General Election 2017: An Edelman Briefing by Edelman

GENERAL ELECTION EDELMAN 9 June 2017

ELECTION OVERVIEW WILL WALDEN Managing Director, Public Affairs Former Director of Communications to Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson Well, that went well then! “What a dog’s dinner” was one of the only printable efforts texted to me overnight by stunned Tory advisors. Imagine heading to bed last night thinking that Theresa May was still on course to be returned with an 50, 80 or 100 seat majority; that, for all the narrowing in the polls, Labour candidates up and down the country were privately still talking about meltdown; that the talk was of a Labour leadership contest in the coming months, not a Tory one. Just imagine! Well, that is what most commentators and campaigners actually did imagine. Yes, the polls had narrowed; yes, social care had punctured the strong and stable bubble of ‘Mummy’ May; yes, Jeremy Corbyn had defied very low expectations and run a pretty effective campaign. But really, a hung Parliament? Surely not! Only eight weeks ago she was twenty points clear. Why, then? Because some pollsters were indeed right. YouGov’s new model was dismissed as outlandish – predicated as it was on young voters turning out in droves as never before – and yet for once they did turn out, in massive numbers, an unmistakeable V-sign flicked by the 18-25 generation at parents and grandparents who voted Leave, at Brexit, Brexiteers and the Tory Party. Unencumbered by memories of Corbyn and the 1980s hard Left they saw instead a man who spoke about hope; who, however unrealistic his numbers, offered promises on tuition fees, schools and the NHS. Labour also benefitted from the collapse in the UKIP vote, when everyone had predicted it would head uniformly to the Tories; and yes, Tory Remainers did indeed switch – or at least stayed at home. But this election was really lost for Mrs May in the campaign itself. She ran (or was run by her advisors) as a presidential brand, but without the requisite charm or charisma – and the varnish came off in spectacular fashion. Not content with irritating the Tory base on social care and winter fuel payments, it was decided that the U-turn wasn’t

actually a U-turn; that “nothing has changed”. Having decided to change direction, the ‘strong and stable’ thing to have done would have been to say “I’m listening and we have changed the policy.” Instead, Mrs May’s reputation hit the buffers as she insisted to incredulous reporters (and by extension millions of voters) ‘there’s nothing to see here’. She will need to change the way she governs. The fingerpointing and acrimony has already begun. Out I’d suspect goes the model of a tiny select coterie of advisors. She really will need to lead a team, if what comes next is to work. Don’t expect any big changes at Cabinet level; her room for manoeuvre has gone. She will need to replace Ben Gummer and the other seven Ministers who lost their seats, but that in all likelihood will be that. The Queen’s Speech that follows will be ultra-thin. It will probably be easier for stakeholders to influence or even stop existing policy in the months ahead, but equally it will likely be more difficult for stakeholders to get anything new and more substantive in front of government. Welcome to the parallel universe that is British politics, led by a woman averse to risk who rolled the dice and lost. Diminished, yes; finished? No. Mrs May will need to at least look like she is in charge in the coming days. It’s a huge test. That she has decided to stay is unsurprising. Out of options, she couldn’t exactly have said ‘It’s not gone well so I’ll step down in a few months; does anyone want to help me form a government in the interim?’ The country needs at least a sense of stability and continuity. That means forming a government now and attempting to reassure the country, her party, and the markets while beginning Brexit negotiations on time. Her speech in Downing Street was in marked contrast to her words a few hours ago in her Maidenhead constituency. More bullish, more Prime Ministerial – but ultimately delivered in the full knowledge that this has been a terrible night for her. Listening to her, you’d have thought she’d secured a 50-seat majority – fairness and opportunity for all, certainty, we want the best possible Brexit deal, we will make a success of it. It’s a massive task and it will define her immediate future, her legacy and the direction of this country in the years ahead. The Tories have a ruthless streak when it comes to leaders – Theresa May is on notice - but equally the party will be keen to avoid talk of leadership challenges, new elections and yet more uncertainty. For now…

WHAT IT MEANS FOR BREXIT LUCY THOMAS Director, Public Affairs Former Deputy Director, Britain Stronger In Europe Theresa May called the election asking voters to back her position on Brexit: to leave the Single Market and Customs Union; to end free movement (as it currently operates); and to leave the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. There was also a firm bottom line: no deal is better than a bad deal. Far from the strong mandate she’d hoped for, the election result calls all this into question. But will it be softer or harder? There are contradictory pressures from her own Ministers and other parties both to soften the Brexit position and to stand firm. Brexit Secretary David Davis said that the Conservatives losing their majority would amount to having lost their mandate to take Britain out of the single market and customs union, that the manifesto had set out that position and it would be the “people’s decision” as to whether they accepted that or not. Other unnamed Brexiteers have blamed Davis for the election being called and warned May she is “on notice” to resist pressure to water down Brexit – with the lessthan-subtle threat they’ll try to replace her if she doesn’t. The third pull factor comes from the Democratic Unionist Party, and what it wants as a price for supporting the Conservatives. While pro-Brexit, DUP Leader Arlene Foster

is mindful of the sensitive and intricate issues in Northern Ireland and has repeatedly said that “no-one wants to see a ‘hard’ Brexit” or a hard border. Given the uncertainty, can the talks be delayed? Article 50 itself says that the process can be extended so long as there is unanimous agreement among the 27 EU leaders and Jean-Claude Juncker has said he hopes the day will come when the UK will “re-enter the boat.” In the meantime, though, in the hours since the election EU leaders have lined up to say that the clock is ticking on the negotiations and the end date remains the same. However, while the posturing and politics are outwardly firm, it remains in the EU’s interests for the UK to retain as close as possible a relationship with the bloc, to keep paying into the budget and to ultimately agree an orderly exit.

A phrase often used in the EU by Angela Merkel and others is “where there’s a will, there’s a way”. Given the interests at stake on all sides, both the will and the way would in all likelihood be found to accommodate any delay.

GENERAL ELECTION 2017 RESULTS: AT A GLANCE

9 June 2017

What Happens Next THE GOVERNMENT’S PROGRAMME With no overall majority, the Conservatives’ planned legislative programme, due to be unveiled in the Queen’s Speech on 19 June, has been thrown into disarray. Even if an agreement with the DUP materialises, which seems likely, Ministers will only be able to pass legislation which commands cross-party support. The cap on energy bills – lifted from Ed Miliband’s 2015 manifesto – would seem like a good bet; and, if Theresa May retains any authority, she may try to pass measures on workers’ rights and corporate governance (if her furious backbenchers will swallow it). Given the events in Manchester and London, some anti-terrorism legislation is possible – and the tech sector should be prepared for measures aimed at platforms such as Whatsapp. The Bill on driverless cars and aviation that was lost in the pre-election wash-up may also return. Large parts of the manifesto are, however, dead. New grammar schools, lifting the fox hunting ban and, more seriously, reform of social care are off the table for the foreseeable future. And when it comes to Brexit, the progress of the Great Repeal Bill must now be in serious doubt. With its political energy consumed by internal maneuvering and challenging parliamentary arithmetic, it is highly unlikely that the new Government will embark on any substantive programme. Instead, it will be looking to sort out the crisis at the top of the Conservative Party ahead of a possible second election later this year or next.

LABOUR This result places Labour in an unenviable electoral position. As the results came in, party members treated it as if their party were winning a landslide; their hopes and dreams were finally being validated, as the electorate backed an unashamedly socialist programme. But we should remember that this is a hung Parliament. Labour did not win this election; in fact, it showed just how far it is from commanding a Commons majority. Despite the surge, there is no evidence that a Corbynite platform can return Labour to power – but the results mean that the party is tied to that platform for the foreseeable future. Moderates will have to regroup and consider their options. Any prospect of challenging Corbyn is off for now. There are still internal battles to come on the Labour Party rulebook, but centrists will now play a very long game. In the meantime, the parliamentary party will have its tails up with an infusion of new comrades and the chance of regularly defeating the Government – but Corbyn and his team will have to up their game as an Opposition if cracks are not to reappear.

THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS Whilst the Liberal Democrat resurgence expected at the beginning of the campaign has not materialised, this is a far better result than had seemed likely. A gain of four seats is in stark contrast to the losses that many in the party had predicted. The return of heavyweight former coalition ministers - Vince Cable, Ed Davey and Jo Swinson - will greatly increase the party’s confidence and credibility in Parliament and with the media. The loss of Nick Clegg, however, is huge, if not entirely unexpected. His expertise as the party’s Brexit spokesman will be greatly missed. Moreover, modest gains for the party should not overshadow how lacklustre Tim Farron’s campaign performance has been. That it took a recount to confirm he had retained his own seat shows the party’s fortunes continue to rely on slim margins. Nevertheless, this limited success in the Commons will also increase the party’s confidence in the House of Lords, where Liberal Democrat Peers remain a significant voting bloc. Indeed, their potential opposition to Brexit legislation was one of the reasons Theresa May claimed an election was necessary in the first place. After this result, they certainly won’t be making the Conservative Government’s life any easier.

9 June 2017