Both Con & Lab policies are, in fact, simple:
Con: Trust Boris Johnson to deliver Brexit.
Lab: Don& #39;t trust him, trust us. We& #39;ll do it better. And because there& #39;s no mandate for one version of Brexit over all the others, we& #39;ll put our deal to the people for a final say. https://twitter.com/JamesDMorris/status/1200095757157773312">https://twitter.com/JamesDMor...

The first part of Labour& #39;s argument should be straightforward: can you really trust Boris Johnson? The second requires a small amount of nuance on two issues: the need for another referendum and Corbyn& #39;s & #39;honest broker& #39; stance.

On the referendum, Labour needs to explain that the narrow 2016 vote masked a world of difference between different kinds of Brexit, with massively different outcomes for people depending on which was finally chosen. Once the choice is made, a final vote is the right thing to do.

Then Corbyn must explain why Cameron& #39;s resignation was both inevitable & wrong: Brexit is a major national decision, deeply dividing the country; government must implement the outcome, whatever it is, & continuous leadership is vital. An & #39;honest broker& #39; PM makes that possible.

Compared to the deceptive simplicity of & #39;trust Boris Johnson to get Brexit done& #39;, of course Labour& #39;s extra steps add complexity, but necessarily so. It puts them on the right side of the argument, even if that argument requires more effort to articulate.