4 ms·

A game played by Cameron expecting a coalition government and bugger all chance of needing to call a referendum. Probably going to hasten Scots secession too.

A game played by Cameron expecting a coalition government and bugger all chance of needing to call a referendum. Probably going to hasten Scots secession too. A game Cameron wasn't very good at. He now gets the place in history he deserves. Shame everyone outside Westminster suffers though.

ptaipale 10y ago
I don't think you can blame it on just a game by Cameron. There definitely was a strong movement among the voters that wanted the Brexit referendum to take place. You know, in fact so strong that Brexit got a majority of votes.
- anexprogrammer 10y ago
  No? Let's look how we got here. He boxed himself into a stupid position by betting all on renegotiating UK's place then bringing home none of the things that mattered to their party policies, finishing by tellng the country what a great job he'd done. It was a play to diffuse UKIP and the EU sceptic segment of the party which has been a varying problem for decades. Certainly since Maastricht almost split the party. Referendum wasn't necessary, there was no new treaty, no change in our terms. That's when a referendum may make sense, like fter Lisbon or Maastricht perhaps. Wilson gave us the 1975 referendum on the EEC (Britain's first referendum). That was called because euro sceptics were threatening to split the Labour party. Plus ça change. The 75 campaign had nearly everyone for remain. Tony Benn and Enoch Powell were the main proponents of out - for remarkably similar reasons. Thatcher campaigned hard for remain! All long before anyone aside from Heath and a few FO wonks knew anything about ever closer union and so on, it's just the Common Market. As we've learned since, Heath knew full well what he signed up to. Post Maastricht when realisation of union hit, UKIP and Tory Euro skeptics became more visible, and started to lead to some vote fragmentation. Some of the calls for referendum were actually audible now, and as we went through the Blair years we learned new government by pager and soundbite. This fed the rise of LibDems, Greens and UKIP (probably SNP too), as the electorate became disillusioned with media centric government. Of course many were attracted to the various policies, but a time of plummeting turnouts, and politicians no one trusts, it doesn't matter who you vote for, especially with our electoral system. Remarkably we end up with our only coalition since the war. In an age of government by ideology and Overton Windows, even on scientific and factual matters, the voters wanting a referendum was irrelevant, unless there's rioting in the streets. They sure as heck didn't listen. After Brexit both Johnson and Gove looked ashen. Neither believed they'd win. They had no clue what next. A depressing amount of Brexit voters seemed to regret the morning after or just wanted to make an anti-govt protest. A game good sir. Very badly played as it goes. Just another knee jerk idea so beloved of Cameron. No wonder May made Boris Foreign Secretary - "you broke it, you bloody fix it".
  - ptaipale 10y ago
    So it's just a "bad play of game" if a politician allows a referendum about something where a very large part, likely a majority, of the population wants a referendum? This looks to me a bit contemptuous towards the voters. And I think that contempt, quite visible in the campaign at least in British media, is precisely what turned the tide in the referendum.
    - anexprogrammer 10y ago
      > So it's just a "bad play of game" if a politician allows a referendum Yes > very large part, likely a majority, of the population wants a referendum Not true. Noticable minority > This looks to me a bit contemptuous towards the voters. Politics since 1997. Hence the ever growing disconnect. Tory majority government elected by 22.5% of the electorate - the lowest figure ever. Of course it's contemptuous.
      - ptaipale 10y ago
        > Tory majority government elected by 22.5% of the electorate - the lowest figure ever. I don't know how you came up with that number. Labour won a majority in 2005 with 35.2 % of votes, in an election with 61.4 % turnout. That's 21.6 % of the electorate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2005 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_electio... In 2015, Conservatives got 36.9 % of a 66.4 % turnout. That's 24.5 % of electorate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2015 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_electio...

ptaipale 10y ago

I don't think you can blame it on just a game by Cameron. There definitely was a strong movement among the voters that wanted the Brexit referendum to take place. You know, in fact so strong that Brexit got a majority of votes.

anexprogrammer 10y ago
No? Let's look how we got here. He boxed himself into a stupid position by betting all on renegotiating UK's place then bringing home none of the things that mattered to their party policies, finishing by tellng the country what a great job he'd done. It was a play to diffuse UKIP and the EU sceptic segment of the party which has been a varying problem for decades. Certainly since Maastricht almost split the party. Referendum wasn't necessary, there was no new treaty, no change in our terms. That's when a referendum may make sense, like fter Lisbon or Maastricht perhaps. Wilson gave us the 1975 referendum on the EEC (Britain's first referendum). That was called because euro sceptics were threatening to split the Labour party. Plus ça change. The 75 campaign had nearly everyone for remain. Tony Benn and Enoch Powell were the main proponents of out - for remarkably similar reasons. Thatcher campaigned hard for remain! All long before anyone aside from Heath and a few FO wonks knew anything about ever closer union and so on, it's just the Common Market. As we've learned since, Heath knew full well what he signed up to. Post Maastricht when realisation of union hit, UKIP and Tory Euro skeptics became more visible, and started to lead to some vote fragmentation. Some of the calls for referendum were actually audible now, and as we went through the Blair years we learned new government by pager and soundbite. This fed the rise of LibDems, Greens and UKIP (probably SNP too), as the electorate became disillusioned with media centric government. Of course many were attracted to the various policies, but a time of plummeting turnouts, and politicians no one trusts, it doesn't matter who you vote for, especially with our electoral system. Remarkably we end up with our only coalition since the war. In an age of government by ideology and Overton Windows, even on scientific and factual matters, the voters wanting a referendum was irrelevant, unless there's rioting in the streets. They sure as heck didn't listen. After Brexit both Johnson and Gove looked ashen. Neither believed they'd win. They had no clue what next. A depressing amount of Brexit voters seemed to regret the morning after or just wanted to make an anti-govt protest. A game good sir. Very badly played as it goes. Just another knee jerk idea so beloved of Cameron. No wonder May made Boris Foreign Secretary - "you broke it, you bloody fix it".
- ptaipale 10y ago
  So it's just a "bad play of game" if a politician allows a referendum about something where a very large part, likely a majority, of the population wants a referendum? This looks to me a bit contemptuous towards the voters. And I think that contempt, quite visible in the campaign at least in British media, is precisely what turned the tide in the referendum.
  - anexprogrammer 10y ago
    > So it's just a "bad play of game" if a politician allows a referendum Yes > very large part, likely a majority, of the population wants a referendum Not true. Noticable minority > This looks to me a bit contemptuous towards the voters. Politics since 1997. Hence the ever growing disconnect. Tory majority government elected by 22.5% of the electorate - the lowest figure ever. Of course it's contemptuous.
    - ptaipale 10y ago
      > Tory majority government elected by 22.5% of the electorate - the lowest figure ever. I don't know how you came up with that number. Labour won a majority in 2005 with 35.2 % of votes, in an election with 61.4 % turnout. That's 21.6 % of the electorate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2005 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_electio... In 2015, Conservatives got 36.9 % of a 66.4 % turnout. That's 24.5 % of electorate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2015 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_electio...