Crisis? What Crisis?

Thatcher in 1990, Callaghan in 1979.  Two British Prime Ministers who thought that being seen to ‘get on with the job’ was the best way to handle political difficulties at home.  Perhaps it is fitting therefore that Boris Johnson is also out of the country, presumably in part for the same reason.

When the unanimous judgement of the UK Supreme Court was handed down this morning.  The court’s ruling, that there was no reason, let alone a justifiable one, to prorogue Parliament and that the UK Government acted illegally, was as damning in its judgement as it was surprising in its clarity.

As with much of what has happened with Brexit, it is impossible to guess what might happen next.  Immediate calls for his resignation from all sides are predictable, but it is likely that whilst in the New York, the Prime Minister might follow the advice of “America’s Boris” and stick it out, at least in the short term.

What the Opposition chooses to do next will be critical in that determination.  With the media narrative clearly building up to the decision today though it was with a chronic lack of perspective, but entirely unsurprising, that Labour Conference chose to continue petty squabbles and fudge positions.  A clear clarion call this morning of its position would have further increased the pressure but has not yet materialised.   Strong, visual action today could still salvage the situation, but whether the party is capable of that or cedes that group to the SNP, Lib Dems and others remains to be seen.

The guesswork will continue over the coming hours, days and weeks but I suspect the news from the Big Apple will echo both Callaghan and Thatcher, “Crisis? What Crisis?” and “No, No, No.”

If you don’t like how the table is set, turn over the table

Like most people who work in politics, I have spent the last few days, weeks and months trying to figure out if Theresa May has any kind of long-term strategy for how to handle Brexit and, if she does, what that might be.

Orbit Communications - Graeme Downie 03
Graeme Downie, Director. @graemedownie

Also like a lot of people who work in politics, I tend to find myself reaching for some kind of comparison for political drama or documentary to explain what I think.  That is often West Wing or Yes Minister.

In this case, however, it is the new version of House of Cards with Kevin Spacey.  In that show there is a recurring line which Frank Underwood uses to explain why he takes what at first glance seems like illogical or risky actions – “If you don’t like how the table is set, turn over the table.”

That is the closest I have come so far to trying to explain what Theresa May might be up to.  Here is Prime Minister, previously regarded by many as a steady, safe pair of hands – winning the Conservative Party leadership by virtue of being the only candidate not to make a stupid mistake.

And yet, her approach to the upcoming Brexit negotiations and her dealings over a possible second Scottish independence referendum have seemed more the actions of a spoilt teenager, taking intractable black or white positions.  This has often seemed unreasonable and surely doomed to fail, afterall where is the famous British strength of negotiation and compromise, something Brussels diplomats will genuinely miss when the country exits the EU?

On Brexit, the Prime Minister is smart enough to know that in a traditional negotiation she has a very weak hand indeed.  One country versus 27 who are angry, have self-preservation at the core and, crucially, control many of the timescales.  No one would realistically expect to walk in to that kind of fight and not come out more bloodied that the opponents.  However, her actions, right from her decision to delay the triggering of Article 50, despite initial howls from the EU top brass, through to the way she has managed the furore about EU nationals is not what might be thought of as the traditional “British” way of handling diplomacy.

In her dealings with Nicola Sturgeon as well, the Mrs. May has been extreme – starting off with a “No” when questioned about whether Brexit was a sufficient material change to justify a second independence referendum and sticking to that hard line this week with a brisk “now is not the time” response to the First Minister’s demands for new constitutional vote.  This didn’t seem like simply a negotiating position, this was seemed pretty definitive and with a hint of dismissiveness.

Hardly the Marquess of Queensberry rules here from the PM either then– no negotiation, no discussion, no pleasantries.  Just no, in fact.

The response of many in Scotland this week has been to dismiss this approach as a Prime Minister who doesn’t understand Scotland or just flat out doesn’t care as she is beholden to the right wing of her own party.

This may well be the case but perhaps Theresa May just doesn’t like the way the traditional table of British negotiation is set and knows the meal will end badly unless she upends the table and at least tries to improve the setting from disasterous to at least just bad.