Should we mention any bloc votes or union influence ?, not to mention sitting on the fence so long that he's got splinters in his piles.

You are unusually myopic on the Corbyn position on this WC; he's playing a blinder here, sitting back and letting the Tories destroy themselves, whilst still focussing on the big issues that the man in the street cares most about - despite the political obsession about Brexit - i.e poverty, the inequities of UC, wealth inequality, the NHS etc etc.

I'm not sure what you want him to do - but he's just been proven right in his decision to delay calling a no confidence vote - because he knew the more swivel-eyed faction of the Tory party were about to do it for him; timing is everything.

My comment was aimed at the xenophobic Brexiteers who criticse Juncker for being unelected & irremovable. Both of which are bololx. Whereas our own dear PM is not elected by the people.

As regards Corbyn, you mistake me for a Labour party member. I belong to a different political party. Having said that, I find it hard to criticise Corbyn for his current approach. The Tories created this shoite storm, not him. Where I think Corbyn is torn, is that, like Tony Benn, he believes passionately about democracy, down to the local level. And he finds that is at odds with a European organisation. What I believe, & my party believes, is that we should be fighting for local decision making on issues such as education, health, social services, local energy, local transport; while the bigger issues such as environment, workers' rights, food quality/production, major transport need large scale approach. One of the biggest things that infuriates me about Brexiteers is that they are happy to hand all decision making to a elite bunch of London-centric, in-bred, hate-filled, Eton Oxbridge 'elite' who don't have the slightest clue or care for the mass of the population.

I keep reading the ramblings of the liberal lunatic fringe over at The Guardian and I really don't know what they expect Corbyn to do, other than sit back and watch the Tories burn. While ever he's in opposition, Brexit isn't his problem to solve. He could change his stance on the matter every day if he wanted, there's nothing he can effectively do about it.

Their obsession is with a People's Vote - which I can empathise with to some extent - but they seem to have created the idea that it's within Corbyn's gift to just snap his fingers and make it happen; which it clearly isn't. And even it were - I'm not sure what it solves - half the electorate will still be pi$$ed off - just the other half.

The vote we need now is a GE - if Labour can get into office, which I think they would in a GE, then some of the things that people seem to think Corbyn should do now in opposition, he will actually be able to do; starting with reversing the crippling austerity years and tackling pressing issues like homelessness, child poverty and the slow death of the health and social care systems.

The only People's vote that is defensible is:

1. May's 'deal'?
2. Just get out.

Lucid.

Bren, I think that Corbyn has been increddibly slow to reveal his actual position on Brexit.

I certainly dont remember him "selling" a remain position duriing the referendum campaign and he was happy to leave it to dumb and dumber (Cameron and Osborne) to sell the remain option, which failed horribly.

Therefore he is culpable for allowing us to end up where we are.

Yes, he is of course, more than happy to sit back and watch the Tories implode and it has to be said, this is something that they are doing rather well, but, Corbyn should have been far more pro-active.

He too is also being less than honest with the electorate, in pretending that Labour (should they get the opportunity) would negotiate some kind of magical deal which honestly, appears to be dreamland stuff.

It was bad enough having Farage & Co lying and misleading the public so badly but, Mr Corbyn, has his focus firmly fixed on becoming prime minister and right now, this is to the detriment of ANY Brexit deal

Surely, a second referendum is inevitable now?
Isn’t a hope in hell that either no deal or May’s deal will gain a parliamentary majority (good ol’ sovereignty) so it will be put back to the people.

It could all be done in one referendum. First question: Do you want to Leave the EU or Remain? Second Question: In the event of a majority Leave vote, would you prefer to leave on the terms of the PM's deal, or with no deal?

And before the more swivel-eyed leave supporters start spouting the undemocratic nonsense, this would not be "overturning" the result of the 2016 referendum, any more than a General Election overturns the policies and mandates arising from the previous General Election. Indeed, democracy can only operate properly and fairly if voting is an ongoing process.

The problem is, it is the wills of the people, and whatever they do, those that agree with them will take it for granted and those that don’t will be furious with them. And whatever they do most people will disagree.

I accept that you don’t want to tie negotiators hands, but ‘leave’ was a ridiculously open option. It had to be leave and go somewhere somewhat specific. By leaving it so open, people could project their own preferences onto it, which in some cases were/are mutually exclusive.

So a general election made sense from that perspective... but led to a hung parliament. There’s no settled public consensus still, more than two years on, on what Brexit should look like.

It is very simple. People voted to leave the EU. That was followed by a General Election in which the two parties receiving the overwhelming majority of votes cast stood on manifestos stating they would honour the referendum result. So, any daft so called People's Vote should not include a 'remain' option without first holding a general election where at least one major party stands on a Remain ticket and wins.