Jul 25th 2017

Britain En Marche ?


LONDON – We live in a politically turbulent age. Parties barely a year old have recently swept to power in France and in the huge metropolitan area of Tokyo. A party less than five years old is leading opinion polls in Italy. A political neophyte is sitting in the White House, to the profound discomfort of establishment Republicans and Democrats. So where will the political earth shake next? The answer could be – indeed, should be – the United Kingdom.

Even as the UK faces the upheaval of Brexit, nobody is talking about remaking – much less replacing – the established political parties. Many deny that they would even consider such a thing. Former Prime Minister Tony Blair – a pro-European centrist innovator who won three general elections for his Labour Party in the 1990s – took great care in a recent article to stress that he is “not advocating a new Party.”

But Blair, or someone like him, should be doing just that. After all, while the British political system does put formidable barriers in the path of any new party, the chances of success are greater now than at any time in the last 40 years. In a political system still feeling the aftershocks of two major earthquakes – the June 2016 Brexit referendum and, a year later, the humiliating electoral setback of the Conservative Party that spearheaded it – there is a clear opportunity for newcomers.

Already, the Conservatives are locked in an internal battle that they can only try to obscure. In the Labour Party, too, rebellions are erupting. Now is the moment for a new party, styled after French President Emmanuel Macron’s “La République En Marche,” to capitalize on the division, disarray, and distrust in the established parties. Now is the moment for a photogenic young British man or woman to follow in the 39-year-old Macron’s footsteps, making history by casting aside the old guard.

Of course, as Blair suggested, Britain’s first-past-the-post electoral system, based on single-member constituencies, implies huge advantages for the established political parties. A new party could well find – after spending huge sums of money and energy, and perhaps even securing a sizable chunk of the vote in its debut general election – that its voters are spread too thinly across the country to deliver more than a handful of parliamentary seats.

That is what happened the last time a new centrist party entered the fray. In the early 1980s, four defectors from Labour, alarmed by their party’s leftward shift and anti-EU stance, created the Social Democratic Party. Capitalizing on the unpopularity of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s early economic policies, the new SDP – in alliance with the small Liberal Party – won 25% of the national vote in the 1983 general election. But they ended up with a mere 23 seats. It was all downhill from there.

That memory is discouraging political innovation today. Those in Labour who are deeply suspicious of the left-wing economic and foreign-policy stance of their popular leader, Jeremy Corbyn, still think the most sensible strategy is to be patient and, when the opportunity arises, to recapture their party. The same goes for Conservatives who think Brexit is leading the country to disaster.

But the history of the SDP can and should be read in a different way. At one point in 1982, the party was attracting the support of more than 50% of voters in opinion polls. Many senior Conservative figures were saying privately at the time that they thought the SDP was going to win the next election in a landslide.

Then came the Falklands War, which amounted to a major victory for Thatcher. So it was the Conservatives who ended up winning the 1983 election in a landslide – a result that launched the still-unpopular Labour’s long trudge back toward the political center.

Today, no major victory looks to be in the cards for Labour or the Conservatives. Moreover, the recent election – in which the Conservatives’ 20-point lead disappeared seemingly overnight, as voters, especially young people, threw their support behind Labour – suggests that British voters are up for grabs.

The recent election held another important lesson: Europe and Brexit is not the issue that British voters care about most today. Corbyn’s Labour ran on the same Brexit policy as May’s Conservatives. But on issues like jobs, hospitals, schools, and the welfare state, their approaches contrasted sharply.

To defeat the establishment parties, therefore, a new political movement would have to stand, first and foremost, for restoring public services, reviving the economy, and rebuilding trust. A strong relationship with the EU should be pitched as a means to advance these goals, not as a goal in itself.

In the next few months, an opportunity to create such a movement may well present itself. It depends, first, on whether leadership ambitions and divisions over Brexit consume the Conservative Party and, second, on whether the recent rebellion of more than 50 senior Labour members over Corbyn’s Brexit policy escalates.

Anyone considering such an opportunity should remember the Falklands, and wonder what the SDP might have become had Argentina not invaded. And they should recall the motto of the British special forces: “Who Dares Wins.”


Bill Emmott, a former editor-in-chief of The Economist, is Chairman of the Wake Up Foundation.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2017.
www.project-syndicate.org



To subscribe to Facts and Arts' weekly newsletter, please click here.

To follow Facts & Arts' Editor, Olli Raade, on Twitter, please click here.

If you have something to say that you want to say on Facts & Arts, please

Write to the Editor, or write a comment in the comments section.

 


This article is brought to you by Project Syndicate that is a not for profit organization.

Project Syndicate brings original, engaging, and thought-provoking commentaries by esteemed leaders and thinkers from around the world to readers everywhere. By offering incisive perspectives on our changing world from those who are shaping its economics, politics, science, and culture, Project Syndicate has created an unrivalled venue for informed public debate. Please see: www.project-syndicate.org.

Should you want to support Project Syndicate you can do it by using the PayPal icon below. Your donation is paid to Project Syndicate in full after PayPal has deducted its transaction fee. Facts & Arts neither receives information about your donation nor a commission.

 

 

Browse articles by author

More Current Affairs

Aug 3rd 2009
A potentially decisive battle to define this year's health care debate - and the Obama Presidency - will take place in town hall meetings, little league bleaches, and conversations on door steps near yo
Aug 2nd 2009

The Obama administration's push for a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace may have a much stronger likelihood of succeeding this time around because of the prevailing political and security dynamics.

Jul 30th 2009

MOSCOW - My great-grandfather, Nikita Khrushchev, has been on my mind recently. I suppose it was the 50th anniversary of the so-called "kitchen debate" which he held with Richard Nixon that first triggered my memories.

Jul 28th 2009

NEW YORK - In the afternoon of July 16 two men appeared to be breaking into a fine house in an expensive area of Cambridge, Massachusetts. Alerted by a telephone call, a policeman arrived smartly on the scene. He saw one black male standing inside the house and asked him to come out.

Jul 28th 2009

As the G-2 "strategic dialogue" between the US and China gets underway in Washington, I talked

Jul 28th 2009

I have a confession to make. I am an avid reader of personal advice columns. When I read those published generations ago, I feel that they provide a great insight what life was really like in those days--and what the prevailing norms were regarding what was considered right and wrong.

Jul 28th 2009

Jul 27th 2009

LONDON - In her brilliant book, "The Uses and Abuses of History" the historian Margaret Macmillan tells a story about two Americans discussing the atrocities of September 11, 2001. One draws an analogy with Pearl Harbor, Japan's attack on the US in 1941.

Jul 24th 2009

With a significant majority of Israelis and Palestinians in favor of a two-state
solution with peace and normal relations, why then there is no national drive in
either camp to push for a solution? The United States cannot equivocate with the
Jul 23rd 2009

Landrum Bolling, former President of the Lilly Endowment and Earlham College, has put together a collage of commentary from four outstanding American foreign policy giants.

Jul 22nd 2009

In contrast to the thesis -- much promoted by the president himself -- that he is not an ideologue but a pragmatic, Obama has laid out a strong new normative foundation for his foreign policy.

Jul 21st 2009
Today it would be hard to find one member of Congress who openly advocates the abolition of Medicare or Social Security.
Jul 20th 2009

LONDON - Mainstream economics subscribes to the theory that markets "clear" continuously.

Jul 16th 2009

Obama is challenged to come up with ways to pay for a health insurance plan that will cover most, if not all, Americans. Many call for cutting services and reducing fees for doctors and for hospitals. Others favor raising taxes one way or another. I say first cut out the crooks.

Jul 15th 2009
In the current health care debate, Democratic Members of Congress representing swing districts have often (though not always) been among the most cautious when it comes to supporting President Obama's proposals for health care reform.