Tags
2017 UK General Election, Arlene Foster, Democratic Unionist Party, Hung Parliament, Michel Barnier, Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland, Theresa May
2017 UK General Election
This morning’s 2017 General Election results shows a damaged Theresa May with the usual predictable calls for her to resign but she’s no need to do this. Look at the final results and do the maths.
The Conservatives (318 seats) may not have an overall majority (they needed 326+ to be unassailable) but even if Labour (262 seats), Scottish National Party (35 seats) and the Liberal Democrats (12 seats) all combine to vote against the Conservatives, they are short of a majority: 262 + 35 + 12 = 309, 10 short of a defeat vote. The balance of power lies with the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland, leader Arlene Foster. They have the 10 seats. If the DUP members add their votes to the Conservatives, the total rises to 328, two votes above the magic number of 326. If the DUP members add their votes to an unholy alliance of Labour, SNP and LibDems, the total rises to 319, one vote, just one, above the Conservatives’ 318.
So, here are the questions:
– How likely is it that Labour, the SNP and the LibDems would all conspire to vote against a Conservative government bill? Answer: very unlikely but not improbable.
– How likely is it that the DUP would then throw its votes into such an alliance? Hmm…
Suddenly, the DUP is thrust into the limelight and Arlene Foster’s policy statements will now come under intense scrutiny as politicians, pundits and soothsayers alike ponder on how she and her party will respond to certain key issues. For me, the issue that may cause a major rift between Foster and May is the soft/hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. At the moment, the border between these two countries is soft—no border checkpoints or other controls—and the DUP members want to keep it that way post-Brexit. Northern Ireland benefits enormously from the free flow of goods, services and capital coming from the Republic of Ireland and creating a hard border across a 499 km (310 miles) stretch of land with more than 200 public road crossings is a formidable task (but not as big as Trump’s US-Mexican border construction). But, I would imagine that EU Chief Negotiator Michel Barnier and his band of Brexit mediators in Brussels will now be rubbing their hands with glee at Theresa May’s predicament. How can she comply with a Brussels demand for a hard border when she may have to rely on the DUP’s support in a critical Brexit vote?
I would not want to be in Theresa May’s shoes this morning but I do have a solution to the hard border problem: release Northern Ireland from its membership of the UK and allow the province to reunify with the Republic of Ireland. After all, 56% of the voters in Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU in last year’s Referendum. This solution removes the 10 votes from Parliament (actually, it removes all 18 Northern Ireland parliamentary seats) and gets Barnier off May’s back.
Now, there’s an idea.
(^_^)
Message body
Andrew Neil: Cameron gambled and lost, May gambled and lost, is the Tory party a casino?
LikeLike
Winston Churchill once said, “A politician needs the ability to foretell what is going to happen… (in the future). And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen.”
With one word change, we get, “A gambler needs the ability to foretell what is going to happen… (in the future). And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen.”
What’s different?
LikeLike
Perhaps the difference is, a gambler goes out to gamble – it is his choice. A politician does not need to go out and gamble unless forced to. Cameron did not need to call for a referendum, he just had to leave it – not mention it. May did not need to call a snap election, just serve her term as good as she could. They are not just gambling with their own egos and party political expediency, they gamble with the country and its people.
I am thinking we might be heading for another general election and brexit referendum within the next 6 months? Both on the same ballot paper. What do you think?
LikeLike
We could argue about a gambler gambling out of choice. Once the addiction takes hold… As for May’s decision to call a snap election when it was not necessary, we may never know the true reasons but my guess is that she was badly advised and didn’t realise it. I hope she can form a decent alliance with the DUP but I fear that the hard border soft border issue will scupper any long-lasting relationship. May might resign and trigger another General Election but that would throw a massive spanner into the Brexit talks and might, as you suggest, allow the ex-Remainers to demand and get a second EU Referendum but I sincerely hope not. The UK, EU, and USA political arenas are already more complex than ever before and if the MENA explodes, literally, the world will become extremely unstable. Even a return of Nigel galloping in on his white steed brandishing his pint of beer will not be enough to save it. And God/Allah/Bramha/Buddha, or whoever is in favour these days, help us if Blair decides to re-enter British politics!
LikeLike
I think that the Tories wanted to lose the election so they could get out of the Brexit talks. The things that they proposed were suicidal: bring back fox hunting, scrap free school meals, means test the winter fuel allowance, scrap the triple lock, don’t mention the dementia tax. May could not fix a two piece jigsaw, she keeps changing her mind
LikeLike
I agree. I also think her decision not to engage Corbyn in a head-to-head public debate was a sign of weakness. When she took over from Cameron, I was impressed by her stature, poise and air of leadership. I am no longer impressed. It would appear she is too willing to listen to her advisers and incapable of taking a leadership position. It’s a pity.
LikeLike