It’s become cliche that every Tory prime minister since Major at least has been brought down by Europe. Also, that it appears to be happening yet again. I think Brexit exposes something deeper than this in terms of the problems faced by the Conservative party, going all the way back to Thatcher’s departure in 1990, and it’s not so much about the UK’s membership of the European Union as it is about what the Conservative party is and what it exists to do.
First of all, the party is actually the Conservatives and Unionists. Problem is, some people within the party care very, very deeply about the Union and some actively dislike it (although orthodoxy causes them to hide this). Brexit has always been an existential threat to the Union – and behind the scenes, most Brexiteers fully own up to this. Yes, it would be a shame if Scotland went independent and Ireland reunited, but we should hardly let the tail wag the dog here, should we? After all, England needs to do what it needs to do, and if the Celts don’t care for Brexit, well, there are options. A very public disagreement between those who think the Union is one of the main reasons why they are Tories in the first place and those who don’t really care either way has been simmering for some time.
Coming back to the dilemma posed at the end of the first paragraph: what is the party for and what it is exists to do? Pre-Thatcher, the Tories were a mostly ideology free zone, at least at national level. Ideology was for the lefties, it was thought; it is the Tories who will just get on with whatever works and keep things ticking along. Thatcherism was a break with this, with free market ideology coming front and centre in a way it hadn’t previously. Yes, the Tories pre-’79 had been pro-business, but Thatcher took it to a whole new level. The fallout from Thatcherism created a situation in which whole swathes of the country became areas where the Tories wouldn’t, couldn’t really win again, even up until the present day (the 2017 general election was expected to reverse this trend; it definitively did not). This is the main reason, it strikes me, that the Conservative party have struggled to get majorities since 1992, and why even when they got one in 2015, it was a very thin majority that was only achieved by the one-off effect of the Lib Dem collapse.
Brexit places this question back front and centre: are the Tories a party of basic conservatism, as in, are they there to keep things ticking along with whatever compromises that entails, or are they a party of the radical right, willing to create occasional havoc to achieve their ends? This to me is the fundamental dilemma the Conservative party faces, whatever happens with the Brexit vote. That’s what the split between the ERG and May essentially amounts to. The prime minister negotiated a deal she felt would honour the referendum result without causing disruption – a classic, old school Tory bit of moderation. The ERG, who see this all as a once in a lifetime possibility to radically alter the way the country runs, are adamant that this chance is taken. This is why they are saying they will vote down May’s deal – they want it all or nothing. They must be aware that what they are doing makes no Brexit much more likely; no matter, they are willing to take that gamble.
Once May moves on, the question about what the Tories want to be will become even more salient. The one nation group will argue that if the Tories occupy the centre-ground, they will be sure to defeat the Marxist opposition; the ERG bunch will claim that Corbynism can only be fought with an opposing idea that is equally radical. We’ll see who wins in the end – and if that causes a split in the most successful political party in the history of the world.
Good point, though I would note that support for Brexit and support for the union are not mutually exclusive: most unionists in Northern Ireland voted to leave, and I would not be at all surprised if the same was true in Scotland (given that the Yes vote in 2014 was 45%, and almost all of them probably voted Remain, and the Leave vote in Scotland was about 40%, that’s 40 / 65 or about 60% of 2014 No-voters backing Leave — very roughly).
M –
The ‘Official’ Ulster Unionist party was, er, officially for Remain, but if my memory is right, three senior UUP old stagers – Lords David Trimble, John Taylor and Ken Maginnis all recommended a Leave vote shortly before polling day in 2016. Further, I believe I am right in saying that the UUP has moved away from its 2016 Remain position. Happy to be corrected on this. The Democratic Unionist party was, of course, for Leave.
The UUP was last relevant in about 2004.
According to some random article I found on the inter-net: ‘Of those who identified as nationalists, 88% voted Remain, compared to only 34% of those who described themselves as unionists. And 87% of “Irish” respondents voted Remain compared to only 37% of “British” respondents.’
Remain / No maps a lot more consistently than Remain / Yes, and in fact that’s how it played out in Scotland.
People who think it’s a bad idea to leave a successful political union are quite consistent.
The more economically literate wing of the SNP has calculated that the only shot at a relatively functional “independent” Scotland is inside the EU, and so they instructed their voters accordingly. Even so, a third of them voted leave, presumably the ones who actually believe in independence, come what may.
Bottom line: nobody really knows how Remainy Scotland actually is because the EU ref was fought entirely in the shadow of the more existential referendum of 2014.
The extent to which May is a not so intelligent pragmatist or is a foolish ideologue is not at all clear cut. In many ways she is author of her own and he country’s difficulties.
I have written about it here: https://liberaldemocratsluxembourg.wordpress.com/2018/11/18/the-follies-of-may-while-micawber-becomes-macabre/
Nonetheless it is very much the case that many of the Conservatives are anything but conservative and that those who would welcome a Maoist scorched earth policy have hitched themselves to, and in some ways have taken over a weakening party base have little in common with the party of old. Although May is a lousy leader, who would look terrible up against any previous Labour leader, she does seem to have a foot in both camps.
Nick –
“Brexit has always been an existential threat to the Union – and behind the scenes, most Brexiteers fully own up to this.” Really? That notion credits EU membership with a magical pulling power on ordinary voters over and above their concerns about the real issues like the state of the NHS, education, housing etc., etc. I don’t think so.