My name is David Dunn, I’m Professor of International Politics at the University of
Birmingham.
Today I want to talk about the general election, the election that’s been termed the ‘Brexit
Election’ and to examine this proposition because in many ways this election is about
Brexit – we wouldn’t be having the election if it hadn’t of been for the change of Prime
Minister that happened after the referendum – and certainly Mrs May has made it explicit
that she wants an increased majority to strengthen her hand in the negotiations in Brussels.
And in many respects, one of the themes of this election is about leadership – the
leadership of Theresa May versus that of Jeremy Corbyn – and that’s largely about who
could best represent the UK and get the best deal for the UK in Brussels as part of the
Brexit negotiations.
And yet the paradox here is that the main issue of whether Britain leaves the European
Union, or whether it should leave the European Union, is absent from the main discussion.
It’s a paradox because this is the most important question of our age and during the
Brexit election we have no meaningful choice on this important question.
Now, I’m sure your response will be, ‘well we’ve had a referendum and that’s settled
it’.
Well, I ask you to consider three questions in that regard.
Firstly, would UKIP and the Brexiteers have accepted the result had it been 52/48 the
other way?
And I suggest that wouldn’t be the case and the next election following the referendum
they would have been there hammering on for their case as relentlessly as they did previously.
Secondly, are the majority happy with the result once they realised the full stakes
and the full risks involved and what Brexit actually means and all the delusions and falsehoods
that were perpetrated as part of that campaign have been shown to be false.
And thirdly, is it likely that Theresa May will get anything like the deal that was promised?
And my suggestion is, to answer all three questions, the answer is no, no and no.
And yet this is why it is paradoxical because despite those things, despite there still
being a burning issue due to the party system and the way in which our party system is set
up, it’s in the interests of both parties not to make this an issue at this election.
For the Conservative, Brexit allows them to heal divisions over Europe, to wrap themselves
in the flag and to pretend to be the Unionist party even though the biggest threat to the
union in terms of Scotland and Ireland leaving, are precipitated by the Brexit decision.
For Labour, this bit is different.
They’re split between working class voters who are largely supportive of Brexit in the
north and in the East, as opposed to the other base which are metropolitan liberals who are
by and large more internationalist and European in their outlook.
So for Labour they would like this election to be about anything other than Brexit and
Jeremy Corbyn has pushed hard for this to be a change election about nationalisation,
public ownership, public expenditure and the like, trying to actually offer a change and
theme as opposed to the impact of change that will come from Brexit.
So both are behaving as if the Brexit has already happened in many respects and this
is why there is this paradox.
There’s no meaningful way to have an influence on Brexit because the election was called
to deprive us of a say for five years over this question.
This is due to the fact that the deal promised is undeliverable.
Any deal would be difficult with the European Union.
No deal has been done in two years and what’s more, the deal that Britain has said it wants
will be incredibly difficult to do.
A basic free trade agreement with preferential access to the European Single Market on certain
sectoral issues.
But of course fundamentally the deal that was promised was that we had a better relationship
on cheaper terms with Europe and that is an impossible thing to deliver.
So why is it then that given those circumstances, that there is no opposition?
It’s partly a timing issue.
It’s partly to do with the fact that in the short term, the markets have gone up due
to the devaluation of the pound and fixed contracts elsewhere for businesses, the full
impacts of Brexit are not yet apparent and won’t be apparent until after we leave in
two years’ time.
So effectively what the opposition people in all parties and in the political establishment
more broadly are waiting for, is waiting for the full implications of Brexit to become
apparent.
Waiting for the car crash to happen before they actually voice their opposition, in a
sense saying ‘you wanted Brexit, let’s see how Brexit pans out and then let’s talk
about where we go from here’.
So the paradox of the Brexit Election is that this election is really about the next election
and how we pick up the debate at that point and that’s a paradox indeed.