On the UK front next year looks set to be dominated by BREXIT – the process of extracting the UK from the EU. Doing this successfully is set to be the defining act of Theresa May’s premiership and even though the referendum decision was more than six months ago we still have little idea what this is going to mean.
Comments
Politicians have recently asked the electorate a question many of them didn't like the answer to, collectively, and for different reasons, they will not seek the electorate's views again until they have to....
Forget for a minute the farce of the Opposition not wanting an election, but a scenario where the govt has no majority yet is a dozen points ahead in the polls has to be quite likely at some point in the next couple of years.
If she asks her party to vote that they have No Confidence in her but they refuse, I guess she can go the The Queen and tender her resignation, then we do the See If there's A Spirited Person Who Wants Her Job thing again. If nobody does it, I guess there's an election, although I'm not sure if it's constitutionally possible for the Commons to keep on voting that they have confidence in her, and for The Queen to refuse to accept her resignation. I'm not sure what would happen after that, but whatever it was it would be entertaining.
The Whitehaven News is only one title n a declining medium but it's a traditional area and it's well read.
By far the most likely best combination of those variables is Thursday May 4th 2017. Riding the A50 invocation wave, no detail yet to scare the punters and in May's continuing honeymoon. I don't doubt the considerable constitutional hurdles but the raw politics is this. If she stands out side Downing St waving a copy of the A50 notification she sent that morning and announce she now wants a mandate for Red, White and Blue Unicorns in the negotiations can Labour *really* refuse her ?
A political party refusing an election ? An opposition leader voting to keep a PM in power ? A political party " wrecking " the Brexit negotiations by denying the PM a mandate ?
It'll be seen as a farce and I think enough Labour MP's will buckle.
If May doesn't go for the obvious window on #Mayday she's either a remarkable statesperson putting political advantage behind national stability or she's a poundshop Gordon Brown. History will tell.
But they need to work in that now and argue the case. The day after May's Downing Street stunt will be too late. She'll have seized the narrative.
The end-of-March deadline seems the most likely trigger. If either courts or parliament have prevented her from triggering A50 by then, I could well see her demanding a snap poll. What makes that the more likely is the confluence that such a timetable would have with the May elections (the motion would have to go to the Commons in late March rather than early April given the 25 working day rule but it ought to be clear by that point whether she could invoke A50 or not).
However, I'd put the chances in the low-20s rather than the low-30s. It's certainly a possibility and one that I think her party is preparing for but not one that she'll want to if given a free hand.
This is the risk with the VoNC route: there is the possibility that HM could call on Corbyn, as LotO, to form a government and he might say 'yes'. He would of course fail to survive a vote himself but might still end up with the keys to No 10. HM would presumably be advised that she ought to go through the motions of seeking a potential PM and might then return to May. However, if it were clear that May had no intention of allowing a confidence vote in her passing, the Queen equally might not ask her. Corbyn would then be PM for six weeks or so from the VoNC through to election day. That might colour people's perceptions of him (and of Theresa May) differently from what they are now.
Time was when, in particular, Labour and the SNP wouldn't be seen dead together, but needs must when the Devil drives and after 7 years of Tory rule, the Devil is currently the F1 Racing Champion !
May is a sensible woman and patriot so she may well knows the. She may fear an election increased Tory majority and subsequent Brexit majority. After all she only got the job because Dave won an unexpected majority. She knows how dangerous the Tory backbenches can be.
But she's made of flesh and blood. Corbyn ? A mandate of her own ? A majority big enough to sideline " Bastards ". Who could blame her ?
There are a lot of enemies of the people out there. May can argue the people need to speak again as soon as she wishes.
However, the chances are that any GE would show an increased / substantially increased Con majority. So, Theresa is working on the pretence she already has that majority. Then she is waiting for a defeat on something of substance. At that point she can and probably will go to the country. "I sincerely tried to govern, but unfortunately was unable to do so ... ".
When this will be will depend on events. If the Michael Crick stuff comes to fruition then she will not want to fight more than 2 or 3 certain loser by-elections. To my mind that is the only circumstance in which there could be a 2017 GE. Ironically, none of the major parties, except UKIP, want to dwell on this - they all have bodies floating in that stinking pond.
Otherwise she will want to wait for the new boundaries. Who wouldn't ? It is always easier to do the right thing when it is also to your political advantage.
I think the most likely outcome - disregarding the Michael Crick stuff is a full term parliament. Otherwise May 2018 on the new boundaries.
Personally, either May 2017 or May 2018 would bring out the voters for the council elections I will be standing in but May 2018 would be better as the new boundaries give a realistic prospect of a change of MP here in W&L.
Of those three, the first requires Labour support, the second risks a Corbyn premiership and the third risks a Lords veto (at least until 2018).
If Labour plays ball over a dissolution motion, fine. If not, then what?
Labour MPs would back 2017 if it came up, as they would prefer the existing constituencies.
But I accept this is an art not a science. We'll know more when the Supreme Court rules. But then of course the odds will shift.
I agree that an impending General Election is unlikely. May might try for it if the pressure within her party grows. I do wonder if she might end up being axed sooner rather than later. Probably not, as the heat for the EU will be a serious albatross for any PM, and would-be successors would want her to suffer that, but it could drive her to seek an early election if she thinks she'll be toppled.
Not sure we have seen enough of May to call her a ditherer though.
Her reshuffle was certainly decisive and she has taken a decision on Hinkley and Heathrow even if she took a bit more time on it.
An election in 2017 would be dominated by Brxit and would expose big divisions in theTory party. It could also leave her with more Tory leaver MPs. Not sure she wants that.
Its why Bookies price up specials and only offer one side of the bet. When they do that its often a giveaway that its not value
That is true, but it is just as true of the other parties.
But, I think the boundary changes are too big a prize. They doubly benefit the Tories, as the losses accrue mainly to Labour, and the redrawn seats will involve bitter Labour selection battles (Copeland is a harbinger of what is to come).
Unless your decent to particularly poor quality as hominem was deliberate rather than careless that is ?
Has 2016 got anything else to throw at us? New Year's Eve cannot come quickly enough.
The Prime Minister would be 64 to 69 years old if she then serves a full term, and she might prefer a quiet retirement with a seven-figure advance on her memoirs and the odd six-figure speaking fee to keep the wolf from the door. Against that is the obvious lure of power that kept Blair and Thatcher clinging to office but Theresa May is not obviously an ideologue on a mission.
And it is quite possible that a hard-fought Tory campaign in Copeland will be an exercise in trying to push voters' buttons in order to better frame an early election.
True, the Jezziah will never co-operate over it. There is however an entirely realistic scenario that Labour MPs might co-operate for two reasons (1) an election will destroy Corbyn (yes it will - he will lose and lose badly) (2) it would be fought on the old boundaries which would both stymie deselection and favour Labour in key areas.
417 is the key number. Add the DUP and probably Carswell to 80 Labour rebels (less than half the number who voted against Corbyn this year) and it's not a ridiculously long way off.
Moreover, Labour MPs voting for an election on Brexit would spike UKIP's guns in Labour heartlands. If they vote to block it, the risk of a split vote increases markedly.
Add in the House of Lords being buggers.
That'll be a nice legacy for her to have, to be spoken in the same breath as the Real IRA.
If it were that much of a priority maybe you should be regularly contesting all the seats there.
The betting markets are not a good indicator of political events.
The conservatives did a stupid deal with the UU instead of standing in their own right, in effect they pulled out and left the field to the sectarian parties.
And last time I looked the Remainers werent just conservatives, what happened the rest of your cohorts with their pseudo concern about NI ?
Hard to think now but back in 2000 my mother didn't want me taking a job in London because of the IRA regularly bombed it.
it's been restless for the last 200 years and nobody much cares.
As for bombing London that's simply accelerated urban redevelopment
You have great faith in the skills of the Empress' tailor.
5-4-3-2-1:
'This polling is meaningless/skewed/unrepresentative/voodoo'
As for urban development, it is often remarked the best thing to happen in Manchester in recent times is the IRA bombing Manchester City Centre in 1996, which led to lots of improvements and regeneration in Manchester.
Perhaps John McDonnell was right, we should start honouring the IRA.
Boris? Too flaky and no attention to detail.
Hammond? May without the charisma.
Rudd? Lightweight.
Osborne? Unappealing to the public (maybe he should do Strictly)
Gove? Has handed out too many knives to be trusted.
Hunt? Negotiating with the BMA might be good practice for the EU but no great track record and still a bit punchable.
Davidson? Untested and out of Westminster.
Javid? Underwhelming.
Fox/Davis/IDS? History says don't go there.
And so on.
All the alternatives have too much history, too little talent or are simply paler versions of the incumbent.
That might have been a project fear story that would have worked.... If we vote to leave, 48% of the nation will act like spoilt brat teenagers, forever stomping their feet and saying its not fair/no one understands them
https://twitter.com/dailymailuk/status/814410421373468672
I didnt know remainers had their own party
odd name for it
As John Major was to Thatcher
Greg Clark is to May.
Different spelling.
Unionist not Eunionist.
In reality, both were developed at the same time as the post-war European infrastructure was developed; both can also be seen as different but complementary answers to the same problem of how to prevent what just happened from happening again.
I think the General Secretary of NATO is going to need a bit better CV than that.
Do you want to write it or shall I?
I only have a little in my account, but if you're Captain Moneybags and don't mind risking for a low return, those odds do look too long to me, if anything from the whispering market is right.
He doesn't have to be an admiral, does he.
Strikes me that many orange book Tories and many centrist Labourites are protesting too much about May. Suggests to me that they're properly scared about her abilities to broker Brexit and win a general election. They should be. As far as I can see she'll be much more in tune with the British public outside of the unrepresentative cities than any leader since Major or Thatcher. Election winner written all over her.
But it would be foolish to go before the boundary changes are in place. The out of date position needs to be corrected.