Why did the 2017 and 2019 general elections produce two starkly different results? Both took place in the shadow of the EU referendum, both times Labour put up Jeremy Corbyn as its candidate for prime minister, and even when the Tories switched from Theresa May to Boris Johnson, they in fact turned to a *less* popular leader.
There are two perfectly cogent explanations. First, by 2019 Corbyn’s ratings had fallen so far that Johnson still enjoyed a considerable lead on ‘most capable PM’. Second is the idiosyncrasies of first-past-the-post: May made impressive strides in Red Wall seats in 2017, she just couldn’t quite win enough of them. Johnson did.
Yet these explanations pale into insignificance compared with the one factor we all take for granted at this point: 2019 was a ‘Brexit election’, whereas 2017 was not. And that is because first time around, both Labour and the Tories were pro-Brexit parties.
Yet two years later, the shadow Brexit secretary (whatever happened to him?) had dragged Labour to a second referendum position. The result was that one-third of voters who backed Leave in 2016 and then Labour in 2017 voted Conservative in 2019. Having appeared to lance the Brexit boil, Labour proceeded to reinfect itself.
Believe it or not, this is a newsletter about Nigel Farage and NatWest, whose chief executive resigned late last night after acknowledging she made a “serious error of judgment” in discussing Farage’s relationship with Coutts, owned by NatWest Group, with a BBC journalist.
In the last few days we’ve heard plenty from ministers, commentators and of course Farage himself. One person largely conspicuous by his absence is Keir Starmer – because he has nothing to say except ‘I told you so’.
2024 is not going to be a Brexit election. But that is not solely due to the passage of time and certainly isn’t a reflection on how well the thing has gone. It’s not even because of Covid, Russia or the cost of living crisis, though clearly these have impacted British life in a major way. It is because of a calculation by the opposition leader and his team.
Labour has returned to its 2017 position of essentially mirroring the Tories on Brexit. And while there may be bigger smiles and firmer handshakes were a prime minister Starmer to meet with Ursula von der Leyen or Olaf Scholz, a Labour government would not take Britain back into the EU or the single market.
The Farage/NatWest affair – with the population again sorting into its Leave/Remain tendencies – serves as a helpful reminder that the Brexit divisions, while far less present than a few years ago, are still with us, only a little below the surface. And so despite Brexit’s waning popularity, the issue still has the power to ‘2019 up’ the 2024 election. To that extent, Farage has done Starmer a favour.
In the comment pages, Financial Editor Simon English says many male bankers have leaked worse than NatWest’s Alison Rose. Ayesha Hazarika, who’s swapped Sicily for Orkney, wonders whether the summer holiday in the Med can survive. While Teo van den Broeke explains why Sir Mick Jagger is a trailblazing queer icon.
And finally, what’s so good about a Coutts account anyway? Isolde Walters lays out the benefits of the exclusive credit card.
