Why has Corbyn asked to meet EU Negotiator Barnier next week to discuss Brexit?

[TheaSaurass]

I know that team Corbyn claimed Labour won the June 8th General Election with Labour’s 262 parliamentary seats to the Conservatives 318, but now Article 50 has been triggered, the last thing a government needs is the leader of an opposition party deciding he needs to add his two pence worth – and that sends such weak negative negotiating signals to an EU side already playing hardball – and the markets funding our spending deficits and national debt.

Admitted Labour campaigned at the general election for a Brexit that respects the EU Referendum result, and understands that the UK will therefore have to leave the Single Market, but mirroring the obvious UK governments stance to an EU that sells substantially more to us than we do to them, Mr Corbyn wants the tariff free trade Mr Barnier confirmed just Friday – cannot be “frictionless” as we are leaving the Single Market to control our own borders.

Remarkably Mr Corbyn felt that he should mention Labour will not make a commitment “at this stage” (before an election due in 5-years has been called) to paying for access to a Single Market exporting more to us, but he DID just bring up the ‘Norway model’ he was said to have favoured before.

The ‘Norway model’ is more complex than (the UK) STILL paying the EU and still having the ‘Freedom of Movement’ of EU citizens who arguably would be more of a problem for a broader 65 million citizen economy UK, than the smaller 5 million economy of Norway – but for those remainers that pretend no one said on the Referendum ballot paper or in the media that we would leave the Single Market when many on interview were recorded saying just that – clearly no one at all said ‘Freedom of Movement’ of EU citizens, would remain after Brexit.

As what would be the main point of the UK leaving the EU if still ‘staying and paying’, with open borders, via a model that works for a mainly oil and fish economy of Norway with a more limited scope for unknown annual immigration numbers, versus a UK with services and home availability already stretched?

The General Election was early June, it is now early July, surely it’s a bit unseemly if anyone, never mind a party not in government, to start a dialog with the EU on a Brexit model that includes ‘Freedom of Movement’ without having first asked the people, via a general election manifesto commitment?

OCSock What do immigration figures for Muslims have to do with free movement within the EU? Just wondering.

It was mentioned to indicate the full scale of migration into the UK, and because that was a solid number. I would hazard a guess that it reflects the higher birth rate within the Muslim community rather than migration alone. The concern is over-population as much as the rapid cultural fragmentation. European countries' cultures and political systems have been evolving slowly and organically for millennia. Since 1945 the pace of change has accelerated phenomenally fast, for multiple reasons.

since when you OP can be personal when others aren't?

Just out of interest, is anyone else reading Either, the debate erupting following Tony Blair's claim that the EU is ready to discuss curtailing freedom of movement on the Torygraph website, OR B, the Times Online's debate responding to the news that Italy is about to issue travel papers to the 200,000 2017 arrivals from Libya in anger at the EU's failure to help them deal with the crisis?

"I would hazard a guess that it reflects the higher birth rate within the Muslim community rather than migration alone", that is just a guess, it could also reflect the number of people converting to Islam. An awful lot of the Muslims I know are converts.

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/parentscountryofbirthenglandandwales/2015 but we need more people anyway to work hard to pay tax to keep the old people.

The EU ballot paper did not say leave the single market. It said leave the EU . You can leave the EU and stay in the EEA. Anyway since the election 90% of MPs (all Tory and Labour) were voted in on a leaving single market ticket so here we are and we have to make the best of it People may draw some comfort in all this that at least we lawyers will do okay and that those who voted for Brexit will be the ones likely to suffer most.

Is this a week day only thread? There are loads of posters here during the week, with strong opinions and forcefully worded posts. Where are you at the weekend, when there is time to read and comment intelligently? Missing you...............

Apology, that should have read "read widely" to reflect the time pressure in the working week.

I think this thread has attracted a few opinionated people but maybe vast majority don't really care about corbyn discussing brexit with eu negotiators.

Corbin has been a lifelong Eurosceptic - until now! So much for principles! That's why he was largely absent in the campaign as the Labour Party's official position always has been pro EU, apart from Barbara Castle and Tony Benn of course!

Corbyn's biggest problem is he has to do what the unions want.

He went to Brussels for the same reason Sturgeon did - it looks good to the voters - "see I'm important".

May, Davis, Johnson, Hammond are too busy knifing each other in the back at the moment to care about Brexit negotiations.

Considering there is all out war within the government at the moment, surely someone has to take represent British interest in the Brexit negotiations?

It may as well be Corbyn. Compared to the Tories, Corbyn looks like a rock of stability at the moment (despite what those bankrolled by Aaron Banks write)

Pedantic, but I had to pick up on this point:
"especially one who would be our Commander in Chief defending us..."
...Corbyn will NOT become our commander in chief, no matter who wins the next GE (whenever that will be) because that post is filled by Queen Elizabeth II. You are confusing us with the US, maybe.

I have no objection to Corbyn speaking to the negotiators. He is not currently authorised to negotiate on our behalf, but it seems pragmatic for the opposition leader to build up a relationship with the EU negotiators, especially with the current government so precarious. Whatever your opinion of Corbyn, at least it would save a bit of time if he does become PM. And time is something in very short supply at the moment.

Makes sense for Sturgeon to go, too. If May is cutting the regions and devolved nations out of the Brexit plans completely, why wouldn't they seek to get their point across a different way? She would not be doing her job properly if she didn''t do everything in her power to promote Scottish interests.

Yes - no Northern Ireland. Can you honestly not imagine why that might be????

NRTFT - because no one else is actually negotiating. They are all far too busy massaging ego's within our own parliament to actually realise their soundbites are not, in fact, legal. Boris' whistling comment comes to mind, but there have been so many. No one is actually checking that these empty promises for our tabloids can actually be achieved. The single market is the most worrying case of this - the EU really has tried to tell us we cannot stay in it without accepting freedom of movement. It's only in the last week or so anyone in UK parliament has apparently realised this..... Huge amounts of time are being wasted and we have no structural idea of what to do if no deal is struck. It is possibly the worst emergency this country has faced in living memory. I for one am glad SOMEONE is actually talking to the EU. Imagine selling a house and just demanding everything and refusing to agree the law is the law and never meeting the seller or agents to discuss? Madness.

Thea are you still banging on about no possibility of a "soft" Brexit? Some of us have already pointed out to you on the other thread that your arguments about this are based on what you personally want Brexit to look like.

I do care, very much, that Corbyn et al have been over to Brussels. If they truly cared about negotiations, they would be talking to our government. We need a united front to try and get the best deal. How does this make this possible? I find it despicable that they are, instead, political posturing.

I notice that DD stayed in Brussels for almost a full two hours today, so I'm sure the negotiations are almost done and dusted. No need for JC at all.

I'm not saying I think that DD is doing well. I'm also appalled at what's happening within the tory party - the briefing against Hammond particularly. I just think that we are going through important negotiations and the Opposition going over to have seperate chats is terrible. Self-seeking in the extreme, especially given how poorly Corbyn behaved during the Referendum campaign.

Whatever you think of the Tories, they are our elected representatives. Labour aren't. They've just got all excited because they did better in the GE than anyone expected. That doesn't mean they won, and have the right to go over to Brussels.

I do care, very much, that Corbyn et al have been over to Brussels. If they truly cared about negotiations, they would be talking to our government. We need a united front to try and get the best deal. How does this make this possible? I find it despicable that they are, instead, political posturing.

lucydogz, the EU would speak to our government but we haven't had a functioning government in the UK since the election was called last March.

Our so-called government is at war with one another. The Tory cabinet are too busy knifing each other in the back at the moment. They don't seem to want to bother their silly little heads with doing their jobs or negotiating on behalf of the UK.

Just because the Tories are reenacting Lord of the Flies does not mean that Jeremy Corbyn and Nicola Sturgeon should be expected to down tools and do nothing. The Leader of the Opposition and First Minister of Scotland continue to function.

We'll have to agree to disagree. JC and ns are not acting in our interest and are behaving inappropriately. IMO.

The Muslim population has partly risen due to freedom of movement in the EU. There are many Muslims who get citizenship in Belguim, France etc and then move to the U.k. The UK is seen as fairly 'muslim friendly' compared with France, which has banned the face veil. In the past few months I have met muslim familes from all over Europe coming to live in the small town where I work.

Lucy, same applies to tories and their representatives. Imo.

"The Muslim population has partly risen due to freedom of movement in the EU. There are many Muslims who get citizenship in Belguim, France etc and then move to the U.k."

If you are referring to large numbers of migrants and refugees being granted citizenship in countries like Germany and France, then i think you are wrong.
Refugees and migrants would normally be granted leave to remain, or asylum, which is NOT citizenship and does not give them a German passport or freedom of movement within the EU. Even long term residency does not confer those rights. Citizenship is only granted after residing in the country for a number of years, and after fulfilling a large list of criteria. TBH, by the time a migrant has lived in a country for 8 years; passed an oral and written language test; shown their commitment to the German constitution; and (often) given up their foreign nationality, they are probably settled enough in Germany to not really want to travel to the UK.

I am not saying that nobody ever moves country after becoming a citizen, (its not just Muslims who move house) but I don't think that EU membership has had a significant affect on the number of Muslims in the UK.

hang on ytho, the Tories did win the GE didn't they? Which makes them our democratically-elected representatives?