2017 UK Election: On Reflection

2017 UK Election: On Reflection

On the face of it the election result showed that the government has no mandate for a hard Brexit. This, now, is self-evidently the «will of the people» but don'expect the government to respect that. «The will of the people» was never more than a convenient excuse and the extreme right has never had much time for democracy anyway, as its numerous attempts to avoid parliamentary scrutiny have demonstrated. I think it would be foolish though to assume that the extreme right is as yet defeated. Hammond apart, most senior government posts are still held by the extreme right. Moreover, the mooted alliance with the DUP, with its overtones of cosiness with terrorist-linked groups and threat to peace in Northern Ireland, shows a desperate attempt to cling to power at whatever cost. However, the beauty of the extreme right is that it cannot embrace compromise and must cling to its path, even if that path leads to self-destruction. I hope it does in this case but the extreme right is not dead yet.

Nor should the revival of the Labour party's fortunes be overestimated. There was an undoubted large element of tactical voting in the election which may not be repeated in any future election. However a revival of some dimension must be accredited and I suspect that Corbyn's focus on social issues was crucial and hopefully will keep those at the top of the political agenda. Corbyn is to be congratulated on that and on securing his place at the head of the Labour party for the forseeable future.

The result obviously brings into question the form of Brexit the government can go for. The Daily Telegraph suggests that the government may already be in secret talks with the Labout party regarding the possibilities for a soft Brexit. The talks, if they exist, would have to be in secret because if known they would split the Conservative party completely in two. May has said she will get the Conservtive party out of the mess she has got it into but it is very difficult to see how she can do this. If, again, the talks are happening, they would be in line with declared Labour policy for a soft Brexit but the Labour party would be in position to demand more for any cooperation. It could demand some safeguards on social issues or a parliamentary vote (even a second referendum?) on any final Brexit deal. Needless to say, any of that would be anathema to the extreme right. I suspect that answers to much of this will become clearer once talks with the EU are underway and the initial issues of the rights of EU citizens and financial payments are decided (or not). On the former point, I note that EU Directive 2004/38/EC, which limits free movement for longer than three months, was never implemented in the UK. Now how did that happen?

It will be interesting also to see what line the gutter press in the UK takes in the future. It's campaigns of hate and misinformation patently failed but, if Rupert Murdoch and Lord Rothermere have to give up on their apparent dream of a UK tax haven for the moment, they cannot but react with anger to any soft Brexit deal. We can expect howls of headline protest against «27 countries lined up against us» (they're called the EU) and against the EU totally unreasonably sticking to its treaties and regulations (how dare it?) but what else? Has its readership started trying to use its brains, Heaven forbid? If blatant lies and slurs don't work, could a subtler approach be applied? But then asking the gutter press to be subtle is like asking an elephant to be dainty and, anyway, their readership would probably miss any subtlety. Like the Conservative party, the gutter press will need a rethink.

"Stable and strong" has become weak and wobbly. Time for a rethink indeed.