UK politics: alternative scenarios
Thursday 13 June 2013
 Such an attitude renders UKIP more like a cult than a political party, and there is a well-known tendency of failing leaders to promote mass suicide, every one of them convinced that they are following the one true way – rejecting any other voice which might offer a different viewpoint. Strangely though, from being a respected and venerable party, David Cameron too is beginning to take on the mantle of a cult leader, marking a remarkable convergence between the Tories and the UKIP wannabes, to the extent that it becomes increasingly difficult to tell them apart. As the UKIP leader seeks to talk less and less about "Europe" in order to become electable, and Mr Cameron talks more and more about "Europe" in order to become electable, they begin to merge in the mind's eye. Man becomes pig and pig becomes man. They talk the same, sound the same and look the same, even down to the incipient double chins and the corpulence that comes of eating in too many fine restaurants. But the "teenage scribbler" Forsyth doesn't quite see it that way. His intellect does not allow him to deal with more than one idea – or party – at the time. So, without looking at the interaction between UKIP and the Tories, which will define the next few years, he tries to define the next few years, using the Tory party as the pivotal point, doffing his cap occasionally to the Labour party and Mr Miliband. The result, a trite, superficial dirge, is what passes for top-flight political analysis these days, which is possibly why so many senior politicians and their aides are ill-informed and never see things coming, until they rear up and bite them where it hurts. Where Forsyth really has a problem though is that, in speculating about what might happen in the event of an EU referendum under Cameron's watch during the next Parliamentary term, he is attempting to dissect the unknowable. This leaves him to evaluate scenarios which can't even begin to look credible without factoring the wild card that is UKIP. We end up, therefore, with blather – as we so often do in the legacy media. It may be quite well-written, and marginally entertaining, but it is still blather – self-referential and introspective. The culmination of the Forsyth thesis is that he believes that it is "good news for Cameron" that Tory "unity" on Europe will probably hold until 2015 – not that you need any great brains to work that one out. There are, he says, are only a handful of his MPs who can't sign up to his "strategy" of renegotiation followed by a referendum. After that, says the scribbler's scribbler, the Tories will not be able to put off the "big choice" much longer – whether we stay in or leave. Whichever way it goes, adds Forsyth, "there'll be those who can't accept the decision. EU membership will have split the Tories just as the Corn Laws did". That, of course, is exactly the scenario that Farage is hoping for, but no one seems to want to look further than that point. But, as I posit on our forum, that is just when it starts to get interesting. The Farage scenario has his party gain some MPs at Westminster, but that would – inescapably - be against the background of a heavy defeat of the Tories, putting either Labour or a Lib-Lab coalition in office. Maybe then, the Tory party does split, fulfilling the Forsyth prophesy. The thing is, what happens then? One Tory faction, inevitably, goes over to join the Lib-Dems, strengthening the government. In the Farage scenario, the "rump" joins him, and they form a right-of-centre opposition. Once again, we have to ask the question, what then? Short of an "in-out" referendum which is unlikely with Labour or the Lib-Labs in office, we stay in the the EU. In 2020, we face another general election. Then a weak Tory rump allied with UKIP fight a Lib-Lab alliance strengthened by Tory defectors. And what are the chances of the "Tor-IP" party winning the election then? That much, though, is but one scenario. There are others. And outside the self-referential claustrophobia of the Spectator claque and the chattering classes in general, it may not be entirely surprising that there are other capable people out there doing their own analyses. This blog is by no mean the only place when the net is being cast wider, and thought are deeper. Analysis, though, can change the future. Ambitious politicians – assessing the odds in a scenario that Farage does not dare to tread, and Forsyth doesn't have the wit to – have already worked it out. The "Tory split" meme is a one-way trip to nowhere – a free pass for the Left for the next generation. Stepping aside from this for the moment, we see the French air traffic strike in progress over EU Single European Sky plans. This highlights the fact that the EU is far more than just about trade – we are talking about a scheme that aims to revolutionise air traffic control throughout Europe. The other thing, as we pointed out, is that the Commission is right in pursuing its objectives. When the United States controls the same amount of airspace, with more traffic, at almost half the cost, something really must be done. That the Commission has so far been unable to implement its plans also says something of the inadequacy of the EU construct, but it also says that, if we are to achieve what for the UK are laudable aims, we need a relationship with "Europe". To that extent, we need to redefine the language. We are not seeking to leave, Europe – we are seeking to redefine the relationship. Here, in terms of his overall objective, there is actually nothing between Cameron and our objectives. As we have observed before, where we differ is how to achieve that desirable aim. And here, it seems to me that the gap is not unbridgeable. More to the point, it could provide the starting point for a Tory renaissance. Thus, we have a different scenario where, with the help of Farage's party and the "UKIP effect", the Tories fail to win the next election, putting into place a weak Labour or Lib-Lab administration. But instead of "splits", under a new leader, the party unites behind an realistic plan to redefine our relationship with "Europe". UKIP – having done its job, melts way into oblivion. That then brings us to 2020, when a resurgent Tory party storms to victory. Within days, the UK is sending off an Article 50 notification to Brussels and we are on our way out of the EU. Some years later, maybe, we will finally get a Single European Sky, in which the UK will play a full and active part. The funny thing is that clever-dicks like Forsyth will never even see it coming. COMMENT: POLITICAL SCENARIOS: COMBINED THREAD Richard North 13/06/2013 |
UKIP: more blip than permanent shift?
Thursday 13 June 2013
 Don't get me wrong. We need a eurosceptic party. If one didn't exist, we would have to invent one, as other countries are beginning to discover. But we also need a party that can deliver. And The Guardian's Tim Bale may well be closer to the truth than many would care to admit. In Farage we have a man who very recently, to a cheering crowd, called for an EU referendum "now", without the first idea of how he would fight it, much less win it – if indeed it can be won. Bale's analysis is not new though. We expect UKIP to take the electorate by storm during the euro-elections, topping the 16.5 percent it achieved in 2009. And it will hold on to rather more of its support at the following general election than it managed in 2010, when it lost more than 80 percent of its vote-share from the year before. But then, if the coalition lasts that long, people will be deciding who governs, not sending a message. And they'll be voting under first-past-the-post and in much greater numbers, as well as in the light of UKIP councillors and MEPs probably making less of a difference than they hoped, says Bale. That is the received wisdom, but UKIP does have the capacity to shock, so we could be seeing more, rather than less of this "protest party". Yet, even if there any gains, UKIP will still be hard put to get any MPs elected. It may simply wreck the europhile ambitions of Mr Cameron, and open the way for Mr Miliband's party, which currently refuses to offer a referendum. Ironically, the net effect of UKIP would then be to stop us having a referendum that we cannot win. That much is better than nothing, as it avoids the destruction of the eurosceptic movement for a generation. On the other hand, if Mr Farage had the wit to devise a plan for winning a referendum, Tim Bale would not get away with what he is saying. That, though, would require from Mr Farage substance, rather than rhetoric. And that is not yet on offer. Sadly, "bums on seats" remains Farage's only strategy. He wants MEPs in place and then he really does hope to take Westminster by storm. But just supposing he gets some (it could only be a few) MPs at the general? Where will that take him? By that time, there are three possibilities ... a Labour party in office, a weak Tory party or another coalition ... which could be Lib-Lab. Where does Mr Farage then exert his influence to get us out of the EU? What is his plan? And this is what troubles me. For twenty years or more, Farage's ambition has focused on Westminster. He wants to split the Tories and create a new parliamentary party comprising the right "rump" and UKIP, thence to form a majority to take us out of the EU. That is the full extent of his strategy. He has no other plan. That's it. Thus, the whole of Farage's effort is devoted to winning elections. He has no other objectives. And his thoughts do not extend past the point where he puts a timescale to the process and asks whether, in any of our lifetimes, we will actually see an anti-EU majority in the House of Commons. He just assumes it will happen if he keeps pushing. Meanwhile, under his nose, he we see the emergence of a referendum movement. This came from outside UKIP. Sir James Goldsmith started it. It was never in Farage's game plan. Belatedly, he has jumped on that bandwagon, and calls for a referendum "now", but without any great conviction. Perhaps he knows that the chances of winning are slight. Certainly, he has never sketched out any plans for securing a victory. Possibly, though, the only realistic option we have, which might see us leave, is the referendum route. But, if that is going to happen, that is where the focus needs to be - even if it is only a contingency. We need a game plan to win a referendum. But the one-trick pony simply doesn't want to know. As he piles on the pounds and smokes and drinks his way to a heart attack, he leads his adoring members into a cul-de-sac of his unrealistic, half-thought-out ambition. Thereby, unwittingly, he is doing his best to ensure the failure of the entire eurosceptic movement. Come to think of it, Tim Bale is wrong. There is more to Farage than most people think: blind ambition and an absolute determination to fail. And that is why this blog cannot support UKIP under the leadership of Farage. The man his leading his followers over the edge of a cliff, towards oblivion. COMMENT THREAD Richard North 13/06/2013 |
EU referendum: recognition at last?
Wednesday 12 June 2013
 Richard North 12/06/2013 |
Thursday, 13 June 2013
Posts
