Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Mid Staffs report is right: NHS targets went too far (Guardian)

Without being knee-jerk or top-down, Labour must learn lessons from the failings at Stafford hospital, says Andy Burnham.

2. US must do more than focus on deficit (Financial Times)

A broader, growth-centred agenda is needed to propel the economy, says Lawrence Summers.

3. What a tragedy that we couldn't stop the war in Iraq despite marching in our thousands (Independent)

Forget the expenses scandal: it was Iraq that exploded what trust millions had in our political establishment, says Owen Jones. But the real anguish lies elsewhere.

4. Tories must keep talking about family values (Times

Ructions over gay marriage are no excuse for retreat, says Tim Montgomerie. Update social conservatism, don’t abandon it.

5. Barack Obama is pushing gun control at home, but he's a killer abroad (Guardian)

President Obama's appeals to respect human life in the US are at odds with his backing for drone strikes in foreign parts, writes Gary Younge.

6. This still won't pay the bills for elderly care (Independent)

It has to be asked whether ministers have not taken the coward's way out, says an Independent editorial.

7. Care, inheritance and penalising the thrifty (Daily Mail)

Not only has George Osborne held the inheritance tax threshold at £325,000 since the election, he now reportedly wants it frozen for another five years, notes a Daily Mail editorial.

It’s all down to taboo, mankind’s way of defining ourselves and avoiding chaos, writes Boris Johnson.

9. Cut off NHS head to save the patient (Sun)

Since NHS head David Nicholson refuses to do the decent thing, the Prime Minister must do it for him, says Trevor Kavanagh.

10. Scotland: Britain's real referendum (Guardian)

Bit by bit the arguments and terrain for the 2014 referendum vote are taking sharper shape, says a Guardian editorial.

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.