Jeremy Corbyn's people have been congratulating themselves this weekend at their party conference. Why? Well they think that the Liberal Democrats' decision to go full Remainiac and revoke Article 50 without a referendum has left them in the sensible centre ground of Brexit politics: proposing what they are calling a Final Say. They are wrong.

Labour are of course correct that the Liberal Democrats have made a nonsense of their own party name by refusing to recognise the democratic vote for Brexit in 2016. Of course, I sympathise. I would revoke Article 50 tomorrow, if I had the choice. But you simply can't tell people that their vote in a referendum is to be ignored, cast aside, because they weren't clever enough to understand what they were voting for.

UK voters were promised in 2016 that their decision would be honoured, not least in the millions of government leaflets put through their doors. The LibDems claim to be the great champions of civil liberties and human rights, yet they are prepared to abandon the most important right of all: the right to vote.

We now know what would have happened in 2014 if Scotland had voted for independence. The Liberal Democrats, who were in government at the time with the Tories, would simply have just rejected it. Impossible to implement. Scots didn't know what they were voting for. Chaos wasn't on the ballot paper.

So the LibDems have made an egregious error, but this doesn't mean that Labour's policy is much better. It is marginally more democratic, at least in offering voters a choice. But what a choice.

Jeremy Corbyn says that he will negotiate a new and better Brexit than the Tories. Britain would remain in the EU Customs Union with the closest possible alignment with the European Single Market. Britain would retain all the work place and environmental protections that Theresa May offered to add to her Withdrawal Agreement that Labour rejected.

Under Labour's plan the UK would therefore remain under the rules of the single market, overseen by the European Court of Justice, and would have all trade policy set by Brussels. Now, I'm not knocking this. It is essentially the Norway option of remaining in the European Economic Area that was rejected by parliament in March. However, just how would this look to a Brexit voter?

Labour is proposing to put Remain and their Norway Plus as the only choices in their Final Say referendum. But is that really a choice? It sounds like Remain v Leave-in-name-only. Thinking back to the Scottish vote, it would be like holding an independence referendum in which the choices were: Remain in the UK versus Federalism. That would have been condemned, rightly, because independence supporters were denied any say.

I am a supporter of remaining in the European Union. I have long argued that the Norway option is the obvious compromise. But it seems to me inconceivable that a referendum on leaving the European Union could exclude the option of, er, leaving the European Union. What are they thinking?

The trouble with both Labour and the Liberal Democrats is that they’re talking to themselves. Brainwashed by their social media feeds, they think that Brexiteers are a species of bigots who don't deserve to have the vote at all. Some academics have actually said that there should be an educational qualification before people are allowed to vote.

But this isn't the worst of Labour's Brexit policy. Mr Corbyn first has to negotiate his “credible Leave option", a bespoke deal that allows the UK to have all the benefits of membership of the European Single Market without actually being a formal member of it. But Labour's Brexit spokesman, Keir Starmer, and the Shadow Foreign Secretary, Emily Thornberry, say they'll campaign for Remain in the Final Say, against their own party’s policy.

What is Brussels going to say? Well, Mr Corbyn, we really don't see why we should be bending over backwards, sideways and upside down in order to offer a deal that your lot are going to reject in a referendum. Thank you for coming.

If Labour get a deal that meets all their criteria on jobs, environment, trade, free movement etc, so why on earth would they vote against their own negotiating triumph, their own policy? “We the Labour Party have reached an agreement with the European Union that gives us everything we asked for, so we are going to reject this disgraceful sell-out”.

Not so much a Final Say as Famous Last Words. No wonder Fiona Bruce was confused on Question Time. This incoherence explains why Labour has been overtaken by the Liberal Democrats in the latest YouGov opinion poll.

The opposition have lost the plot on Brexit. It's not a good look when political parties make fools of themselves. I'm almost tempted to say: come back Theresa May, all is forgiven. Perhaps the Labour MP, Stephen Kinnock, is right: Labour should have voted for May's compromise, or at the very least abstained, when they had the chance.

Her Withdrawal Agreement is the best that Brussels was prepared to offer, and she conceded quite a lot to Labour on employment rights and the environment. The UK was going to be allowed to remain, effectively, in the single market and customs union until a new trade deal was negotiated. The idea that the EU would offer more to Jeremy Corbyn, only for his party to reject it, is for the birds.

Boris Johnson is clearly going to bring back a version of May's Withdrawal Agreement, sans the Irish Backstop, even though it was rejected three times in parliament. And yes, I know it wasn't rejected solely over the backstop, but times change. Anyway, there will still be a backstop, only it will have moved to the Irish Sea in Boris's cunning plan. But parliament is going to have to take a good look at itself when this is put before MPs on October 19.

The Benn Act, that compels the government to avoid no-deal, will surely be null and void if parliament rejects the only deal on offer. The only certainty then will be Article 50, which triggers Britain's departure from the European Union whether or not there is a deal. MPs voted by a majority of 384 to trigger Article 50 in 2017. They have voted down every alternative since then.

I don't actually believe that Boris Johnson wants a crash-out Brexit: he is proud that he has managed to get movement from Brussels. But make no mistake. If parliament continues to prevaricate, and fails to come up with a majority for any kind of compromise, then Britain is scheduled to leave the EU on October 31. It is irresponsible to demand a further extension of A50 if it is to no purpose.

It sickens me to say it, but there is a half-decent Brexit deal on offer and MPs will have to think very carefully before rejecting it. The alternative will not be revoking A50, or a referendum, both of which have been rejected by MPs. The alternative will be a hard-right Brexit. And parliament will be as much to blame as Boris Johnson.