Britain’s anti-Brexiters need a common front

In a month’s time, unless Theresa May can push her withdrawal agreement through the House of Commons after yet another attempt, the UK will hold elections for the European Parliament. The prospect does not inspire great joy in the Conservatives, who fear that their votes and seats will drop sharply as the public punishes them for their floundering inability to achieve progress with Brexit. For Labour, although it is currently projected to win, the elections will test the fragile compromise between Jeremy Corbyn, its instinctively Eurosceptic leader, and his more anti-Brexit colleagues.

The real opportunity is for the parties which have a strong and united view on Brexit and can attempt turn the election into a “soft referendum”. On the Leave side, Nigel Farage, having deserted the UK Independence party of which he was formerly leader, has made the early running with his new vehicle, the Brexit party. But on the Remain side, voters wanting a second referendum or to revoke the UK’s notification to leave will have a multiplicity of parties vying for their support.

In particular, the new party Change UK, created from the Independent Group, a band of centrist MPs who broke away from Labour and the Conservatives, will stand against two other strongly anti-Brexit parties, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens.

Although the voting method for the European Parliament elections is more proportionate than for the House of Commons, splitting the anti-Brexit vote will still cost seats. A Financial Times analysis suggests that a unified slate of candidates from Change UK, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens would win 16 of the 60 seats up for grabs in England. Standing separately, they would take just seven. And while their leaders may argue hoarsely that the overall vote share for anti-Brexit parties is what matters, the public is all too likely to take seats won as a more accurate metric of national sentiment.

The electoral problem arises largely from the desire of Change UK to establish itself as a separate party. It has turned down the idea of a “shell vehicle” for the three parties specifically for the European elections, and more generally a durable alliance with the Liberal Democrats. The party leadership argues, with some justification, that the paperwork for a shell vehicle would have been needed weeks ago, before a European election seemed likely.

But it also continues to reject any new attempt at co-operation. Although the three anti-Brexit parties are forbidden from running a single slate of candidates, there is nothing to stop one or two of the parties standing aside for the others in particular regions.

It is unfortunately testament to the lack of political skill of Change UK that it has managed to get into a situation where it will deprive anti-Brexit parties of seats. True, the formation of the new party did probably help drag Labour towards the Remain side and promise a second referendum to avoid losing anti-Brexit votes. But Change UK has failed to adapt to events and come up with a coherent strategy.

Minority parties always struggle in the UK’s political system — and Change UK’s distinctiveness is, in any case, somewhat lost in a House of Commons where party discipline has broken down. It is not too late for it to realise, however, that tactical co-operation with other parties in events like the European elections will not necessarily stifle the new party at birth.

The way to get things done, as the saying goes, is not to mind who gets the credit. Opposing Brexit is a pressing issue for three parties, each with the ability to win substantial numbers of votes. They should form a common front.