Getty Images
Show Hide image

Tony Blair: The Conservatives will hand power to Jeremy Corbyn if they push through a Brexit deal

The former Labour prime minister said the Tories were “in danger of going down” if they refused to hold a new EU referendum. 

The Conservatives must understand that pushing a Brexit deal through parliament will be “the gateway” to a Jeremy Corbyn-led government, Tony Blair said this morning.

The former prime minister also said he didn’t believe Labour would vote for the Conservatives' Brexit deal, contradicting shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry’s (supposedly sarcastic) claim yesterday that Labour would “probably” vote in favour of the final deal.

Speaking at an event held by UK in a Changing Europe to mark the one year anniversary of Article 50 being triggered, Blair said that if Conservative MPs were to vote for any final deal, “Brexit will then be 100 per cent owned by the Tories…and it will allow Labour to say ‘well we’d have got you a better deal and these guys didn’t get the right deal’.”

“By the time you get to 2022 [the official date of the next general election] you’ll be out of the European Union. I’ve got a feeling the 17 million who voted to leave are going to be short on gratitude and the 16 million who voted to remain are going to be long on memory,” he said. “If they’ve still got Brexit round their neck...they’re in danger of going down.”

Blair also said that another referendum on the final terms of the deal would be strategically useful for the Conservatives, as it would allow the government to pass on responsibility for Brexit – its terms, conditions, and eventual outcome – to the electorate.

Blair also reiterated his support for a new EU referendum, blaming the media for portraying a second vote as a betrayal of the British people: “If it wasn’t for the way this whole thing has gone, and for the way that that - what I call that - right-wing media cartel just keep this constant barrage of propaganda, it would be common sense to say ‘let’s wait until we see the terms of the new relationship’ before irrevocably we get out of the old one.

“It’s only in the bizarre world that’s been created that we think that this is a betrayal of the British people.”

Asked what type of question should be on the ballot paper in the event of another vote, he said: “I think the question would have to be whether you prefer this deal to staying,” but didn’t rule out the possibility for a ‘no deal’ option to feature.

In the event of a rejection of any deal, Blair said seeking an EU renegotiation would not be realistic. He also argued that if parliament voted down the deal, Theresa May should not have to resign. “She’s perfectly entitled to say ‘look I did my best and here it is’ and now it’s back for the people to vote.”

Blair's comments followed his appearance on the Today programme this morning, during which he said cancelling Brexit was becoming “more likely”. Blair also said that the rest of the world didn't buy the claims Britain was making about its life outside the EU: “We shouldn’t kid ourselves – the rest of the world do not see this as globally ambitious Britain. They really don’t. They think, ‘Brits, you guys were always common sense people’."

Asked if he felt guilty for legitimising referendums as an acceptable tool of constitutional decision making, Blair laughed: “Well, err...every situation on its own merits. I think if you’re going to change radically the constitutional relationship of the country there’s a case for having a referendum, which is why we did it on devolution.”

Blair, meanwhile, dodged questions on Jeremy Corbyn's leadership and future prospects, joking: “Leave aside the wisdom – or otherwise – of a Corbyn government for the moment … I won’t be drawn on that, today at least.” The former Labour leader also said it was important to understand that the reasons for staying in the EU today are not the same reasons for Britain joining decades ago: “It’s not about peace today it’s about power.”

The University Challenge final. Photo: BBC iPlayer
Show Hide image

Why University Challenge is deliberately asking more questions about women

Question setters and contestants on how the show finally began to gender-balance its questions – and whether it’s now harder as a result.

University Challenge has long had a gender problem. When the show first started airing in 1962, some Oxbridge colleges were still refusing to admit women as undergraduates; in the decades since, women have been consistently outnumbered by men, with all-male teams still a regular occurrence. Those women that did appear were all too regularly criticised and objectified in equal measure by audiences: notable contestants like Hannah Rose Woods, Emma Johnson, Samantha Buzzard and Sophie Rudd have experienced intense media scrutiny and criticised the sexism of the show and audiences. In recent years, sexism rows have dogged the show.

How satisfying, then, to see two women carrying their teams in last night’s final: Rosie McKeown for winners St John’s, Cambridge, and Leonie Woodland for runners-up Merton, Oxford. Both secured the majority of points for their teams – McKeown with visible delight, Woodland looking unsure even as she delivered correct answer after correct answer.

But there is another site of sexism on University Challenge, one that earns less column inches: the questions. Drawing on all areas of history, science, language, economics and culture, the questions often concern notable thinkers, artists, scientists, and sportspeople. Of course, our society’s patriarchal hierarchies of achievement have meant that the subjects of these questions are mostly men. General knowledge is, after all, a boys’ club.

Over the course of this 2017-8 series, though, I noticed a shift. More women than ever seemed to be making their way into the questions, at times with deliberate reference to the inherent sexism of their lack of cultural prominence. On 5 February, there was a picture round devoted to female composers, with contestents asked to identify Clara Schumann, Ethel Smyth, Rachel Portman and Bjork from photographs, who, Paxman explained, are all “women that are now listed in the EdExcel A Level music syllabus after the student Jessy McCabe petitioned the exam board in 2015.” Episodes have included bonus rounds on “prominent women” (the writer Lydia Davis, the pilot Lydia Litvyak, and the golfer Lydia Ko), “women born in the 1870s and 80s” (Rosa Luxemburg, Elizabeth Arden and Vanessa Bell), and the female philosophers Mary Midgely, Philippa Foot and Iris Murdoch.

Elsewhere, questions raise a knowing eyebrow at the patriarchal assumptions behind so much of intellectual endeavour. A music round on famous rock bands quoted the music critic Kelefa Sanneh’s definition “rockism”: “the belief that white macho guitar music is superior to all other forms of popular music”. Another, on opera, quoted Catherine Clement’s Opera, Or The Undoing of Women, which explores how traditional opera plots frequently feature “the infinitely repetitive spectacle of a woman who dies”. “Your music bonuses are three such operas,” Paxman said dryly, to audience laughter.

University Challenge’s questions editor Thomas Benson confirms that there has been a deliberate attempt to redress a gender imbalance in the quiz. “About three years ago, a viewer wrote in to point out that a recent edition of the programme had contained very few questions on women,” he explains. “We agreed and decided to do something about it.”

Last night’s final included a picture round on artists with works concerning motherhood (Mary Casatt, Lousie Bourgeois, Leanora Carrington and Frida Kahlo) and a music round on Marin Alsop, the first woman to ever conduct the Last Night of the Proms, as well as sets of bonuses on the American writer Willa Kather and Byzantine historian and princess Anna Komnene.

Former winner Hannah Rose Woods is delighted by the increase in such questions. “I think it’s fantastic!” she tells me. “These things are really important in changing people’s perceptions about women in the past, and the way women’s contributions to science and the arts have often been written out of history. We need to keep challenging the idea of the White Male Canon.”

Last night’s winner Rosie McKeown says that while she didn’t necessarily notice a deliberate attempt to gender balance the questions, she was “very pleased with the quality of those questions that did come up”.

“Although it wasn’t in one of our matches,” she tells me, “I thought the picture round on female composers was especially good for highlighting women’s achievements.”

For all the enthusiasm for these questions, in the studio they’re often met with blank stares. While University Challenge questions are broad and imaginatively posed, there are some reliable revision topics and techniques: from Nobel laureates and the years of their wins to identifying famous paintings and classical music excerpts. McKeown says she has been a religious viewer of the show since she was 11 years old, and admits to watching reruns of the show to prepare. Shift the kinds of answers you might be looking for, and teams may struggle.

“Do we know any female British composers?” Leonie Woodland said weakly, looking at a picture of Ethel Smyth. Trying to come up with a female Muslim Nobel laureate, one contestant desperately suggested Aung San Suu Kyi. Asked to provide a first name linking an American concert pianist with the sister of Lazarus one male contestant still buzzed in with “Daniel”.

“Even if we didn’t always get them right,” McKeown tells me, citing that round on female philosophers, which saw them pass on every question, as an example, “it was great to see so many important female figures represented.”

“I don't think the questions about women necessarily affected our performance, but it’s certainly a very good thing that they were there and I hope that they’ll arouse people’s interest in the women featured and in their achievements.”

Benson believes that it hasn’t had a significant effect on performance. “The great majority of the questions that feature women are no different to any others, in that they sit firmly within the realm of standard academic general knowledge.”

He notes that they often refer to historical and background details, citing sets of bonuses on Canadian novelist Ruth Ozeki and British physicist Hertha Ayrton, which both teams answered correctly in full. “Though Ozeki and Ayrton may not be household names, the questions are definitely answerable and deal with central themes in their work and achievements.”

It’s easy to brush off the significance of a fairly geeky Monday night BBC quiz show, but University Challenge still regularly pulls in three million viewers. In any case, a show like University Challenge has a cultural significance that outweighs its viewing figures. It helps to shape our understanding of which subjects are intellectual or important, which are history’s most notable achievements, and who is worth learning about. To ignore questions of identity is to risk intellectual laziness, relying on tired ideas of canonical figures – or worse, supremacist propaganda, privileging the achievements of white men over all others.

Quite aside from making for less predictable and more enjoyable television, by including questions on the likes of Stevie Smith, Nella Larsen, Gertrude Stein, Myra Hess, Margaret Mead, and Beryl Bainbridge, University Challenge can diversify the mental encyclopaedias of its viewers, be it a tweed-wearing 60-year-old in Leamington Spa or an 11-year-old like Rosie McKeown with her own dreams of one day competing. It has a responsibility to do so.

Anna Leszkiewicz is the New Statesman's deputy culture editor.