Will a general election really break the Brexit deadlock?

Alexandra Hill examines possible outcomes of the upcoming December election.

Three-and-a-half years of talking about the B-Word has undoubtedly taken its toll on the general public. It has culminated in a multitude of feelings, from despair or anger to just pure apathy at the whole dismal, seemingly-stagnant state of affairs. However, what does seem to unite us all, Leave or Remain, angry or apathetic, is Brexit fatigue – an epidemic across the UK, with unfortunately no known cure.

The cure most certainly does not seem to be a general election, but this is what awaits us. To add further insult to injury, the timing of said election will coincide with work Christmas parties, school nativity plays, and the Christmas shopping conquest. In fact, it seems highly ironic that a time when we are all supposed to build bridges, find common ground, and put our differences aside, has become hijacked by such a divisive event.

Nevertheless, while it is easy to be cynical about the election on 12th December, it seems to me to be the most viable means to resolve the Brexit deadlock.

Since voting to leave the European Union on 23rd June, MPs have, on three separate occasions, voted down a withdrawal agreement negotiated by Mrs May, and have since voted again on the timetabling of Johnson’s modestly different withdrawal agreement, which would have seen us leave the EU on 31st October. As a result of this failure to achieve any kind of consensus, the date of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU has been extended four times. The most recent extension we’ve seen took us until 31st January 2020, a move that Mr Johnson was forced into requesting under the Benn Act. After the PM’s “do or die” promises over Brexit and his statement that he’d rather be “dead in a ditch” than request an extension, this was undoubtedly humiliating for him.

In typical Boris fashion, the PM has been quick to lay the blame for this extension on the so-called “dead” parliament who voted against his timetabling proposals. Such a view of the dysfunctionality of Parliament is what forms the rationale for this election, articulated in the PM’s own words as giving the public a “choice” over the future of Brexit and the country as a whole.

Unfortunately, the other needs of the country will be something of an afterthought in this election, to the great anguish of the population and politicians alike. The B-Word is consistently ranked as the public’s greatest priority – a YouGov poll in October, asking respondents what they perceived to be the most important issue facing the country, returned “Britain leaving the EU” at 70%. 

An election will give the public a choice over Brexit, and a far less arbitrary one than that which could be offered in a referendum-type arrangement, with an easy yes or no response. Evidently, Brexit is a complex issue, with several viable causes of action that can be taken beyond simply ‘Leave’ or ‘Remain’. In preparing their respective manifestos, each party can propose their policy towards Brexit, defining it more precisely than in the referendum or the 2017 election. The likely result of this will be the Conservatives proposing Mr Johnson’s transition agreement alongside ambitions of a future free trade agreement with the EU, Labour putting forward the policy of renegotiating the transition agreement with the aim of entering a customs agreement with the European Union, and the Lib Dems ditching Brexit entirely. Inevitably, given the emergence of the Brexit Party, we can expect them to offer the electorate a Brexit policy antonymous with the Lib Dem policy of a ‘clean-break’ Brexit stance. 

The array of options put forward in an election give the public a clear choice about the kind of Brexit (if any) they want to be enacted by the policies, which will hopefully be proposed by the respective parties. 

If there is a majority election outcome, the winning party will have an unambiguous mandate to action their Brexit policy. However, difficulty could arise if a hung parliament is the result of the election. This situation could potentially be avoided through “alliances” or informal election pacts between parties with relatively comparable Brexit policies, whereby one party decides not to stand a candidate in a marginal constituency in order to not dilute the vote of their “allied” party (as we’ve seen with the new alliance between the Lib Dems, Greens, and Plaid Cymru). The Conservatives and Brexit party could also unite as a means to secure a Leave majority; or with other unambiguously remain parties, such as the SNP and Lib-Dems, who could potentially be kingmakers in the event of a hung parliament, and therefore use their seats to soften or reverse Brexit. 

While an election is clearly not a perfect solution, and its Brexit-centric focus will exasperate those of us who want to discuss other issues like education, health, or the environment, it is arguably the best mechanism to decide which Brexit policy wins the most public support.

Pi Opinion content does not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial team, Pi Media society, Students’ Union UCL or University College London. We aim to publish opinions from across the student body - if you read anything you would like to respond to, get in touch via email.