‘A cowardly dereliction of duty for someone hoping to keep her job as prime minister.’ (Picture: REX/ PA)

At the last election, Theresa May was steadfast in her refusal to take part in a TV debate.

When every other party leader agreed to face the public, she sent Amber Rudd in her place. It was a cowardly dereliction of duty for someone hoping to keep her job as prime minister.

So her confirmation that she wants to go head-to-head with Jeremy Corbyn is huge progress.

But it’s clear that her approach is about saving her own skin, rather than beginning a public conversation about the future of our country.


If this was about democratising the Brexit debate, the Prime Minister would open herself up to challenge from all perspectives.



A May versus Corbyn set-up would present a false dichotomy to the public, and act as a threat to dissatisfied MPs – warning backbench Tories that they risk installing Corbyn in Downing Street if they don’t get behind her.

It would send a message that our only options are her bungled version of Brexit and Labour’s fantasy of a renegotiation that can magically solve all our problems – flatly ignoring the growing prospects of either a catastrophic no deal, or a democratic route forward with a People’s Vote.

It would ignore huge swathes of the country – Wales, Scotland and, crucially, Northern Ireland.

Broadcasters must take this opportunity to present the full, complex and nuanced reality of where things stand

And it would dismiss the views of the 48 per cent who voted Remain in 2016 – and the growing numbers who, having seen what Brexit really looks like, want to stay in the EU.

Recent polls suggest they are now in the majority.

The public doesn’t need a tussle between a prime minister who’s spent two years negotiating a deal almost no one can get behind, and an opposition leader who essentially agrees with her on Brexit, but thinks he could do a better job.

Broadcasters must take this opportunity to present the full, complex and nuanced reality of where things stand.

And that means a truly cross-party debate, with diverse voices representing the interests of every nation, as well as the main positions on the Government’s deal and our relationship with the EU.

It will come as no surprise that I believe it’s vital the Green Party is included in any debate. Our position on Brexit is unique.

Like many others, we’re calling for a People’s Vote to give the public a say on the Government’s deal.

But we also understand why a majority voted for drastic change in 2016, and we want to address the reasons people are rightly so angry with the status quo.

Too many people are living in communities that have been hollowed out by deindustrialisation and decades of neglect.

Years of austerity have starved public services, economic vitality has drained from their neighbourhoods and many feel hopeless and trapped.

The Government is investing in exciting new transport links in well-connected areas of London – while infrastructure elsewhere is neglected.

Decisions that affect our lives and our local areas are made by out-of-touch ministers in Westminster. And all around us, our natural environment is damaged and depleted in the name of short-term profit.



People should be angry. They were right to give the establishment a kick.

But leaving the EU – especially on the terms the Government has negotiated or, worse, without a deal at all – would make the poorest areas poorer still, and only make it harder to fix things.

The Green Party isn’t interested in turning back the clock to 2016. We want to transform our economy and share the benefits the EU brings more fairly, with investment in communities across the country, stronger rights for workers and bold democratic changes to give people a say over decisions that affect them.

At the moment, those arguments are missing from the endless political in-fighting on Brexit.

With Parliament gridlocked and likely to vote down Theresa May’s deal, a People’s Vote looks increasingly like the only viable way forward.

To have no one making the case for it would render any TV debate meaningless.

The concern raised by some that another referendum might be divisive is valid – but the reality is our society is already split.

If we leave the EU under any terms, there will be huge anger when the promised benefits don’t materialise. In order to heal our communities, we need the dialogue that becomes possible with a truly democratic process.

The TV debate should start an honest and open conversation about our options, and set the tone for a constructive People’s Vote on our future.

MORE: Theresa May’s Brexit deal will leave the average Brit poorer


MORE: What is a vote of no confidence and how many votes are needed?

MORE: Here’s everything you need to know about the draft Brexit deal