Supporting Johnson`s deal a mistake, Starmer

Larry Elliott might well be right when saying that what matters politically is "the quality of goods and services" resulting from the UK-EU deal, rather than the actual details in the small-print, but when the inevitable delays, shortages and queues occur, there will be plenty of "political fallout" going the prime minister`s way (Johnson`s happy to "own" his deal - Labour would gain little by opposing it, 28/12/20). That is why making sure "Johnson owns the accord" and then voting for it in parliament has to be a mistaken route for Labour, as it assumes its claims will receive a fair hearing in the right-wing media. Hasn`t the party`s recent history taught it anything? Instantly as Labour gives its support, it will share the blame for all the problems ensuing from the deal, no matter what the shadow front-bench says to the contrary. Just because the Tories supported the Iraq war in 2003 and escaped any culpability for the ensuing disaster does not mean Labour can expect to get away with this. As soon as Starmer attributes any problems to Johnson, he will be mugged by the press and forced to share responsibility. The only sensible way forward for Labour is to abstain, as Polly Toynbee suggested a few weeks ago, accompanied as it must be by the leader`s "speech of a lifetime" (Johnson`s deal will spark a war in his party, 08/12/20). By giving assurances to oppose not only any deregulation following Brexit which threatens workers` rights, safety and security, but any moves towards a return to austerity, he could yet prove himself capable of unifying his party. Increasing the distance between Labour and the Tories, whether over Brexit, the economy and the north-south divide, or basic domestic policy is now more important than ever.