Feeding the Dragon: Guards! Guards! and Brexit

For a book published 31 years ago, "Guards! Guards!" by Sir Terry Pratchett has a lot to tell us about Brexit. I started reading it for light relief from the news; it didn't entirely work, but did give me a new perspective.

(Minor spoilers follow, but as noted, it's been 31 years.)

I hadn't reread GG for at least a decade, and what struck me this time is how angry it is. I don't mean that as a bad thing. Beneath all the daft puns and jokes (which are extremely funny), is a deep and righteous anger at the petty evil of humanity.

Ltoinel, CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

In Which I Select The Least Awful Conservative Leadership Candidate

The British Conservative Party is having the leadership contest for which it has long yearned.

Inspired by John Scalzi's posts on the 2016 and 2012 US Republican candidates, I am ranking the contenders from most to least terrible.

Rogues' gallery. Image source: BBC

Jumping The Queue And Other Lies

Theresa May, who brought us the hostile environment, the "citizens of nowhere" speech, and the Windrush deportations, has struck again. This time, trying to sell her embattled Brexit deal to the public, she has said it will stop EU citizens from "jumping the queue" ahead of "engineers from Sydney or software developers from Delhi".

This is offensive nonsense. There is no queue; EU citizens have exercised a right of free movement guaranteed by international treaty. But it's revealing of the aims and likely outcome of Brexit.

Theresa May. Source: The Independent/Reuters

What does May mean by this phrase? Of course, some of it is tribal signalling, almost beneath the level of spoken language. "Britain good, Europe bad" is the crude subtext. For this purpose, she might as well be flinging her own feces at a European flag. But there's something more interesting going on here.

What Is This I Cannot Even

Reading the news seemed a harmless habit, even virtuous; but that was before the world went wrong.

I miss the old days, when we could be concerned about a stained blue dress or a guy eating a bacon sandwich. Paying attention to current affairs is becoming too much to stomach.

Blogging here has been light for a while, and nonexistent for a month. That's partly because I'm still settling into my new life in Toronto. Maybe some of it is blog fatigue, after four years of posting on a weekly basis. But mostly it's just... how do you react to absolute and total madness?

Data Security: Just Read The Instructions

Basic internet security isn't that hard, but people who should know better still contrive to foul it up.

Image: Blue Devil Hub / Creative Commons

I'm a professional software developer with some grounding in the mathematics of cryptography, but not an Internet security expert. In this context, I don't need to be. I know wretched carelessness when I see it.

This Is Who They Are

I thought I was numb to hearing about acts of cruelty by the UK immigration authorites. I was wrong.

Two cases this week gave me a sick, hollow feeling in the pit of my stomach.

• Julie Bolitho's husband Vikram was deported from the UK, not because of any error on their part; not because they had fallen foul of the complex and arbitrary immigration rules; but because the Home Office had broken its own regulations and refused to back down from the error.
• Leah Waterman is raising two young children, and caring for her husband Simon, who was severely disabled by a stroke. The Home Office has deported her, saying that Simon must act as sole carer to the children, even though he suffers from hours-long seizures and is unable to speak or write.

In a horrible way, these are the lucky ones. They have chosen to fight, can afford legal representation, and are articulate enough to get their stories into the media. Others must be simply going, silently; they have much to contribute to the UK, but are being thrown out for no good reason.

"What kind of man are you?"
--- Dave Brewster, The Man Who Wasn't There (2001)

Joining the Choir Invisible

The British government has pledged that if any petition on its official website receives more than 100,000 signatures, it will merit a formal response from the government and a debate in Parliament.

Going to meet its maker?
Source: Wikimedia Commons

A petition requesting a second referendum on the terms of Brexit has reached that threshold. The Parliamentary debate has yet to be scheduled, but it has received a response from the recently created Department for Exiting the European Union. It is worth quoting in full, as a window into the government's rather flaky state of mind:

He shall rise and on the surface die

I started to write a longer and more serious piece on our post-election chaos, but the weather was nice so I went outside in the daylight instead. Maybe next week.

I must admit, I also lacked motivation. There are only so many ways to say we are led by a crew of complete and utter nitwits; and Theresa May is the worst of the lot, perhaps even eclipsing her predecessor David Cameron.

Shortly before the 1997 election, Tony Blair and New Labour had a gigantic lead in the polls. The late Roy Jenkins compared Blair to a man carrying a priceless antique vase across a highly polished floor, terrified that one slip could smash his hopes into a million pieces.

Theresa May, then, is the hapless individual who tripped over an untied shoelace and shattered a couple of Qing Dynasty vases in the Fitzwilliam Museum.

Cameron had no plan for losing his European referendum. May had no plan for losing the Conservative majority in her snap election. Nobody has any plan for how to manage Brexit without making us all substantially poorer. Oopsy daisy, where did all these bits of porcelain come from?

(Some NSFW language below the fold, if anyone is concerned about such things.)

The Kraken. Source: Medievalists.net

UK Election Explained for Americans and Other Aliens

By request, I am attempting to explain the 2017 UK election to Americans and others unfamiliar with the weirdness of British politics. This is a high-speed tour of:

• How British elections work;
• Why this election happened in the first place;
• Why it turned out as it did;
• What the results mean.

The UK has an archaic, complicated and illogical system of government, so what follows has been drastically simplified. I've tried to give a balanced view, steering clear of partisan bias, but other opinions are available.

The Palace of Westminster, home of the UK Parliament.

The Good, the Ugly, and the Astoundingly Bad

Thoughts on the major UK-wide parties, as we enter the final days of the campaign:

Liberal Democrats

I am voting Liberal Democrat. My reasons for backing them in 2015 still stand. I agree with their principles, more so than any other party. Their candidate, Julian Huppert, was an exemplary MP for Cambridge from 2010-15 and I would be happy to see him return to Parliament.

The shadow of Brexit hangs over everything now. I believe it is a dreadful mistake. The LibDems promise a referendum to allow us to reverse it.

I encourage anyone in a constituency with a viable Liberal Democrat candidate to support them. More Liberal Democrats in Parliament would provide a badly needed voice in support of human rights; accountable government; and international cooperation, including but not limited to the European Union.

Before A Fall

Labour is gaining ground in the polls. I'll admit it: I did not expect this.

Some perspective is in order. The Tories still enjoy a lead outside the margin of error, in every single poll taken so far. Let's look at the last five polls, released between 27 May and 1 June. The Conservative lead varies from +12 (ICM, 29 May) to +3 (YouGov, 31 May). Taking the mean of these five, we have Con 43.4, Lab 35.6, LibDem 8.2, UKIP 4, for a Tory lead of +8. Plugging this into the UK Polling Report swingometer results in a Conservative majority of 46.

Conservative Central Office. Displeased at recent developments, but still planning for victory.

Twenty-five months ago, David Cameron would have given his left testicle for these polling numbers. The boost in Labour support won't necessarily hold up; and it appears to be driven by younger voters, who may or may not turn out on election day.

That said, this election was widely expected to be a walkover for the Tories, with excitable talk of a landslide of 150 seats or more. Expectations were driven so high that Theresa May could win a majority of 40 or 50 seats, the best Conservative result in 30 years, and it would still feel like something of a defeat.

How has this happened?

Belief and the Supervillain

Conspiracy theories can be comforting, to bloggers and heads of government alike.

If a shadowy cabal of supervillains is responsible for wars, terrorist attacks and economic recessions, then it's scary, but also kind of cool. It provides reassurance that at least someone is in charge. If you can divine the motives of the grand conspiracy, you might be able to oppose it or at least stay out of its way.

Our Prime Minister, looking particularly villainous.
Image source: Buzzfeed

The Useless and the Cruel

This is an extraordinary election. On the one hand, we have cruel but competent Tories; on the other, well-meaning and inept Labour. The Tories are not widely loved, but it's unclear if Labour could even function as a government.

A recent column by George Monbiot acknowledges Labour is incompetent, but claims it doesn't really matter:

I would love to elect a government led by someone both competent and humane, but this option will not be on the ballot paper. The choice today is between brutal efficiency in pursuit of a disastrous agenda, and gentle inefficiency in pursuit of a better world.

Monbiot is wrong. To see why, let us consider the word "humane".

In order to be humane, it is not enough to have good intentions. If I sit around thinking nice thoughts while my child goes hungry, that is not humane behaviour. Being truly humane requires action and hard work.

Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May.

Waiting for the Hammer to Fall

It is not surprising Theresa May has called a general election. She is likely to secure a crushing victory, such as very few Prime Ministers have done before her. For the rest of us, the news is not so good.

Image source: Wikimedia Commons

The Conservatives have a current majority of 16, based on a 6.5% lead over Labour in 2015 with a feeble 37% of the popular vote. Polls now give them a 20-point lead over Labour, and 44% of the vote, for a predicted majority of 134.

To put this in perspective, there were 19 general elections between 1945 and 2015. Only four of them had a government majority larger than 134: 1945 (Lab 146), 1983 (Con 144), 1997 (Lab 179), and 2001 (Lab 167). May is on course for a historic landslide.

Source: Electoral Calculus, polling from 11-18 April

I think this will be an awful result. The Conservatives are a mean party, in both senses of the word: Cruel and petty. Their expected victory will give them a free hand to victimise the poor, the sick, the disabled, and immigrants. As I've recently discussed, the Conservatives celebrate cruelty as a virtue; one they value above economic success. This does not bode well for their conduct of the Brexit process.

All the same, the early election has a certain democratic logic. The referendum result has instigated Brexit, but the ballot paper said nothing at all about what kind of Brexit we want. In theory, the general election gives us a chance to decide just that.

In practice, we are caught between multiple devils and the deep blue sea.

The Conservatives offer cruelty, but also decisiveness. They will not make many decisions I agree with; but I must admit, they are largely united, and capable of setting policy and carrying it out. They are able to function as a government. It's not clear that any other party can.

The Scottish National Party will keep their grip on Scotland. The more dysfunctional Westminster is, the more it bolsters their demand for a second independence referendum. I don't blame them -- they are perfectly clear that independence is their overriding priority -- but it means they are unlikely to take a constructive role in the government of the UK.

The Liberal Democrats are unequivocally opposed to a hard Brexit. For that alone, I would probably be willing to give them my vote. As it happens, I agree with them on most other issues too. I will gladly support them as I did in 2015. Their former MP Julian Huppert is standing again here in Cambridge; he has a good chance of winning, and I hope he does.

On a national scale, though, Liberal Democrat victories are likely to be no more than symbolic. They have been reduced to a mere nine MPs. If they triple or quadruple their representation, it would be very impressive; but it would do little to dent the expected Conservative majority, especially since many of their potential gains are at the expense of Labour or the SNP.

Even with Labour in disarray, and a clear contrast with the Tories on Brexit, the LibDems are stuck at 10% or so in the polls. I think there will be a hard ceiling on LibDem support, because they simply are not trusted. Voters have not forgotten their coalition with the Conservatives, and their broken promise on tuition fees. Maybe this is unfair, but politics is not a fair competition.

Comrades, we should be struggling together

As for Labour... well, I hardly know where to start.

Prime Minister Corbyn? Really? He's a woefully incompetent leader, and his party quite plainly can't agree on what day of the week it is. Less than a year ago, eighty percent of Corbyn's own MPs voted no confidence in his leadership, and his personal popularity is abysmal. In the latest YouGov poll, 50% think Theresa May would be the best Prime Minister, next to a pitiful 14% for Corbyn. "Don't know" is beating him by a factor of more than two to one.

Labour has published a list of ten pledges. They sound... nice. I mean, who isn't in favour of full employment, improved social care, and protection for the environment? But positive change does not come about solely from the power of good intentions. It requires both ruthless efficiency, and an ability to negotiate and compromise. That does not sound like today's Labour party.

If Labour really means to do this, it's the most ambitious programme for any incoming government since 1997, maybe since 1945. Blair and Attlee had united and fiercely disciplined parties, and landslide majorities in Parliament. Corbyn will have neither.

If by some miracle Labour wins a slender majority, I don't believe they are remotely capable of implementing their pledges. They might as well have promised to ban rain on bank holidays, for all the difference it makes. We would see a weak and divided government, flailing helplessly in the face of the slightest challenge. In some respects that might be preferable to the Tories, but it's hardly surprising most of the electorate doesn't see it that way.

The ten pledges are notable for their failure to mention Brexit. How will Labour handle the central issue of this election? I have no idea, and I strongly suspect the Labour party doesn't know either.

As for Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell trying to negotiate a comprehensive trade deal with the European Union... my mind is well and truly boggled. These are not detail-oriented people, and their preferred approach to capitalism is shouting angry slogans about it. Putting them in charge of complex, delicate, and vitally important international negotiations would be like putting a toddler at the controls of an aircraft. It's possible they would be even less suited to the task than Boris Johnson, which is really saying something.

It's a moot point anyway. Labour's chance of overcoming the Tory lead is so remote, it can only be seen through a powerful telescope. For practical purposes, we're waiting to see how large the Conservative majority will be.

It could be very large indeed. The Conservatives and their allies in the press will unleash a monstering of Corbyn such as we have never seen. His past record provides plenty of material to work with.

Labour's performance in 2015 was so poor, it doesn't have that far to fall. Its near-wipeout in Scotland entailed a 17% swing, which is unlikely to be replicated in England. It had 30% of the UK popular vote in 2015, and even in a worst-case scenario, it is likely to hang onto 20% or so.

That said, there are a lot of moving parts which can work to the detriment of Labour. Remain voters will switch to LibDems, Leave voters to UKIP or the Conservatives. Those disillusioned with Corbyn's leadership will vote for other parties or simply stay home. A great many seats could be handed to the Conservatives, even in the most unlikely places.

Current polling has Con 44, Lab 25, LD 10, UKIP 10. Let's try the Electoral Calculus swingometer with Con 48, Lab 20, LD 15, UKIP 5. This gives a Conservative majority of 216; an all-time record if we leave aside wartime coalitions, and all the more impressive with only one or two Tory seats in Scotland. Of course this is only a crude estimate, but the general point is clear.

I think the Labour party is rather looking forward to this election, because it will allow them to get on with their real objective of fighting each other.

Labour has observed an uneasy truce since last year's leadership contest, but internal grudges have not been forgotten or forgiven. After the expected defeat, moderates will blame Corbyn's incompetence, Corbynites will blame the MPs' disloyalty, and the party will once again plunge into civil war. Few outsiders will take much notice; and for good or ill, Theresa May will have almost total power to rule the UK as she sees fit.

Parliament: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

It's been an exciting week in the UK Parliament. Some MPs should be proud of their actions, others thoroughly ashamed. Herewith are some of the heroes, villains and victims.

The Brexit Strategy

Tony Blair. Image source: The Guardian

This week, Tony Blair called for supporters of the European Union to mobilise against Brexit:

[Blair] said those who believed in the EU "have to recognise we're the insurgents now ... We have to build the capability to mobilise and to organise. We have to prise apart the alliance which gave us Brexit."

He suggested that, given a general election or second referendum, the results of the referendum on 23 June could be reversed:

"If it becomes clear that this is either a deal that doesn't make it worth our while leaving, or alternatively a deal that's going to be so serious in its implications people may decide they don't want to go, there's got to be some way, either through Parliament, or an election, or possibly through another referendum, in which people express their view."

Blair does have a point. Brexit has not yet passed the point of no return, and it's increasingly clear that it is likely to do grievous harm to the UK economy. It would be prudent to put on the brakes, and reconsider whether we really have to do this.

The Not So Good Old Days

The Conservative MP Heather Wheeler has claimed on Twitter that the "British Empire" was the real winner at the Rio Olympics:

Now that's what I call winning!!! Well done Team GB & all our Commonwealth friends, now for the Trade Agreements.... pic.twitter.com/Qg9qkYxWHp

— Heather Wheeler MP (@HeatherWheeler) August 22, 2016

Honestly, Britain. You'd be a lot more fun at parties if, after your third drink, you didn't start mumbling about how awesome the Empire was.

This is what they call a teachable moment. As Empires go, the British one was relatively benign, but it was still an Empire. It was not a peaceful and voluntary alliance of nations; perhaps Wheeler is confusing the British Empire with the European Union. (She is staunchly opposed to the latter, but that's by the by.)

The Price of Schadenfreude

Thanks to Theresa May's "you broke it, you own it" approach to appointing ministers, Boris Johnson now represents Britain as our Foreign Secretary. Our new Prime Minister is displaying a hitherto unsuspected sense of humour.

Boris Johnson (left) and US Secretary of State John Kerry (right, trying not to laugh).
Source: QZ

As I said of Johnson a few weeks ago:

He doesn't want the responsibility of rebuilding British international policy from the ground up; where's the fun in that?

Johnson is about to find out. He has had an uncomfortable start to his time as Foreign Secretary. It turns out the rest of the world takes notice, when you insult and lie about them for fun and profit.

He now has a serious job, in which he must deal with serious people, who are not impressed by his naughty schoolboy act. For one of the least serious people in politics, it will not be a pleasant experience; but the status of the Foreign Office job is such that he couldn't turn it down. After his role in the Leave campaign, Johnson more than deserves his discomfort.

I can't help but enjoy the spectacle; in these times we must find amusement where we can.

I wonder how Johnson's tenure at the Foreign Office will play out. Here are some scenarios, in ascending order of plausibility:

• He gets a grip. Johnson is a spoiled, self-indulgent, overgrown child, but he is not stupid. It is possible he will commit himself sufficiently to become an adequate Foreign Secretary. Possible, but not likely.
• He resigns. To reverse Peter Mandelson's famous self-description, Johnson is a quitter, not a fighter. He might find or manufacture some reason to flounce out. What would hold him back? The perks and prestige of being Foreign Secretary, and the certainty of being consigned to a dull life on the back benches for the foreseeable future.
• He gets fired. May would do this only as a last resort, because she would then have a miffed Johnson with time on his hands to make trouble. She would need an iron-clad reason. Considering some of the things Johnson has already said, it would have to be egregious. Depressingly plausible; I only hope Johnson doesn't do too much damage in the process.
• He carries on as he is. The long-suffering diplomats at the Foreign Office try and smooth over the consequences of Johnson's blundering. Johnson remains in post until May feels secure enough to remove him; it could happen if she wins an election in her own right, but I think not before then.

Meanwhile, British foreign policy is the laughing stock of the world. This is unfortunate, since it faces greater challenges than at any time since the 1940s. It may be a sort of poetic justice for this multi-millionaire old Etonian; I only hope the rest of us do not pay too high a price.

Reality and Unreality

Two major news stories of the week are connected by a simple question: What is reality?

This may seem abstract, but it has a close bearing on both the Conservative leadership contest, and the Chilcot enquiry into the Iraq War.

Good riddance to Boris Johnson

I almost called this one in advance, but didn't follow my logic to its conclusion. Yesterday morning I wrote:

[Boris Johnson] doesn't want the responsibility of rebuilding British international policy from the ground up; where's the fun in that?

I assumed Johnson was too ambitious to give up on the prize. He would become Prime Minister, and leave the country in an even worse condition than he found it. As it turns out, he really doesn't want the responsibility. A couple of hours later, Johnson announced he would not stand for the Conservative leadership.

David Cameron and Boris Johnson are the two people most directly responsible for our present state of chaos. These former inmates of Eton, Oxford, and the Bullingdon Club behaved like the spoiled children they are, and treated British institutions like expendable playthings. They tried to use the referendum to manipulate the Conservative Party's internal factions, for their own personal gain. They wanted to show off by juggling flaming torches, and now they have set fire to the family home.

Their own country mansions are intact. They can retire in luxury, and watch as others try to put out the flames and rebuild.

Our next Prime Minister will be the winner of the Conservative leadership contest. The current favourite is Theresa May, but these contests have a way of surprising us. Few expected William Hague to win in 1997, or Iain Duncan Smith in 2001. Whoever succeeds will of course be a Tory, so is unlikely to have much in the way of compassion; but I can at least hope for a degree of competence and responsibility.

Cameron and Johnson can now scuttle away, to spend more time with their ill-deserved personal wealth. I expect they are too busy feeling sorry for themselves to spare a thought for the rest of us. Be gone, the pair of you, and know that our fury and contempt will follow you for the rest of your pathetic lives.