 |
| Nick Clegg: Can he convince undecideds on Europe? |
In case some of you were unaware, an incredibly significant
poll is to be held in a few months.
I’m not talking about the Scottish independence referendum,
either.
In May the country will vote on who it wants to represent it
in the European parliament. It’s going to be a tough test for the Liberal
Democrats – party president Tim Farron has publicly admitted as much – and
there is a possibility that our representation could be reduced to previously
unthinkable levels. Here in Scotland George Lyon, a progressive voice of reason
in Brussels, has his work cut out to retain his seat; elsewhere across the UK
Lib Dems face challenges from Labour, a resurgent UKIP and potentially also the
Green Party.
Given that, in the aftermath of recent electoral reversals,
these were never going to be easy elections for our party I have been impressed
by our determination to take a firmly pro-European stance. For a European
federalist like me, who considers the party’s position on Europe to be a
primary factor in determining my membership of it, this has been long overdue.
I accept, naturally, that we have been historically the most pro-European of
the three major parties but too often in the past we’ve shied away from the
strong rhetoric of conviction on this issue, wilfully opting not to be too
closely identified with the unpopular cause of the EU. The logic of the
increasingly polarising issues of immigration and Europe demanded we tackle
them directly and honestly; electoral expediency and populism demanded
something different.
And so is it, I believe, a welcome development that such
caution has finally been put to bed. Perhaps it is because the leadership
realise that we no longer have anything to lose and may well gain from being openly
pro-Europe. Perhaps it is because, unlike previous leaders, Nick Clegg is at
his heart a European. Perhaps it is due more to the UKIP phenomenon and how the
Lib Dems hope to counter it. Whatever the rationale behind the decision, it is
overdue and welcome. Europe should be at the forefront of our thinking, our
identity and our political future. The SNP also understands this, while Labour
prefers to content itself watching the Tories tie themselves in knots over it.
In Scotland, the strength of the pro-EU SNP means that UKIP
will inevitably be an irrelevance north of the border. Elsewhere, however, it is a
different story altogether. This is a party that knows how to use both the PR
system and its one star performer to its advantage, as witnessed by the considerable
progress made by UKIP in recent years. That this has been tempered by revelations about the
unsavoury nature of some UKIP representatives, laughably inaccurate predictions of the numbers of Bulgarian and Romanian incomers, and the inability to make the electoral breakthrough is
an undeniable statement of truth; however, there can be no evading another reality –
that, while hardly scaling the heights achieved by the SDP in the early 80s,
UKIP support has steadily increased. Not only do they strike a populist chord
on Europe and immigration, but (in the absence of another strong fourth party
in England) are able to do what the Liberal Democrats once did best – appeal to
the “anti-politics” vote and masquerade as an alternative to the self-serving
political establishment.
On the one hand there are the Liberal Democrats: committed
to federalism, human rights, a strong Europe, a realistic view of Britain’s
place in the world, pluralism and co-operation. On the other is UKIP, fronted
by Nigel Farage – proponents of a curious mixture of romanticised, historically
inaccurate notions of British identity and dangerously right-wing policy ideas.
There could not be two more diametrically opposed parties, and there could not
be two more different perspectives on the question of Britain’s future in
Europe.
And so, inevitably, a debate between the leaders of the Lib
Dems and UKIP has been perceived to make good TV. Perhaps it will. What it
almost certainly won’t be is an informed debate, with the potential to reach
out to those who are undecided. It will serve the interests and agenda of Nigel
Farage far more than it will those of Nick Clegg. While Clegg has recently
appeared to welcome such a debate, the fact is he has overreached himself and
fails to perceive that the “opportunity” is fraught with danger.
Clegg will want to take on UKIP directly. He will seek to expose the myths, challenge
the lies and suppositions, and make the case for continued British membership
of the EU. He understands that if he hurts Farage, he hurts UKIP. There can be
no doubting his political courage, but there remain questions surrounding his
judgments.
One problem that Nick Clegg has in this debate format is
that he’s in the unfamiliar position of being cast as a figure of the
establishment. That’s a challenge for any Lib Dem leader, not least one who is
the prominent member of an unpopular government. This will be something that
Farage will inevitably seize upon, to his advantage. Clegg now longer is seen
as an “alternative”, as he was in the 2010 debates, but at best a product of
the mainstream three-party political “elite” so derided by UKIP and indeed many
voters.
Another problem for Clegg is likely to be in his tactics.
There seems to be little doubt that he wishes to focus on the cerebral, the
logical, and the intellectual case for Europe. He will no doubt come across as
measured, sensible, rational and perhaps even passionate in his championing of
the case for “in”. He will focus on systematically dismantling the UKIP arguments, intelligently
pointing out the flaws and shortcomings in their various positions, countering
myths and assumptions with factual evidence.
The difficulty with this strategy is that it assumes the
most effective weapon with which to defeat UKIP is reason. Hence, Clegg is out
to win minds. If, however, anything has been learned in the last year it is
that UKIP has not suffered as expected when it has been shown that their leader
disagrees with the manifesto, that their elected representatives include such
deluded individuals as a man who believes gay people cause bad weather, that
their predictions of mass immigration from Bulgaria and Romania were wildly
inaccurate or that their MEPs happily collect generous expenses for the very
minimum of work. Sections of the public
do not vote for them because of their well-considered, responsible policies but
because Nigel Farage knows how to successfully appeal to the emotional. He appeals to more than
mere logic, which is a lesser tool in winning the hearts of voters than either
patriotism or personal charm – something of which he is more than aware.
This is a battle of reason versus populism and logic versus
charisma. There is no obvious winner in such contests, but the picture is
complicated by the fact that it is more difficult to win people over if they’re
already convinced you’re dishonest. Is Clegg likely to appeal to any
undecideds? Is it probable that he could convince any Euroskeptic voters that
they’re wrong? If Clegg's objective is the former, then he is almost certainly the wrong person; if the latter, he is entirely deluded. Farage, on the other hand, tends to do very well in these kinds of situations and knows how to effectively reach out to voters who, in truth, don't entirely buy his political philosophy.
The televised debate is an opportunity, of course, for both
Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats. But there can be no denying that UKIP stands
to gain the most and that they have very little to lose. Clegg, on the other
hand, is risking a great deal in banking on his personal ability to deal UKIP
an unlikely knockout blow. Unfortunately
for Clegg, crushing UKIP is not merely a question of destroying their arguments,
but defeating their appeal and the reasons behind it.
And, ultimately, should Clegg fail in his self-appointed
quest there will be far-reaching ramifications for his leadership, for our
party and, potentially, for Europe. There were reasons why Cameron and Miliband
refused to take part in the debate, and for once I honestly wish Clegg had
followed their lead. I wish him every success, not only because I identify with
his arguments, but because I fear the consequences of anything less than an
inspiring and utterly convincing performance.
It not simply for these reasons I am suspicious of the
televised debate. Of course Clegg v Farage is sure to make good TV. But a duel
between two leaders of radically different parties is not a valid substitute
for the informed public conversation that is needed on our future relationship
with the EU. In focusing on personalities, the BBC has created a forum that
will be good for headlines and a media obsessed with scrutinising performances,
but less likely to engage with the real issue – the nature of our relationship
with Europe.
This “debate” risks making the European elections a
referendum on Nick Clegg . We cannot afford to lose sight of the reality that
these elections are about so much more than personality and prejudice...or
indeed UKIP. There is an important
debate to be had, but I doubt a polarising televised spat between an unpopular
Deputy Prime Minister and an egomaniacal right-winger is the way to facilitate
it.
The debate will be shown on BBC2 on Wednesday 2nd
April 2014.
