Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsirpas delivers a televised address from his office at Maximos Mansion in Athens. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Tsipras vows to go ahead with referendum and campaign for No - what next for Greece?

The No side's lead has narrowed since the bank closures on Monday. 

When it emerged this morning that the Greek government had accepted the the bulk of the troika's conditions, the assumption was that the referendum scheduled for Sunday would be called off. But in a characteristically defiant TV address this afternoon, Alexis Tsipras dismissed this possibility. The Greek PM announced that the referendum would still go ahead and that he would campaign for a No vote. He again insisted that the vote was not on whether to remain the euro and that the hoped-for result would strengthen his hand in negotiations. "A popular verdict is much stronger than the will of a government," he declared.

It is far from clear what Greeks are voting on now (indeed, it never has been). The offer that was withdrawn after the referendum promise or the deal now being discussed? But for Syriza, "oxi" (the historically resonant Greek word for No) is now an act of symbolic defiance. 

The polls are pointing to a victory for the No side but its lead has narrowed to nine per cent since the bank closures on Monday. It is doubtful, however, after Tsipras's relentless brinkmanship, that the troika will respond by offering improved terms. Should Greece vote Yes, the government would have to resign and new elections would be held. But there is no guarantee that Syriza (which was elected with just 36.3 per cent of the vote in January) would not again be returned to power. 

Ahead of his emergency Budget next Wednesday, George Osborne, as in 2010, is pointing to the crisis as evidence of the dangers of easing up on austerity. But as economists rightly contend, it is a surfeit, not a dearth, of austerity that has immiserated Greece. Though one would not know it from Osborne’s statements, the country’s cyclically adjusted primary budget surplus (which assumes a normal level of economic activity and excludes debt interest payments) is the largest in Europe at 6 per cent of potential GDP. It is the absence of stimulus for a depressed economy that explains the overall shortfall in revenue. Greece, on this basis, has been more fiscally responsible than the UK government (which has failed to achieve a surplus of any kind). Indeed, had Osborne not reduced the pace of the cuts, the recovery that he lauds would have been weaker.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

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.