The reelection of Jeremy Corbyn may well have strengthened rather than weakened the right in the Parliamentary rather than weakened it.
Not holding any Shadow Cabinet posts they have no worries about being sacked and can make outspoken statements that echo those on the Government benches.
According to the Huffington Post
Rachel Reeves, Emma Reynolds and Stephen Kinnock – who all campaigned for Remain in the June referendum – now accept that immigration controls are one of the key lessons to be learned from the result.In a collection of essays released today by the Fabian Society, the three MPs agree that freedom of movement from the EU must end – even if that means leaving the Single Market.
Though this may appear to chime with party leader Jeremy Corbyn, who earlier this month called for the UK to have access to the Single Market but not be a full member. There are aspects in thier calls for immigration control that are deeply disturbing.
In the essay collection, titled “Facing the Unknown: Building a progressive response to Brexit”, Leeds West MP Rachel Reeves said:
“Immigration controls and ending free movement has to be a red line post-Brext – otherwise we we will be holding the voters in contempt.Progressive, Progressive in what way is this Progressive
“Subject to that, we need the greatest possible access that we can get to the single market without free movement.”
Aberavon MP Stephen Kinnock said that while he was “resolutely pro-immigration” the Labour Party “must recognise that immigration is not the same as freedom of movement.”
He added:
“The referendum had a clear message: the limitless nature of freedom of movement, despite its proven economic benefits, is not socially and politically sustainable.”
This argument could be made by someone who claims to be against draconian treatment of offenders, accept it because that what the people want.
Its tailoring your policy to the editorials of the Mail, Express and Sun.
Kinnock also goes on to argue that
“to deny the reality of white working class people, quite frankly, smacks of ‘class privilege’.”This is the sort of argument you get in the Tabloids accusing the Liberal- Left of speaking from a minority of a middle class elite who are a bunch of Do-Gooders (as opposed to Do-Badders or Do-Nothingers?) who try to force their idealist views on a "Working Class" that are in reality right wing and reactionary.
Emma Reynolds, Labour MP for Wolverhampton North East, argued that the main reason for the overwhelming leave vote was immigration concerns.
Addressing the sort of Brexit deal the country should strike with the EU, Reynolds said:
It is my strong view that no future deal can retain free movement of people in its present form.That is no argument, if you believe that such concerns are wrong. It leads down the dangerous path where hate filled politicians can create scapegoats who have no party to turn to for support .
“We must argue for restrictions while getting the best possible economic deal in the circumstances. This won’t be as good as the status quo but leave voters clearly said that their concerns about immigration trumped their worries about the economic cost of leaving.”
Accepting Ukip propaganda like the poster below, in order to regain those votes you believe you may be loosing to them is shameful
But it is clear that Labour are a party which whist electing a honourable leader who has a record of fighting for causes which may not always have much support from your typical Labour voter consist of many particularly within the PLP are prepared adopt the language of the far right rather than press the argument against.
They can smugly sit om the Back Benches knowing that any attacks on them from within the Corbynist supporters will be deemed a Witch Hunt and in which they can conjure up imaginary plots to deselect them.
Those who thought that Labour were now on the right path away from the Red-Tory years of Blair and Brown may well be deluded. Indeed the indication is that there are now Labour MPs who are now Red-Ukip.
1 comment:
I agree with you on many things Glyn, but in this case I think that these Labour MP's are actually reading the runes for once on this particular issue. Although I admire Jeremy Corbyn for his fortitude and personal integrity, I feel sure he is likely to alienate a huge amount of people if he says today that he wants migration levels to carry on as usual. I would imagine he will say this because of his own personally held beliefs on internationalism and so, rather than more base concerns on garnering the future votes of migrants. But even so, for someone who has based his whole campaign on listening to ordinary people's concerns and involving then in a more participatory type of politics, it does seem incredible that he wants to ignore one of the key public sentiments expressed during the recent referendum.
There is an alternative way of opposing unlimited migration which does not have to follow the UKIP agenda. Simply say that unlimited migration is a form of modern imperialism, which is denuding poorer countries of their own talent. In years gone by, the British Empire plundered countries' lands and treasures- now they are plundering their people! There is an ethical way of looking at this issue, which is miles away from the tabloid hysteria of the red tops!
Cymru Rydd
Post a Comment