As Sherlock Holmes would put it: 'Elementary, my dear Watson.' For the manoeuvre yesterday by Labour's deputy leader Tom Watson — to insist that, in all circumstances, his party commits to a so-called 'confirmatory referendum' on Brexit — is indeed transparent.
First of all, it signals (in case anyone had failed to notice) that the MP for West Bromwich East is applying for the post currently held by Jeremy Corbyn.
Although Watson's own constituency voted solidly to Leave the EU in the 2016 referendum, a recent internal poll of Labour Party members showed that three-quarters are active supporters of a second referendum and 88 per cent would vote to stay in the EU, given that chance.
Tom Watson's challenge to Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn over Brexit is a clear pitch for his job
Watson is not speaking to the millions in the country, but to those hundreds of thousands whose votes he would need to succeed Jeremy Corbyn.
The second purpose of Watson's pellucid plot is to sabotage the talks being held between Labour and the Conservative Government to find agreement over the terms of Britain's departure from, and future relationship with, the EU.
Trouble
The one thing that would ensure a collapse of those talks — designed to break the parlimentary deadlock — is Labour insisting that the discussions be conditional on a 'confirmatory referendum'.
Theresa May and the Conservatives are in enough trouble as it is: to agree to that would set them not just against the overwhelming majority of their own party membership, but also those who voted Tory in the last election.
Jeremy Corbyn is pushing Prime Minister Theresa May for a guarantee the UK will remain in a customs union with the EU
It may be that the odds are, in any case, stacked against such an agreement between Corbyn's team and May's. The former have pressed for some sort of commitment to remain in a customs union with the EU, which would cross one of the PM's 'red lines'.
Labour's team also want 'better protection' for workers' rights in any deal made by the Conservatives with the EU (which is odd, since any future Labour government would be able to pass whatever legislation it wanted on this issue).
But if agreement were reached, what would be the point of then calling a referendum with the option to remain in the EU? As Corbyn himself told reporters after the first round of talks with Mrs May: 'I said this is the policy of our party, that we would want to pursue the option of a public vote to prevent crashing out or to prevent leaving with a bad deal.'
In other words, if an agreement can be reached with May to avoid both those 'bad' outcomes, then there's no need for a referendum on the matter.
Theresa May is in talks with Corbyn's Labour in an attempt to break the parliamentary deadlock
It's interesting to examine the language used by advocates of a second referendum. The main campaign for this attempt to overturn the result of the first one — which at the time politicians on both sides accepted would be final — calls it a 'people's vote'.
The term is itself a pathetic piece of propaganda, which implies that the referendum of 2016 was not a true expression of democracy or of the wishes of the British people.
Tom Watson had originally scorned this movement. Two years ago he vehemently attacked the Liberal Democrats for supporting a second referendum to overturn Brexit: 'People feel that politicians who campaigned against Brexit are still trying to stop it happening, ignoring the clear decision the British people made.
'I have to say those fears aren't completely unfounded. Unlike the Lib-Dem Brexit deniers, we believe in respecting the decision of the British people. To do any less is to fail to respect the British people themselves.'
He might have added that Sir
