Lib Dems: the illiberal anti-democrats have become extremists on revoking Brexit

In the run-up to the 2010 general election, the Lib Dem leadership needed to identify a policy with a clear message that might increase their appeal with younger and centrist voters. In the wake of the financial crisis there was a danger that the party would look irrelevant and be squeezed between Labour and the Tories. The canny campaigner, Gordon Brown, was Prime Minister and he was supported (astonishingly it seemed at the time) by his former adversary, the Prince of Darkness Peter Mandelson. The Tories had an energetic young leader aiming to present the coming election as a binary choice between a tired Labour government that had made a mess of things, leaving the country badly prepared for a global crisis, and a moderate, revived Tory force under David Cameron.

The advantage the Lib Dems had enjoyed in the 2005 general election thanks to being the anti-Iraq War party was fading as memories dimmed and voters moved on to other concerns. In 2010, the Lib Dems needed a big retail “offer” to grab attention. That offer was the promise to freeze student tuition fees in England and Wales.

Prompted by activists, in their internal discussions the upper echelons kicked around the argument on how far to go in terms of making promises.

The then leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg, urged caution. The public finances were a sea of red, with the deficit soaring thanks to the banking crisis. The Lib Dems, he warned his colleagues, would look daft or worse if later, perhaps as the junior partner in a coalition, they were unable to freeze fees as promised.

Pre-election, Clegg lost the internal argument. He then did something that still to this day strikes me as extraordinarily foolish, irresponsible and guaranteed to destroy trust. He put the tuition fee freeze pledge at the heart of the election campaign anyway, despite him knowing that it was undeliverable. He knew. But he went ahead, putting his signature on signs and wooing the National Union of Students with a dud promise.

In coalition, what Clegg had feared when he initially warned his colleagues happened. The public finances were in even worse shape than first thought. University finances were under strain. Student fees rocketed from £3000 to £9000. Students blamed Clegg and the Lib Dems were ritually humiliated. Inevitably, for a while Clegg (this is the Lib Dems) had the gall to go on talking as though the party occupied the moral high ground as the supposed conscience of the coalition. Eventually, his strategy in ruins, Clegg was reduced to issuing cringeworthy videos in which he said he was “so sorry.” At the 2017 general election he lost his seat.

Almost a decade on, the Lib Dems are enjoying their Brexit bounce in Bournemouth, and no wonder. The party is meeting for its annual conference in extremely good heart and anti-Brexit voters are getting back on board ahead of a likely general election to be held at some point this autumn. The tuition fees debacle must seem like a distant memory.

The episode and how badly it turned out for the Lib Dems should, however, serve as a cautionary tale for a party with a fresh leader making wild new promises.

This week, at her first conference as leader, Jo Swinson has committed the Lib Dems to revoking, that is cancelling, Brexit, annulling the result of the 2016 referendum. This is quite an extraordinary policy position to adopt – considering that the Lib Dems called for an in-out referendum on Brexit and said they would honour the result. Instead, now, the Lib Dems are promoting the highly illiberal and anti-democratic policy of scrapping the 2016 result because they do not like it.

There is some disquiet among more thoughtful Lib Dems, such as the retiring MP Norman Lamb. Others, naturally sympathetic to the Lib Dems, have said on social media that it is a dangerous and extreme policy.

One can easily imagine how it became policy. A pollster or focus group strategist can presumably show that it will have a rallying effect in 40 key seats where the Lib Dems being the party of revoke could provide the energy for a breakthrough, to inspire the EU beret brigade and get them out there evangelising.

On seeing such a presentation, the job of a decent leader is, at that point, to say that this is an interesting presentation by the pollsters, but no, thank you, revoke is not a good idea because it threatens to destroy the torn social contract and in addition it “looks nuts on the news.”

Many weary voters may be open to a second referendum (and many more are not) but just annulling the 2016 referendum looks borderline deranged. On the evening news on Sunday the grinning Lib Dems seemed high on their own supply.

Revocation will only happen if the Lib Dems win a majority at the election, says Swinson, as though that’s okay and the votes of, say, 9.5m Lib Dem voters if they did ever win, cancels out 17.4m votes for leave three years ago.

The policy is disingenuous on another level. Say the Lib Dems in return for a new referendum prop up a Labour coalition dedicated to renegotiating a Brexit deal and then putting it to voters. Will the Lib Dems support or undermine the renegotiation while it is happening? How will they vote on the process in divisions in the Commons as votes crop up? They will have no credibility as honest players in any such government or pact. They are for annulling votes they don’t like.

There is another obvious and enormous constitutional problem Swinson should as a theoretical Unionist have anticipated, that this policy is a gift to the SNP in Scotland. The Lib Dem line is now that a parliamentary majority is now enough to annul Brexit with the stroke of a pen by a Prime Minister. The SNP will note this and – quite fairly in the light of Swinson’s policy – make a similar argument that a majority in the next Scottish parliament elections now constitutes a declaration for independence. Even before a referendum. The Lib Dems have sold the Unionist jerseys in Scotland when chasing Remainer votes in Cheltenham.

Swinson looks untroubled by self-doubt. She is someone who projects boundless confidence in the manifest belief that she is the cat’s pyjamas, that is quite excellent and right at all times. Granted, she’s a tough campaigner, someone who won back her seat on the outskirts of Glasgow in 2017 from the Nationalists. At Bearsden Cross in her constituency, where the residents do not much care for Brexit or Boris, her “Stop Brexit” position will be popular.

Many Remainers, across Britain, will find the revoke policy equally attractive. It is a big offer, again, far more audacious than freezing student fees, that sounds like a simple solution to a complex problem, the mess of Brexit.

Others – potential Tory switchers – may be unnerved slightly by the cheek of it. The pious Lib Dems preach tolerance and are now for scrapping referendum results. And, amusingly, defecting former Tory MPs who have joined the Lib Dems wanting a second referendum are already at odds with their new and extremist party leadership.

The tuition fees blunder eventually made the Lib Dems extremely unpopular when after the election they were rumbled by voters who felt, correctly, they had been duped by a party on the make.

It is unlikely Remainers will be furious with Swinson if she ends up after an election not being able to revoke. But the same principle applies, again, as it did in the case of Clegg and the bogus pledge on fees.

In politics, as in life, doing things for the wrong reasons usually comes back to bite you in time. The opportunistic Lib Dems under Swinson are sending a dangerous signal – that they are prepared to disregard basic democratic norms to win votes – and they will then trade and agree to a referendum having demonstrated that they do not respect the results of referendums.

The clear opportunity for Swinson was to present herself in contrast to the other parties as the straight dealer among card-sharps. Somehow, she has already conspired to put herself in a position where she looks just as tricksy and untrustworthy as her opponents.

Let us know your view. Send a letter for publication to letters@reaction.life