The exit poll for the UK General Election indicates that the Conservative Party will win 368 seats, whilst the Labour Party will win 191. This will result in a majority of 86, the largest majority for the Tories since the 1980s. For Jeremy Corbyn, this will be Labour’s worst result since 1935.

The Scottish National Party (SNP) are set to increase their dominance in Scotland and win 55 seats, whilst the Liberal Democrats may only gain 13. The Brexit Party is unlikely to make any gains at all.

If these results are accurate, Boris Johnson may have turned around the Conservative Party’s fortunes. He has always been a divisive figure in British politics, but compared to 2017, he has always had one advantage over Theresa May- he campaigned for Brexit. Since he became Prime Minister, Boris has tried to ensure that Britain leaves the EU on time. He deployed every tactic in the book from proroguing Parliament to securing a deal satisfactory to all sides of the Conservative Party. A general election was his last resort, and it has worked to his advantage.

Throughout the election, the Tories’ mantra was ‘Get Brexit Done.’ Their message was simple- if the electorate awards the Conservatives a majority, they can vote through Boris’s deal and complete the Brexit process. They have also focused on areas that Labour are traditionally strong on, like health and education. Throughout the 2019 General Election, the Tories have consistently said the Brexit paralysis has delayed their progress on these issues, and by securing that majority, they can invest in public services and concentrate on other issues that matter to the British people.

The Tories have conducted a safe campaign. They have avoided cowering out of debates, the game-changing mistake that May made in 2017, and they had a simple manifesto message. The 2017 manifesto was damaged by policies on fox-hunting and making pensioners pay for their social care.

They have also been fortunate enough to witness the Brexit Party’s vote collapse. Nigel Farage agreed not to contest candidates in seats the Conservatives need to win. They were also damaged by bloopers like four of their MEPs declaring their support for Boris.

Considering how close they came to power in 2017, Labour hoped that their campaign of ending austerity would work to their advantage after almost ten years of Conservative rule. Corbyn tried to rally his coalition of voters that almost shifted him into power two years ago, but his support has collapsed.

Many of their policies have been exposed for being expensive, like free broadband, which would have to be paid for through nationalisation. Their campaign of ‘saving the NHS from Donald Trump’ was damaged by revelations that the health service would not be included in a US-UK post-Brexit trade deal. Furthermore, Corbyn’s neutral Brexit stance left its voters unsure whether the party stood for remaining in or leaving the EU, which left them vulnerable to the Tories and the Liberal Democrats.

The Liberal Democrats hoped that their anti-Brexit message would appeal to Remainers, but Jo Swinson failed to cut through to them because her position was viewed as extreme. This is why she failed to win over Tory Remainers who voted against leaving the EU, but believed that a democratic result should be respected.

The Tories’ Brexit message failed to resonate in Scotland, which voted to remain in the EU. They hoped their unionist message would prevent an SNP onslaught, but Nicola Sturgeon won the argument there. This shows that Brexit, not the Union, was the dominant theme north of the border.

Brexit overwhelmingly influenced this election outcome, and this result reflects that the majority of voters want it completed. But this poll leaves Labour in dark territory. As Andrew Neill said- they have already lost the 2024 General Election. This vote will change British politics, no matter what the final result actually looks like.

L'articolo 2019 UK General Election: How Britain Reached this Outcome proviene da InsideOver.

At last week’s BBC Question Time election special, Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn stated that if his government were to negotiate its own Brexit deal and offer voters a second referendum on it, he would maintain a neutral stance. One audience member called Liam Shrivastava, who has since been exposed as a Labour communications officer, defended Corbyn’s Brexit stance by claiming Harold Wilson was neutral during the 1975 referendum on the UK’s EEC membership, even though he campaigned to remain in the Common Market at the time.

When it comes to leaving the EU, Labour find themselves equally, if not more divided, than the Tories. They are a pro-EU party led by a man who has always believed Britain should leave the bloc. 61 per cent of Labour’s current MPs represent constituencies that voted to leave the EU, while 68 per cent of Labour voters opted to remain in the bloc. It is understandable why they have struggled to form a coherent policy over the issue for the last three and a half years.

Although Corbyn has failed to declare how he would campaign in a second referendum, his party has finally managed to adopt a clear stance on Brexit. They seek a deal that ensures Britain remains in the Customs Union, is aligned to the Single Market, and protects workers’ rights. On their website, they attack the Tories for threatening to ‘sell the NHS’ and the Liberal Democrats for wanting to overturn a democratic result. Once they have negotiated an agreement with Brussels, they want a second referendum so that it can be approved by the electorate. But their deal is similar to the Norway model – it equates to the UK remaining in the Single Market and the Customs Union without a say. It is a position designed to appease Labour Remain voters who cherish the EU’s institutions and Labour Leave electors who want to quit the EU.

Their strategy to appeal to their Remain and Leave voters worked in 2017 when they increased their number of MPs by 31 and denied the Conservatives a majority. This is what they are continuing to do now, only circumstances have changed since then. Labour’s vote is torn between the Brexit Party, the Conservatives who are so far leading in the opinion polls, and the resurgent Liberal Democrats who are promising to cancel Brexit altogether. From Labour’s perspective, they have made a terrible mistake adopting a neutral stance and considering 68 per cent of their voters opted to remain in the EU, they should have campaigned in this general election as a Remain party.

Jo Swinson formed a pact with the Greens and Plaid Cymru to contest a single Remain candidate in 60 constituencies, which means the Liberal Democrats have a chance of retaining seats like Brecon. The Brexit Party have also refused to fight 317 constituencies the Tories won last time, improving their chances of gaining a majority this time.

But if Labour could have united under a Remain banner and formed a pact with other pro-EU parties, they could have caused significant damage to the Conservatives in seats like Worcester, which is currently being contested by Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens, and in Broxtowe, where the Remain vote was split in 2017 but a single pro-EU candidate has every chance of winning the seat this time.

Corbyn’s neutral Brexit stance may cost him seats elsewhere. The Daily Telegraph reported that Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry is at risk of losing her Islington South and Finsbury constituency to the Liberal Democrats. If Labour formed a pact with other Remain parties under a pro-EU banner, this would be unlikely to happen.

A pro-EU stance from Labour has its risks of further alienating its core Leave voters, but under first-past-the-post, they have more to gain from being a Remain party. Corbyn wants a majority, but ironically he has adopted a Brexit position that could cost him one. Whatever the outcome of this general election, in years to come Labour will regret not being clearer on Brexit sooner.

L'articolo Have Labour Made a Mistake by Not Campaigning as a Pro-EU Party? proviene da InsideOver.

The UK general election is at risk as hate crimes have increased in a country which is officially in turmoil.

Police have seen an increased level of intimidation and harassment aimed at MPs, and have told candidates on the campaign trail ahead of the Dec 12 vote to be careful, not to canvass alone and most of all, to think carefully about the language they use citing that they “campaign responsibly,” and “use moderate language”.

The National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC), the Electoral Commission and the Crown Prosecution Service have told MPs to follow the written safety recommendations they have delivered and to seek advice on security measures at their home, workplace, and to the Detective Superintendent that they have appointed to each candidate as a direct point of contact. 

The Eight Rules

The political atmosphere in Great Britain is hostile and tough and election-related crimes continue to escalate. To prevent and detect crime, the police have sent a full guide to candidates that reads they should:

1. Take active steps around personal safety to keep themselves and their campaign staff safe
2. Not canvass alone and make sure someone knows where they are canvassing
3. Keep records of any intimidating behaviour or abuse
4. Engage with their single point of contact within their local force for candidate security
5. Conduct an online health check to ensure sensitive personal information is not widely available
6. Report intimidation or abuse to internet service providers and social media platforms
7. Make sure they go out with a fully-charged mobile phone
8. Think very carefully about the language they are using so that they are not inflaming the already highly-charged environment. 

Police are known to work in efforts to enable the democratic process to proceed unhindered. This generally happens with every election, but this time things have gone further.

Push Brexit through

This could be a ‘momentous’ election but as a consequence, it is also fraught with danger. More than 70 lawmakers have announced they are not running for re-election amid Britain’s toxic political atmosphere.

Even if all parties try to focus on national political issues such as economy or housing, and attempt to regroup their electorate through shared political beliefs to win a majority, the issue that UK voters still care most about is Brexit.

According to the polls, Brexit has become the most major issue since the EU referendum.

The Ipsos MORI Issues Index shows Brexit continuing to be the public’s biggest concern, with 60% mentioning it as one of the biggest issues and almost half (47%) seeing it as the single biggest worry.

While the level of public concern about Brexit has lessened somewhat in recent months (in April of this year 72% of the British public said Brexit was a big issue) it remains at historically high levels. The NHS continues to be the second-biggest issue for the public on 39%, and crime is now considered to be the third-biggest worry.

Behind these issues lie a series of concerns – education, the environment, poverty and inequality, and housing – which are each considered worrying by around a fifth of the public.

According to the polls, British adults are more likely to be in favour of the Conservatives than the Labour Party. Remain voters are most favourable towards the Liberal Democrats rather than Labour whilst Leave voters are most supportive towards the Conservatives.

Most polls see the Conservatives leading but for many British voters this year, their feelings about Brexit could trump traditional party loyalties. Tactical alliances could play a part in the parties’ success.

Commenting on the findings, Ipsos MORI Research Director, Keiran Pedley, said: “The Conservatives enter the campaign in a good position, ahead in voting intention polls”. On the other hand, for Labour, it will be a concern that Remain voters feel more well-intentioned towards the Liberal Democrats, although there are some signs in voting intention polling that the Liberal Democrats’ vote share is already starting to be squeezed by Labour regardless.

However, it should be noted that there are still several weeks to go in a campaign likely to be dominated by Brexit, so things could rapidly change.

An Election fraught with danger

“Strong and varied views are the mark of a healthy democracy, but these should not cross the line into criminal abuse, harassment or disorder. There are serious penalties for those who are found guilty of criminal offences,” the police said explaining why they issued the practical guidance sent to help candidates stay safe on the campaign trail.

Candidates have also been warned of potential signals that behaviour could be escalating – threats of imminent violence, fixated ideas or release of personal information not already in the public domain – and to immediately call 999 in an emergency.

“We’re not going to tell anyone to limit their campaigning or enthusiasm in any way, but we are taking precautionary steps ourselves and providing sensible advice to candidates.”

All police forces are going to offer security briefings for candidates and have a senior officer responsible for this as abuse or intimidation of candidates in elections has serious implications for individuals and for democracy itself.

Electoral Commission Chief Executive, Bob Posner said: “It is vital that all parties and campaigners comply with election rules and campaign responsibly. Robust political debate is part of a healthy democracy, but sometimes things can go too far.”

Instances of intimidating and abusive behaviour are increasing in the country as a result of calling another election, even though police have already seen an increased level of intimidation and harassment aimed at politicians since the backdrop of the murder of Jo Cox during the Brexit vote campaign, in 2016. 

National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) chairman Martin Hewitt said the current political landscape has been ‘highly charged for a long period of time’.

There have been increasing concerns for British politicians’ safety since Labour Party legislator was stabbed to death. Jo Cox was assassinated by a man with far-right sympathies during the run-up to the EU referendum three years ago. Her murder was the first killing of an MP in more than 25 years. The man who killed her first shot and then repeatedly stabbed her, shouting: ‘Britain first’. He was given a life sentence for the crime.  

Trying to avoid the worst-case scenario

The NPCC said the increase in hate crimes “seemed to coincide with some of the debates” in parliament. Studies showed that when the debate was quite strong, hate crimes increased as it happened around the original date for Brexit on 31 March this year.

The first spike took place when parliament passed the “Benn Act” –  the one Johnson labelled “surrender Act” – aiming to prevent a no-deal Brexit, police revealed. Some far-right activists threatened to riot at protests over the introduction of the law calling MPs who supported it “traitors”.

The second spike recorded by police occurred in the last week of September, when a heated debate followed the reopening of parliament after the Supreme Court ruled its five weeks suspension (asked by Johnson and approved by the Queen) unlawful.

On 19 Oct, the day after the million people march in London, protesters hounded the leader of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg and his 12-year-old son in the street while leaving Westminster shouting: ‘shame on you’. The officers then lined up across the street near Mr Rees-Mogg’s mansion to prevent activists pursuing him to his front door

Cabinet colleague, Michael Gove, also had a 12-strong police escort to leave the House of Commons on that day.

The scenes coincide with the Commons harsh debate. A Peoples’ vote spokesman said they didn’t endorse anybody being followed or barracked by protesters on their way home.

The Daily Mail columnist Sarah Vine, Gove’s wife, said: “The thing about politicians is no one feels any sympathy on them and to a certain extent you have to suck it up. This is just what happens if you are in politics in Britain today”.

Senior officers would not be drawn on the specific impact of the prime minister’s language but repeated appeals for moderation from public figures.

Police wanted to make clear that, sometimes the way things are said can be perceived as permitting people to act beyond the normal boundaries.

It is not necessarily what is being debated but the nature of the debate and the way things are said that, to some extent, reflects on incidents reported across the rest of the country with a dramatic increase in abuse pushed by a xenophobic and racist wave starting since the EU referendum was called. Since June 2016, incidents were reported all over the country and several people have been prosecuted for making threats to politicians, that’s why they are requested to campaign responsibly.

Different episodes, same target: women

A 55 year-old-man has been jailed for sending a threatening letter to the MP Anna Soubry (who is standing for the Independent Groups for Change) telling her that she would be murdered like Jo Cox. “Cox was first, you are next,” he wrote. The letter arrived at Soubry’s constituency office and was opened by a member of the staff.

Jess Phillis, a Labour MP, a month ago, said she received a death threat which quoted Boris Johnson. The threat read: “It was rather prophetic that Boris Johnson should say ‘I would rather be found dead in a ditch.’ That is what will happen to those who do not deliver Brexit,” Ms Phillips revealed on Twitter. She also said the police were called to her house several times amid a “massive recent increase” in personal abuse, right after she asked an urgent question in the House of Commons to debate on Parliamentary language and after claiming PM had a “direct strategy designed to divide”, which, she said, was ‘working’.

The former US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, spoke at King’s College London, talking about issues faced by women. She criticised the heavily misogynistic atmosphere online which has seen female candidates not stand in the general election. She has warned that the number of female MPs quitting politics because of threats and intimidation risks putting Britain on the path of ‘authoritarianism’.

“It is a terrible loss and a loss to democracy if anybody is intimidated out of running, and disproportionately the people choosing not to run in the first instance or for re-election are women,” she said.

Mrs Clinton said social media culture was serving the ‘amplification of hatred’ which led to the ‘political assassination’ of Labour MP Jo Cox. All kinds of hatred and bias has been with us from the beginning of time, that is no surprise, “but something about the amplification of the hatred attracts even more people,” Clinton concluded.

Nicola Horlick “was dubbed a ‘superwoman’ in the 1990s for her ability to balance a large family with a successful career in a largely male-dominated industry,” The Financial Times said.

She is now standing as an MP for the Liberal Democrats. In 2005 she fought off a man with a gun outside her house in London and she would ‘do the same if she had to’. “Women are attacked online more frequently than men,” she admits. “The only explanation is that the attackers are misogynistic and often lonely men who feel empowered by having a phone and access to Twitter. They feel like ‘someone’ when attacking a prominent female.”

The high-profile fund manager and City “superwoman”, Ms Horlick, doesn’t fear standing and campaigning even if she has to admit: “there is always a risk that this men could harm to a female politician as happened with the killing of Jo Cox” and that’s why she concluded: “The key thing is to not go out alone”.

How to solicit voters in the mid-December snap elections 

A mid-December general election throws up challenges that could wreck even the strongest campaigner because of hard weather conditions representing a real headache for all candidates. Cold wind, gales, heavy snow, ice and floods could ruin travel plans and leave candidates grounded.

The election date is only a week from the shortest day of the year and this makes it harder for activists campaigning in the dark and chilly evenings and poses also problems for polling stations staff. What if that day will be particularly rainy, windy or snowy? 

Being honest, this would also affect turnout; we should not forget how voters are tired of the never-ending-Brexit debate. 

The very short and dark winter days are a particular challenge as voters won’t welcome representatives after dark. Travelling around some areas in the UK will be tough and most people will be thinking about Christmas, parties and shopping instead of the boring political issues. 

And what about the weather conditions in areas like Scotland where a large part of constituencies have no street lights, the sun rises at around 9 am sits low and sets at 3 pm? After sunset it is dark and it raises the challenge of making sure canvassers and candidates get to people. Add in rain, wind and cold it makes campaigning from street stalls harder too, again reducing the chance for voters and candidates to meet.

Door-to-door canvassing is considered to be one of the most effective tools, since the age of the ancient Rome. The face-to-face interactions are supposed to help increasing a voter’s investment in a candidate more than any other strategy, especially before social media broke into modern political communication. 

Most canvassing happens early evening, when voters return from work and activists are free to help, it is difficult to get people to come to the door on a winter’s night and getting them to stay at the door if they do.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council said it is urging candidates not to campaign alone if possible and to contact local police in advance of campaigning in specific areas like these. 

Just a quick flashback.

Despite the political wisdom that winter elections suppresses turnout, December 1923 was mild and numbers held up. Although the Conservatives remained the largest Party the result was a hung parliament. In January 1924 MacDonald became the first Labour Prime minister, but the Labour government fell the following November.

L'articolo United Kingdom General Election: An Election Fraught with Danger proviene da InsideOver.

Following Tuesday night’s defeat of the Third Reading of Boris Johnson’s Withdrawal Agreement Bill, a general election seems inevitable. In the eyes of their opponents, the 2017 General Election eradicated the Tories’ mandate to take Britain out of the EU without a deal, if necessary. Theresa May’s failure to strike a deal with Brussels has left Brexit paralysed. Opposition parties have used this to their advantage to frustrate, or even to try and cancel, the UK’s EU exit. Boris’s only option now is to win a majority so that he has the numbers in the Commons to approve of his deal or no deal.

The upcoming election will be a battle between the Conservatives, who will be campaigning for their new deal whilst retaining the option of no deal if it is rejected. The Brexit Party will fight to take Britain out of the EU without a deal at all. Labour will be advocating a second referendum on Boris’s deal and the Liberal Democrats will campaign to stop Brexit altogether. The latter would trigger a democratic crisis worse than what this country is experiencing now. Leaving the EU must happen.

The next general election will more than likely be the last one where the Liberal Democrats position themselves as a pro-European party. If a Christmas vote ensures Boris gains the majority he needs for his deal or no deal, Brexit is guaranteed to happen. Once it does, the Liberal Democrats will have no core identity left that distinguishes them from the other parties. Their unique policy positions on the Iraq War, tuition fees and now the EU have been fundamental to their success since the 2005 General Election. Since 2016, their electoral gains demonstrate that the electorate has forgiven them for betraying their tuition fees promise and for forming a coalition with the Tories.

The Liberal Democrats’ current leader, Jo Swinson, will preside over a divided party once Brexit has been delivered. Aside from the EU, their raison d’etre has always been electoral reform. It is unlikely former Tories Dr Sarah Wollaston and Sam Gyimah will support a fresh bid for introducing proportional representation to future British elections considering they originate from a party that is united in its support for First-Past-The-Post. The 2011 AV Referendum proved there was no enthusiasm for electoral reform when voters overwhelmingly rejected the Alternative Vote. The only way they could achieve their long-term goal is by forming a coalition with Labour, but even they are divided on this issue and it is doubtful Swinson would want to prop up a Labour government under its current leadership.

Prior to 2005, the Liberal Democrats positioned themselves to the left of Labour during the Iraq War. This worked to their advantage as they secured 62 seats, the most they have had since 1923. When the Orange Book Liberals took over in 2007 under Nick Clegg, their strategy was to move the party to the right. This cost them five MPs. 

Post-Brexit, Swinson is likely to shift her party rightwards again. During the Coalition years, she scrapped bureaucratic regulations, opposed gender quotas and supported zero-hours contracts. But if a Johnson-led Tory Party monopolises these issues, there could be pressure on her to chase after Labour voters considering Corbyn has pushed his party so far to the left.

The Liberal Democrats are in an unenviable position. Whilst Brexit continues to dominate mainstream politics, they intend to assert themselves as the anti-Brexit party. But once that issue is gone, there is no rallying cry for them anymore. The Greens, the Tories and Labour between them dominate policies on the environment, the economy, health, education, immigration and crime. The Coalition years showed how difficult it is for them to radically reform the unwritten British constitution. After Brexit, who are the Liberal Democrats?

L'articolo After Brexit What Do the Liberal Democrats Have Left to Stand For? proviene da InsideOver.