27 Jun 2016

Apollo 13? Removing Corbyn is the only credible, if long shot, route to a second EU referendum

86D37C30-D9F5-4DA1-917CCFED923332FB.jpg


British politics has been on a vast collective acid trip over the past few days. A referendum result that few in the Leave campaign, never mind the Remain camp, actually believed would happen has triggered anarchy. First within the Conservative Party as a Prime Minister, who had said as late as last Wednesday that he would continue whatever the outcome, announced his resignation and now inside the Labour Party as multiple members of the Shadow Cabinet outlined their resignations in advance of a Parliamentary Labour Party meeting debate on a no-confidence motion in the leader. Technically this has no constitutional status whatsoever but could trigger a second wave of departures and a dispute about what the Labour Party rules on leadership elections actually mean that could easily end up in the courts. To cite Tears for Fears (a 1980s rock group), it is a Mad World.

Yet this madness matters. Jeremy Corbyn is absolutely central to the EU referendum events. It was because he was elected Labour Party leader last September that the Conservative Party concluded that it could rip itself to shreds over the EU and take the risk of destroying its own Prime Minister without fear of retribution from the electorate; and it is because he was Labour leader that the party itself was so ineffective at mobilising its core supporters to vote to Remain.

And looking at the data there is no doubt that it was the Labour vote outside of the successful metropolitan cities that was decisive. The centre-right electorate split pretty much as might have been anticipated four months ago. It was the centre-left vote in the North East, the West Midlands and Wales that was different from what might have been expected then. The Leave victory involved the fusion of two very distinct parts of the electorate, namely a largely middle class section who feel culturally/socially discontent with the modern world and a predominantly working class segment who feel economic discontent. The link is migration which culturally threatens the first set and economically threatens the second.

So what happens about Mr Corbyn then?

It all depends on how one reads the rules. These state that any challenger to a Labour leader must have the explicit personal backing of at least 20% of Labour MPs and MEPs. That is straightforward. If one of my cats were a Labour MP it could pass that hurdle. The uncertainty is whether the sitting leader is then obliged to also be re-nominated by a similar number of parliamentarians. Those in the Corbyn camp would argue that the silence of the rulebook on the matter indicates that the leader remains the leader until and unless they are defeated, so no such nominations would be needed.

The anti-Corbyn fraternity can, though, point to the precedent of 1988 when Tony Benn challenged Neil Kinnock for the Labour Party leadership having achieved the (then lower) number of Labour MPs required to trigger that contest and Mr Kinnock responded by producing his own collection of MP nominees (although it is utterly unclear as to whether he did this because he believed that he was obliged to do so or simply to demonstrate how much support he had in the PLP). It does not help matters that the person who took that decision within the Kinnock team died some time ago and can thus only be contacted to discover what they understood the party rules to be via a séance.

Yet on this disagreement turns everything. If it is deemed that Mr Corbyn has to be re-nominated, then he has virtually no chance of remaining as Labour leader. Any prospective challenger who can pass the 20% barrier has a very strong probability of being returned unopposed. The wider membership of the Labour Party would doubtless hate it and complain like hell but it would be they who then had to decide whether or not to split off and form their own new political force. If, on the other hand, it is thought that Mr Corbyn is automatically entitled to be on the ballot with no duty to summon up nominations from MPs then the chances must be that he would remain in office, albeit with a Shadow Cabinet which resembled the intergalactic bar scene in the original Star Wars movie, and every chance of another challenge in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 until either he was finally ousted by his MPs or a majority of the PLP membership were de-selected by Corbynite members. Strewth.

This is all very interesting(ish) so far, but why on Earth should anyone outside Labour care?

Apollo 13. For readers under the age of 50 this analogy requires some explanation. Apollo 13 refers to the quite astonishing drama of 11 to 17 April 1970 when the aforementioned rocket suffered a massive explosion while in space, forcing the crew to deploy what was supposed to be their landing module as an escape vehicle, hurling themselves around the back of the Moon (so becoming, as they still are, the three human beings to have travelled the furthest from our planet) and then exploiting its gravitational force to propel them back towards the Earth and finally pulling off an outrageously implausible splashdown with less than half of the electric power of a contemporary £5 digital watch.

Removing Corbyn is the only remotely credible Apollo 13 option for those who favour the UK staying in the European Union. It involves Labour acquiring a more electable Leader, positioning itself as the political party that favours an early general election and a second EU referendum if it wins it. If Mr Corbyn remains in place then it would not want a premature ballot (because it would be stuffed). He would not endorse the argument that the electors had been sold a pup on 23 June and had to have the chance to reconsider its position in the cool light of more evidence about the extent of the economic disruption involved, the unattractive nature of the deal that the EU would actually impose and the chances of the UK breaking up as Scotland headed off towards another independence vote.

It hence becomes clear why Apollo 13 is a legitimate comparison. The mix of moves required to lead to a second referendum are a very long shot. First, Labour has to be rid of Mr Corbyn. Second, the public has to change its mind about the wisdom of leaving the EU. Third, there has to be a general election before exit from the EU is absolute. Fourth, Labour has to win that election by convincing some instinctively pro-Conservative electors to lend them their backing to get a second referendum, and finally a new Labour Government has to hold and win that second referendum. Fantasy politics, probably. Yet the odds on a second referendum on Friday at Noon were about 5%. Were the PLP able to remove its leader then those odds would rise to at least 15%. If the incoming Conservative Government were to make a hash of withdrawal, then those numbers would move upwards further.

Which leaves us with a spectacular irony

On the face of it, you would have thought (entirely reasonably) that the contest to succeed David Cameron was the most important occasion in British politics over the next three months. It is very important but no one who enters that competition (let alone anyone who has the slightest hope of winning) is going to do so on the basis that there might be any reconsideration of departure from the EU. That contest will be about personalities and the tactics of exit. It will probably boil down to an internal referendum on whether Boris Johnson is temperamentally suited to be leader and PM.

If Mr Corbyn could be ejected (which, as noted, depends more on how the rulebook is read than on anything else), the subsequent identity of his successor and the policy stance that they take on EU membership suddenly becomes potentially more pivotal than the name of the next leader of the Conservative Party and Prime Minister. It implies that the referendum could be refought either at an early general election or through the medium of the 2020 election. It is, to repeat, a long shot, 15% and only if Mr Corbyn is thrown out. But what were the odds of a Leave win at 10pm on Thursday?

Tim Hames, Director General, BVCA



×

Update your login details

We updated our website and supporting systems on 12th December. 

If you previously had an account, please reset your password. If it's your first-time logging in, please register to create an account. For assistance, please contact the BVCA Membership Team

Login