Editor’s Notes: Is this new group just a respite centre for Remainers…or something more?
Are we witnessing the dawn of a new political age, or the spasm of a few politically homeless MPs?
The smart answer is that it’s too early to tell, but if I were forced off the fence I’d say the latter is more likely.
There will almost certainly be more defections, from Labour as well as the Tory party, but until an MP who supports the principle of leaving the European Union joins the newly-formed Independent Group, it will be seen first and foremost as a respite centre for Remainers.
The founding members offered a dozen reasons for their decision, of which opposition to Brexit was one. Other motivating factors included justifiable dismay at the state of the Labour party and the irreparable inadequacies and deficiencies of its leadership. I cheered them on.
But then came the three Tory MPs, whose opposition to Brexit is no less sincere but who cannot in all seriousness claim to have witnessed the demise of their home party in the way that Labour MPs can. Despite their claims to the contrary, the Tory party is not in the grip of the hard-right. Nor has its membership been taken over by UKIP activists.
When Theresa May isn’t battling on Brexit she leads a distinctly stodgy centre-ground government, characterised not by free-market zealotry but by interventionist instincts. £20bn more for the NHS, beefed-up national interest tests for M&A, “an end to austerity” and constant tinkering with the edges of the housing market. The government can be accused of many things, but a lurch to the right isn’t one of them.
As for Brexit, May is pursuing (rightly) what used to be called a soft exit, but which now satisfies neither those who wish to remain nor the hard-Brexit advocates on the Tory backbenches. If Brexit happens at all, it will be soft.
Anti-Brexit MPs now have a new home, and doubtless some public support, but they won’t achieve the earthquake they hope for.
Fighting the City's corner…in church
I spent Monday evening deep in the crypt beneath St Paul’s, defending the free flow of capital and the role of finance as a force for good. I’ve taken part in plenty of debates on this subject, but the ecclesiastical tinge was a new element. The Bishop of London Sarah Mullally was another voice on the panel, as was Dr Adrian Pabst – the author of a report that included some startling policy proposals for the redirection of capital into “productive activities in the real economy”. Pabst is no rabble-rousing Corbynite, and his approach seemed to come from a more conservative critique of markets. Nevertheless, his proposal to introduce “country-specific capital flow management” represents a draconian attitude to finance. In my response to his ideas I drew on the case study of the north west by think-tank New Financial, which highlights nearly 1,000 businesses in the region – very much the real economy” – that relied on the City’s capital markets for funding and growth.
Corbyn's Labour is the true face of British populism
“Left-wing populist parties almost always describe themselves as belonging to the left. They do not, however, regard Social Democrats as part of the left, but dismiss them as post-political and/or neo-liberal. Hence, they inevitably propose a deeply populistic world-view, where they alone represent the people, while every other party is part of the establishment working against the people.”
This quote, a near perfect description of the current Labour party, is from the latest comprehensive study of populism in Europe by the Swedish think-tank Timbro, and is part of the authors’ definition of left-wing populism. They go on to add that left-wing populists “hold an authoritarian view on the free market and propose socialisation of banks and large corporations”. Right-wing populism, in contrast, has failed to gain a foothold in democratic British politics. Some suggest the referendum result was our own populist moment but in truth, UK populism comes from the Labour party – not Brexit.