Forgive me for once
again adapting a line
from Tolkien’s ring-verse, but it does so naturally follow on from
the post
where I first used it. Then (before Theresa May announced her
election) I noted that by March 2017 many more people had accepted
that they would be worse off because of Brexit than immediately after
the vote. However the proportions of people who say we were wrong to
leave the EU has stayed pretty stable. (In the latest poll yesterday,
there was, for the first time, the smallest majority possible
believing it was wrong to leave.)
I wrote
“Here is a possible reason for this paradox. Voters feel that once a democratic decision has been made, it should be respected, even if they personally now feel less comfortable with the reasons behind the decision. It is important to respect the ‘will of the people’ for its own sake, just as it is important to keep to a contract even though you may now regret signing it.”
That was why I
called that post ‘one vote to bind them all’.
These thoughts were,
as I said at the time, largely speculation, but the extraordinary
poll bounce May has received since she announced another vote makes
me think I was right. When announcing the
election, she talked about the country uniting behind Brexit. She
also said
“Every vote for the Conservatives will make it harder for opposition politicians who want to stop me from getting the job done.
Every vote for the Conservatives will make me stronger when I negotiate for Britain with the prime ministers, presidents and chancellors of the European Union.”
The second sentence
is just nonsense, while the first is ominous for any democrat. But as
both polls and focus groups suggest,
the spin that she needs ‘a strong mandate to get the best Brexit
for Britain’ chimes with many voters. It is a vote to 'bring them all' into the darkness of an endeavour the aims of which remain hidden by platitudes.
In this rather odd
sense, there are similarities with what
the Falklands did for Thatcher. The negotiations have been portrayed
in the UK media as a battle between the UK and the EU. It is only
natural for this to inspire nationalism among many voters: May needs
strong backing (a large vote) so she can get the best deal for
Britain in her battle with the EU. (And, of course, anyone arguing
for the EU is therefore
a ‘saboteur’.) May’s election announcement bounce therefore has
similarities to Thatcher’s Falklands poll bounce.
As ever, reality is
very different. What happens in the negotiations is largely down to
the EU, with the occasional choice for the UK. These choices should
be made by democratic means, and not by one person who has the
interests of her party to worry about. My impression is that as far as
the media outside the UK is concerned they just cannot understand
why we have embarked on this crazy path.
If May and her team
realised this when they called an election they were clever. There
are plenty of other reasons why she called an election: potential
prosecutions associated with election expenses, as Bill Keegan’s
notes
the negative impact of brexit is about to become visible, and of
course the unpopularity of JC. [1] The latter was, I’m afraid,
inevitable
from the moment he was re-elected, and the responsibility for that
vote lies as much with the PLP as with Corbyn and Labour party
members.
It is almost as if
May’s line is ‘who do you want to lead us into battle, me or JC’?
With the referendum still regarded as the most important issue
in UK politics, it is a line that could make the UK into virtually a
one party state.
[2] Of course many die-hard Remainers (like me) will never vote for
her, but they comprise at best only around half of the 48%. Labour’s
core support will remain loyal. But even if you could form some kind
of ‘progressive anti-May alliance’ (which will not happen),
Chaminda Jayanetti is right
that there just are not enough progressives around to defeat the
Conservatives, particularly if the UKIP vote collapses.
So is a Conservative
landslide which decimates Labour assured? Heroic talk of defeating
May and trying to shift the debate on to something else besides
Brexit will not work. This is not because the Tories are not
vulnerable. Quite the opposite in fact: I have never known a
government that has such a poor record on health, education (this,
and grammar schools for pity’s sake) and even prisons. The ‘we
now have a strong economy’ line is a lie just waiting to be busted.
All that means the Conservatives will focus relentlessly on Brexit
and leadership. In 2015 the broadcast media followed
the press in focusing on the issues where the Conservatives were
strong, and they will do so again with (unlike 2015) justification
from the polls.
Perhaps predictably,
the wisest words I’ve seen written on this have come from Tony
Blair. He suggests
the slogan ‘no blank cheque’. It concedes defeat, which is
realistic and has the advantage of shifting attention away from JC’s
leadership qualities. It encourages voters not to ask who would be
best battling for Britain against the EU27, and instead to think
about choices to be made which may not be in the country’s
interests but instead are in Conservative party’s interests. I do
not think the leadership will ever adopt this line, because it
requires them to admit they are going to lose and I do not think they
are brave enough to do that. But on the doorstep it might help.
[1] When I tweeted
Bill’s column with this point about Corbyn, someone replied that I
couldn’t help making a dig at Corbyn when the price was a Tory
Brexit. This is the other side of those on the right who accuse me of
being politically biased when I’m critical of the government. Both
misunderstand what I do and don’t do. I don’t do propaganda as
defined here.
[2] The culture war
analogy that Chakrabortty
uses is interesting, as is the comparison with Nixon. But in many
ways it is the spin doctors, well versed in what happened in the US,
who are calling the shots, and May just has to agree to what they
advise.
