A government of national unity is a non-starter so the 'rebel alliance' need to stop entertaining it
PUBLISHED: 12:37 11 October 2019 | UPDATED: 12:44 11 October 2019
Talks about a government of national unity have taken up too much time, argue readers. They claim MPs need to focus their efforts elsewhere.
Become a Supporter
The New European is proud of its journalism and we hope you are proud of it too. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism
The fantasy of a government of national unity (GNU) is taking up far too much time on the Remain side. Jeremy Corbyn's supporters will only accept him as leader; Amber Rudd and the Tory rebels make it clear they will never accept Corbyn.
Just focus for now on making Boris Johnson follow the law and working with him, post-Halloween, to produce an acceptable deal which can pass the Commons on the proviso that it contains a confirmatory referendum with the option to remain.
Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters like to go on a lot about democracy - except, of course, when it comes to expelling or trying to deselect life-long members of Labour who displease them, or forcing through a major policy decision on a show of hands only.
However, given the contentious issue of who might lead a possible post-Johnson unity government, is it not possible for the collective opposition parties to submit a number of names (their own and others like Ken Clarke or Harriet Harman), and then all their MPs undertake a secret ballot, by a process of elimination, until whoever has the greatest support is thereby elected?
Then the acting prime minister (for such they would be) would form an inner cabinet of 'advisers' from the respective party leaders, perhaps with the second most voted-for candidate as deputy acting PM.
That way Corbyn has as good a chance as any, but whoever does get elected has real authority and respect.
Garth Groombridge, Southampton
When Jeremy Corbyn declared, apparently with some conviction, that he "would do anything to stop a no-deal Brexit", did that include waiving his right to lead an interim 'unity government' after a successful vote of no confidence against this wretched Tory administration?
As this seems to be the only way to ensure the achieving of a workable deal with the EU, and then submitting it to a People's Vote, could he be persuaded to honour the aforementioned pledge by agreeing to step aside for an alternative leader of such a temporary government? I somehow doubt it, given his past ambivalence on the issue of putting country before his leadership of the Labour Party.
- Send your letters for publication to firstname.lastname@example.org and read more by buying Thursday's newspaper each week.
Become a Supporter
The New European is proud of its journalism and we hope you are proud of it too. We believe our voice is important - both in representing the pro-EU perspective and also to help rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.Become a supporter