This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/14/cameron-referendum-trap-ruin-parties

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
David Cameron should beware the referendum trap David Cameron should beware the referendum trap
(4 months later)
Beware the deadly lure of referendums. In the United Kingdom referendums are proposed for the wrong reasons – and even after they have been offered are rarely held. Leaders make the offer not because they have discovered a sudden passion for new forms of direct democracy. Their motive is the precise opposite. They fear losing control and hope that the prospect of a vote at some seemingly safe distant point will make life easier for them in the meantime.Beware the deadly lure of referendums. In the United Kingdom referendums are proposed for the wrong reasons – and even after they have been offered are rarely held. Leaders make the offer not because they have discovered a sudden passion for new forms of direct democracy. Their motive is the precise opposite. They fear losing control and hope that the prospect of a vote at some seemingly safe distant point will make life easier for them in the meantime.
Instead they become even more trapped. Leaders are drawn towards referendums only to be torn apart the closer they get to a full embrace. They have a mountain of evidence to warn them of what will happen, but still they make their fatal moves.Instead they become even more trapped. Leaders are drawn towards referendums only to be torn apart the closer they get to a full embrace. They have a mountain of evidence to warn them of what will happen, but still they make their fatal moves.
David Cameron is the latest to be caught out. In January he offered his "in or out" referendum – not because he wanted to do so, but because he hoped that his party would unite around the policy and that Ukip would be undermined. Predictably, the opposite has happened: Ukip soars while his party becomes even more worked up. In theory there are four more years of this destabilising stirring before the referendum is actually held – if indeed it ever is.David Cameron is the latest to be caught out. In January he offered his "in or out" referendum – not because he wanted to do so, but because he hoped that his party would unite around the policy and that Ukip would be undermined. Predictably, the opposite has happened: Ukip soars while his party becomes even more worked up. In theory there are four more years of this destabilising stirring before the referendum is actually held – if indeed it ever is.
Because the zany pattern of national referendums is that they can be proposed, but are rarely staged. Before the 1997 election both the Conservative and Labour leaderships offered one on the single currency. The Conservative party calmed down for around half a second when John Major announced his reluctant support for one. Soon his MPs were demanding another on the next EU treaty. In an eerie echo, Tory MPs have upped their demands on Cameron since January, while others are calling for a referendum on gay marriage.Because the zany pattern of national referendums is that they can be proposed, but are rarely staged. Before the 1997 election both the Conservative and Labour leaderships offered one on the single currency. The Conservative party calmed down for around half a second when John Major announced his reluctant support for one. Soon his MPs were demanding another on the next EU treaty. In an eerie echo, Tory MPs have upped their demands on Cameron since January, while others are calling for a referendum on gay marriage.
After 1997 the referendum on the single currency was never held. Nor was the one on electoral reform, another plebiscite that was promised in Labour's 1997 manifesto, and was once again the source of endless angst.After 1997 the referendum on the single currency was never held. Nor was the one on electoral reform, another plebiscite that was promised in Labour's 1997 manifesto, and was once again the source of endless angst.
On the rare occasions when a national referendum is held it solves nothing. The legislation that gave the go-ahead for the referendum on our membership of the Common Market in 1975 was supposed to be "legally binding" on future parliaments. The then prime minister, Harold Wilson, held it for a single reason – to keep his party united. It proved to be neither binding nor unifying. Soon after 1975 his party fell apart, largely over Europe. By the 1983 election, a mere eight years after the binding referendum, Labour was pledged to pull out of Europe. The SDP was formed partly because of Europe.On the rare occasions when a national referendum is held it solves nothing. The legislation that gave the go-ahead for the referendum on our membership of the Common Market in 1975 was supposed to be "legally binding" on future parliaments. The then prime minister, Harold Wilson, held it for a single reason – to keep his party united. It proved to be neither binding nor unifying. Soon after 1975 his party fell apart, largely over Europe. By the 1983 election, a mere eight years after the binding referendum, Labour was pledged to pull out of Europe. The SDP was formed partly because of Europe.
If she were alive today, Margaret Thatcher – who had campaigned energetically for a yes vote in 1975 – would probably emulate Ukip, Michael Gove and others in wanting to leave the EU, although Gove hides behind the protective shield of Cameron's "renegotiation". As Nigel Lawson and others have noted, this is likely to prove a tiny shield. In the meantime, Cameron faces the nightmare of being asked whether he would vote to leave the EU if there were a referendum now. He will not answer on the basis that there is no referendum now. But he will look evasive because he is being evasive.If she were alive today, Margaret Thatcher – who had campaigned energetically for a yes vote in 1975 – would probably emulate Ukip, Michael Gove and others in wanting to leave the EU, although Gove hides behind the protective shield of Cameron's "renegotiation". As Nigel Lawson and others have noted, this is likely to prove a tiny shield. In the meantime, Cameron faces the nightmare of being asked whether he would vote to leave the EU if there were a referendum now. He will not answer on the basis that there is no referendum now. But he will look evasive because he is being evasive.
Let us assume for a moment that a referendum is held in 2017. Once more it will solve nothing, whatever the outcome. In terms of party management, the Conservatives will have split at least three ways by then, and will not come together very easily in the aftermath. If the result of the vote is to stay in, the campaign to pull out will revive within a few minutes. If the outcome is to pull out, there will be political conflagration, after which calls to go back in, or to hold a second referendum in favour of continuing membership once the terms have been re-renegotiated, would start to be heard.Let us assume for a moment that a referendum is held in 2017. Once more it will solve nothing, whatever the outcome. In terms of party management, the Conservatives will have split at least three ways by then, and will not come together very easily in the aftermath. If the result of the vote is to stay in, the campaign to pull out will revive within a few minutes. If the outcome is to pull out, there will be political conflagration, after which calls to go back in, or to hold a second referendum in favour of continuing membership once the terms have been re-renegotiated, would start to be heard.
The same pattern applies to the Scottish referendum, a potentially explosive event taking place in the autumn of 2014 a few months before the general election. Admittedly the context for this poll is different. The SNP rules in Scotland, and has in theory wanted this referendum for a very long time. Alex Salmond, the SNP leader, will be less keen if the opinion polls continue to show majority support for the union. But if he loses, he will argue that the next stage should be "devo max", bigger powers for the Edinburgh parliament. Senior members of the SNP tell me that their campaign for independence will pause briefly and then return. If the opinion polls prove to be wrong and Scotland does vote for independence, there will be demands for a referendum in other parts of the UK on the issue of separation. There will be chaos, crisis, and no resolution.The same pattern applies to the Scottish referendum, a potentially explosive event taking place in the autumn of 2014 a few months before the general election. Admittedly the context for this poll is different. The SNP rules in Scotland, and has in theory wanted this referendum for a very long time. Alex Salmond, the SNP leader, will be less keen if the opinion polls continue to show majority support for the union. But if he loses, he will argue that the next stage should be "devo max", bigger powers for the Edinburgh parliament. Senior members of the SNP tell me that their campaign for independence will pause briefly and then return. If the opinion polls prove to be wrong and Scotland does vote for independence, there will be demands for a referendum in other parts of the UK on the issue of separation. There will be chaos, crisis, and no resolution.
As for the referendum on electoral reform held in this parliament, it resolves nothing. If there is a Lib-Lab partnership after the next election, expect electoral reform to be back on the agenda.As for the referendum on electoral reform held in this parliament, it resolves nothing. If there is a Lib-Lab partnership after the next election, expect electoral reform to be back on the agenda.
I am not suggesting that if Cameron had stood firm and refused to offer an in/out referendum, he would have discovered a primrose path to the next general election. But the route would have been less hellish than it is now proving to be.I am not suggesting that if Cameron had stood firm and refused to offer an in/out referendum, he would have discovered a primrose path to the next general election. But the route would have been less hellish than it is now proving to be.
His offer is dependent on a Conservative majority that seems even less likely since the referendum was dangled in front of his troops. Like most other national referendums it may never be held, although Labour will be under huge pressure to offer one too, dooming its leadership to a nerve-wracking nightmare if it wins the next election. Ed Miliband could well be the next leader to offer a referendum even though he does not believe it would be in anyone's interest and might destroy his leadership.His offer is dependent on a Conservative majority that seems even less likely since the referendum was dangled in front of his troops. Like most other national referendums it may never be held, although Labour will be under huge pressure to offer one too, dooming its leadership to a nerve-wracking nightmare if it wins the next election. Ed Miliband could well be the next leader to offer a referendum even though he does not believe it would be in anyone's interest and might destroy his leadership.
In theory referendums are a noble form of empowerment. But not the way they arise here: offered, postponed and withdrawn with leaders, in a state of neurotic panic, misguidedly hoping the deceptive device will give them peace and stability. Referendums have nothing to do with calmly devolving power to the voters.In theory referendums are a noble form of empowerment. But not the way they arise here: offered, postponed and withdrawn with leaders, in a state of neurotic panic, misguidedly hoping the deceptive device will give them peace and stability. Referendums have nothing to do with calmly devolving power to the voters.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.