I have, of course, spoken to a few people since yesterday morning who seem pleased that the country is to have its third national poll in two years. They, perhaps unsurprisingly, are also Tory and pro-Brexit. For the rest the reaction of the woman who said ‘not again' seems to sum it up.
Quite explicitly I do not accept May's claim that this election is about Brexit. She has triggered that despite opposition. She will continue to get what she wants from parliament. And no one believes otherwise. So that is not what this is about.
Instead, as I argued on The Conversation website yesterday, this is about seeking a mandate before economic news turns really sour, which I have little doubt it will.
That though means that this election shoukd not be fought on the battleground of Brexit. I think it has to be taken as read that Brexit will happen. And whilst very clearly each party has to make clear what they think this means, which for all parties on the left is bound to mean remarkably similar discussion on retaining as much access as possible, it is everything else that then matters, and which may catch the Tories by surprise in dominating this election.
Those other issues are health, education, housing, cuts, austerity, pay, devolution, benefits, tax and social justice, and more besides. I say this because it's my belief that most people think Brexit is done and dusted. They've had an election on that. I am fairly sure they won't want another one on the same theme. And if that's what the Tories offer it will backfire for them. Many people will think they gave the Tories what they wanted on this issue last year and will ask now why it is they can't apparently deliver despite that, and a backlash might follow.
I'm not suggesting that this will change the overall outcome of the election. But it may make a difference. In particular it may be good for the LibDems. Even Linton Crosby apparently thinks they may recover most of the seats they lost to the Tories.
And it probably won't help UKIP.
Given then that I foresee remarkably little overall change in the Scottish result that means what happens on election night depends almost entirely on whether the Labour vote does really collapse. It is forecast that it will. But who knows? If Labour could offer a half decent manifesto, and better still one that shows clear willingness to cooperate with a range of other parties, it may still provide an opposition and the forecasts could be by wrong. But that is a big ‘if'.
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:
I’m just hoping that the Tory majority is cut. They might still be the biggest party but can be resisted on the nasty end of their spectrum. That might come down to just a few thousand voters. If nothing else Brexit showed up the lies they tell – £350m/wk for the NHS might still come back and haunt them.
The 350m was never a Tory promise. And May has never repeated it.
I agree
Gisella Stuart made it as well
So what? Millions of people thought it was. And May couldn’t repeat it could she? She was a pretend remainer at the time. Of course after the poll they all denied it. So she is no different to the rest of them.
The Tory high command of Cameron and Osborne were the two most prominent Tory remainers. I have no idea what makes you think that “millions of people” thought that the 350m/week was government policy. It’s not even true to say that they denied it after the poll – ignored it maybe, but I don’t see anyone who denied it.
I really don’t see how May can be blamed for the 350m/week debacle: she campaigned for remain, she never mentioned it during the ref campaign, she hasn’t promised it after the ref campaign – what do you expect her to do?
Try out right condemning the lie which underpins her government policy
And what would that achieve?
The 350m was endlessly debated and argued over at the time of the referendum. The ONS even said twice that it was untrue (which as far as I am aware was unprecedented for them to make public and political pronouncements like that in the middle of a political campaign).
Your hypothesis makes a lot of sense but that ‘if’ is very large. Corbyns team show no sign whatsoever of having any interest at all in working with other parties to defeat May
I agree with the analysis. May is cutting and running in the belief that things can only get worse and opposition to Brexit increase as a result.
The left can make this case as part of our defence of public services.
Also think this is a subversion of democracy. She’s not doing it so we can agree on something but to nullify a probable majority against Brexit when the fatal date comes “Wel, we had an election, I’ve got a mandate. Whatever the state of publi opinion now, it’s a done deal.
In Scottish terms the left should also promote an “anyone but the SNP, no indyref2” platform. Kill off a second referendum and get us a few votes, maybe even some seats, boost Labour and damage the SNP. Can’t be bad.
I think you live in hope but not reasonable expectation in Scotland
Alex Gallacher is promoting the idea that got him one Labour seat in Scotland last time. It seems everyone but him knows the Scottish Tories have captured the “anyone but the SNP, no indyref2” platform.
The PM, writing in The Scotsman this morning (with the same ghoulish photo on the front page as elsewhere) says the GE “will be a vote on Scottish independence”. Clearly this is aimed at the GE15 tactic of scaring both the English voter and the Labour party and preventing any idea of cooperation between the SNP and Labour.
Milliband went along with this for two reasons – one, he believed cooperation would damage his English vote and two, he hoped his Scottish branch could win seats. Everyone except Alex would now agree the second reason has been killed off.
However, I fear the Tories and their pet tabloids may succeed again in persuading the English voter that cooperating with the SNP is a bad idea, and that may again damage the Labour vote. Perhaps not so much as in 2015 if remainers think clearly. Also we have the prospect of a Lib Dem revival in England. So, if that happens and Corbyn is not crushed in his many safe seats, you could have the prospect of a 3-way cooperation against the Tories.
I would not bet my house on it, but the new slogan in Scotland is “Make June the end of May”.
I very much like that
Anyone but the SNP including Tories and UKIP?
You have a ‘novel’ view of “the left”!
My sense from a few of my Scottish friends (and as a half Scot) is that the prospect of years of May/Tory rule will drive people towards SNP and Independence, even if many do not especially like the SNP. Post-independence they can then vote for a left-wing alternative and opposition, possibly a reformed Scottish Labour
Your sense is my sense on this issue
I’m intrigued at Richard;s position on this. Less than a fortnight ago he had an article in the National utterly destroying the SNP’s economic case for Scottish independence.
Now he seems to think there’s still some value in them.
You clearly did not read my article in The National
It did not in any remote way suggest what you say
Richard
Of course your “National” article didn’t contain the words “SNP economic case for independence destroyed”.
But it said that you can’t trust GERS, that it is unreliable, that Scots shouldn’t trust it.
The SNP’s economic case for independence is based on GERS.
If GERS is crap, as you say it is, the SNP has no economic data or statistical base for its case for independence.
Case destroyed.
Q, E and D, as our logician colleagues say.
Keep up Alex
The Case is Altered, as is said
Richard.
If by “the case is altered” you mean we need a new set of data, fair enough. That’s your case, although where these new data are to come from isn’t at all clear.
My case is also fair enough: if GERS is useless, as you say, and GERS underpins the SNP’s case for independence, then the SNP’s case for independence has no basis in reliable data.
A logical extension of the “GERS is useless” hypothesis is that the SNP needs new data on which to make the case for independence. They don’t have that new data.
And an economic case that has no foundation in data and statistics is no case at all.
Conclusion: if you are right that GERS is useless for any practical purpose, you have destroyed the case the SNP has been making for ten years – based on GERS.
Alex
I think you’re wasting everyone’s time now
We know this is no longer the SNP’s case
Now stop making yesterday’s argument
Richard
The only Labour MP in Scotland has previously advanced the argument that Corbyn is unelectable, so there seems little point Alex in you advocating votes for Scottish Labour. It appears the “anyone but the SNP” meme is now being advanced by the very same Labour MP – my head is spinning.
As has often been said Alex, the Labour case for arguing against Scotland being independent (based on GERS) is that we are too poor (as well as too wee and too stupid according to a Scottish Labour MSP).
So your cunning plan is to keep Scotland in the UK; hence, by your logic, remaining too poor for independence from our benificent “owners” for ever more. Regardless of whether GERS is right or wrong, this is your cringe-worthy argument.
The unionist press in Scotland is currently full of demands from the unionist parties, saying why don’t the Scottish Government do something to improve the economy – with absolutely no sound suggestions on what to do.
At the Smith Commission, the Scottish Labour party proposed the smallest devolution of powers to the Scottish Parliament. Even the Tories proposed more powers (albeit booby-trapped). Is that because you Alex as a unionist, i.e. a British Nationalist, wish to keep Scotland in thrall to the UK and the Labour party for ever more?
Overnight the SNP have another 700 new members I believe.
Face up to it Alex Gallacher. Labour are struggling to survive in Scotland. There is no reason for them any more. Kezia Dugdale is frankly a bit of a laughing stock here, she has done so many uturns and doesn’t know what she thinks about anything.
I think it’s really wrong of Scottish Labour to blame the SNP for their demise. It’s all their own doing. Further, SNP gained because their mps were more able, competent and talented and ordinary voters saw that and voted with their feet. I know what I’m talking about. I was one of them.
I have been really intrigued by local politics recently in my constituency of the Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch. All of a sudden local politics has become really popular with so-called independent candidates turning up all over the place. One of the lovely things about living in the highlands is that you get to know people quite well —small population and small villages mean that fold are ‘weel-kent’. One of these ‘independent’ candidates had his front garden draped in Union Jacks in 2014 at the time of the referendum. I have photos – it was so remarkable. He is a Tory in all but name, but has not got the courage to run as a Tory or pro-union candidate because he knows his chances of being returned are practically nil in this area, so he’s pretending to be independent, saying he really wants to work for the area and not any political party. Aye right! I suspect this kind of thing will confuse a lot of voters who will be taken in by it.
The reason you are seeing ‘anyone but the SNP’ on your returns is because that is what has been suggested to them by the Tories! SNP are quite well aware that the other parties are promoting an ‘anyone but SNP’ tactic. All that’s going to happen is that SNP voters will return the compliment and put anyone supporting the union last! Why wouldn’t they? But of course politics is not a game, is it Theresa?
🙂
Sadly for me, Richard’s talk in Brighton next week is sold out, but in Brighton and Lewes, we have a realistic chance of 2 Labour, 1 Green, 1 LibDem. Or we can have 4 Conservative clones. I currently live in a genuine marginal constituency, which under the Cameron gerrymander was to be converted into a safe Conservative seat for 2020.
Crikey: I have forgotten I am in Brighton next week!
Thanks for reminding me
Our local election canvas returns show strong signs of “anyone but SNP”. Volunteered. Unprompted.
For some, of course that is true Alex
Alex – what do you think might be prompting this? Dissafection with SNP – if so why? Renewed enthusiasm for someone else? If so whom?
It’s virtually the Tory campaign, so it’s in peoples’ minds, but there is a lot of disaffection with the SNP and a lot less antipathy to Labour.
Out leafleting this pm. Four casual conversations in passing: all four said when asked who they were voting for – “anyone but the SNP”, Two Tory, one Labour and one (said) undecided. I think I persuaded the 2 Tories and the undecided to at least give me their 2nd preference.
Alex
Good luck
But I have to say the SNP MSPs I met today seemed remarkably relaxed about the election
Richard
Thanks Alex – which part of Scotland may I ask?
I think that your blog puts a lot of faith in the voter. I do not think this is misplaced.
One can only hope that Labour does indeed make a better case to capture the increasing discontent – especially as you say – with a possible reduction in the interest in UKIP.
This is a raw grasp for power dressed up as an intellectual argument however – and I’d rather see Parliament stopping this.
I still cannot see why May wants to walk into power amidst the ever growing train wreck of the economy all started by Cameron.
Her preparedness to do this hints at only one thing – ideological drivers within her party to use the worsening economy to debase the State even more – maybe the coup de grace – and create the Thousand Year Tory Reich?
Conversations I hear this morning imply a weariness with this election, already
I believe the general election should be about the nhs, economy,education,housing,transport and not if Scotland becomes independent or brexit. Everyone knows the dire situation the nhs is in and how this is a symptom of what is wrong with the country. We should all realize that why the country is like it is, is because the establishment in this country believe in free market economics and not a democratic government. Over the past forty years our governments have handed more power and resources to the banks and multinationals which in reality means more cuts in public spending,housing shortages,skill shortages and a transport system unable to cope. I believe only Labour with a radical programme which none of the other left parties has any chance of delivering can create the country which is so needed now,
Derek. T
I have let this on as it is your first post
I will not be tolerating more of the same in the next seven weeks: this is not the place to say vote this or that
Well said.
Though we need to be careful not to be seen to be afraid of talking about the EU.
The priority now is to rally the troops and start fighting. However forlorn the hope may be. Or, as you point out, not.
I’m not sure about signalling co-operation in advance, though. I think most people would prefer to see a principled campaign, perhaps with a very few tactical deals where these are no-brainers. We all know that, whatever people may say up front, deals may be done in the end.
What we can hope is that the principles will be stated as clearly as the policies. We will accept compromise on policy, but not on principle.
Why doesn’t Labour accept that sooner or later Scottish independence, like Indian, Irish, etc, will happen? A Scottish Labour Party, supporting independence, could present a real challenge to the SNP whose current blanket nationalism hides a clear left/right split. Ok it makes it harder to win a majority in England/Wales but they have to face up to that as the Scottish flock of Labour seats has long flown to the SNP and will never return.
As a recent LP re-joiner, largely in support of social democratic policies which Corbyn has brought back to the fore, I have to agree with you that Jeremy cannot win a general election, mainly because the public, like the media, largely sees the process as a choice between personalities rather than a policies. Labour’s best hope is not to lose too badly and then to chose a genuine leader who will not revert to neoliberal policies. Sadly I fear we are going to have a re-run of 1983.
I have to agree with you re Labour and Scotland
The party is dedicated to a world that no longer exists
Labour in Scotland no different from Labour in UK; dedicated to democracy, equality,
fair taxation and better public services for all.
Of course that world exists, there will always be a need for such a political philosophy and no other party is currently offering it.
Alex
I suggest you remove some blinkers
Richard
Good point & it would allow Scottish Labour to carve its own path whilst calling Tory Scots glove puppets. Independent Scotland is now “If” not “when” – time to move on – but I have a feeling that Labour under Corbyn is incapable of that.
I absolutely agree, this is not done and dusted – at least not as far as a huge Tory majority is concerned.
The trouble is that we’ve plenty of experience that the MSM knows exactly how to make this all about Brexit. Any area where Labour does better – the NHS, housing, the environment, education – have been sidelined in the last two elections and when they do get an airing they’re always framed withing a vacuous TINA / living within our means context.
We can look forward to much more of the same this time.
I cannot see anything other than the Tories winning with an increased majority. The polls may shift a bit but its highly unlikely that they will change that dramatically over the course of the campaign.
The Tories have a trump card: Jeremy Corbyn. They will play it relentlessly and keep posing the question, “Do you want JC as your PM?”
Labours best hope is to limit the damage and rebuild after the election.
The LibDems will probably win some seats back but nowhere near enough to make a significant difference.
We are set for a Tory govt with an increased majority for the next 5 years.
I suspect overall you are right
But maybe by not quite as much as current forecasts suggest
Keep an eye on the Parliamentary vote this afternoon. The motion needs 434 votes *in favour* to pass – not just a two-thirds majority of those voting. SNP are to abstain, I hear. This means that half the Labour party could scupper the whole thing before it starts.
If I was them I’d consider it very carefully. May has announced the election on the basis that the job is too hard for her as things stand. Essentially, a huge admission of weakness and failure nine months in, which could come back to haunt her if the motion is not passed.
We are pretty much at the zenith regarding the economy and Brexit so as good as it is going to get for the Torys. I agree entirely the state of the nation is in a bad state and believe that the Torys “austerity” policy will make things far worse as indeed any plausible Brexit result.
What modest growth we have is concentrated as ever under the Torys in London and the South East of England.
I expect a frenzy of flag waving and English Nationalistic drum-beating and dog whistle campaigning on a scale even to exceed the Brexit referendum. The right wing press will go into a frenzy of sham patriotism. The election is particularly unwelcome in Northern Ireland where it will scupper and chance of a deal between SF and the DUP as the DUP will enter campaign mode and delight in all the flag waving politics. This is particularly unwelcome given how potentially disastrous Brexit will be for NI.
Given the appalling quality of the Brexit referendum debate I agree that there is little appetite now for a rerun, but it may be entirely appropriate in 2019 when the shape of the actual deal is known. Let’s hope Labour can step up to the plate, another 5 years of Tory government is too ghastly to contemplate.
I agree entirely and let’s hope we can add to that discussion on http://www.progressivepulse.org/blog/
I think quite a bit of Lib Dem outlook may be involved too.
As far as Labour is concerned the biggest problem is disloyal MPs.
Every MP that has thwarted or made life difficult for JC needs the membership to knock on doors so that they can betray them in power. The collapse of the LibDem vote occured because of this same issue.
Surely the problems of the left are due to continued tribalism in the hearts of voters not being present in the heads of their fearless elected representatives.
You could almost not make your tribalism up
Are you trying to parody your own supposed concern?
The best we can hope for is a hung parliament, of course, but one which won’t give the LibDems the chance to do what they did before, but forcing the exposure of the tories in a minority government. If there were the opportunity for a non-tory alliance (highly unlikely) that would be the time for a pact. Voters would punish Labour for forming an alliance beforehand.
I suggest that that they woudn’t punish Labour for suggesting an alliance with the Lib Dems or anyone else for an allince which supported principles that they all believed in.
Hi Richard – What worries me now is that we are seeing signs that the neo-liberal bandwagon has not lost its legs as yet and still has a lot of mileage. The polls seem to indicate too much of a Tory majority for error margins of a few percent to creep in, there have been too many polls showing a vast gap. My view of why this is happening, for what its worht is:
1) The populace is tired and stressed and haven’t the energy to resist the lowest common denominator any more and are falling for May’s power dressing and finger-wagging headmistress/matron simulacrum of Thatcher.
2) Labour has utterly failed to challenge the myths of monetarism and, to be honest, even if they had done it better, the mental wallpaper is too firmly set after nearly 40 years of blanket propaganda -it can’t be unwound before an even deeper train wreck starts the slow emergence out of the sleeping sickness.
3) People, on the whole, think the property bubble (now of 40 years duration) is a natural phenomenon because NOT ONE politician has explicated the issue with clarity-and lets remember there are lots of M.P’s fingers in that pie. An estimated 39% of Tories and 22% of Labour have greasy mits in this almighty rentier scam. Recent reports estimate that wealth transference of assets to the next generation is about 24% of young people meaning 76% are LOCKED out for good and only have debt-peonage to look forward to all their lives. This too is seen as a natural state of affairs and ‘the way things are.’
4) There is a lot of fear of change and in such circumstances people want a reassuring authoritarian voice be it vacuous and hollow and with May they certainly have the latter.
5) I agree with Richard that the EU is irrelevant to this election. Let’s not forget that the EU is decimating its own populace something Labour never point out. Jean Luc Melenchon in France is doing a better job than Corbyn in pointing out the change that needs to take place in the EU offering the French at least a real choice.
6) The nature of poverty is different to the past: globalisation has created cheap white goods/cars and combine this with credit many live in a relatively high tech poverty-we have maybe 1-2 million getting really hammered but we not talking Hoovervilles.
7) Those getting hammered are often dejected and lack the energy/confidence for collegiate action. No karl Polanyis and WEA activists and a strong educational thrust -just people slumped on sofas and atrociously poor journos like the Kuhnsberg phenomenon.
I think Craig Murray hit the nail on the head here:
‘ In the quite extraordinary public politics of the terminal phase of the existence of the United Kingdom, the system of controlled democracy has reached its apotheosis. The media message has achieved a startling degree of unanimity. The Overton Window has become the Overton Slit.’
maybe ‘terminal phase’ is too apocalyptic ( Murray has that tendency occasionally) but the point seems valid to me.
Non-voters, eligible to vote in the last election but chose not to, outnumber the voters for every Parliamentary party.
A large part of the silent agenda will be campaigning and media coverage so repellent as to keep a third of the population disengaged from politics and voting.
Nile – good point. Arguably this has been going on for a long time, a good example being the Torygraph and its campaign on MPs expenses. The effect was to undermine public confidence in Parliament itself. I had something of an inside view at the time and have been clear that our MPs were far from overpaid by international standards, and most work very hard and were not overclaiming their expenses. (I’m not defending what was a shambolic system – that’s a different debate). But lasting damage was done
It has struck me that it feels like there has been a relentless campaign by the usual suspects in the media to undermine trust in the core institutions of the state, legislature, executive and more recently the judiciary, local as well as central. Those institutions get in the way of a totally marketised, neo-liberal economy. That could be creating a sense of disillusion and apathy amongst voters, and fertile ground for an authoritarian centralised state. Appealing to the far Right, but also to the further Left who are often guilty of joining in with the mud throwing.
This runs deeper than just defending our public services. We need to defend and be positive about our core institutions. Like the NHS, they too may be being dangerously undermined
Robin, I don’t think it is just the expenses scandal that has undermined the trust in parliament, there is a whole raft of other things: Lobbying; M.P. doing outside work (Rifkind/Straw); the Osborne phenomenon where politics is a ‘career’ enhancer. As for the ‘hard work’ while maybe true in many cases we had the sting on Rifkind with him boasting that he had lots of free time for £1,000 a day jobs on the side.
Much has also ben written about the ‘depoliticisation of the political sphere’, a grandiose phrase simply meaning that politicians are no longer willing or able to function as the custodians of social purpose and are rather simulacra of a putative democracy. This latter is a serious issue and one reason, as Varoufakis has pointed out, that we get poor quality politicians who are not ‘well meaning.’
there is more to it that gratuitous ‘mud slinging’.
But then just because Benefits Street tells us that there are some ‘benefit scroungers’, does not mean that all are scroungers. The media has successfully extrapolated from some appalling MP examples to imply that all are equally bad – and we’ve bought that argument sold by the media. Why should we assume that they are all like Osborne/Rifkind/Straw rather than say Jess Phillips or Jo Cox? Are those two ‘poor quality and not well meaning’? Would the good examples be good stories for media?
Why would anyone want to be an MP these days when you are going to be attacked by all sides? That may be as big an issue as any other in discouraging the right kind of MP to go into politics. Ive a lot of time for Varoufakis (and have been to hear him talk) but Greece, much as I love the place, is very different politically.
I think my general point is worth reflecting on – might there be an agenda to undermine the wider institutions of state? MPs expenses is but one example. The likes of Aaron Banks and the press barons are certainly on that page. It suits their agenda to ‘frame’ (in Lakoff’s terms) all institutions of the state as inefficient and probably corrupt. We should think carefully before buying their arguments
Agreed Nile -which probably dooms a progressive alliance even if it were possible.
Dawn Butler on the eddy mayer show today 20/04/2017 5pm is just embarrassing. Naive. Shows whats wrong with Labour MP’s. No chance if getting my vote
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39659304