,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
The amendment Labour are planning to back would require a referendum on Theresa May's deal vs remain, in order to validate her deal. But danger is that could itself be amended before the referendum occurs, e.g. to turn it into TM's deal vs no deal.
theguardian.com/politics/2019/…
theguardian.com/politics/2019/…
It also establishes a bad precedent because it in effect says "Theresa May, we think your deal is good enough to be worth presenting to the people" but up until now Labour have adamantly maintained it's a terrible deal, and nothing will have changed.
It's like making a chocolate cake using manure rather than the finest Belgian dark, then saying "well, if people are stupid enough to vote to eat it..." The responsible thing would be to leave the manure in the sack where it belongs, and push to use more palatable ingredients.
Even bigger problem: what is Labour's logic if the amendment gets voted down.
Their support of the amendment says: "we now think TM's deal is good enough to put to the people". But if that were true when it was voted down, how can they then vote against the deal minutes later?
Their support of the amendment says: "we now think TM's deal is good enough to put to the people". But if that were true when it was voted down, how can they then vote against the deal minutes later?
