Labour’s ineptitude is an insult to democracy

How incompetent does an opposition party need to be in order to turn the Prime Minister’s worst week in office to its own disadvantage?

Laugh if you will at the hyperbole, but consider the facts. Since revealing her deal last Wednesday, Theresa May has faced cabinet resignations, attempted coups, and wall-to-wall condemnation from all fronts.

And yet, according to the latest YouGov poll, the Tories are down just two points since last week, and still hold a three-point lead over Labour when it comes to voting intentions.

This isn’t about Brexit – hard, soft, or covered in red, white, and blue sparkles. It’s about democracy, and the crucial role bestowed upon the opposition party.

While it might not always feel like it, talk of “holding the government to account” isn’t a glib platitude – it is the basis of a functioning political system. Because if the ruling party reveals itself to be incapable of governing, people need to know that there is another option.

That means having a clear set of policy proposals. It means watching the Prime Minister closely and responding reflexively every time they slip up. It means using the time on the opposition benches to audition for the top job, reminding the country at every turn that people have an alternative.

In short, it means years of gruelling hard work. Not quite as hard as actually being in power, but a good training programme for a government-in-waiting.

In normal times, a dysfunctional opposition means that the government gets to muddle on without proper scrutiny. In Brexit times, such ineptitude amounts to a constitutional crisis.

May’s deal is the definition of a Pyrrhic victory: a tangle of unfathomable legalese that offers very few of the benefits of leaving the EU, wins some concessions on migration that are likely to do more economic harm than good, combined in a document that has prompted widespread condemnation from her own party.

It is an epic compromise that will keep the UK economy from crumbling, but potentially cost May her position. And yet, Labour’s response has been a study in slapdash misdirection, paradox, delusion, and childish incompetence.

The party’s position on Brexit is that May’s deal is bad, and Jeremy Corbyn’s deal would be better.

How, exactly, is a mystery. Half the party seems to want a second referendum, despite this having been routinely ruled out by the leadership. Everyone is braying for a snap election, although MPs tend to get a bit fuzzy when asked what their official platform would actually be.

In essence, it feels a lot like Labour is trying to coast into government, with no plan for what comes next.

Corbyn has implied that the deal could be renegotiated in the two-year transition period that is itself a feature of the deal that would be being renegotiated (very meta).

He has hidden behind the semantic differences of “a” customs union and “the” customs union to try to suggest that the UK could have the benefits of leaving the EU while keeping the advantages of staying in (very post-structural).

He has also suggested that the deal could be easily adapted in Britain’s favour, without destabilising the situation in Northern Ireland, all with just four months to go before exit day (utter hubris).

And if Labour defenders need evidence of just how delusional it is to think that a Corbyn government would be able to handle Brexit any better than May, just look to the finance bill debacle this week.

Labour had tabled an amendment to the government’s bill, calling on the Treasury to assess the impact of the Budget on child poverty and inequality. Ostensibly little to do with Brexit, this is the kind of work an opposition party should be doing to keep the government on its toes.

In a surprise move, the disgruntled DUP MPs who are propping up May’s fragile government decided to vote against the Conservatives to signal their discontent with the withdrawal agreement.

What could – should – have been a major victory for Labour at a crucial time fizzled out when not enough Labour MPs turned up to vote, allowing the Tories to scrape through even without their DUP partners.

Then in an ironic twist of fate, one of the missing MPs turned out to be Corbyn himself. His excuse for being absent has changed several times, but it’s hard to think of a more apt exemplar of Labour’s current sloppiness than the leader missing the chance to defeat the government because he didn’t think it was worth trying.

This is the party we are meant to perceive as a viable government-in-waiting, ready and able to take the reins should the Conservatives fall?

And that’s why it’s no surprise that the latest polling doesn’t reflect the disastrous week May has just had. The public might be disappointed or even furious with the current administration, but not enough to turn to the bumbling opposition.

At a turning point as momentous as this, Britain deserves a viable alternative. It deserves a leader ready to step up if the government falls, and hold its feet to the fire on every detail.

Whether you blame it on laziness, ineptitude, or a misguided belief that Brexit matters less than the potential for a Marxist revolution, Corbyn is failing to provide that leadership. And in doing so, Labour is letting down democracy.