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?

Yes Lucy (if you can call that winning, in that they lost less badly than everyone else). It is not traditional, following a GE defeat, for the opposition to shut up and sit down for 5 years until the next GE. The opposition is supposed to challenge the government when they think it is necessary, and all MPs are supposed to represent the best interests of their constituents, whether they are in government or not.

Its not like JC and NS are tricking the EU negotiators, or pretending to have authority they don't possess. The EU negotiators know who the official Brexit team is, and who the shadow Brexit team are, and if they are willing to listen to JC and NS then fair enough.

My democratically elected representative in Westminster is an SNP MP. It doesn't matter that her party are not in power in Westminister, nor does it matter whether I voted for her or not. She is my representative. That's how our system works.

ok, well it's just me that thinks that they should be having discussions with and within our government.

and your SNP representative squishy should be doing the same.

How???? My SNP can't have discussions within the government.
Oppositions MPs can have discussions WITH the government, but the leaders of the devolved nations have been repeatedly excluded from any Brexit related decision making. Therefore I can't really blame them for trying to get their voices heard a different way.

You idiot. You just don't get how things work do you.

Op of course..

well, as the SNP were defeated in Indyref1, and had their majority reduced in the GE, they are just looking for a chance to flex their political muscles. They are still behaving irresponsibly, but what does Sturgeon care, as long as she appears in the papers? Whether the SNP like it or not, they are still, by a democratic decision, part of the UK and should be behaving with the benefit of the UK as a whole in mind. NS is ignoring the scots majority who voted against independence. But then, she's been doing that since the Independence Referendum.

Maybe she believes that the government's interpretation of Brexit will not benefit the UK as a whole? I would agree with her on that point.

but its not up to NS is it? Either of us might agree with her - but would that give us a right to talk to the EU? No. We've had a referendum, we've had Indyref, we've had a GE. All of those mean that we have empowered our legally-appointed government to carry out Brexit. If posters think 'well, I don't like what they're doing, or how they're doing it' tough shit. It's called democracy. Corbyn, NS et al should be working out for a better Brexit for all of us, instead of blithely carrying on with their political agendas when they have been defeated in the polls.

Well, technically everyone has a right to talk to everyone....

What do you mean they should be "working out for a better brexit for all of us"? How? What does this look like? Does it involve nodding along and smiling at everything the Brexit committee says and does, and voting through whatever May tells them to vote through?

well, it doesn't mean political parties (that have been defeated in the polls) going to the EU with seperate plans. but then, self-aggrandaisement is so Sturgeon, isn't it?

By all accounts the EU thinks the tories are 'shambolic'. If anyone is making our country look as though someone knows what is going on, i'm more than happy to let them soften the negotiators if they can.

I assume lucy would rather wait until 3 months before we crash out when all but one or two tories currently in the cabinet are left standing?

At least Davis is enjoying himself. That makes all the chaos worth it. I am sure he appreciates the air miles he's building up too.

So I get that you think that the Tories aren't doing well. Does it make it better for the SNP and labour to act independently, especially as they have no actual power? Or does it make a bad situation worse?

As pp said - EU knows Corbyn doesn't have powers. He can however soften them up and remind them we aren't all Eton buffoons. Corbyn is a good negotiator by all accounts, he works with people not against them. I'm not a labour voter btw. I actually feel this shouldn't be political bickering, I don't care who said what to whom. I just want someone to get on with talking to the EU rather than giving wedgies in the locker room.

Oh dear, political squabbling is detracting big time from the quality of debate here. I may disagree with the views the pols are putting forward, but they are only there as our elected representatives. Surely, the big discussion is about the end result I/you/ others want to see?

For much of the UK, the discussion is about how the standard of living (and I acknowledge the inequalities in the system) is spread, shared and paid for. Health, education, housing, policing, defense and administering it all is costly. Collecting the tax payable needs to be seen to be fair and enforced for everyone. People in desperate need (like disabled people and those too young, old or incapable) ought to have a minimum standard. Where is that line drawn?

If we want a society where the winners do not take it all, there also needs to be acceptance that not everyone can automatically have, or benefit from, the best of everything/the latest drugs and medical technology or an Oxbridge education, although they should still expect a reasonable share in the benefits a first world society offers. In a society where people are free to achieve to the best of their ability, some will seem to fall short of achieving the dream. Contributing something, anything, as best possible is how we belong.

Stating it in medical terms, there will always be conditions we can only alleviate but not eliminate.

Labour have a shadow Brexit committee, which is doing what a shadow committee should do. Like I said upthread, politics is pretty tumultous at the moment and it is possible that Labour might be in power before the negotiations are over, so they should be preparing for this eventuality. Establishing a relationship with negotiators now might save a bit of time later, and we need time!

You will notice that the shadow education department often has an opinion on education, the shadow home secretary should have a plan for how they would handle the prison crisis, etc. It is easier to criticise than do, of course, but that doesn't mean the opposition shouldn't hold the government to account. For too long Corbyn was not doing this enough, and it is good to see Labour challenging the government and looking like a proper opposition again.

Labour and the SNP are independent, in so far as they don't have to do what May tells them. Would you have them bound by the Tory whip?

If Labour were in power, I wouldn't expect the Conservatives to sit back quietly and do what they're told either.

Surely, the big discussion is about the end result I/you/ others want to see? So let's forget about who our elected representatives are and have ad hoc representation. As I said upthread, whether you like it or not, the tories won and labour lost. I believe the opposition should and must do their job in the Houses of Parliament. It is irresponsable for them to go over to Brussels with their own agendas.
Would you have them bound by the Tory whip? can you tell me why they would be bound by the tory whip? If they're not tories. And what is wrong with them debating in the Commons?

lucydogz, you seem to have an extremely limited understanding of how our democracy works.

sorry about that. perhaps you could explain to me why Labour can't discuss Brexit stratergy in the Commons.

As I said upthread, whether you like it or not, the tories won and labour lost, I wonder for how long. Not only did the Tories not get an overall majority but they have done an awful lot to alienate voters since then. Even their own grandees are preparing to jump ship.

GraceGrape

You say ” 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.”

Hahahahaha ,,, Labour’s chancellor over the weekend was saying he still hadn’t made up his mind if we will be in the Customs Union, or if there will be ‘some’ freedom of movementt’ – yet the Labour manifesto say the UK will leave the Single market.

NEWSFLASH if the UK accepts freedom of movement, accept the supremacy of European Courts, or is still in the Customs Union etc, we have not LEFT the EU – which is a ‘soft’ Brexit, not anything to do with me or what I want.

Pray tell, what do YOU think a Soft Brexit is as mentioned by so many clueless MPs, before and after the Referendum????

It is clear from what they were saying over the weekend, that Labour would be going to EU negotiations with EVERYTHING on the table, when the EU have already said it isn't - HOW is that a negotiating position????

There isn't 'a little bit' of the Single Market, its all or none - if Labour hasn't worked that out yet - they shouldn't be let anywhere near Westminster - never mind on an away day to Brussels.

They lied to in their General Election manifesto for 'Leaver' votes, like they lied on their Scottish Independence position, their Trident and now it seems Tuition Fees - now an 'aspiration' not a promise.

Telling the media, or writing down one thing, and then in meetings telling others something else, obviously works around UK general elections - but they shouldn't be let anywhere near the EU table to polish it, never mind negotiate.