Corbyn votes against himself and loses as he tries to limit power of prime ministers
Decisions on military action, Jeremy Corbyn told the Commons, should not be taken unilaterally by a prime minister. Instead, they should be put to a vote in Parliament. “Enshrining the right of MPS to decide on matters of peace and war,” sniffed the Labour leader, “is essential.”
Limiting the powers of prime ministers, of course, is bound to look appealing while one is in Opposition. Someday, however, the prime minister could be Mr Corbyn. And it’s not hard to imagine a situation in which a majority of MPS wanted military action… while Prime Minister Corbyn opposed it.
Given Mr Corbyn’s unshakeable commitment to parliamentary democracy, he would, we must assume, carry out the majority’s wishes.
“This war my Government is about to authorise is morally indefensible!” he would declare, signing off on air strikes before heading into Parliament Square to join a protest against them.
“I, and millions of people across this country, am appalled by the weak leadership shown by this Prime Minister!” he would bark into a megaphone.
“His short-sighted demands in Opposition have facilitated this disgraceful rush to war! The blood of innocent people is on his hands!”
The rest of his speech would be drowned out, amid violent scuffles between his supporters. Half would be cheering Mr Corbyn as normal, while the other half would be denouncing him for daring to criticise himself.
“These sickening attacks on Jeremy Corbyn by Jeremy Corbyn are a betrayal of Jeremy Corbyn,” a blogger at the pro-corbyn website The Canary would fume. “It’s about time Jeremy Corbyn got behind himself. If Jeremy Corbyn doesn’t support Jeremy
It’s not hard to imagine a situation in which a majority of MPS wanted military action, while Prime Minister Corbyn opposed it
Corbyn’s leadership, he should make way for someone who does.”
For now, at any rate, Mr Corbyn’s proposed “War Powers Act” looks like a distant dream. Yesterday, Tory MPS rubbished the idea. Simon Hoare (Con, N Dorset) argued that Theresa May had been right to bypass Parliament over Syria because the air strikes required “the element of surprise”. (This would have been an easier argument to make if Donald Trump hadn’t used Twitter to tell the entire world about the strikes in advance.)
Andrew Bridgen (Con, NW Leics) warned against weakness in the face of foreign aggression. “Some in this place would not have authorised action to retake the Falkland Islands in 1982,” he snorted. “I’m afraid some wouldn’t even authorise action to retake the Isle of Wight!”
As usual, Mr Corbyn stared longsufferingly into the middle distance.
The debate ended with a moment of farce. Mr Corbyn tabled a motion that MPS had “considered Parliament’s rights in relation to the approval of military action”, said that he hoped it would “command support from both sides of the House” – and then not only voted against it, but ordered his MPS to vote against it, too. A majority of MPS, however, voted for Mr Corbyn’s motion – meaning that he lost.
In a way, I look forward to his premiership. It should be quite something.