I suggested when posting yesterday that I would continue to discuss the potential consequences of the EU referendum even though I have made my own voting intentions clear. I think this important because, as I noted yesterday, whether or not we vote to leave unprecedented issues are subject to debate right now, and they are well worth pursuing because of their potential impact on the political economy.
One of those that is clearly exciting interest - including at a talk I gave last night - is what happens in the event of a 51 : 49 vote for Remain. I will deal with this before, in a separate blog, considering the immediate political ramifications of a vote to leave.
As things stand right now I think there are many at Westminster who would heave the most almighty sigh of relief if Remain did win by a margin as big as 51: 49. In fact I think they'd accept a win on the basis of cutting a pack of cards right now. But that, in itself highlights just how desperate things have got for a campaign that I am quite sure David Cameron thought he could win with ease or he would not have called it.
The first obvious point to make in that case is that if this is the best that Cameron can deliver his political career will have reached the point of failure, as it is said all do before they reach their end. And it will not only be Cameron's that will be in tatters; Gorge Osborne's will also lie shredded all around him. Would there be an chance of ether surviving in office? I think none at all if the Conservatives were to continue in this situation to try to hang on to power and see out their fixed term to 2020, as is now their right and, in fact, their duty.
The reasons for their need to go, and very quickly should, I think be obvious. The first is that it would have become clear that these two had, by the exercise of poor judgement, brought the country and, potentially, the European Union to a point of crisis which was wholly unnecessary. To describe it as incompetence is to be kind.
Second, in the process of doing this Cameron and Osborne have torn their own party apart: there is no hope of it being unified again whilst they remain in positions of leadership.
Third, it will be quite clear that such a narrow margin of victory will, in effect, be a vote of no-confidence in their judgement from the people of this country. They have destroyed their own mandate.
So, the first consequence of a narrow Remain with will be the end of the Cameron and Osborne era, and few will mourn that. Looking at it wholly objectively it has been a continuous exercise in misjudgment. The failure to meet any of the forecast economic outcomes that they have so confidently predicted is the best evidence of that.
But in that case, who will replace them? There are, of course, two options: either there is an internal change in the leadership of the Conservative Party, and hence a new Prime Minister, or there is a general election. Dealing with the second option first, this cannot happen without the agreement of Parliament. Given that Labour has not had a good referendum (another myth that should surely come to an end is the one that Alan Johnson would ever have been a good leader of Labour) and the Tories have torn themselves to shreds, and look likely to continue to do so, I can see no incentive at all for Labour to agree to an early election. An election can't be ruled out, but I think it very unlikely.
In that case who will lead the Conservatives and become the next Prime Minister? Most will speculate on either Boris Johnson or Michael Gove but I do not think that either are likely. After all, they will have just lost an election, and neither have exactly covered themselves in glory in the process. Gove is a very difficult political sell whilst I suspect that very many Tory MPs can think of nothing worse than having to actually work with Boris Johnson, and in the Conservative party it is definitely the case that MPs opinion still count. So who is likely? The obvious answer is Theresa May.
May has cannily disappeared from the political scene for the last few weeks. And, in situations like this reconciliation candidates are turned to: that would be her role. I strongly suspect she will be our next Prime Minister. I do not expect her to walk in the footsteps of Thatcher. It took her a decade into really bring that party into line with her thinking; May will not have ten days and it is riven with disputes.
Remember I am discussing Remain winning here. Such a win will, I am sure, mean we do stay for the time being. But May would then lead a party that is not going to deliver what a substantial part of the UK wants, and they will not forgive her for that. They will also remember this as a Tory campaign: Labour's back seat role may not look so odd in a year or two if Remain is to happen. I cannot see there being a Tory bounce after Remain.
In no small part that will be because the fractures amongst the Conservatives will have got worse. If May is the unity candidate there isn no guarantee they will unite. The divisions are real. Some MPs may consider following Carswell to UKIP. A substantial rump will not accept the result. Either way this government will look more lame duck than John Major's 1992 to 97 administration ever managed, and it was dire.
May will get no help from the EU in this: they will show no enthusiasm for working with a Conservative administration that has done them no favours. And they will be quite sure that the threat of the UK leaving will have gone away for the time being. From 2017 to 2020 a Conservative administration will have no hope of negotiating anything with Brussels.
Combine that with my continuing fear that we will have a recession, and that any new Chancellor will be more extreme than Osborne and the chances of a successful May administration look low.
But what of Labour and other parties? It's true that it usually takes a government to lose an election, but there has to be an opposition to exploit that opportunity. Can Labour do that?
There is no secret that Labour has been half hearted in its support for Remain. That was because, I am quite sure, it believed that a rough campaign would always inflict massive harm on the Conservatives and their intervention could only mitigate that effect. Whether that was responsible or not, given the importance of the issue, is open to debate. In the context of this blog what is, however, important is that if Remain now win then I have little doubt that Labour will claim a lot of the credit for that, having intervened at a late stage in the campaign when it was apparent that the Cameron/Osborne axis was not working. This is how, if Labour is to now claim any credit from what has happened, it will seek to do so.
How it will exploit this opportunity is uncertain. There is little evidence, as yet, that Labour has a coherent plan for managing a post-Remain crisis. In the last few days some senior Labour figures have put immigration onto its agenda, with mixed reaction amongst some members. There is, however, no coherent policy on this issue as yet and it is also not clear at present how Labour would wish to renegotiate European membership if other member states were willing to do so.
As a result I cannot see Labour wishing to force a general election as yet: it is simply not ready for it. What it has instead to do is work out precisely where it will go in this circumstance, and indeed, what it will do if Brexit happens, and I do not know if those discussions are taking place.
So what of the SNP? Where might they go in the event of a Remain vote, which is what they have campaigned for? I think they will take the very likely significant Remain majority in Scotland as an indication of their support, and use it continually to remind the government that they helped deliver this result that the Conservatives would have been unable to have secured by themselves, but I cannot see the SNP exploiting a Remain vote to do much more than that: unless and until there is a breakdown in the ranks of a Conservative government the opportunities for the SNP to demand a new stance towards Scotland will be limited in the case of a Remain vote.
This does not, however, mean that the Labour party, SNP, the Greens, the Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru and others should not be talking to each whilst the Conservatives go into a period of infighting, which is almost inevitable. I think it is vital that these parties do then talk to each other because, like it or not, the election demographics now suggest that unless there is complete Conservative meltdown replacing a Conservative government under the current electoral system would be difficult. In that case I think all these parties have a duty to talk to each other about their combined political vision for the UK as a whole, even if some of those parties are committed to leaving in the long term.
What no one can deny is that a very narrow Remain victory will be the clearest indication to date of a rejection of much of the current political process and these parties have all contributed to that problem arising. If the Conservatives are unable to come up with a coherent national narrative other parties have to do so. It s for them, I suggest, and together if necessary, to put forward how they will now seek to transform the body politic of the UK so that it is restored to a position where it can be said to be fit for purpose.
I believe that the challenge will be to create a short-term coalition of interests between these parties with the one, and only, focus of re-establishing a basis for government that reflects the best interests of the people of this country. Only by doing so can the credibility of these parties be restored, because this exercise would demonstrate to a deeply disenchanted population that politicians have listened to the message that they have been given.
People dislike their voices not being heard.
People want diversity inside the Westminster bubble.
People have had enough of the power of large corporations and want it to be constrained.
People have had enough of of the petty squabbling.
And, to most people's surprise, they have discovered that coalition does not necessarily lead to disaster.
So it is my suggestion that if there is a very small vote for Remain it is the job of all political parties to join together (although I very much doubt that the Conservatives will) to do these things:
- Agree on a basis for electoral reform
- Agree on the future of the House of Lords, and its reform
- Agree a broad programme of reforms to be demanded from the EU
- Agree policies on migration
This is not about abandoning party politics: this is about dealing with a national crisis where democracy itself is under threat, which threat the government is deepening rather than relieving by the decisions that it has taken. But, and this is the key point, this will take time, and as a result I do not believe it is in any opposition parties' interest to force a general election now.
And all of this could be academic, of course: the country might vote Brexit. I will get to that soon.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Don t like Tess Diabetes d’ Urberville.
Prefer Gove with Dave Davis as Deputy.
I was not discussing preferences
I was discussing likelihoods
I agree with you, Richard. May is not unlike Thatcher: she looks and sounds intelligent and stateswoman like – miles above anyone in the cabinet now. I don’t expect I’ll like her policies anymore than Thatcher’s though.
A worthwhile exercise, I offer the following:
As a member of the Labour Party who will be voting Leave I believe you understate the absence of tactical and strategic vision within the party.
Given its hopelessly unclever one-sided approach to the referendum it is facing being gutted in parts of England as it was in Scotland and unfortunately UKIP looks like the only beneficiary. Labour voters will remember the referendum and how the Party presented itself and make it pay. I have an image of the rump of the PLP hanging on to an upturned boat which they know will sink by 2020.
The alternative was whittling away whatever popular support they still enjoy in England/Wales/NI, in order to prop up Cameron. This is technically known as a double bind.
I suspect it will be whatever the Labour party does next which defines its future. Corbyn/McDonnell got a stay of execution in the May elections. But they’re going to have to be more proactive to stave off a reversion to Tory lite, particularly as a vacuum is left by the implosion of the actual Tory party.
A very thoughtful and thought provoking blog, Richard. I don’t accept your underlying premise as Remain are going to loose this. But it is interesting to factor across to a 51:49 (or greater) Leave those things that would still apply, most obviously that Cameron and Osborne are toast, and that the Tory party remains torn to pieces. Unfortunately I have no time to add more as I need to get off and catch a train.
See you later
I was intrigued by your comment Richard “This is not about abandoning party politics: this is about dealing with a national crisis where democracy itself is under threat”
That struck me as very odd, as the exercise being undertaken in this referendum is one of the few times the UK public are allowed to vote on a single issue by direct democracy. The only thing under threat in my mind is the real nature of the representative system of party politics we have in this country, which may perhaps be revealed (yet again) to be non-representative and non-democratic.
Here’s my take for what its worth on what a close result either way, or a big swing to Leave would indicate to me.
All the machinery and power of government has been thrown into promoting staying in the EU. The main opposition party, the Greens, the Lib Dems, the SNP have all supported Remain with very little dissent by their MP’s. That should have resulted in a slam-dunk win for the Remain campaign if they are “in touch” with their voting supporters across the country.
If the UK public vote in large numbers for Leave, then to me this is yet another indication that representative politics and the Westminster system of government is broken as it no longer represents the interests or views of the people of this country in a representative way (if it ever did).
Direct democracy can throw up some surprises, but cannot and should never be ignored.
And so my take on your statement above is that it is incorrect, that a close result or a swing to Leave should force this country to question everything about its current party political system and form of government.
I think that is what I am saying to
Look at what I suggest those parties should do
I am not sure where you are disagreeing with me especially if you read Monday’s blog on why people might vote Brexit
I don’t disagree with most of what you wrote. It was just this one sentence that jumped out at me over my cornflakes (and before my cold shower!)
A 51:49 result could still mean some regions of the Union vote in the majority to Leave. Some churlish people might even say absurd things like those regions should no longer get EU funding as they clearly don’t want it.
A tensions rise, I foresee an increase in job openings for our excellent host and perhaps for the perspicacious commentators on here too.
Interesting, but do not think that Cameron/Osborne would resign, even if they won the Remain vote with the tiniest of margins.
They could claim, with some justification, that their mandate has been strengthened, that they have more than half of the electorate behind them. That is more than the 37% who voted for the Conservatives at the last general election.
We would see a reshuffle of government by removing the main culprits and back-stabbers (Gove/Johnson) from the cabinet and onto the back-benches – probably for the time being. And back to business as usual, with some conciliatory voices to the Brexit voters with “we will attempt to intensify our efforts to restrain immigration”
65 Tories have already said they would. Not support Osborne
I was being proved right as I wrote this blog, which I began yesterday morning.
If this is indeed the result (or something similar) I cannot see your rather reasonable possibilities for reform (which I agree with fully) coming to fruition until the 2020 UK elections where hopefully a party or a coalition of parties will replace the ‘business as usual’ Tories (and UKIP) reform our own democracy and then set about the EU and be a leading light for reform there.
The Tories and the PLP love how the establishment is set up and will seek to preserve it – the possibilities opened up to address voter concerns by such a close vote may well be swept under the carpet. I say this because I have no faith really in British politicians to address these issues.
But what is more frustrating is knowing what British MEPs have been lobbying for whilst at the EU. Have these MEPs been ignored by the EU or have they not bothered and simply go there to observe and criticise without doing anything?
Farage does a video of him standing up at a meeting shouting at MEPs about how useless the whole thing is but what has he really done concerning a reform agenda?
The other question for me is bar the obvious occasional stage managed ‘little Britain standing up to the big EU’ event like Cameron’s recent involvement is just how seriously the UK Government takes being in Europe.
Europe in my living memory has always been treated as a pain in the back side – just negative stuff all of the time – as though we just tolerate it. The benefits of EU membership have been somewhat undersold in my view which is wrong when you consider how effective European development grants have been in parts of the UK that our Government has neglected.
And also lurking in the background is this superiority complex we have – that we ‘won the war’ , were never invaded etc., etc., (forgetting of course that had it not been for the English channel or a fateful decision to invade Russia, England would have collapsed just like many other nations under the German blitzkrieg and that just like in other European nations, members of our elites and establishment would have welcomed the Nazi’s with open arms).
PSR, that is a very interesting point which I hadn’t considered before: “had it not been for the English channel … England would have collapsed.” I’ll remember that when I encounter the next chauvinist.
As usual a thoughtful and logical analysis. However, despite the bookies’ latest odds still favouring Remain (http://www.cityam.com/243358/betting-odds-indicate–per-cent-probability-remain-banks) I just can’t see it happening. Usually in referenda the undecided opt for the status quo in the voting booth, but I fear this will be the exception that proves the rule. The level of immigration hysteria being whipped up by Brexit campaigners across the country is disgraceful but effective. The Mail, Express and Telegraph know that if they get the headline that’s all that matters. Later retractions only come weeks after the damage has been done (http://infacts.org/mail-online-express-correct-3-inaccurate-migrant-stories). Apparently the Brexit campaign has had a lot more money to spend on promotion than the Remain camp, which is odd considering the commercial interests at stake. If anything the result will much more likely be around 52-48 for Brexit with a 2/3rds turn-out. Anyhow that’s my current prediction … for today. So, I look forward to reading your assessment of the fall-out in this scenario which will be more relevant (IMHO).
Tomorrow…with luck
I’m very surprised that your to do list for the next ‘coalition’ does not include the ending of austerity, which at the moment I’d be putting top – even ahead of electoral reform. And surely it is also something on which a coalition without the Conservatives would find easiest to agree.
It is implicit in the suggested plan for recovery
A post-script. Just read that Switzerland has withdrawn its long-standing application to join the EU. While it is just a rubber-stamp decision with no meaningful relevance to the Swiss status-quo, I can see it being fully exploited by the Brexit campaign.
A good analysis , Richard.
When you say the referendum could be seen to have unnecessarily brought the EU to a point of crisis, I would say that the EU IS in crisis and big style, referendum or not. But it is clear that Cameron et al have wasted the time and energy of the country on something that is a displacement activity and huge decoy, which some commentators are noticing is increasing public anger as people feel the increased irrelevance of Westminster. (see: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/15/brexit-working-class-sick-racist-eu-referendum?CMP=share_btn_fb).
As you say, the utter incompetence of leading politicians has had a more intense floodlight shone upon it and it is becoming glaringly obvious that many of the people supposedly ‘governing’, or chancers, shysters, and wide boys/girls who are making it up as they go along hoping a dumbed -down public will not notice. But it is being noticed.
As you hint, Labour is not ready for an election and could, conceivably, go through its own self-destruct phase quite soon as the coiled tensions within start to cause the structure to give way. We know Corbyn and McDonell are reluctant remainers and yet their is the majority Blairite camp that must know their time is up (toilet rolls at Westminster must be at a premium).
Given that there is no sign of a ‘coherent plan’ from Labour we can say there is a Westminster that is a ‘coherent-plan-free-zone.’ That is alarming but might reveal the underlying reality more clearly that the forces that control us (finance capitalism and globalisation) are the real ‘Government.’ I think this is a necessary stage of awareness development before change is possible.
I agree that there can be no Tory bounce and no Labour bounce either. I think the coalition you mention is a real way forward but I doubt that Labour is yet willing to see beyond its outdated notions of trying to be unified party with a corporate image and the absurd tribalism that goes with it which is all bound up with traditional politics that should be declared dead.
I think that politicians know, at some level, that their ‘game’ is up and they are becoming nervous of a public that is simmering.
I think that it is the simmering anger that will create change
Agreed.
My hope is that this growing anger and resentment at inequality can be signposted into productive activity like demanding country-by-country tax reporting, HMRC reform, job guarantee schemes, demands for green QE investment etc. We could all benefit from this change process.
My worry is that the forces of darkness (neoliberalisms little helpers) divert the flow into hatred of immigrants, despair of democratic processes, ‘greed is good’ self preservation tips and continued austerity which finishes the dismantling of our hard-won state provision.
This next 2 years will be a bumpy ride.
I would favour a 51/49 Remain vote,
it would signal a grudging acceptance to continue with the EU arrangement on the proviso changes were discussed and acted upon,
I agree that coalitions should now be considered a workable option, when you compare the last year of this current administration with the whole of the previous administration coalitions actually look rather appealing!
I most definitely think all parties outside of the Tories and UKIP should be talking, the most cringe worthy aspect of the last election was Labour allowing the Tories to browbeat them into a pledge of non co-operation with their natural allies,
Corbyn Labour, SNP, LD’s Greens and Plaid should examine their common concerns and create a manifesto to represent the goals of a coalition of the willing,
my perception of commonalities,
economics and finance in a post neo-liberal world,
the futility of austerity,
fair, effective and successful taxation at home and abroad,
inequality, excessive corporatism and monopolies,
UBI’s possible role in the profound reform of our welfare system,
a determination to tackle the negative effects of the expanding human race and it’s activities upon the bio-sphere of our home planet,
an independent foreign policy sympathetic to an equitable multi-polar world view and not subservient to the neo-conservative faction in Washington,
a commitment to engage and work with Europe in sharing our goals and aspirations and seeking the betterment of quality of life for all European citizens instead of pandering to the whims of elites and corporations,
on the subject of migration,
it is fair to be concerned about the expansion of our population and the challenges it presents, is it not the case that global population expansion places great strain upon the resources and resilience of our planet?
to be concerned about quantities and rates of flow is pragmatic,
to be obsessed over who is coming or perceptions of what they’re like says a lot more about the obsessed than who they are obsessing about,
I see the drivers of migration being the implementation of neo-liberal economic policies with the European sphere and the application of Washington’s neo-conservative foreign policies combined with climatic changes outside of the European sphere,
neo-liberalism is harsh on populations, in the 90’s it drove Russians from Russia until Putin managed to regain a semblance of control, currently austerity is driving out Greeks, Spaniards, Portuguese,
neo-liberalism inflicted on Balkan and ex soviet satellite states as part of European integration has driven people out along the path of least resistance which the door of the Shengen agreement has held open,
a way of mitigating population flows might be to introduce zone-ing to the Shengen agreement grouping countries along the lines of the era’s in which they joined the EU,
this would only alleviate a symptom, the cure has to be stopping the shock doctrines of neo-liberalism destabilising domestic populations, ceasing complicity in fuelling conflicts in the middle east and arresting climatic change which is expanding desertification and bringing drought and famine to the developing world,
but hey.. it’s only an opinion!
Richard
I have not been a follower of your blog for a great length of time so I hope you will forgive me If I make some points that you have already made.
The Tory’s never expected to get an outright majority at the last general election. Their Manifesto was I think an opening bargaining position with the Lib Dems and as such was far to the right of what Cameron and Osbourne anticipated. I’m not sure how many manifesto commitments would have been negotiated away, but Nick Clegg has maintained for years that an EU vote is not in the national interest. Polsters got the result badly wrong and the last time I remember this happening was in 1970 when Heath trailing Wilson badly in the opinion polls came into power.
In the famous words “I agree with Nick”; this referendum should never have happened but we are where we are. The referendum has turned out to be a vote on immigration. Many of the benefits of this flow to the private sector and the costs in terms of schooling, health housing and infrastructure bourne by the vastly underfunded public sector.
I think a leave vote is more likely. I am fearful of something resembling Nazism happening in a major western country. My bets were on the US but it is coming ominously closer to home.
The Tories will, Brexit or not, see it as their divine right to rule and stay in power till 2020 unless by-elections chip away their majority. May is a very possible candidate for PM, but either way the government will be as useless as ever. Change will come eventually. I Fervently hope it will come in the form of a good left wing coalition government rather than Fascism. There is no good outcome but a Brexit defeat will at least make a decent outcome in 2020 possible. A win for the Brexit group will damn the UK to something resembling hell for the foreseeable future.
Sean
That is an interesting and wholly plausible theory
Re fascism: Poland and Hungary are in their way. Others might follow. The risk is very real. It is why I hope others have the sense to unite
Richard
Richard
composing a reply when I heard Jo Cox has been fatally shot. I’m feeling a bit in shock.
Me too
I may comment later
I agree that Labour is in no fit state to fight a general election for a couple of years. They need more time to produce a comprehensive set of policies. Having watched Jon Snow interviewing Cameron yesterday, something which struck me today is that Jeremy Corbyn is the only leading politician who never looks embarrassed – with good reason. (I must qualify that, though, by the word ‘male’). I think that this will eventually shine through to the general public who are sick and tired of politicians who lie.
I think you are right there, Carol -it could well shine through.
I think you neglect to mention another important aspect here – many Labour supporters, particularly in their northern heartlands, are mightily angry at their party’s leadership’s indifference to their concerns on immigration. I still think the aftermath of the referendum will be more bloody for the tories than for Labour, but don’t underestimate the complete disconnect between the people who run the Labour party in islington and the people who have traditionally voted for it northern England.
I will be mentioning that
And did, of course, yesterday
I am incredibly aware of this
Once upon a time Mr. Murphy, you had some good points on the issue of tax avoision. In recent times, and dare I say it, maybe a professorship has gone to your head, your posts tend to verge on the rant rather than readworthiness.
Over the last fifteen years I have been told time and again that if only I knew my place I would be so much more effective. Invariably those saying so really mean ‘shut up’. I have always ignored their advice, for good reason. Please forgive me if I treat your comment in the same way
Some good observations here:
First it is right that Cameron should pay the price for landing the UK with this unnecessary and ill timed referendum. There was no new treaty change to decide, and therefore no need for a referendum. Instead, what we have ended up with is a vote that in many people’s eyes is either about accepting the status quo in British politics, which means Remain, or voting for change via Brexit. Even the biggest issue of immigration should have been decoupled from the question of continued EU membership. The EU policy of completely open borders is increasingly unworkable and in short order I expect we will see a seed change – you only have to listen to Donald Tusk’s public statements to know this. However, what the UK will now end up with is a Brexit that will be deeply damaging to our economic future, could precipitate further breakup of the EU, and possibly even of the United Kingdom itself. Cameron must pay the price for the political crisis that he and his party have led us into.
I also agree that the UK needs a general election right now like we need a hole in the head. I can’t think of any time when every major political party was in such disarray. The Tories may split completely, or if they don’t will be a cobbled together hotbed of division. Lib Dems in my view unfairly paid the price for having entered into a coalition with the Tories that was in the best interests of the country at a time of crisis, but has left them a spent force. Labour is headed by a media unfriendly leader that most Labour MPs don’t want, and has also failed to make the progress needed in Scotland to make them electable. UKIP remains a party of protest but with little real influence. The most united party on the scene is the SDP and their main objective is the breakup of the United Kingdom. How did it ever come to this, and how can it be made better before 2020?
I must admit I look with very green eyes at Canada. In 2015 Pierre Trudeau led the Liberal Party to victory moving the third-placed Liberals from 36 seats to 184 seats, the largest-ever numerical increase by a party in a Canadian election. Forbes has ranked Trudeau the 69th most powerful person in the world. He is attempting to place Canada at the leading edge of environmental reform, with an election promise to introduce Federal carbon pricing, has begun to lean against inequality by undoing Harper era tax breaks and raising the top income tax rate from 29% to 33%, as well as supporting liberal policies to encourage a more inclusive society.
I would love to hear more from people who understand what he is doing an how he is doing it, but as I survey the sorry and divisive state of British politics, I feel like the man in the restaurant who says “Can I please have what they are having?”
Robert P Bruce
author http://www.TheGlobalRace.net