Jane Barlow/PA Wire/PA Images. All rights reserved. DiEM25UK with DiEM25 as a whole is working out its stance on the forthcoming UK elections. See a similar debate here that took place regarding the French elections. Against a background of a first-past-the-post electoral system, together with various suggestions for tactical voting and progressive alliances to prevent a May/Dacre victory at the ballot box, here is an early contribution to the discussion. It is a personal view.
With the benefit of hindsight, the sudden announcement of a rather imminent general election should not have come as a surprise, given the current state of affairs at the UK-wide and European level. In proposing a stance that DiEM25 UK should adopt as an organisation, I have tried to take into account as many facets of the issue as my currently rather feeble mind can contain. Among them, it is worth noting that the announcement has taken place less than a month after the official activation of the separation process, while government officials have been complaining about the inadequacy of the specified duration of this process. It is also worth noting that the climate in the EU is not particularly conducive to the establishment and development of progressive, reformist ideas (to put it mildly).
The expectations for the negotiation that appear to be prevalent in UK public opinion are quite high. People, on average, seem to be expecting at the very least an improvement in their economic conditions, accompanied by a substantial reduction in total net immigration. Given the distribution of power and leverage in the negotiation setting, I consider it unlikely that the UK can achieve an economically non-damaging separation without major concessions linked to the immigration of EU nationals. This view may be wrong. However, if it is at all accurate, the current government is unlikely to be unaware of this. The announcement of a general election can be seen as supportive to this argument: had they expected that a favourable outcome is highly likely, they would simply have ‘gone for it’.
