Tag Archives: General Election 2017

Britain, Government, Politics

Theresa May on borrowed time

BRITAIN: GENERAL ELECTION 2017

myview

When Theresa May walked from her prime ministerial car on Friday afternoon towards the waiting media – after having met Her Majesty The Queen – and told the nation she was ready to ‘provide certainty and lead Britain forward at this critical time for our country’, who was she kidding?

Mrs May has neither the competence nor the authority to carry out the mission she describes. Her days as the occupant of 10 Downing Street are surely numbered.

It would be easy to sketch a narrative in hindsight and say that May’s decision to call a snap general election just seven weeks ago was a mistake, that she was doomed to failure the moment she announced her plan. But we cannot say this with confidence.

What we can allude to is that the Prime Minister ran a spectacularly, jaw-droppingly mute campaign. She called the election and didn’t have the guts to debate anything with her political opponents. It seems as if the Tory party have totally forgotten what democracy actually is. To suggest May ran a bad campaign would be putting things lightly. She shattered her reputation as a safe pair of hands by letting us see the real her.

The Prime Minister also kept away from members of the public as often as she could, preferring instead tightly controlled events where she would repeat the words ‘strong and stable’ for the cameras.

When she had to interact with voters, her demeanour was comically awkward. She grinned and nodded and occasionally shrieked with uncomfortable laughter. In interviews, she was wooden and monotonous, delivering drab staid bromides and displaying reticence to engage that would have further undermined her.

May sought our trust that she would be the best person to deliver on the Brexit deal. But what materialised was the polar-opposite: we were shown just how unfit she is to perform that mammoth task.

The consequences for the Prime Minister are acutely critical and she will not be the only victim of her own ineptitude.

The UK enters Brexit negotiations far from a position of strength. The remaining members of the EU owe the UK nothing and, politically, it is in their interests to make this clear. With nationalist parties across the EU agitating for similar referenda, our former partners will be keen to show that departure from the bloc has significant consequences. There are those European leaders who clearly think the best outcome would be for the UK to pay heavily, a measure that would deter other populist countries from pursuing a similar route.

On what basis could Theresa May be considered the right person to enter these negotiations? She has been humiliated by an election disaster of her own creation. Her credibility has been severely damaged with every other leader across the EU sensing her political vulnerability.

A myriad list of other implications also exist that give cause for concern.

The political solution to years of sectarian violence in Northern Ireland is young and fragile. To date, the most important role the UK government has been able to play is that of honest broker when things have grown fraught between unionists and nationalists at Stormont.

In matters devolved to the Northern Ireland assembly, the neutrality of the UK government is self-evidently important. Mrs May’s dependence on the Democratic Unionist Party to help her minority administration get legislation through the House of Commons will certainly be bad news for the power-sharing agreement at Stormont. At almost a stroke, the DUP finds itself with considerably more political power than the republicans of Sinn Fein. This disturbance in the equilibrium cannot be seen in a wholly positive light, despite Arlene Foster, the DUP leader, seeking some concessions for Northern Ireland as part of the agreement in supporting Theresa May’s government.

Then there is Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson who has sought immediate assurances that any dealings with the socially conservative DUP would not mean the diminution of LGBT rights. Whilst it was reported that Miss Davidson had received promises she was seeking on these issues her disdain for the arrangement was palpable. There has even been some talk of the Scottish Conservatives breaking away to form their own party and constitution.

Many will understand that the Conservative Party did not earn its deserved reputation for resilience without displaying a considerable degree of ruthlessness when it was required. Many others, however, will equally argue that austerity cuts on those who could least afford it has now come back and hit the Conservative Party hard. There has hardly been a fair redistribution of wealth under Conservative rule. It may be best that once a leader becomes a liability they are put out of their misery as soon as possible. Expect another Conservative Party leadership challenge, if not another general election, sometime soon.

A certain amount of fate awaits. Senior Conservatives say May is safe until after the party have delivered a Queen’s Speech and re-established themselves in government. After that, it will be a matter of when, not if, she is invited to step down or face a bruising leadership challenge.

The Prime Minister might have won most parliamentary seats but she has squandered a majority and revealed herself to be far less able than her predecessor. We should be surprised if she has the stomach to fight any challenge to her leadership.

Despite Jeremy Corbyn not having the disastrous outcome that many had predicted for Labour, Mr Corbyn still didn’t come close to beating a heavily weakened Tory party. Even if all other parties are added to Labour’s the magical 326 seats needed in forming a government is still not reached.

Those in the Labour Party treating the result as a victory should think carefully about what they achieved. Yes, Mr Corbyn is in a more secure position than he has ever been as Labour leader, but he remains a divisive figure whose appeal is lost on a significant number of those voters whose support Labour needs if it is to win a general election.

With the SNP also wounded by the loss of 21 seats in Scotland, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon still leads the biggest party north of the border. The SNP’s 35 seats are more than all the other parties put together. But the party have admitted that its fixation on independence was a significant factor in the loss of so many SNP MPs, including former deputy leader Angus Robertson and former first minister Alex Salmond. Their seats both fell to the Conservatives.

Ruth Davidson has been the only clear winner from this election. She is gaining pre-eminence among fellow Conservatives and finds herself now with considerable authority in the Tory Party, both north and south of the border. Socially liberal and pro-EU, we should expect her to influence the direction of Brexit.

As things stand, it would be apt to ask whether the current Prime Minister will be involved in the final Brexit settlement. Her colleagues will probably dictate that she won’t be. Britain finds itself in a precarious position as it starts these talks in a few days from now.

Standard
Britain, Government, Politics

Are the Conservative Party about to form an alliance with the DUP?

GENERAL ELECTION 2017

As Prime Minister Theresa May proceeds with forming a minority Conservative Government, consideration is being given of forming an alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) of Northern Ireland. A shock General Election outcome resulted in the Conservative Party losing dozens of parliamentary seats and will now need the support from elsewhere.

At this juncture, it is apt to ask what the DUP will demand to prop up Theresa May.

The Democratic Unionist Party’s hard-line stance against gay marriage and its opposition to a hard Brexit are issues that could be stumbling blocks in any attempt to forge a coalition with the Tories.

Northern Ireland’s largest unionist party has in the past been condemned by former prime minister David Cameron for its long opposition to allowing gay marriage in Northern Ireland.

Northern Ireland is the only remaining part of the UK where same-sex marriage is not legal and the DUP has used a controversial veto mechanism to block any change to legislation. Senior figures in the party have called the issue a “red line” for power sharing talks at Stormont.

Former Northern Ireland Health Minister Jim Wells earlier this year claimed he and other members of the assembly would split from the DUP if it relaxed its opposition to same-sex marriage.

He vowed in April: “Peter will not marry Paul in Northern Ireland.”

The DUP’s stance was previously condemned by David Cameron when the prospect of a coalition with the DUP was raised before the 2015 General Election.

The then Prime Minister said he “profoundly disagreed” with the DUP’s policy on gay rights and would “never validate” it.

The DUP’s stance on Brexit could also cause tension.

Arlene Foster, the DUP leader, is keen to avoid a hard border with Ireland and has spoken against a “hard Brexit.”

She has said: “No-one wants to see a ‘hard’ Brexit, what we want to see is a workable plan to leave the European Union, and that’s what the national vote was about – therefore we need to get on with that.

“However, we need to do it in a way that respects the specific circumstances of Northern Ireland, and, of course, our shared history and geography with the Republic of Ireland.”

The DUP manifesto says the party wants a “comprehensive free trade and customs agreement with the European Union.”

The document also reveals splits with the Tories over pensions and winter fuels payments.

The DUP pledges to maintain the pension triple lock, while the Tories jettisoned the 2.5 per cent rise safeguard.

Their manifesto also says they are committed to winter fuel payments and they pledge to “resist any assault” on what it sees as an important universal benefit.

Arlene Foster has also said the party remains opposed to any reform of the province’s notoriously strict abortion laws.

She said last year that she would “not want abortion to be as freely available here as it is in England”.

 

 

Standard
Government, Politics, Scotland

General Election: Jeremy Corbyn, pragmatism and progressive politics

LABOUR PARTY

Jeremy Corvyn

Jeremy Corbyn has ruled out an alliance with the Scottish National Party if there is a hung parliament following the general election. His stance could change if he finds himself in the position of forming a government.

Intro: Jeremy Corbyn insists he will not do a deal with the Scottish National Party at Westminster. But, if there is a hung parliament, circumstances should dictate that he reconsiders. Pragmatism may have to override principle.

Politics has a habit of delivering the unexpected. But sometimes, particularly in the current political climate, we should be ready to apply pragmatism as a means of moving forward.

Anyone who has followed the long political career of Jeremy Corbyn will not have been overly surprised at his remarks concerning the possibility of striking a deal at Westminster with the Scottish National Party following the general election.

Mr Corbyn reiterated that there will be ‘no deals’ and ‘no alliance’. He has given an almost steadfast pledge that he is not willing to consider Nicola Sturgeon’s overtures.

Politically, of course, it is perfectly understandable why the Labour leader has maintained his position. By ruling out any alliance with the SNP, he is giving potential Labour voters in Scotland good reason to back his own party. Were he to have signalled the possibility of doing a deal, that proportion of the electorate would likely go against their instincts. Politics is not about giving rivals an advantage to your own detriment.

Mr Corbyn, a hard left-leaning socialist, is a man of principle who has remained true to his ideals for decades. Some within his party perceive that as damaging stubbornness, but it remains universally fundamental to his vision of politics.

But waging election battles and governing are worlds apart. With all opinion polls cutting Theresa May’s lead, there is every chance that Mr Corbyn could find himself in a position where he could be required to form a government with the support of the SNP. If that scenario did come to pass, he would be invited to take a different path to the one he has been advocating up until now.

If he were to reject that, the Conservatives would be returned to power and Labour voters would never forgive him for not removing a government that has caused them great hardship. Austerity has reduced many to seek desperate help from food banks, with many unable to make ends meet. Idealism during the election campaign is fine and well, but he has not been in this position before. If the Labour leader wishes to take the mantle of power, he will likely have to adopt a much more pragmatic approach.

Such an alliance with the SNP would raise other issues. A second independence referendum in Scotland would become a prerequisite and condition of agreeing to do a deal with Labour. The SNP would be expected to pursue progressive policies in any alliance, so it wouldn’t just be a dilemma for Mr Corbyn. Any reversal of promises made by Ms Sturgeon would likely lead to the SNP facing a torrent of criticism.

Political history matters, too, particularly in relation to the mistakes of the past. The SNP have surely learnt the lessons of what transpired after it failed to back Labour in 1979.

Standard