Home

Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Ruminations on the British election from a nosy by-stander


As shocking as the recent UK election has been for the British people, and for pundits of all stripes, it has the eerie feeling of familiarity for those of us in Canada.

To deconstruct this result in an organized and thoughtful manner would be pointless, so I humbly offer an outsider’s view:

1.    The economy – Sure, it’s not where people want it to be, but based on the measures, it’s doing reasonably well. Advantage to the powers that be.

2.    Holding the base – In agreeing to be part of the governing coalition, the Liberal Democrats signed on for policies that were anathema to their base. Your base is party members, the people who canvass, phone neighbours, and cheer at rallies. They donate their time and money. They lend their name and reputation to your cause. As Canada’s federal Progressive Conservatives learned in 1993, lose your base and you will lose your deposit.

3.    A mile wide, but an inch deep – UKIP and the SNP demonstrate the fact that when it comes to votes in a Westminster style First-Past-The-Post system, you need quality as much as quantity. Back to the 1993 Canadian federal election, the total number of votes cast nationally for the Progressive Conservatives and the Reform Party was roughly at par.  Yet, the former earned two Commons seats while the latter attained over 50. The Bloc Quebecois received even less than them and ended up with even more seats than that!

4.    Fear trumps all – It is an old bromide of political veterans that voter intentions really get sorted out in the final 7 days of the campaign. That’s when the undecided start to move and soft support begins to shift. In this vote, that timeframe was dominated with reports that neither the Tories nor Labour could get a majority, and that the SNP would be the kingmakers. If you were a voter in England or Wales who fretted about the notion that the people who initiated the independence vote last year would have any control over Parliament, you may have decided to pick the party who was closest to the finish line. It was Hadrian’s Wall rebuilt with ballot papers instead of stone and mortar.

No analysis would be complete with some nosy neighbor advice, so here it is:

1.    The promise of a Referendum on Europe will need to be kept. Given popular opinion on the idea of a vote, let alone how it would go, a government that reneged on this promise would burn through its political capital like a rogue currency trader on a bender

2.    The Unity issue needs more than an ad hoc treatment. It is all well and good to say that you will keep your referendum promise and give more to Scotland, but understand that in doing so you set a precedent. Imagine coming home to your four children and giving one of them a brand new PS4 gaming console, then explaining to the other three why they got nothing. Yeah – thought so. Remember that a big component of the success of Canada’s Reform Party was based on the sense that Ottawa favoured Quebec at the expense of the western provinces. If the voters in England and Wales feel that Westminster is prepared to give Scotland things that no one else will get, then expect a bump for Plaid Cymru and whatever party seizes on comparable English discontent the next time around.  In the end, the best approach may be the dreaded f-word…federalism.

3.    Scottish votes for Scottish questions, etc. is a dangerous idea – How would this work? Imagine the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod playing nightclub bouncer and kicking out 90 percent of the elected MP’s at Westminster because the government needs to vote on buying 5 acres to extend the runway at Edinburgh Airport. How does quorum work on this? With only one MP in Scotland, how does the government argue its policy? Would every bill, in this instance, be a private members bill? Even if you resolve all this, what if 80 percent of the money for said airport expansion came from English and Welsh taxpayers?

When all is said and done, every election is a setup for the one to follow. Those of us in Canada who have endured referenda and numerous constitutional debates should have some empathy for the British people. Even if we’re too polite to give advice (which evidently I am not), we should be willing to offer some reference to consider on the long road ahead.