This week's Richmond Park by-election, prompted by Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith resigning in protest over Heathrow expansion, was a minor earthquake. After dropping over 23% in Richmond back at the 2015 General Election, the Liberal Democrats managed to gain Richmond Park from Goldsmith, who was standing as an independant, with a 21.7% swing. In historic terms, that swing is one of the highest ever. Putting aside the stastics, what does this Liberal gain in leafy, surburban Richmond mean? Just a blip for the Lib Dems, slowly recovering from a seemingly incurable massacre? Or a start of a true liberal, remain revolt against the plans (or lack of them!) for the UK's depature from the EU?
From what I've read, the Richmond Park by-election was fought on 3 issues: Heathrow expansion, Brexit & a referendum on Zac Goldsmith's 6 years as an MP. I intend to come to each in turn. Firstly, Heathrow expansion. All candidates standing were against a 3rd runway at Heathrow, which would seriously affect the noise and air pollution of Richmond Park. I gather that many voters were against expansion, so being in favour would be neither wise or a vote winner for candidates. Therefore, on the Heathrow issue, no candidate could really stand out and disagree with another, as they all took the same view. Heathrow was the start of the Liberal Democrats' by-election campaign, but this slowly drifted (or shall I say flew) off the radar. The most important issue of a generation, affecting us for years' to come - Brexit. Not the odd sounding cereal, as some commentators refer to the phrase as, but Britain, after 40 years, departing from the European Union. Both our neogotiations and future outside remain unclear, leading to instability and fear. As a party, the Liberal Democrats have been seen as the most pro-EU for many years. In Richmond Park, nearly 70% of voters backed remain, so this already gave the Lib Dems a headstart. Most would be angry, disapointed and unclear about what the result would mean for Britain, giving the Lib Dems something to capatilize on, with the candidate promising to vote against Article 50 if elected. As the MP for Richmond Park since 2010, Goldsmith seemed liked and popular within the community. Campaigning hard on local issues, he increased his 2010 majority of 4,000 to over 19,000 in 2015 - the highest majority increase in that election. Given that neither UKIP nor the Conservatives were fielding a candidate against him, given there was so much opposition to Heathrow, given he was seen as a popular figure, what went so wrong? Zac Goldsmith was a staunch Brexiter, disagreeing with the majority of constituenents on this matter. Given that he would have almost certainly voted for Article 50 in Parliament, this went against him with many voters clearly wanting to remain. His London mayoral campiagn earlier this year was controverisal, being seen as racist towards the current mayor, Sadiq Khan. This may have damaged his reputation, perhaps being perceived as saying anything to get a vote. So, does the Liberal Democrats winning really change anything? In terms of House of Commons votes, not particulary. The Liberal Democrats still only have 9 seats, and if the Conservatives and Labour both vote for Article 50, it will be envoked whatever. However, the Government's already small majority has further decreased, meaning some opposition from rebel backbenchers could stop various legislation. In terms of by-elections, council elections, elections in general, I think all parties will take nothing for granted and campaign as much as possible, even in supposedly safe seats. The future for remain MPs in seats that voted leave is insecure and potentially catastrophic, given the mighty swings. I believe, slowly but surely, the Liberal Democrats will revive and have double figure Parliamentary seats. It's also clear that whatever complacency previously existed in politics - that has gone, forever.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Author:Noah enjoys writing a blog and drinking tea Archives
September 2022
Categories
All
|