Photo Credits: ITV/PA
This article is about the second 7-party debate. Commentary on the third 7-party debate will come in part 3 of the series.
During the second 7-party debate, Labour and the Conservatives gained more of the limelight, not for the right reasons. Both were shouty and undignified, and the governing Conservatives were desperately trying to win the taxation argument in a bid to mitigate a catastrophic poll slump. This mostly involved scare-mongering about Labour’s tax plans. Labour was equally pugnacious, albeit on much better ground, as they are widely believed to be the prospective victors in July the 4th's general election. Amidst their bickering, both were exposed to attacks from the smaller parties. The SNP's Stephen Flynn quipped that it was like the House of Commons.
Talking over each other with little restraint, the two main parties' representatives were locked into ferocious attempts to discredit each other. The oft-reported conspiracy of silence between the two main parties on Brexit was fractured by a question from the public. Each representative was asked to quickly say whether they would rejoin the European Union (EU).
The SNP struck a defiantly pro-European chord in light of Scotland's overall "Remain" vote on EU membership in 2016. The Liberal Democrats expressed enthusiasm at the prospect but said that rejoining was not possible in the current political context. Plaid Cymru went further and proposed returning to the Single Market and the Customs Union. However, they stopped short of rejoining immediately. While Plaid Cymru believes in EU membership for Wales, they must respect the Welsh decision in the 2016 referendum. The Green Party said Yes, as an eventual goal rather than an immediate commitment. Labour, the Conservatives and Reform responded with a post-referendum No.
The pressure put on Labour and the Conservatives by the small parties did not diminish as the debate continued. Condemning the (professedly trustworthy and competent) Conservatives, the SNP stated that we could not tolerate one more day of their Westminster rule. Towards the end of the debate, they suggested another independence vote to rid Scotland of the Tories forever.
Equally cutting was the SNP’s criticism of Labour’s stance on Israel-Palestine. Flynn stressed how long it took for Labour to call for a ceasefire and asked Angela Rayner whether a future Labour government would halt arms sales to Israel. Rayner responded that they would review their commitments in line with international law.
In the list of upsets for Labour, none was more harrowing than the condemnation of their refusal to remove the two-child benefit cap. It was brought up within the context of a broader discussion on widespread poverty in Britain, and the precarious economic situation facing many families during the cost-of-living crisis. Plaid Cymru referred to Nigel Farage’s opposition to the two-child benefit cap as an embarrassment for Labour. Labour responded by mentioning the housing, employment and free school meals policies they have proposed to address poverty. They justified their benefits policy by saying that they could not take on unfunded spending commitments.
Regarding Farage and Reform UK, the default answer to every issue raised was the much harped-on-about “population crisis”. The constant reference to this led Farage to exclaim, directly to the audience, that large-scale immigration is “making us poorer”. This statement is based on his selective use of isolated pieces of economic data. Simple, scapegoat-heavy and divisive, it creates an enemy “other” figure on which to place the entirety of the blame for the cost-of-living crisis and the general state of the economy, ignoring the complexities and government policy decisions at hand.
Increased levels of in-work poverty and serious inadequacies in public services (such as healthcare) have led to widespread migrant-and-refugee-scapegoating as people in politics search for a simple explanation that absolves them of any responsibility for these problems. Farage, leading his self-styled “People’s Revolt”, criticised the Conservatives on their failure to meet their stated goal of cutting net migration.
Farage had an outsized political role in shaping, and gleefully inhabiting, a vast space of consensus on migration after Brexit. He is a small-party protagonist, with his commitment to net-zero migration being part of the increased pressure on the two main parties. The Conservatives have chosen to quantify their anti-immigration rhetoric numerically. Focusing on reducing the supply of visas, they have proposed a cap on migration numbers. Labour have conformed differently, seeking to attract voters by prioritising hiring British workers. This will cut the demand for those from abroad.
This political context suits Farage, outside the corridors of power. Brexit (accepted as done by the two main parties and therefore beyond their criticism) is the only thing with legislative consequences that he can be held responsible for, and even then, he did not have parliamentary responsibility for its implementation. The empty promises of the Brexit campaign and the cuts and damages to UK public services are, with varying levels of accuracy, not attributed to him. On the populist right, he holds a position which is often attributed to the radical left: that of the ideological purist unscarred by the compromises that come with genuine governmental power.
Embracing this distinction, Farage went on to say something similar to what the Green Party representative Carla Denyer said in the first debate: Labour and the Conservatives are closely aligned. The self-proclaimed “leader of the opposition” boasted about Reform UK’s slight lead over the Tories in the opinion polls (at the time of the debate). He also called for more referendums in British politics.
At the end of the debate, Farage claimed that Labour and the post-Coalition Liberal Democrats were closely aligned and that the divided Tories were not credible (in their current form). He is pitting his personal brand of right-wing populism as the main alternative to Labour after their predicted electoral victory.
Returning to the other parties, the Scottish and Welsh nationalists continued to put pressure on Labour and the Conservatives (Plaid Cymru criticising their education policies). The Green Party joined them with their alternative tone and policy suggestions. They proposed significantly higher investment in public services and an increase to the top rate of tax. This diverges from the economic orthodoxy upheld by both Labour and the Conservatives.
Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats worked to rebuild their credibility after the coalition. They championed popular policies while attacking the Conservatives. They explained their plan to revive a collapsing NHS. They seriously criticised Conservative public sector policy. Their proposals have all the necessary properties needed to regain trust with the public. They will have to wait and see if broken promises will be forgiven.
This debate created political groupings through direct and simple questions the representatives were compelled to answer. Asked about whether net migration was too high, only the nationalist parties and the Greens did not raise their hands. Flynn, representing the SNP, decried what he termed the Westminster consensus on immigration. The Liberal Democrats were the only hand-raising party to respond to this comment with positive statements about migrants. They also mentioned the need for investment in neglected public services, and simply stated that migrant numbers were due to come down.
The Greens touched on a general lack of faith in politics and presented an alternative vision for the country. With the small parties openly predicting a Labour victory (in contrast to the stern and tight-lipped Conservatives and the careful and strategic Labour Party), the Green Party’s statement to the public was intriguing. After criticising the First-Past-the-Post electoral system, they told voters to choose real change.
A search for genuine choice balanced against tactical considerations will likely ensue.
Comentarios