Saturday 4 May 2019

Local difficulties

Local elections in the UK tend to be fairly parochial affairs: They do excite domestic media which treats them as a barometer of support levels for the main parties but that is usually it. This year, however, matters were very different with coverage making it into newspapers across Europe. The reason is, of course, Brexit with the elections acting as a measure of how the public has responded to the interminable political wrangling of recent months.

It did not make pretty reading for the main parties. There were 8412 local council seats up for grabs, of which the Conservatives held 58%. They lost 1334 to reduce their share to 42% of the contested seats. Labour also lost ground, but to a far lesser degree (its share fell from 25% to 24.1% of the contested seats). UKIP continued its spectacular implosion following its local council successes in 2015 whilst the biggest winners were the Liberal Democrats (up from 7.7% to 16.1%) and other parties representing a variety of local interests (up from 6.1% to 14%).
If ever politicians needed a wakeup call that their handling of Brexit deliberations has turned voters off, this was it. But what exactly did the results tell us? It is too simplistic to suggest that voters wreaked their vengeance on the Conservatives because they have changed their minds about Brexit but analysis of the results suggests that they lost one-third of the seats they contested in majority-Remain areas. Meanwhile the Lib Dems, which avowedly support a second EU referendum, picked up gains across both sides of the Leave-Remain divide. This would appear to suggest they gained as a result of dissatisfaction with the main political parties following the parliamentary debacle of recent months, in which both Labour and the Conservatives played a key role. However, the Lib Dems could also have picked up votes from potential Labour supporters who have been discouraged by the party’s attempt to back away from a commitment to holding a confirmatory EU referendum. That said, Labour performed badly in majority Leave-supporting areas, indicating voters’ dissatisfaction with politicians’ efforts to deliver Brexit.

What the results do suggest is that voters want an end to the political wrangling. But it is less clear that they want the sort of Brexit that Theresa May has in mind – it is far from clear that they want Brexit at all. And it remains highly disingenuous of the prime minister to accuse the Scottish First Minister of wanting to "re-run the independence referendum because she did not like the decision of the people of Scotland" and to "re-run the EU referendum because she did not like the decision of the people of the UK" when that is exactly May has tried to do in ramming her deal through the Westminster parliament. And the prime minister knows only too well that the electorate can change its mind. After all, there were only two years between the general elections of 2015 and 2017 when voters changed their mind about electing a majority Conservative government, and we are now almost three years on from the EU referendum. And as the arch-Brexiteer David Davis once said, ”if a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy.”

What the results also suggested is that voters are currently not aligned along party political lines and instead have become more issue-driven. That is not the same thing as saying the two-party hegemony is over for good, as some of the more excitable political commentators have suggested, but party loyalties are currently being tested. Brexit obviously tops the domestic political agenda but the strong performance of the Greens might indicate that environmental issues are playing a bigger role in voters’ thinking following the recent publicity surrounding 16-year old Greta Thunberg’s castigation of politicians’ treatment of climate change issues. Indeed, intra-generational issues are likely to be high up the UK agenda as issues such as health funding, access to education and affordable housing are all items which have been pushed down the political agenda in favour of Brexit.

As for where we go on the Brexit debate from here, both Labour and the Conservatives realise it is in their interests to find an agreement before the October deadline. Theresa May could thus be tempted to accommodate Labour demands for a customs union with the EU whilst Jeremy Corbyn shows every sign of wanting to back away from the commitment to a second referendum. Of course, neither of these options would please members of their respective parties, with large numbers of Labour Party members particularly in favour of a second referendum.

The debate is only going to heat up as we are less than three weeks away from European elections in which the UK believed it would not have to participate. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party is currently polling at 30% making it the largest single party although we should not overstate this result. It merely tells us that large numbers of Brexit supporters have found a new home. However, if repeated in the European elections, this will reaffirm the government’s view that it is required to deliver some form of Brexit and preferably sooner rather than later. Most people I speak to share my view that the last three weeks have proven to be a welcome Brexit-free break. Unfortunately, it might be about to come to a noisy and fractious end.

4 comments:

  1. It is emphatically NOT in Labour's interests to make a deal with the government for Brexit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You would not think so. But as noted below, the Labour leadership fears it will lose votes if it doesn't try to deliver some form of Brexit. So it might try to fudge the issue if it thinks it can pin the blame on the Tories if it all goes wrong, but claim some credit for getting Brexit over the line if all goes well.

      Delete
  2. A good article Peter: A few observations though.
    1. Unbelievably the right wing press are claiming that 1,300 seats lost by the Tories and about 900 gained by the only two parties who are Remain; is proof that the UK unanimously wants a quick Brexit.
    2. I am (just about still) a Labour Party member and a former Labour borough councillor. My opinion about the duplicity of our party's leadership on Brexit isn't fit to print and I don’t have sufficient blood pressure tablets to complete the task.
    3. I am very much a supporter of Remain. As you point out, there are a variety of views on this in both the Labour and Conservative Parties. For some of my 2016 campaigning, I worked with Conservative In, Labour In, Lib Dems and Greens. The enemy was not only UKIP, but other elements of the Conservative Party and a smaller section of my own party.
    While the Conservatives appear split down the middle, the bulk of Labour members and Labour MPs are Remain. Sadly our leader is not, nor are many of the divisive clique who run the NEC. While very early on, JC lost the confidence of Labour MPs he hung on by getting a massive vote from labour membership. It is of course all about party member’s opinion and democracy; that is until a massive majority of members want something that the leader doesn't like.
    4. In 2017, I think that Labour did so much better than expected (but still lost), because we picked up a lot of remain votes, and were seen as a Remain Party. We lost in Brexit places, such as Mansfield. The electorate was not yet ready to forgive the Lib dems who had jettisoned all their principles in 2010 and became part of the very government that called this very bad referendum. Last week may have shown signs that this has changed. The current leadership of Labour seem to want to appease the Leave vote out of fear of losing more "traditional heartland" seats, and seem prepared to write off the vote of the 16 million who voted Remain.
    5. It seems obvious that a Brexit deal of whatever sort, should be put to a second referendum (with Remain on the ballot). Given that the whole argument for Brexit is that it is the will of the people, then let the people to decide. There are huge problems with the original referendum, it didn't detail what sort of Brexit was being proposed, the Leave claims were impossible (£350 million per week extra for the NHS) and above all, the notion that Brexit would be easy, would not cost us anything and would have no negative impact on people's lives. There was of course a massive disinformation campaign led by certain sections of the press and the internet was awash with a campaign of lies. In the end, in spite of the lies, the result was almost a 50/50 Remain/Leave split. No way is this a demonstration of the will of the people.
    6. Given that we now know that Brexit is something that is anything between ” soft” - remaining in EU institutions and having to abide by rules that we have surrendered our influence over: Or it is “hard” - cutting off and crashing out with no deal and losing our EU trade. None of these of course offer anything other than disadvantage to the UK. The mythical "good Brexit" deal is as much a contradiction in terms as a round square with three sides.
    Where we are now in understanding of what Brexit means is nowhere near our public understanding back in 2016. It is simply a time to make an informed choice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Jeremy. I agree with your points here and you have my sympathies as a Labour member who is not being served by your party leaders. Point 4 is the point I was trying to get at when I said that both Labour and the Tories see that is in their interests to do a deal on Brexit ASAP. Precisely because Labour does not want to lose votes in their heartland is why I fear the leadership may try to rush through some form of Brexit accommodation. However, I get the sense that party members and many MPs will not allow that to happen. But whether Brexit does or does not happen, a lot of people on the other side of the argument are going to be disappointed. The worst of the rifts will not begin to heal until we see a generational shift - amongst voters as well as politicians. It will take years.

      Delete