TWO senior Labour frontbenchers have thrown their weight behind calls for a second referendum on a cross-party Brexit deal to gain the backing of their MPs.
Shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer warned it was “impossible” to see how an agreement between the Conservatives and his party could clear the Commons unless it guaranteed the deal would be put back to the public for a “confirmatory vote”.
READ MORE: SNP teases Scottish Labour councillors suspended for teaming up with Tories
And Labour’s deputy leader Tom Watson said he thought the way out of the impasse was a “confirmatory ballot” on Theresa May’s agreement, saying it would be “difficult” for his party to assist in the UK’s exit from the EU without another referendum.
Ahead of the continuation of cross-party talks yesterday afternoon, Starmer told the Guardian that “probably 120 if not 150” of the party’s 229 MPs could vote against the deal unless it was linked to a referendum.
And he said: “I’ve made it clear that at this stage, at this 11th hour, any deal that comes through from this Government ought to be subject to the lock of a confirmatory vote.”
Watson told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “If a deal could be found that inspires enough votes in Westminster then fine, but it seemed to me that that’s very, very difficult. And so my idea of a confirmatory ballot is not a religious point or a point of ideology, it’s just how do you get an outcome, how do you sort this out?
“And one way to do it are these two minority positions – the Prime Minister’s deal and those that think the people should have a say on the deal – plug them together and you build a majority.”
READ MORE: Brexit: Labour-Tory customs deal would cost Scotland £5.9 billion
Watson also described Labour’s position in relation to the European elections as a “Remain and reform” party.
Last month Jeremy Corbyn saw off an attempt to commit the party to a confirmatory referendum on any Brexit deal, and Labour will instead only back a fresh vote only if it cannot either win the changes it wants to May’s deal or secure a General Election.
Nigel Farage later said the idea of a confirmatory referendum was the “most outrageous proposal” he had ever seen and would lead to a party like the Brexit Party winning a majority in Parliament at the next General Election.
Speaking during a walkabout in Pontefract, part of Labour MP Yvette Cooper’s constituency, Farage said: “A confirmatory vote, it sounds all nice and fluffy, what does it mean?
“It means we stay in the European Union as we are, or we nominally leave and stay permanently part of a customs union and with single market rules. They wouldn’t even give the public the option of actually leaving. It’s the most outrageous proposal I’ve ever seen.
“It wouldn’t break the deadlock, it would just mean we’re not leaving the European Union. It would just mean, basically, the second referendum would be there, giving two choices to reverse the result of the first one. It’s an outrage, it cannot happen.
“I promise you this, if we get forced as a country into that choice of a referendum, there’ll be bigger change in British politics than anybody can even imagine.”
He added: “If the Labour Party and sections of the Tory party were to completely sell-out on any idea of a clean break then the Brexit Party, or something like it, would win a huge number of seats at the next General Election and undoubtedly hold the balance of power in Westminster.”
Watson’s description of the party as one of “remain and reform” appear at odds with comments by fellow frontbencher Barry Gardiner who said recently that Labour was “not a Remain party now” and that the leadership was “committed” to leaving the bloc.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel