There is a problem at the heart of the Labour party when the leader whips his MPs to support a motion calling for a confirmatory ballot on the prime minister’s Brexit deal and the chair of the party abstains. For a backbench MP to break the whip is bad enough, but for a member of the shadow cabinet to break collective responsibility is rare, especially when it goes without sanction.

The dilemma helped shape Labour’s EU election catastrophe. The party sat on the fence, with the leader looking both ways, sometimes towards a confirmatory ballot, sometimes towards Brexit. From Ian Lavery’s recent Guardian article, it is obvious he was off the fence walking the fields where Brexit roams. Labour has paid the price.

Implementing any form of Brexit will not save Labour, because you cannot out-Brexit the Brexit party

We achieved 14% of the popular vote – the party’s worst performance since 1910. The Liberal Democrats received a bigger vote share than Labour for the first time since the first world war and are ahead of us in the latest opinion poll. Labour is level with the Tories on 19%. Even Labour party members aren’t voting Labour. What an achievement. I’m sure the party chair will have an explanation. I look forward to his analysis. In the meantime, I can assure him of this: Labour’s ambiguity was not constructive. Clarity won the day, and embracing Brexit, in whatever form, without recourse to the people, is not the answer.

Supporting the motion whipped by Corbyn were 203 Labour MPs, 110 of them representing seats voting Leave in 2016. Promoted by myself and Peter Kyle, the motion would allow the passage of May’s deal through parliament as long as it returned to the people for confirmation. Our constituents have the right to the final say on any Brexit deal. They may decide in favour of the deal. They may change their minds. But we believe it to be a democratic travesty for parliament to implement something that wasn’t on the ballot paper in the EU referendum without asking the people first. John Curtice, the polling expert, called the Kyle-Wilson amendment “clever politics”.

Some in my own party believe Labour should accept Brexit, make it as palatable as possible and implement it, as if MPs know best. They believe the strategy will attract supporters lost to the Brexit party. Lavery shares this approach.

In my opinion it’s a false premise. Implementing any form of Brexit will not save Labour, because you cannot out-Brexit the Brexit party. Nigel Farage will still be there with his narrative of betrayal. Even if the Brexit demanded by Farage is implemented, he will still shriek “traitors” from the sidelines. The only way to defeat Farage is at the ballot box in a public vote on the Brexit terms, with remain as an option.

Like Lavery, I was brought up in a pit village in the north-east of England, so the last thing I can be accused of is “sneering” at the people I grew up with. Some doubt my “leftwing” credentials and I didn’t go to university, so I don’t suppose I can be pigeonholed as an “intellectual”. But I do know this: both Lavery and I live in nice houses and have comfortable lifestyles as MPs. I want the same for my constituents and the people I grew up with. Brexit will make them poorer, so I’m against Brexit and I will not go out of my way to allow it to happen. I also know there is no such thing as a “jobs first Brexit” or a land known as “socialism in one country”. To pedal such myths is irresponsible. Ideology does not put food on the table. Just ask the Venezuelans.

I am also aware of this: the area I represent voted leave in 2016, but as Curtice has said, it was always in Labour’s interest to move towards remain because “30% of its voters voted to leave and 70% voted to remain … given the numbers, when forced to choose, then it makes sense for it to be leaning in a remain direction”. Because we didn’t do this, Labour voters left for pro-remain parties. The vote split. We now have two Brexit MEPs and one Labour MEP in the north-east.

Ambition and aspiration for the communities I grew up in and the country I belong to brought me into Labour politics. They continue to drive me today. Labour needs an electoral strategy to match them. The north-east has suffered nine years of austerity as a consequence of Tory governments. Not as a consequence of the EU. Brexit isn’t the answer to our problems. A change of government is.

Labour needs a reboot – and it could start with bringing back Ed Miliband | Owen Jones Read more

A Labour government that is economically competent and patriotic, and stands by the western values of respect, tolerance and democracy, can make a difference. So can a Labour government that understands that organisations such as the UN, Nato and the EU fulfil our international credentials and do not diminish them.

Above all else, Labour needs to be honest with the British people: any radical plans Labour has for an economy that works for the many and not the few will be severely undermined if we leave the EU, because we know the economy will shrink and the money won’t be there to spend. To say otherwise will be to lead people down the garden path. That way lies the very grievances which fed the referendum campaign. It is best to remain and reform than to leave and regret.

So now is the time for honesty with the people and with ourselves. I know on which side of the fence I stand. It’s the same side as the majority of Labour MPs, Labour members and Labour supporters. It’s time for the leadership of our party to join us.

• Phil Wilson is Labour MP for Sedgefield