Alastair Campbell squirms as TV host confronts him on Iraq during Brexit rerun debate
ALASTAIR CAMPBELL was left squirming as he was confronted over his support for people protesting Brexit after ignoring Britons marching against the Iraq War during his tenure as spin-doctor under Tony Blair.
Brexit: Alastair Campbell slammed by host over protest support
Millions of people marched across the UK to pressure the British Government into backpedalling on committing to help the US in the Iraq War in 2003. Former Labour spin doctor Alastair Campbell was forced to justify his decision to "ignore" Britons marching against the war over 13 years ago while now praising people for marching against Brexit. Sky News host Mark Austin said: "You made the point earlier about the 750,000-million or so people marching over the weekend.
"You ignored, quite happily, millions of people voting and protesting against the Iraq War.
"Why would you change your mind and accept what a million people are saying this time?"
Mr Austin added: "You can’t even decide among yourselves, it seems, if reports over the weekend are to go by, whether you are for Remain or just for a vote so that you can break the Brexit impasse.
"Which is it and is there some sort of coup going on within?"
JUST IN: Macron ally exposes ONLY condition EU will grant Brexit delay amid threat to veto request
Mr Campbell, who was expelled from the Labour Party earlier this year after confirming he voted for the Liberal Democrats at the European elections, insisted the circumstances of Brexit are different to the ones leading to the Iraq War as he defended his call for a second referendum.
The communication expert said: "I think marches and protests do have a role. No big campaign has ever been one without a protest on the streets.
"The point about the Iraq War, just to remind you, is that it had parliamentary support and it was a big decision.
"I think a decision like that people understand that Cabinet and ministers take them, they get them through Parliament."
READ MORE: Labour humiliation: Thornberry's Brexit point sparks Twitter fury - 'Out of your depth!'
Brexit: Johnson’s route to no deal explained by Peter Wilding
Mr Campbell continued: "The point here is that Parliament has not been able to resolve this. Three and a half years, parliament has not resolved it - that’s why it should go back to the people. Johnson’s deal or remain.
"This has been one of the best and most successful campaigns I have ever been involved with.
"In any campaign, you might get a difference of opinion. This campaign is absolutely focused on trying to get a people’s vote and I’m absolutely clear what I want – I wanted it all the way through – with the option of remain and then we go and fight for that to win."
Boris Johnson was forced to pull a vote on his withdrawal agreement after Parliament voted 322 to 306 in favour of the Letwin Amendment – which would allow MPs to withhold support for a deal until all necessary Brexit legislation in unrolled.
DON'T MISS:
Should MPs move to force meddling Speaker Bercow out immediately? [POLL]
Brutal reason Nicola Sturgeon wants to block Brexit at all costs revealed [INSIGHT]
Rees-Mogg makes move to call Bercow's bluff – moves Brexit vote to today [LIVE]
The Prime Minister sought to secure a new meaningful vote on the agreement on Monday but Speaker of the House John Bercow rejected the request.
Mr Bercow claimed no significant changes had been made since the special debate Parliament held on Saturday to discuss the agreement Mr Johnson struck with Brussels at the EU Summit last Thursday.
Following the Government’s defeat in the vote, the Prime Minister issued an unsigned letter to the EU requiring a further extension to the withdrawal deadline.
The extension letter was accompanied by a second letter in which he explaining his opposition to a delay and a note clarifying the Government complied with the requirements of the Benn Act.
Mr Bercow said: "It is hard to see a significant change of circumstances that would warrant a reconsideration on the next sitting day."
"It is a necessary rule to ensure a sensible use of the House's time and proper respect for the decisions that it takes."