Before Saturday’s People’s Vote march, I thought that if it attracted anything less than, say, 100,000 it would be seen as a flop, if it got to 250,000 then it would be a success. So by that or any other reasonable standard the actual turnout, estimated at 700,000, marks it out as a demonstration of historic proportions. It’s very unusual indeed to get 1% of the British population to take to the streets.
Even more important than numbers is context
That’s important, but what really gives those numbers political cut through is the timing of the march. Although long planned, it came at the end of a week when months of deadlock in the Brexit negotiations came to a head. This was meant to be the moment when a deal was done, ready for ratification (indeed, I assume that this was why the date was chosen by the march’s organizers). Instead, issues that were supposedly settled in the Phase one agreement last December remain stubbornly unresolved. At the same time, the bitter warfare within the Government and the Tory Party is on ever more open display.
This context is crucial. Without it, the numbers probably wouldn’t have been so large and, even had they been twice the size, the march would still have been relatively easily dismissed. If Brexit was being confidently and competently executed, it would be easy for the Government and Leave campaigners to pronounce that everything was going smoothly and Britain was on track for a successful Brexit.
That this is not so is the political millstone that Brexiters now carry. The repeated campaign claims about how easy a deal would be now look absurd. It was supposed to be the case that being the world’s fifth largest economy, with a trade deficit with the EU, combined with the supposed interests and influence of German car makers meant that from day one Britain would hold all the trump cards. Had that – or anything remotely like it - proved true, demands for another referendum would now be the preserve of eccentrics and fantasists, rather than a conceivable scenario.
Of course Brexiters have all sorts of excuses for what has gone wrong, blaming the EU, or remainers, or a Prime Minister who did not truly believe in the cause. But excuses are rarely a compelling political message. They are certainly less compelling than being able to point to tangible success. In the absence of such success, the headline counter-argument to another referendum is the rather illogical one that a democratic vote would be undemocratic, or some sort of insult to voters. Yet if leaving is still the will of the people, they will vote for it again; if they don’t then it’s no longer the will of the people. As I’ve discussed in detail elsewhere on this blog, the arguments against another referendum in principle don’t stack up.
Another referendum could only be the product of political crisis
Be that as it may, there are profound practical and political barriers to another referendum and none of these is removed, or even addressed, by the march. Issues of timing – such a vote would certainly require agreeing an extension to the Article 50 period - the question to be asked, and the extent of the franchise remain amongst several powerful difficulties. Moreover, all of this would have to be resolved by a deeply divided parliament, facing a febrile public mood. It would entail Labour shifting decisively towards supporting a referendum, which they have already inched towards, and, for it to be meaningful, a referendum with an option to remain. And it would entail a very abrupt U-turn by a terribly weakened Prime Minister, assuming she could even survive in such a scenario, or considerable toughness – and imagination - from her replacement if she didn’t.
It is all but inconceivable that any of these problems could be addressed in any circumstance other than MPs voting down any deal the Government reaches with the EU, or no deal being struck at all. But those circumstances would be ones of grave political and economic crisis in which the options would be very limited and any possible solution would be reached for, for want of anything better and for fear of something worse.
Control of the agenda is half the battle
It would be in that context that Saturday’s march – and, in such a situation, no doubt even greater public demands for a vote - would assume its greatest importance. By keeping it so visibly on the agenda of possible political options, another referendum would be the off-the-peg solution that politicians could reach for when few other options were available.
It has long been a truism of politics – both national and organizational – that having your policy at least on the agenda is half the battle. The necessary, though not of course sufficient, condition for any policy is that it is both discussable and discussed. That was the achievement of Saturday’s march: it firmly hammered home that another referendum lies in the domain of discussable and therefore possible options.
Brexiters are very keenly aware of this, which is why they go to such strenuous efforts to say that another referendum is not even up for discussion. That it might be so is precisely the threat made to them by Theresa May in her conference speech, and precisely what lies behind Michael Gove’s view that, to paraphrase, what matters for Brexiters is to get a Withdrawal Agreement over the line, even if in a form they don’t like, so that Brexit doesn’t slip through their fingers.
If – and in my view it still not likely, even if it is becoming a little more likely – another referendum came to pass, remainers should certainly not assume that their cause would win the vote and, if it did, that would only be the beginning of a long hard road to healing the damage that’s already been done. But what has already been achieved through the People’s Vote march is to keep open at least the possibility of that road being taken.
No comments:
Post a Comment