If I were trying to oust the Conservative Party right now, here’s what I’d do, in order:
1. Force Boris Johnson to delay Brexit, in order to (a) make hard-line Brexit supporters feel betrayed by him, and (b) humiliate him before swing voters.
2. After Johnson’s humiliation, call for new elections.
Everything in British politics over the last few months seems highly consistent with this strategy. After all, the opposition has voted to forbid no-deal Brexit and refused to vote for an early election. Johnson even taunted, “This is the first time in history that the opposition has voted to show confidence in Her Majesty’s government.”
What puzzles me: I can’t find any prominent observer explicitly stating that Johnson’s opponents are pursuing this strategy. Is my story so obvious that no one needs to say it? So unflattering for both sides that no one wants to say it? Am I overly conspiratorial? Missing something?
Responses from experts on British politics are especially welcome.
READER COMMENTS
Samir Mobasher
Sep 24 2019 at 9:31am
I think the part you are missing Bryan is that he does not have to delay, he can ignore the law and go ahead with Brexit. Then he wins the backing of all the brexit supporters and can then call an election whilst the opposition will have nothing to say on the matter.
iamreddave
Sep 24 2019 at 9:34am
The Prime minister has the power to delay elections in the UK. Tony Blair did that during the foot and mouth epidemic. This allows the opposition to plausibly say ‘we do not trust that Boris Johnson will not delay the election until after the exit from the EU”.
This t makes Johnson look bad by not leaving the EU. And if he does ask for an extension does mean he goes back on a promise. This is good for the opposition politically. I think the conspiracy you describe is likely some of the reason for not holding the election. But it is hard to give % values to ‘don’t want to lose an election’ versus ‘we dont trust you not to delay the election’
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/apr/02/footandmouth.election2001
Daniel Woods
Sep 24 2019 at 9:38am
https://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2019/09/04/checkmate-labour-rejects-johnson-s-election-gambit
Not looking hard enough maybe?
JFA
Sep 24 2019 at 9:49am
Is this actually a Bryan post? This seems a little too related to the news cycle for a Bryan post.
Jonathan S
Sep 24 2019 at 9:55am
Bryan’s EU bet is relying on a failed Brexit.
Matthias Görgens
Sep 24 2019 at 10:19am
It’s relying on a delayed Brexit.
nobody.really
Sep 24 2019 at 10:21am
1: IANAEBP. And the more I read about Britain’s “unwritten constitution,” the less confident I become that anyone is an EBP.
2: That said, Caplan’s thesis doesn’t seem especially noteworthy. Yup, if you wanted to oust the conservative party, I guess you’d do what Caplan suggests. That said,
— Members of political parties pretty much always want to oust rival parties from power. So Caplan’s premise, while more than plausible, is hardly unique to Brexit.
— People who oppose the Conservatives pretty much also oppose Brexit, and thus have every reason to seek to postpone Brexit regardkess of their designs on ousting the Conservatives.
— To add the final banality, opposition parties won’t support a new election unless they think they can benefit by doing so. True, they might have had some additional concerns about supporting an election immediately before the Brexit deadline. But the major impediment to seeking a new election is that the only viable rival party, Labor, is led by Jeremy Corbyn, and Corbyn just isn’t that popular outside of his own party. In short, it may not suffice to humiliate Johnson; Labor needs to boost Corbyn–and that may be a heavy lift, Brexit or no Brexit.
Dan Lucraft
Sep 24 2019 at 10:25am
Of course everyone involved is only pursuing the interest of the nation, out of the very purest of motives!
But yes, everyone knows this is what they’re doing.
I’m not sure why you can’t find it talked about much. Obviously the Remainers wouldn’t want to highlight this as their motive. Perhaps the Leavers don’t like to think about it as they cannot currently see how it can be stopped.
Matt Thompson
Sep 24 2019 at 11:04am
As far as I can tell, ‘ousting the conservative party’ is not quite top of the agenda. Brits are far more concerned about leaving or not leaving the EU at the moment.
Votes on what to do about Brexit do not run neatly down party political lines (which explains the political paralysis) and so an election does not resolve the Brexit question.
That said, absolutely, yes, there are huge political efforts to delay Brexit and an election sooner or later is more or less guaranteed.
At least, it would be if we knew for sure that we weren’t all just figments in the fevered imagination of a deranged psycho-political thriller writer.
Phil H
Sep 24 2019 at 11:04am
No expert, but as a Brit, I follow it. The reasons no-one thinks there is a grand plan on the other side are:
1) The current Labour leadership seem to be incapable of planning their way out of a paper bag
2) The Labour Party have been hit just as hard as the Tories by Brexit, and is in disarray. Even with good leadership, it wouldn’t be ready to execute a long-term, subtle strategy such as you describe.
3) The current strategy is not actually hurting Conservative support, because no-one seems to think Labour could do any better
4) Never ascribe to malice what can be ascribed to incompetence and stupidity. Particularly not when the Labour Party’s involved. (And I say that with all the good will in the world – I vote Labour. But they do seem to have a remarkable talent for messing things up.)
nobody.really
Sep 24 2019 at 11:38am
The US doesn’t have a Labour Party; it has the Democrats. And, as Will Rogers remarked, “I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat.”
Oscar Cunningham
Sep 24 2019 at 2:38pm
There’s also a worry that Johnson will call an election for before October 31st and then change the date until after the 31st, thus forcing the UK out of the EU while parliament is dissolved. In order to prevent this the opposition have to wait until after October 31st before they allow an election. Of course this allows Johnson to accuse them of cowardice.
Thaomas
Sep 24 2019 at 4:15pm
But if one were pursuing the least possible damaging form of Brexit (or even no Brexit) would not one pursue the same route? And if one wanted to ensure a Conservative re-election wouldn’t a Conservative government quickly negotiate a “Brexit” that preserves as much freedom of movement of people, goods and services as possible?
William Connolley
Sep 24 2019 at 6:14pm
Bojo has just been pretty thoroughly humiliated by the supreme court.
As to his opponents: he has many. Many of them are in the Conservative party, who want Remain; they don’t want an election. Some (e.g. Corbyn) in the Labour party are quite happy to see Brexit, so are in no hurry to see a new election. And – I think – many MPs will be election-averse in these strange times: who wants to swap a secure job for an unknown chance of re-election?
Jonathan Monroe
Sep 26 2019 at 9:14am
Bryan is correct – the main reason why Boris Johnson’s opponents are doing what they are doing is to humiliate him (he could end the humiliation by resigning and then moving an immediate vote of no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn, but his ego won’t let him do that). Oscar Cunningham is also correct in that there is a small risk that Dominic Cummings has a cunning plan to subvert an election and deliver no-deal Brexit that will work this time – obviously this risk is very small indeed given the success rate to date of Dominic Cummings’ cunning plans. People who are paying attention to British politics know this.
Incidentally, the fact that Boris Johnson is in fact being humiliated in this way indicates that his opponents are more united and competent than the standard anti-Corbyn narrative would suggest.
The reason why this isn’t being widely said (well spotted to Daniel Woods, incidentally) is that everyone who follows British politics (including people who aren’t partisan on normal party-political issues) has strong views on Brexit, and the truth doesn’t fit the leaver or the remainer narrative:
– Remainers don’t want to admit publically that they are using a dirty trick to humiliate Boris Johnson in order to split the leave vote.
– Leavers don’t want to admit publically that the remainers do in fact want an election, they just want to delay it until after the A50 deadline is extended again. The key leaver narrative is that the remainers are afraid of the people.
– Leavers probably don’t want to admit to themselves that their opponents are more united and competent than anyone expected when Dominic Cummings started rolling out his cunning plans.
Dan
Sep 26 2019 at 10:33am
As others above have mentioned, this seems to be rather close to the conventional wisdom on the topic: https://www.politico.eu/article/where-boris-johnson-went-wrong-dominic-cummings-plan/
Keith K.
Sep 27 2019 at 8:09am
You’ve got it backwards Bryan. This stalling tactic by Labor is actually boosting the conservatives. Approximately 2/3rds of the electorate want to leave and are not pleased with Labor essentially acting as totally obstructionist to the process. The conservatives polling has actually been doing better as this process has proceeded. Johnson is clearly more popular than Corbyn and the Labors, which is why they are ALSO forestalling the calling of a general election because they know they will get their asses handed to them.
Labor has constantly been peddling this line about “saving democracy”, when in reality this is much more akin to the ruling class trying to force their preferred political arrangement down the throats of their lessers. The Democracy part was the actual referendum saying “we want to get out”. Most of the MPs really have no desire to leave and are therefore simply forestalling the process as long as possible in the hope that they can just throw up their hands and say “well we can’t do it now”.
Thaomas
Sep 28 2019 at 8:53am
But on what TERMS does 2/3 (if that’s what it is) want to leave? Trade with EU (including across the Irish border) like any other third country or preserve as unrestricted freedom of movement of goods, people and services as is possible without actual membership?
Comments are closed.