students and young people for granted.

While Lisa Nandy claimed overnight that we were overly focused on London, Labour’s appalling results were spread across the UK.

The talented Clare Moody lost her seat in the South West and Labour lost three seats in Scotland.

These Labour MEP’s should have been sent to Europe to promote Labour values across the European Union.

They should have gone to Brussels to help with fighting climate change and promote socialist policies on Labour immigration and tax reform.

Instead, the party let them down and they now find themselves jobless. It’s not good enough to claim that our result was good in comparison to the Tories. Better solutions need to be found.

Two election defeats in three weeks are not ideal for a party seeking to be the next government. Last week results showed we cannot even take our base for granted.

But there is hope: Fact Check released data yesterday which showed that backing a People’s Vote and Remain would improve our chances in an election.

Even a 5% swing back from the Lib Dems would see us gain 47 seats compared to 2017.

It’s now time for clarity surrounding Labour’s Brexit policy. If the leadership thinks they have a better policy on Brexit than a confirmatory referendum, they should ask the members what they think.

Although the right people have been making the right noises, we have to speak with one voice.

That voice must be for a confirmatory referendum on any deal, support for Remain, and a commitment to transform Europe for the many, not the few.

Cathleen Clarke is a member of Our Future, Our Choice and a member of Momentum

9 Responses to “Labour’s Brexit policy was too complicated for the doorstep”

  1. Andrew Carey

    What does money allow you to do? Move resources around, create incentives, manage projects. persuade talented people to give up one thing over there and do another thing over here that government desires. It means you can set prices which stop the free market coming in and doing whatever unpredictable thing it might do.
    So what is the EU’s biggest budget item?
    Anyone, anyone – not on Labour List you won’t hear about it. This must be about the 20th article about the EU and related that has failed to mention that the primary fiscal purpose of the EU is to transfer funds from median taxpayers to those who own large amounts of agricultural land. The alternatives are no subsidies at all ( e.g. New Zealand ) or devolution to nations ( e.g. Switzerland / Norway ).
    And the second biggest budget item in the EU budget?
    Anyone, anyone.
    Care to guess if it’s a hand out from median taxpayers to people who already own a lot of capital? Nah, no-one’s interested really. People’s views of the EU political class don’t extend to that level of detail. They don’t ask what they do with the money and if it’s better to have centralised policies, they just want those who want to tell a whole Continent how to live their lives to do one, and if we make mistakes, at least we can correct them ourselves later rather than having to hire lobbyists to go to Brussels to simultaneously get 27 other countries to change policy at the same time so that we can.

  2. Tom Sacold

    Labour’s Brexit policy was created to gain support from the metropolitan establishment in the South East.

    Labour is no longer interested in the traditional working-class of the North and Midlands.

  3. Patrick Newman

    I see we have some budding fiction writers here but it is an anti, proBrexit Party agendas we are treated to really. You see what Trump is doing to China. He will have the UK – EU’s little cast-off – for breakfast!

  4. Eddie Clarke

    The message was not so complicated; accept the referendum result, but protect jobs and workers’ rights. I support this. But this election was about supporting Europe or “Brexit”. We know how the leadership has spun previous results. Simples.

Comments are closed.