How Should the UK Run Itself? PROSPECT 2016 2

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

How Should the UK Run Itself? PROSPECT 2016 2 Blueprint for Britain How should the UK run itself? PROSPECT 2016 2 How should Britain run itself? e launched our Blueprint for Britain series nate the post-election political landscape, of which powers Brit- to discuss—and answer—the questions raised ain should itself share with the EU. by the Scottish independence referendum. These are our conclusions. Even though more than a year has passed, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband prom- and a general election has changed the ised Scotland new powers before the referendum, a hur- Wcomplexion of the House of Commons, those questions will not ried pledge dubbed “the vow.” The government created the go away. new cross-party Smith Commission in September 2014 to They are, at heart, the question of how Britain should now consider what those powers should be; in November of that run itself. The answer “exactly as it has done until now” no longer year, it published its report setting out the “heads of agree- seems possible. These constitutional questions have been given ment” on further devolution, and in January, the govern- life by the promises made by party leaders of new powers for ment published a Command Paper of draft clauses aiming Scotland—and the continuing strength of the Scottish National to take those conclusions further forward. But Nicola Stur- Party support since the referendum. David Cameron, stand- geon, Scotland’s First Minister, called the outline of new pow- ing in Downing Street on 19th September after the “No” victory ers disappointing. In her view, the Scottish Parliament’s room was clear, made ambitious commitments that extend beyond the for manoeuvre, particularly in the area of welfare policy, is pledges to Edinburgh: more power to the regions; a financial set- not significantly enhanced by the draft legislation announced tlement that is “fair to Scotland” but fair to other regions too; in January. more power to cities. In the same month, parties in the Scottish Parliament drew up Meanwhile, London’s exceptionalism—its role as a centre of a list of six areas where they thought new powers were due: terms global finance, its property boom and housing crisis, its size and of fixed-odds betting terminals; regulation of farming; votes for wealth, create further questions about how the United Kingdom’s 16- and 17-year-olds; stewardship of the Crown Estate; control resources should be shared and how much regions should keep of fracking licences; the Work Programme designed to encour- themselves. age employment. But in mid-March, the Commons Political and So does the complexity of Britain’s population: multi-cul- Constitutional Reform Committee described the draft clauses in tural, with high immigration, and growing fast. The UK is an the government’s Command Paper, particularly the proposal to increasingly complex society, projected soon to have the largest make the Scottish government and parliament “permanent insti- population in Europe, with one of the most successful western tutions,” as “a bit of a guddle.” Extension of the powers granted economies, and yet disparities of income and wealth—and out- to the Scottish Parliament in any legislation is also likely to be a right clashes of interest and sense of identity—between social central part of the SNP’s platform for the parliamentary elections groups and regions. in Scotland in 2016. (The party will also have to defend its record Britain has seemed for years one of the most stable countries in government, and here, as John McDermott showed in the June in the European Union, but is showing itself capable of contem- issue of Prospect, its performance has been mixed.) plating radical change in the way that it governs itself. A national The tussle over Scottish powers has left unclear the question of propensity to fudge and muddle through, often praised as “Brit- “English votes for English laws.” This surfaced with passion just ish pragmatism,” will come in handy in finding an answer, but is after the referendum, when voters south of the border reacted no longer enough. with indignation to the notion that Scottish MPs at Westminster would continue to vote on matters relating only to England, but To answer these questions, Prospect set up a panel of consti- English MPs could not do so in Scotland. tutional experts, politicians and those with a wider interest in A government paper on the implications of devolution for the outcome. England, published in December, put forward four options for • What powers should Scotland have? ensuring “English votes for English laws,” including a proposal • How should political power be shared between Westminster, to change parliamentary procedure in order to enable English the regions and the cities? How should the money be shared MPs—but not Scottish ones—to scrutinise bills relating to Eng- out—including the wealth generated by London and other land in what amounts to an extra committee stage. This is broadly cities? in line with what Jim Gallagher, who was the UK government’s • How should Wales and Northern Ireland, the poorest areas, be Director-General for Devolution until 2010, recommended in our protected? November 2014 issue. • Should the House of Lords now be reformed, as part of the This is a move that Prospect supports, although it creates its answer to regional representation? own complexities, as Vernon Bogdanor noted in our roundtable • Does the House of Commons need to be cut down to size? discussion in November. He argued that the dominance of Behind those questions looms the one that looks set to domi- England within a union of regions would render a federal system PROSPECT 2016 HOW SHOULD BRITAIN RUN ITSELF? 3 unworkable. That is too rigid an interpretation of how it might fashioned to encompass his plans for helping Manchester and work, however. For a vision of more flexibility, look at David Mar- for linking northern cities more widely, he not only allocated new quand’s argument in the June 2014 issue of Prospect: “A federal funds for transport but allowed Manchester to keep 100 per cent United Kingdom with four states, one of them much more popu- of new business taxes raised. This extends the new powers given lous than the other three, would be an oddity. But it would reflect to Manchester last year under the terms of its “City Deal.” These the odd history which has made this country what it is. If the peo- include “Earn Back,” a scheme that offers incentives to “invest ple and political classes of the United Kingdom want to make it in growth,” principally in infrastructure, in return for a share of work, they will. If they don’t, break-up is inevitable.” national tax revenues. The greatest problem, however, is in defining which mat- We can expect more of the same—and cities, or city-regions, ters should be considered “English-only.” As everyone illus- are right to clamour for it. In 2013, Boris Johnson, as Mayor of trated at the roundtable, to general comedy of a Yes Minister London, called for the capital to be allowed to keep the £1.3bn it type, essentially every issue can be defined as containing an ele- raised the previous year through stamp duty on property sales. ment of finance, and therefore relevant to the union. Bogdanor, Yet the London example illustrates the problem with greater in his response to Jim Gallagher in the December 2014 issue of devolution of funding. By definition, if cities or regions have more power to raise their own money, there is less to distribute from the “The greatest problem is in centre. This is one of the shortcomings of devolution; it weakens the ability to redistribute the wealth of the country. Poorer regions defining which matters should or cities are in danger of losing out. They are not clamouring for change, it is clear. be considered ‘English-only’” A second, serious concern with handing powers back to local areas is the risk of corruption or negligence. The exam- Prospect, pointed out that “even if all control of income tax were ple of Rotherham and other local authorities which failed to devolved to Scotland, the bulk of Holyrood’s revenue would still respond adequately to reports of extensive child abuse, or come from Westminster. This means that any variation in spend- the case of concerns about Birmingham schools, makes the ing on an English service such as health would have a knock-on point: some kind of national supervision and accountability effect in England.” remains crucial. The attempt is worth making, however. It reflects the impulse to devolve decisions to a lower level. That is worth doing. The UK ur roundtable in November 2014 on whether the has the most centralised government among the big western Barnett formula needs to be withdrawn stumbled democracies and it has become steadily more so since the First almost to a halt on this point. The formula—never World War. No other advanced democracy runs itself in that way. intended to be permanent, as its creator, Joel Bar- It is appropriate that the UK finds a way to share out the power Onett, drily pointed out at the outset in 1978 (see John McTernan that currently resides in Westminster. p11)—sets out the share of public spending that Scotland, Eng- It is likely—and in tune with the historic evolution of Britain’s land, Wales and Northern Ireland will get. Northern Ireland constitutional arrangements—that this may take place in a messy has been privileged in this formula because of the consensus patchwork. Pace Bogdanor, this is fine. on the need for public investment after the years of violence.
Recommended publications
  • Syria Debate Creates New Star, but Problems for UK's Labor
    International FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2015 14 Obama welcomes British vote to join Syria air campaign WASHINGTON: US President Barack whelming majority to expand British par- most valued partners in fighting ISIL,” “While this still requires German parlia- Obama hailed a vote Wednesday by ticipation in a counter-Islamic State air war Obama said in a statement. mentary approval, this is a clear sign of British lawmakers to join the air campaign in Iraq to neighboring Syria, offering “We look forward to having British Germany’s continued commitment to the against the Islamic State group in Syria. In Prime Minister David Cameron a much forces flying with the coalition over Syria counter-ISIL campaign and to working a statement that also praised a German needed foreign policy victory. and will work to integrate them into our with a broad range of partners to defeat government decision to provide 1,200 Cameron had been humiliated in 2013 Coalition Air Tasking Orders as quickly as this shared threat,” Obama said. military personnel to support the fight when parliament voted against strikes possible.” Obama also praised a German “ISIL is a global threat that must be against the radical group, Obama praised against the Syrian regime of Bashar al- cabinet move to bolster Berlin’s role in the defeated by a global response. The United a “special relationship” with Britain “root- Assad, a vote that left Obama isolated in crisis. Ministers approved a package of States welcomes any partner’s genuine ed in our shared values and mutual com- pressing for air strikes in response to measures, which still requires legislative counter-ISIL efforts in Syria and Iraq, and I mitment to global peace, prosperity, and chemical weapons use.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Clinton Email November Release
    UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05772613 Date: 11/30/2015 RELEASE IN FULL CONFIDENTIAL October 9, 2010 For: Hillary From: Sid Re: Yes, some things: 1. Richard Wolff told me that one of the reasons Jones was summarily executed was payback for dumping Mark Lippert (whom he called "Thing Two," from Dr. Seuss' Cat in the Hat), McDonough's sidekick (whom Jones calls "Thing One"). Of course, Jones had to go to Obama himself to dispose of Lippert. The true cause was that Thing One and Thing Two were leaking negative stories about Jones. McDonough, naturally, has assumed Donilon's post. Obladi, oblada, as John Lennon (who would have been 70) might say. 2. Shaun Woodward is in the Labour shadow cabinet in his former position as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. Gordon Brown's hatchetman, Charlie Whelan, whose job was to undercut Tony, had worked the unions to vote for Ed Miliband rather than Ed Balls (the one closest to Gordon) in order to beat David--the last scene in the revenge tragedy of Gordon v. Tony. Only 19 percent of the union people voted, but were credited with the full one-third of Labour votes for leader selection, so a minority of a minority threw the election by 1.3 percent to Ed. Then Balls, his wife Yvette Cooper (an MP and former cabinet secretary), and other Brownites ran as a slate for shadow cabinet--the first time the shadow cabinet was to be elected by the constituency. That succeeded to electing them all and shutting out Peter Hain, the former deputy PM, as well as Shaun.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impossible Office? Anthony Seldon , Assisted by Jonathan Meakin , Illias Thoms Index More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-316-51532-7 — The Impossible Office? Anthony Seldon , Assisted by Jonathan Meakin , Illias Thoms Index More Information Index 10 Downing Street, 6, 17, 45, 112, 127, 149, Alfred the Great, 26 166, 173, 189–90, 330–1, 338 Aliens Act (1905), 51 ‘Garden Suburb’, 118 Allen, Douglas, 300 14 Downing Street, 255 Althorp, John Charles Spencer, Lord 1922 Committee, 194 Althorp, 108, 285 1958 US–UK Defence Agreement, 35 American Civil War (1861–5), 107, 209, 263 2011 UK Census, 50 American colonies, 71, 72, 74, 75 7/7 terrorist attack, 44 American War of Independence (1775–83), 70 Whitehall, 166, 190 40, 76, 83, 210, 212, 227, 230, 251, 9/11 terrorist attack, 44, 211 254, 256 Amherst, Jeffrey, 253 Abdication crisis (1936), 121, 203, 240 Amiens, Treaty of (1802), 90, 96 Aberdeen, George Hamilton-Gordon, Lord Anderson, John, 295 Aberdeen, 30, 102, 104, 105, 106, 110, Andreotti, Giulio, 140 113, 173, 181, 212, 234, 262, 287, Andrew, Duke of York, 17 316, 319 Anglican Church. See Church of England Act of Settlement (1701), 12, 223, 251 Anglo French Naval Convention (1911), Act of Union (1707), 10, 12, 26, 38, 66, 265 156, 223 Anglo–Japanese Alliance (1902), 264 Act of Union (1800), 39, 89 Anne, Queen, 12, 14, 22, 64, 65, 93, 223, 251 Adams, John, 168, 227 Archbishop of Canterbury, 25 Adams, W. G. S., 118 Argyll, John Campbell, Duke of Argyll, Addington, Henry, 49, 90, 96, 268, 318, 337 23, 82 Adelaide, Queen, 231, 232 aristocracy, 48 Adenauer, Konrad, 140 Armstrong, William, 143, 144, 171, Admiralty, 26, 117, 155, 250,
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Devolution After the Scottish Referendum
    House of Commons Political and Constitutional Reform Committee The future of devolution after the Scottish referendum Eleventh Report of Session 2014–15 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 23 March 2015 HC 700 Published on 29 March 2015 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Political and Constitutional Reform Committee Mr Graham Allen MP (Labour, Nottingham North) (Chair) Mr Christopher Chope MP (Conservative, Christchurch) Tracey Crouch MP (Conservative, Chatham and Aylesford) Mark Durkan MP (Social Democratic & Labour Party, Foyle) Paul Flynn MP (Labour, Newport West) Duncan Hames MP (Liberal Democrat, Chippenham) Fabian Hamilton MP (Labour, Leeds North East) David Morris MP (Conservative, Morecambe and Lunesdale) Robert Neill MP (Conservative, Bromley and Chislehurst) Chris Ruane MP (Labour, Vale of Clwyd) Mr Andrew Turner MP (Conservative, Isle of Wight) The following Members were also members of the Committee during the Parliament: Mr Jeremy Browne MP (Liberal Democrat, Taunton Deane) Sheila Gilmore MP (Labour, Edinburgh East) Andrew Griffiths MP (Conservative, Burton) Simon Hart MP (Conservative, Camarthen West and South Pembrokeshire) Tristram Hunt MP (Labour, Stoke on Trent Central) Mrs Eleanor Laing MP (Conservative, Epping Forest) Yasmin Qureshi MP (Labour, Bolton South East) Stephen Williams MP (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West) Powers The Committee’s powers are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in Temporary Standing Order (Political and Constitutional Reform Committee). These are available on the Internet via www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmstords.htm. Publication Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/PCRC-publications and by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Insideout in Defence of Special Advisers: Lessons from Personal Experience
    In Defence of Special Advisers: Lessons from Personal Experience Nick Hillman INSIDE InsideOUT A series of personal perspectives on government eectiveness 9 This essay is dedicated to my children, Ben and Amity, who were born while I was a special adviser. I promise to repay the bedtime stories I missed. 2 InsideOUT InsideOUT In Defence of Special Advisers: Lessons from Personal Experience Nick Hillman InsideOUT 3 TRANSFORMATION IN THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE 2010 interim evaluation report Foreword Nick Hillman’s InsideOUT provides the most valuable recent insight into the work of that most misunderstood Whitehall species – the special adviser. The value lies, first, in being up-to-date when much of the discussion of special advisers goes back to the scandals and battles of the Blair/Brown years; and, second, in being written from the perspective of a department rather than the centre. That is crucial in understanding how advisers operate, particularly in the age of coalition, and how they contribute to the work of their ministers, as opposed to the Prime Minister. You would expect that someone who worked for David Willetts to operate in a less highly charged world than in some of the familiar stab-and-tell accounts of ex-advisers. That is an advantage and allows Hillman to concentrate on the key issues, not just, persuasively, in defence of spads but also in suggesting how the system can be improved. Without repeating all his arguments, I would like to discuss one issue which he highlights – the lack of proper preparation and training. Working in Parliament as chief of staff to a member of the Shadow Cabinet, as Hillman did, can, as he says, feel more like a micro-business than part of a great ship of state.
    [Show full text]
  • Open PDF 10MB
    Intergovernmental Relations Quarterly Report Quarter 1 2021 24 March 2021 0 1 Intergovernmental Relations Quarterly Report Quarter 1 2021 24 March 2021 This information is also available on the GOV.UK website: www.gov.uk/government/collections/intergovernmental-relations 2 © Crown copyright 2021 Produced by Cabinet Office You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or email: [email protected] Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Alternative format versions of this report are available on request from [email protected] 3 Contents Foreword 7 UK government’s approach to intergovernmental relations 8 1.1 UK government’s transparency commitments 8 1.2 The review of intergovernmental relations 8 1.3 Principles for intergovernmental relations 9 1.4 Context of intergovernmental working and future reporting 9 Intergovernmental engagement: Quarter 1 2021 11 2.1 Cabinet Office 11 2.2 Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy 12 2.3 Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport 12 2.4 Department for Education 13 2.5 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 14 2.6 Department of Health and Social Care 14 2.7 Department for International Trade 15 2.8 Department for Transport 15 2.9 Department for Work and Pensions
    [Show full text]
  • The Populist Signal: Why Politics and Democracy
    1 THE POPULIST SIGNAL About Policy Network Policy Network is an international thinktank and research institute. Its network spans national borders across Europe and the wider world with the aim of promot- ing the best progressive thinking on the major social and economic challenges of the 21st century. Our work is driven by a network of politicians, policymakers, business leaders, public service professionals, and academic researchers who work on long-term issues relating to public policy, political economy, social attitudes, governance and international affairs. This is complemented by the expertise and research excellence of Policy Network’s international team. A platform for research and ideas • Promoting expert ideas and political analysis on the key economic, social and political challenges of our age. • Disseminating research excellence and relevant knowledge to a wider public audience through interactive policy networks, including interdisciplinary and scholarly collaboration. • Engaging and informing the public debate about the future of European and global progressive politics. A network of leaders, policymakers and thinkers • Building international policy communities comprising individuals and affiliate institutions. • Providing meeting platforms where the politically active, and potential leaders of the future, can engage with each other across national borders and with the best thinkers who are sympathetic to their broad aims. • Engaging in external collaboration with partners including higher education institutions, the private sector, thinktanks, charities, community organisations, and trade unions. • Delivering an innovative events programme combining in-house seminars with large-scale public conferences designed to influence and contribute to key public debates. About the Barrow Cadbury Trust The Barrow Cadbury Trust is an independent charitable foundation, committed to bringing about socially just change.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sewel Convention: the Westminster Perspective
    House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee The Sewel Convention: the Westminster perspective Fourth Report of Session 2005–06 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 6 June 2006 HC 983 Published on 19 June 2006 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £13.50 The Scottish Affairs Committee The Scottish Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Scotland Office (including (i) relations with the Scottish Parliament and (ii) administration and expenditure of the office of the Advocate General for Scotland (but excluding individual cases and advice given within government by the Advocate General)). Current membership Mr Mohammad Sarwar MP (Labour, Glasgow Central) (Chairman) Danny Alexander MP, (Liberal Democrat, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey) Gordon Banks MP, (Labour, Ochil & South Perthshire) Ms Katy Clark MP, (Labour, North Ayrshire & Arran) Mr Ian Davidson MP, (Labour, Glasgow South West) Mr John MacDougall MP, (Labour, Glenrothes) Mr Jim McGovern MP, (Labour, Dundee West) Mr Angus MacNeil MP, (SNP, Na h-Eileanan An Iar) David Mundell MP, (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) Mr Charles Walker MP, (Conservative, Broxbourne) Mr Ben Wallace MP, (Conservative, Lancaster & Wyre) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Journalistic Pathfinding: How the Parliamentary Press Gallery Adapted to News Management Under the Conservative Government of Stephen Harper
    Journalistic Pathfinding: How the Parliamentary Press Gallery Adapted to News Management Under the Conservative Government of Stephen Harper by Jennifer Ditchburn A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Journalism School of Journalism and Communication Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario © 2014 Jennifer Ditchburn ii Abstract Commentary on the contemporary interface between the media and governments often portrays outnumbered reporters as willingly accepting information subsidies as a way of meeting the demands of the 24/7 multi-platform newsroom. But this view fails to take into account the impact on journalistic routines of more extreme forms of government news management, which block access to information and to politicians rather than merely packaging or “spinning” them favourably. The experience of the parliamentary press gallery in Ottawa vis-à-vis Stephen Harper’s government offers an excellent opportunity to take a closer look at the practical realities of political journalists confronted with stringent government news management tactics. A rupture in the historic role relationship between the gallery and the Prime Minister’s Office resulted in journalists adapting their techniques. They became pathfinders seeking out new routes – alternative human and data sources – to reach the information they needed to write their stories and prepare broadcasts. iii Acknowledgments One of the first things you’re supposed to do when embarking on the Master of Journalism program at Carleton University is come up with a thesis topic. For someone like me, having been away from university for 16 years doing hard news, the academic ideas weren’t exactly flowing freely.
    [Show full text]
  • The Death of Spin? Communication in the 21St Century
    The Death of Spin? Communication in the 21st Century George Pitcher Open access. Some rights reserved. As the publisher of this work, Demos has an open access policy which enables anyone to access our content electronically without charge. We want to encourage the circulation of our work as widely as possible without affecting the ownership of the copyright, which remains with the copyright holder. Users are welcome to download, save, perform or distribute this work electronically or in any other format, including in foreign language translation without written permission subject to the conditions set out in the Demos open access licence which you can read here. Please read and consider the full licence. The following are some of the conditions imposed by the licence: · Demos and the author(s) are credited; · The Demos website address (www.demos.co.uk) is published together with a copy of this policy statement in a prominent position; · The text is not altered and is used in full (the use of extracts under existing fair usage rights is not affected by this condition); · The work is not resold; · A copy of the work or link to its use online is sent to the address below for our archive. By downloading publications, you are confirming that you have read and accepted the terms of the Demos open access licence. Copyright Department Demos Elizabeth House 39 York Road London SE1 7NQ United Kingdom [email protected] You are welcome to ask for permission to use this work for purposes other than those covered by the Demos open access licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Privacy, Probity and Public Interest Whittle and Cooper Cover Image © Reuters © Image Cover , –7 the Independent
    Whittle and Cooper cover C:Layout 1 01/07/2009 15:43 Page 1 RISJ REUTERS REUTERS CHALLENGES INSTITUTE for the STUDY of INSTITUTE for the JOURNALISM CHALLENGES STUDY of JOURNALISM | Privacy, probity and public interest probity Privacy, “'Privacy, Probity and Public Interest' shows how privacy has come Privacy, probity and to be both better protected by the courts and more widely ignored: big questions, riveting examples and sharp analysis.” Baroness Onora O'Neill, President of the British Academy and public interest Professor of Philosophy, Cambridge University “is report is from the frontline. Although it contains an admirable survey of the law and the stance of the regulators, it does much more. It gives interested parties a voice. e authors provide their own thoughtful commentary; they do not shirk the difficult questions. Stephen Whittle and Glenda Cooper Everyone should be interested in this debate, and I wholeheartedly commend this report to anyone who is.” Andrew Caldecott, QC, Specialist in Media Law “An erudite and compelling exposition of one of the most important ethical dilemmas facing British Journalism in the internet era. e authors identify a route towards a new journalism that can respect privacy without compromising its democratic obligation to hold power to account.” Tim Luckhurst Professor of Journalism, University of Kent Stephen Whittle is a journalist and was the BBC's Controller of Editorial Policy (2001–2006). As Controller, he was involved in some of the most high profile BBC investigations such as The Secret Policeman, Licence To Kill, and Panoramas on the Olympics and care of the elderly.
    [Show full text]
  • Oh Jeremy Corbyn” – Will You Chose the Old Or the Young ?
    “Oh Jeremy Corbyn” – Will You Chose The Old or The Young ? Blog 20 July by Chris Rose, http://threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org/?p=1533 Photo: ParisMatch, Jeremy Corbyn à Glastonbury. Dylan Martinez/Reuters Can the UK avoid Brexit ? While nearly all attention focuses on Britain’s beleagured Prime Minister Theresa May, the person who could most easily swing it is the newly popular Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn. Whether he does or not, may come down to making a choice he’d rather not make, between the old and the young, between the past and the future. Why so ? Because any of the more plausible routes to Brexit Exit require a significant shift in public opinion, dignified by many MPs after the 2016 EU Referendum, as ‘the Will of the People’. Corbyn is in a position to deliver that shift in mood, whereas May is not. This blog explores why Corbyn probably does not want to do that but he might have to. 1 The Public Mood Is the Will Of The People Mood is pivotal because political credibility increasingly demands staying on the right side of it. Mood captured in opinion polling (see more later) is an expression of the public will. It’s affected by perceptions of events and options on offer, and politicians still have some power to shape those options. As all pollsters and politicians know, people tend not to back options that do not look credible, for instance if nobody in a position of influence seems to back them (‘value expectancy’ theory), and cannot back options that are not put to them.
    [Show full text]