{"id":265040,"date":"2017-04-18T20:40:24","date_gmt":"2017-04-19T00:40:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/issues\/theresa-mays-shrewd-election-bid\/"},"modified":"2025-10-07T21:34:36","modified_gmt":"2025-10-08T01:34:36","slug":"theresa-mays-shrewd-election-bid","status":"publish","type":"issues","link":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2017\/04\/theresa-mays-shrewd-election-bid\/","title":{"rendered":"Theresa May\u2019s shrewd election bid"},"content":{"rendered":"

After repeatedly ruling out a snap election, this morning British Prime Minister Theresa May announced she will ask Parliament to trigger an election, to be held on June 8. (Under the Fixed Term Elections Act<\/em>, the House of Commons now holds the prerogative to call elections, requiring a two-thirds majority of MPs to dissolve the House).<\/p>\n

This is a remarkable and bold move on May\u2019s part, and also a politically astute one. And it is a decision, like so many affecting the UK political landscape recently, driven largely by internal Conservative party divisions.<\/p>\n

UK political history<\/strong><\/p>\n

Let\u2019s back up, because there are two historical examples that underlie May\u2019s decision. The first is the 1974 \u201cWho Governs\u201d election. Short story is, against a backdrop of union militancy, Conservative prime minister Ted Heath called a snap election, framing it as a battle between unions and government. That bold move not only backfired for Heath (the election produced the first hung Parliament since 1929 and Heath was unable to form a coalition government, leaving Labour leader Harold Wilson to form a minority government), but the election also set in motion the destruction of the two-party postwar consensus.<\/p>\n

The second example is in the more recent past, with PM Gordon Brown\u2019s failure to call a snap election after taking over from Tony Blair. Like May, Brown had not fought a general election as the head of his party, but had succeeded a sitting PM. While perfectly legitimate in parliamentary systems (we elect MPs, not PMs), there is always a pressure to face the voters as leader and secure a personal mandate. Brown had a very strong chance to do this in autumn 2007, months after succeeding Blair as leader of the Labour Party and prime minister. The polls were good, and although Brown was unknown as PM, he had a strong record as chancellor. But, in popular parlance, Brown bottled it with his failure to call a snap election. The 2008 recession hit hard, and the opposition framed the narrative around him before he was able to do it himself. The rest is history.<\/p>\n

Theresa May is a canny, shrewd politician. She will take serious lessons from these cases. Indeed, in asking Parliament for an election, she\u2019s already heeded the Brown example.<\/p>\n

The Tories and Europe<\/strong><\/p>\n

Now, let\u2019s do a quick history class on the Conservatives and Europe. Membership in some version of a European union has been the single most divisive issue in postwar history of the Conservative Party. It has, to varying degrees, plagued every single leader. It was a Conservative PM, Harold MacMillan, who first applied for European membership in 1961, and his party was fairly pro-European through the 1960s and 1970s. Thatcher originally supported the European project, but it came to haunt her. She referred to European-supporting moderates in her own cabinet as \u201cthe wets,\u201d and this group of MPs brought about her downfall. Conservative PM John Major branded Eurosceptic MPs in his own party \u201cthe bastards.\u201d<\/p>\n

It was primarily the threat from the anti-EU flank of his own party that led David Cameron to promise a Brexit referendum. All the subsequent positioning \u2014 with Boris Johnson campaigning for Leave, despite likely being in the Remain camp; Cameron campaigning for Remain, while probably personally being a Leave supporter; and Theresa May, although decidedly absent and \u00a0notionally Remain, personally being a strong Leave supporter \u2014 was driven by internal party conflicts and leadership ambitions.<\/p>\n

This proud history continues today.<\/p>\n

Election 2017<\/strong><\/p>\n

May\u2019s statement outside Number 10 on Tuesday focused on the need for stable leadership, as Britain plots a Brexit course. This will be her \u201cwho governs\u201d election. It is nice messaging, but its a red herring. The main reasons for this election were unsaid. So, let\u2019s say them here.<\/p>\n