So I did.
Some of the statements it contains would be almost comically self delusional if the issues weren’t so serious. To show what I mean I’ve copied some of them and then added a few fairly obvious criticisms:
“We will end Theresa May’s reckless approach to Brexit, and seek to unite the country around a Brexit deal that works for every community in Britain.”
In other words the Labour Party official position is that they want Brexit to happen but they don’t think Theresa May is making a very good job of it. There are still a remarkable number of their voters who simply don’t grasp the first half of this. Labour is committed to delivering Brexit.
“We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain”
This statement makes it very clear that Labour are committed to staying in the Single Market and Customs Union. Without being in the EU. We know for certain now that the EU is never going to say that the UK can have access to the Single Market without the commitments. It simply cannot do that without destroying the EU. So the Labour Party are committed to following every single rule put out by the EU without any say whatsoever in what those rules are. In what world is that better than staying in and having your say on the rules?
“A Labour government will end the uncertainty for our farmers and food producers by securing continued EU market access allowing British farmers and food producers to continue to sell their products on the Continent”
How is that deal to be secured? The only basis on which farmers can sell onto the EU single market is by following every single EU regulation. It will not be possible for UK farmers to have one set of subsidy rules and then beat French farmers on price because of those subsidies. So Labour will either have to break this promise or sign up to all the essential elements of the Common Agricultural Policy. If that is the case then once again the question has to be: “What exactly are we leaving behind other than the chance to influence policy?”
“We will develop an export incentive scheme for SMEs “
What can this possibly meaningfully be if it doesn’t involve money? In other words Labour thinks that if it gets Britain out of the EU it can introduce subsidies on exports. Corbyn made a whole series of statements about nationalising and subsidising the steel industry during its recent crisis. What makes them think that other nations will quietly accept the subsidised goods and services we are trying to export to them? Being outside the EU doesn’t make us free to subsidise industry. It exposes us to the risk that a future government will negotiate a free trade deal with the US. Any such deal will be policed by an arbitration body making decisions under the influence of expensive corporate lawyers. That arbitration body will have the power to tell the UK government that it is not allowed to subsidise anything and will be issuing instructions to the UK about how it contracts for things like services delivered by the NHS.
“Where Theresa May wants to shut down scrutiny and challenge, Labour will welcome it. We will work with Parliament, not against it. On an issue of this importance, the Government can’t hide from the public or Parliament”
That sounds pretty good. Until you ask the simple question of how that scrutiny is to be delivered. Not by a people’s vote. There is no commitment to allowing people to have a say on what they make of the actual deal. Rather the reverse. The Labour leadership are very happy to call for a fresh election but they moved heaven and earth at their party conference to avoid being committed to a 2nd referendum. That is hiding from the public not empowering it. The opening sentence on their manifesto page is “Labour accepts the referendum result”. Labour is therefore still absolutely committed to the outcome of a vote two years ago on promises that have since proved to be false
The whole logic of Labour’s position comes down to one simple act of faith. They think that Brexit could have been done so much better if only they had been in charge of it instead of those nasty Tories. If they can only get a General Election and they can only get enough people to vote for them then they’ll immediately transform the negotiations and all will be well. We’ll be out, but it will be a nice friendly helpful Brexit.
This is a delusion. The realities that have tortured Theresa May are exactly the same for Labour. As the Labour Manifesto says: “The EU accounts for 44 per cent of our current exports”.
Anything which puts 44% of your exports at risk must also put jobs at risk. There is no “jobs first Brexit” there is only a jobs lost Brexit or a pretend Brexit. Either we crash out and lose jobs or we stay in and follow all the rules without a say. Labour is therefore committed to solving a logically impossible puzzle. Exactly the same one that has consistently baffled Theresa May. It wants all the advantages of being in the EU but wants to try and find a way of securing those advantages outside the EU. No matter how brilliant their minds are or how decent their intentions there is simply no escaping the hard reality that this deal is never going to be on offer. In other words the UK’s major opposition party is wedded to a policy of wishful thinking and false hopes.
The problem with entering government with confused ideas like these is that you start out very popular but then you end up very unpopular once you are confronted with the impossibility of delivering on your vision. Put more bluntly Labour might very well win the next election on a promise of creating a Jobs First Brexit. But their reputation risks plummeting like a stone once they face up to the challenges that have been destroying Theresa May. What will happen to Britain after both major parties have promised that they can make a success of Brexit and both have failed? What will follow if a confused and divided Labour government discovers that can’t possibly deliver their central promise?
So if you want to vote for a party that insists on telling people that they can be better off outside the EU when they won’t be then by all means vote Labour. If you want to vote for a party that is honestly explaining that we need to be inside a larger regional trading rules and we should be working to improve both those rules and the decision making processes then you are going to have to look elsewhere.
When the Green Party started calling for a second in out referendum on the final deal that is on offer it was an eccentric policy that was way out on the margins. That policy is now backed by millions. Despite both major political parties saying that the country needs to get out of the EU the majority of the country now wants to stay in.
Labour’s manifesto offers the public the option of voting for dither, self-deception and false promises and almost as many serious divides over Europe as the Conservatives. If you are a progressive thinker who is opposed to Brexit then why vote for a party that backs it and risks having any government it forms as battered and damaged by Brexit as Theresa May has been.