CommentPlus: pick of the papers

The ten must-read pieces from this morning’s papers.

1. Are these hardships necessary? (Financial Times)

Samuel Brittan argues that the real argument should be about whether we need unparalleled fiscal austerity or not. All is not lost as long as the US and China stick to quasi-Keynesian policies.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

2. This Budget is the big test (Guardian)

The Labour leadership candidate David Miliband says his party must take on the Budget with principle and passion to show that it has learned the right lessons from the crisis.

3. After Shannon, what about the other 304,000? (Times)

There are 304,000 children suffering low-level neglect, says Camilla Cavendish. It's impossible to expect social workers alone to keep bad parents on the straight and narrow.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

4. The dealing room had it coming (Independent)

Andreas Whittam Smith discusses financial reform. Banks have become huge organisations engaged in scores of different activities, some of them more suitable for gamblers than for sober citizens.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

5. Liberal Democrats should prepare for a bumpy ride (Guardian)

Reading the Lib Dem soul is a tricky business, says John Harris, but there is dissent in the ranks, as most of the people at the top subscribe to a politics very different from that of the party mainstream.

6. West must offer Turkey a proper seat (Financial Times)

Ankara has not turned its back on Europe, says Philip Stephens, but the terms of engagement have changed. Economically vibrant and politically self-confident, Turkey has outgrown the role allotted to it by the west.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

7. Germany won't let the euro train be derailed (Times)

Josef Joffe says that Germany has always been a vital part of the single currency and has far too much at stake to let it fall apart.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

8. Plucky Belgium is leading the way. Today Flanders, tomorrow Scotland (Guardian)

Simon Jenkins points out that however much Euro-enthusiasts wish it were otherwise, the craving for lower-tier self-rule refuses to die. In Scandinavia, Italy, Spain, even the UK, concession after concession is made to devolutionary sentiment.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

9. What football says about a country (Independent)

It is not the fear of losing that does them in, says Matthew Norman. Losing is far too familiar an experience to frighten them a jot. It's the fear of winning.

10. From Russia with Restraint (Times)

The leading article says that although Kyrgyzstan urgently needs outside help, Moscow should not overplay its hand.

Read the CommentPlus summary.

Sign up now to CommentPlus for the pick of the day's opinion, comment and analysis in your inbox at 8am every weekday.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Voters are turning against Brexit but the Lib Dems aren't benefiting

Labour's pro-Brexit stance is not preventing it from winning the support of Remainers. Will that change?

More than a year after the UK voted for Brexit, there has been little sign of buyer's remorse. The public, including around a third of Remainers, are largely of the view that the government should "get on with it".

But as real wages are squeezed (owing to the Brexit-linked inflationary spike) there are tentative signs that the mood is changing. In the event of a second referendum, an Opinium/Observer poll found, 47 per cent would vote Remain, compared to 44 per cent for Leave. Support for a repeat vote is also increasing. Forty one per cent of the public now favour a second referendum (with 48 per cent opposed), compared to 33 per cent last December. 

The Liberal Democrats have made halting Brexit their raison d'être. But as public opinion turns, there is no sign they are benefiting. Since the election, Vince Cable's party has yet to exceed single figures in the polls, scoring a lowly 6 per cent in the Opinium survey (down from 7.4 per cent at the election). 

What accounts for this disparity? After their near-extinction in 2015, the Lib Dems remain either toxic or irrelevant to many voters. Labour, by contrast, despite its pro-Brexit stance, has hoovered up Remainers (55 per cent back Jeremy Corbyn's party). 

In some cases, this reflects voters' other priorities. Remainers are prepared to support Labour on account of the party's stances on austerity, housing and education. Corbyn, meanwhile, is a eurosceptic whose internationalism and pro-migration reputation endear him to EU supporters. Other Remainers rewarded Labour MPs who voted against Article 50, rebelling against the leadership's stance. 

But the trend also partly reflects ignorance. By saying little on the subject of Brexit, Corbyn and Labour allowed Remainers to assume the best. Though there is little evidence that voters will abandon Corbyn over his EU stance, the potential exists.

For this reason, the proposal of a new party will continue to recur. By challenging Labour over Brexit, without the toxicity of Lib Dems, it would sharpen the choice before voters. Though it would not win an election, a new party could force Corbyn to soften his stance on Brexit or to offer a second referendum (mirroring Ukip's effect on the Conservatives).

The greatest problem for the project is that it lacks support where it counts: among MPs. For reasons of tribalism and strategy, there is no emergent "Gang of Four" ready to helm a new party. In the absence of a new convulsion, the UK may turn against Brexit without the anti-Brexiteers benefiting. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.