The Brexit vote was not on party lines – it is wrong of Labour MPs to scapegoat Corbyn

Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

Readers respond to the Labour Party crisis (PA)

I am angry and appalled that the former Shadow Cabinet have orchestrated the coup against Jeremy Corbyn. They predicated their actions on the basis that Corbyn couldn't get people to toe the party line by voting to Remain and that he was unelectable.

It was clear that the referendum vote was not on party lines and I think it is insulting that these MPs think that all Labour voters should do as they are told. Even in my constituency there were Leavers and Remainers all with valid views.

Labour was crucified at the last general election when many of these MPs had been in government for some time, so one might reasonably expect that they should shoulder some of the responsibility for our failure at that election.

Since Corbyn became leader we have made gains at by-elections, county and mayoral elections. Labour party membership has continued to grow, and recent polling put Labour and the Tories each on 32 per cent. Prior to the referendum Corbyn was polling higher than Cameron.

However, these points aside, this arrogant action has almost consigned Labour to the sidelines. It was clear on Friday (and widely speculated in recent weeks) that there could be a snap election. If we had a unified party able to take on the Tories we had a really good chance, especially with a strong anti-austerity agenda and a social responsibility take on the Brexit negotiations.

All that has now gone to dust. The debate on the Finance Bill should have been the focus of Monday's activities and yet it was not even on people's radar as Labour self-imploded.

If Corbyn stands down there is no obvious candidate to replace him that would be acceptable to the majority of the membership, and the timescale for electing a new leader means that the initiative is lost during the run-up to a general election; and a new leader may have been in place for no more than a few weeks, certainly not long enough to have informed policy and developed our strategy to take to the electorate.

If Corbyn remains we are likely to fail in an election because people won't vote for a divided party.

The actions of these MPs has ensured that one way or another Labour will lose an election, Corbyn gets the blame whatever, and no doubt they will then be looking to change the way the party elects its leader. Heaven forbid the members should be allowed to make such a mistake again.

Gail Freeman-Bell

Yeovil

Corbyn’s Remain campaigning was woeful, so he is either disingenuous or incompetent

I'm not a Labour Party member, and do not intend to spend £3 to become one. That doesn't prevent me from having views on their choice.

Jeremy Corbyn was elected because of his integrity. Unlike other politicians, he wasn't prepared to be two-faced when stating his position. He would be straight. So looking at his performance in the referendum debate his position looks a little awkward.

It's possible that after 40 years of opposing the EU he still did, but decided it was politically expedient to pretend otherwise while running a pathetic campaign calculated to hole Remain below the waterline. If so, his integrity has departed the battlefield.

Alternatively, he genuinely believed in remaining in the EU and gave the campaign his best shot. If that's his best shot then Labour are doomed.

You pay your money and you take your choice, but the answer is the same.

One other point, this a man who has spent many years plotting with his mates in the equivalent of the potting shed. To him, glorious failure is as worthwhile as success. Reasonable on the allotment, not when the poor are confronted by a potentially right-wing Government.

For my money he has continued to want to leave the EU and voted so. Don't worry about betraying the young who voted for you, Jeremy, you have already done so.

Pete Thackeray

Bristol

You can be ageist against the young, too

I find the tone of recent letters disturbing. I am 62 and along with many of my peers voted Remain. I share the concern that some younger people might tar all older people with the same brush and think me a bigot or a selfish idiot because of my age. However, to say as one correspondent does, that the young are more interested in social media than voting, falls into the same trap of prejudicial thinking. Many young people used social media to persuade others to vote and to exchange ideas and views. Condemning people because they belong to a particular social group – whether of race, religion, nation, class, gender or age – is lazy, prejudiced and sometimes downright hypocritical. It would be helpful if people could aim their criticisms at those actually responsible rather than escalate the divisions created by recent events by throwing mud at generic groups.

Mark Evens

Cumbria

You have printed some excellent letters since Friday on the subject of the referendum; much eloquent reasoning and thoughtful analysis. While I am at it may I particularly praise Robert Fisk's incredibly frank and moving piece about his father on Monday.

The letter from Derek Watts must speak for most of the 16-plus millions of us who voted to remain. Many of whom were and are fully aware of David Cameron's chief motive in calling a referendum – nothing more than an attempt to spike Nigel Farage's guns – and were aware too of the shallowness of most of the Leave arguments: what did they talk about except immigration, sovereignty (whatever they meant by that), and the £350m figure (known to be inaccurate and misleading)?

But on behalf of the thousands of retired people who wanted, and still do want, us to be part of the EU, I do criticise those of your correspondents who claim that the result was a “victory of the old over the young”. Certainly statistics prove that a certain number of older people voted Leave, but by no means all, especially in London, Oxford, Cambridge, and Edinburgh where the Remain vote was around 75 per cent. Surely places where knowledge might be said to outweigh ignorance, tolerance to outweigh prejudice? To continue to repeat this age-related prejudice, for that is what it appears to be, will only serve to deepen social divisions that the Brexit vote is already causing.

Rosemary Mathew

Cambridge

Leave and their friends in the press have duped this country

Last Thursday the British people were blatantly cheated with a series of promises which have since been confirmed as lies. The little cabal of wealthy, mainly elderly perpetrators of this fraud are already putting the future of our children and grandchildren at grave risk through their shared promotion of climate-science denial. They are compounding this vile betrayal by destroying the economic opportunities and prospects of our young people by leaving Europe.

In March an Oxford University academic paper It's The Sun Wot Won It (Reeves, McKee and Stuckler, 2016) showed how a single newspaper owner can move the vote in a general election by 2 per cent, gaining 525,000 votes for Labour in 1997 and, after switching allegiance, 550,000 for the Conservatives in 2010. In this referendum, several newspapers showed such an extreme bias in favour of the two journalist/MPs who led the Brexit campaign that the outcome was inevitably contrary to what most people, after a few days of reflection, really wanted.

75 per cent of the elected MPs representing this parliamentary democracy favour membership of the EU, yet this handful of extremist politicians and media chiefs are carrying out a fraudulent coup.

Aidan Harrison

Morpeth

Robert Fisk

I have learnt a huge amount over the years from Robert Fisk's reporting. How wonderful of him to add this heartfelt and personal image of his father to the body of his work (Voices, Monday). Nice to think they would have found common ground in their Remain votes.

Anita Feiger

Address supplied