TALKING POLITICS

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A packed episode: we catch up with Catherine Barnard on the Supreme Court's unanimous decision against prorogation and we discuss what's going on in Italian politics. Plus we explore the links and differences between the two, from fears of an election to the role played by presidents and monarchs. Boris, Berlusconi, Baroness Hale and politics on the beach: it's all here! With Lucia Rubinelli and Chris Bickerton.

Talking Points:

Is it surprising that the Supreme Court’s judgement was unanimous?

• There’s a strength in unanimity—it also makes it harder to attribute political motives to individual judges.
• This is only the beginning of what could be a series of contentious judgments, but because the decision was unanimous, it’s hard to read the room.

The Supreme Court didn’t want to get into motive… or monarchy, so it focused on the effect of prorogation.

• If the power to prorogue were unlimited, it could be used for unconstitutional purposes.
• But Parliament did have an opportunity to hold the government to account and it chose not to.

Are there parallels between what’s going on in Italy and the UK?

• The government has broken down, and the opposition is scared of an election. Both Johnson and Salvini are polling at around 30% and facing divided oppositions.
• But in Italy, the opposition has behaved very differently. Despite extreme contempt for each other, Renzi and De Maio are in coalition.
• This is in part because of Mattarella, the President, and the EU.

Does going into coalition with Renzi mark the end of 5 Star’s anti-establishment credentials? 

• They might go forward with a new leader, Di Battista, who is more left wing. 

Renzi is trying to position himself as a Macron-like figure.

• The dominant feature of Italian politics is fragmentation: if you can get even 5-10% of the vote, you can be the kingmaker.
• Renzi thinks he can sweep up Berlusconi’s voters.
• But unlike Macron, Renzi isn’t an unknown entity. And the next election might be fought in the midst of a recession.

Further Learning:

• Our video guide to thinking about the future of Labour leadership
• Catherine on the Supreme Court’s decision
• More on Salvini

Upcoming Events:

• On 5 Oct. David, Helen, and Chris Brooke will be LIVE in London. Tickets here!
• And on 16 Oct. David and Helen will be LIVE at Cambridge Junction with Ayesha Hazarika. Get your tickets here.

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the middle of the epic prorogation battle at the Supreme Court, we ask what's at stake: for the government, for Brexit, for the constitution and for democracy. Is this a case of legal precedent, common law practice or higher constitutional principle? Is the UK constitution becoming more European in the act of leaving the EU? And what are the things lawyers on neither side can say? Plus we ask how Jo Swinson's case for revoking article 50 is going and we discuss whether we could really have a 2nd referendum without another general election. A packed episode! With Catherine Barnard, Helen Thompson and Chris Bickerton.

The prorogation case has reached the Supreme Court.

• Traditionally the courts are reluctant to second guess political decisions. 
• The high courts of England and Wales ruled that the case wasn’t justiciable. The Scottish court took a different line.
• This case is really looking under the bonnet of the constitution.

If there is no judicial control, the right to prorogue could be abused—this could trouble the courts. 

• But according to the UK constitution, the recourse to the abuse of power is supposed to be political rather than legal. 
• The current executive is a constitutional zombie: it doesn’t have the support of Parliament. 

How does the court see its role? 

• What Boris did may be outrageous, but it’s not clear what he gained by doing it. He squeezed options but he didn’t wipe them out. 
• Maybe they just did it to be provocative ahead of a general election. But neither side can say that.

Who are the justices on the Supreme Court? 

• Most of these people have worked their way up the judicial hierarchy.
• This is only the second time that all 11 are sitting. They know this case is a big deal.
• The big question is legitimacy.

Common law has been seen as a central part of the UK’s constitutional history, and common law ultimately is meant to rest on an appeal to experience. 

• What happens if it is used to assert an abstract principle?

Across the board, politicians are no longer abiding by conventions.

• If Parliament were functioning properly, it would replace the executive.
• Parliament chose to legislate against no deal instead of calling for a general election.
• The Fixed-Term Parliaments act has been a game changer. 

Further Learning: 

• The Talking Politics guide to… the UK Constitution
• The Supreme Court and politics vs. the law
• Who is Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson? 

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

David and Helen try to make sense of where we've got to, though things are moving fast (*episode recorded before the Scottish court judgment*). Can parliament force Johnson's hand in the Brexit negotiations if he is still PM? Will Labour hold together now that it's become a second referendum party? Could the revocation of article 50 become a real prospect? Next week, on to the Supreme Court. We also pay tribute to our dear friend and colleague Finbarr Livesey, who very sadly died last week.

Talking Points:

People have claimed moral victories and rhetorical victories this week, but what actually happened?

• Boris is still Prime Minister, and the opposition organized behind legislation that requires him to ask for an extension.
• But the EU will want a reason. And Boris wouldn’t be breaking the law if he said there was no reason, or that it was purely political.

Is it possible that all this turmoil actually gives Johnson more leverage with the EU?

• Unless there’s movement from the Irish government, it will be extremely difficult for the EU to move.
• The DUP’s position is weaker now, but a Northern Ireland only backstop would be a massive crisis for the Union. 

There appears to be a new centrist group in Parliament with Stephen Kinnock and others trying to rally in support of a deal. 

• But the numbers are very small and they’ll have to defend the fact that they voted against the withdrawal agreement before.

What about Labour?

• Labour has now become the second referendum party but there are still a lot of questions.
• If Corbyn weren’t the leader of the opposition, would a vote of no confidence have passed?
• Did Labour make the wrong call on an election?
• Meanwhile, the Lib Dems seem to be moving towards a “revoke” position. 

The constitution is in uncharted waters: there’s a government with no majority that wants to call an election and Parliament is saying that the electorate cannot have a say.

• Do the courts have the authority to reconvene Parliament?

Further Learning: 

• How Would a Second Referendum on Brexit Work? 
• Helen on bending the constitution for the New Statesman
• Is it Legal? 
• The Talking Politics guide to… the UK constitution

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Helen Thompson and Adam Tooze take us beyond Brexit to look at the global situation and the bigger threats we face. Italy, Germany, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Argentina, Russia, Trump vs. the Fed, the US vs. China, Hong Kong, the dollar, the euro, climate change, oil: an amazingly wide-ranging conversation that somehow manages to connect it all up.

Talking Points: 

Christine Lagarde will take up her post at the ECB relatively soon. Does her most recent speech fit into a narrative of a French victory in the euro struggles?

• Lagarde has clearly asserted the necessity of continuing the Draghi agenda, but augmenting it with fiscal action. That’s the big question mark.
• There are still fundamental, unresolved issues: banking union and Italy’s sovereign debt.

The condition for making Italian fiscal activism safe would be some agreement to collectivize a large portion of Italy’s sovereign debt. How that’s accounted for, and whose balance sheet it would fall onto is the real issue.

• Do you really want to activate a major fiscal stimulus in the German economy?
• This might be a good moment for a political deal between the North and South because the engine of German manufacturing is slowing down.

What’s happening in Germany is less to do with the Eurozone and more to do with China and to some extent the Eurodollar system. 

• The Germany economy is export-centric. It won’t respond to stimulating domestic demand.
• If we accept that the status quo is dangerous, then fiscal policy has to be more transformative.
• Trying to figure out what is actually causing the weakness in the world economy is perhaps more important than the confrontation between Trump and the Fed.

Something weird is going on in global capital markets, which means that the Americans are suffering basically no bond-market punishment despite extraordinary dysfunction. 

• At the same time, interest rates have plunged.
• This allows Trump to politicize things further.
• It’s both a return of the past, and something entirely new.
• The eurozone does appear to have a disciplinary role. The idea of a euro-state leaving the eurozone still seems unconscionable.  

China clearly wants to escape a dollar world. Could this deal with Iran make it possible?

• They want to be able to buy oil in their own currency.
• But the dollar and the U.S. banking system are still America’s ultimate weapons.

How big is the risk of a major global economic slowdown? 

• It’s already happening in Germany, Latin America, South Africa... 
• The question is scope: it hasn’t yet spread to the services sector. 
• There’s a variety of different economic ailments, but this is a real risk.

Mentioned in this Episode:

• Adam’s recent article in the NYTimes

Further Learning: 

• Why is Trump attacking the Fed? 
• Adam Tooze on Europe
• Adam Tooze on the US vs. China

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With British politics in disarray, we try to sort out what's a stake - legally, constitutionally and electorally. Can Johnson refuse to do what parliament demands? Can Corbyn get the election he wants? What is Dominic Cummings playing at? And how much is the Fixed-term Parliaments Act to blame for the mess? Plus we explore the likely choices ahead for voters and politicians and we ask the big question lying behind all the drama: is this a question of politics or is it a matter of law? With Helen Thompson and Kenneth Armstrong.

Talking Points:

What was Johnson trying to achieve with prorogation? 

• Deliberately provoking the opposition? Making it look like Parliament had been defeated to push the EU to work toward another agreement? 

A lot is going wrong for the government right now and it is struggling get to the general election it wants to fight.

• Helen thinks that the actual goal is an orderly exit from the EU.
• But people don’t believe Johnson when he says he is serious about getting a deal.

Corbyn says that the opposition wants a general election, but only after no deal has been ruled out.

• But if the election takes place in mid-October and Johnson wins a majority, he could overturn any legislation outlawing a no deal.
• Parliament could still revoke Article 50. This might be the best case scenario for Johnson because he could then have a Parliament vs. the people election.
• The assumption seems to be that the government cannot be replaced, but it also can’t do what it wants to do.
• Everyone seems to be trying to tie someone’s hands, but how do you create the politics where you can actually do things?

At some point there will be a general election: the government is framing it as a choice on Brexit. 

• May tried to do that in 2017 and failed. 
• But Johnson isn’t May, and he’s running on a more populist, anti-austerity platform.
• What does Labour want to fight this election on? Would they fare better in a Brexit or non-Brexit election?
• The Lib Dems are in a very different position this time.

This is an unusual government: the stories about Dominic Cummings are damaging, but it doesn’t look like he’s going anywhere.

• A referendum is very different than a general election.  

Mentioned in this episode:

• Catherine Haddon on the Fixed Term Parliaments Act
• Stephen Sedley on Jonathan Sumption and the rule of law for the LRB

Further Learning: 

• Scottish Court rules that prorogation is lawful
• On challenges around a bill to prevent no deal
• David and Helen talking about prorogation on the 538 podcast

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We talk to political philosopher Clare Chambers about marriage as a political institution. How does it reflect the power of the state?  How does it alter power relations between individuals? Should everyone be allowed to get married or should we move away from marriage altogether? A fresh, radical look at something we often take for granted.

Talking Points:

What makes marriage political?

• Marriage is an institution recognized by the state. 
• It also structures the way people relate to each other along gendered lines, as well as those of race and class.

Most of the clear legal inequalities in marriage have been reformed in contemporary Britain, but there is still significant practical and symbolic inequality.

• Different sex married couples tend to exhibit more gendered behavior than unmarried couples.
• We still view marriage as a goal, particularly for women. And for women, marriage often comes with a number of identity changes.

When the state recognizes marriage, it is endorsing, or affirming the position of being married.

• Does making marriage more accessible make it more equal?
• Same sex marriage is one of the amazing succes stories of the last decade.

Why are we so drawn to marriage?

• What marriage means for people may be out of kilter with its legal condition.
• There’s no official government position on the legal implications of marriage.
• Most people believe that common law marriage exists: it doesn’t. 
• If you’re not married, you have no legal protections.

When it comes to protecting children, it might make more sense to focus on parenthood than marriage.

• In countries like the UK, only about 50% of children are born to married parents. 

Further Learning:

• Clare’s website
• Against Marriage (Clare’s book)
• Clare talking about the politics of marriage at LSE
• Clare at the Cambridge Festival of Ideas talking about marriage

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Special cross over episode with the FiveThirtyEight politics podcast from America, hosted by Galen Druke.

On Wednesday, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced that he had asked the queen to suspend parliament in September, reducing the amount of time lawmakers will have to debate legislation related to Brexit. John Bercow, the speaker of the House of Commons ,called the move a “constitutional outrage.” In this episode of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, Helen Thompson and David Runciman discuss what qualifies as a constitutional crisis and whether they think Britain has reached that point.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

David gives another in his series of talks about democracy. This one draws on the theme of his new book Where Power Stops: The Making and Unmaking of Presidents and Prime Ministers. From Lyndon Johnson to Boris Johnson, does power reveal the true character of politicians or do politicians reveal the true character of power? What sets the limits to what presidents and prime minsters can do? And how do we find them? https://profilebooks.com/where-power-stops-hb.html

The books that have had the single largest influence on modern Western politicians are Robert Caro’s biographies of Lyndon Johson.

• These books are a love letter to politics: the glory, the grind, the graft.
• Johnson’s life is a tale of redemption: he was a terrible man, but he did some great things.
• Johnson’s life shows that individual politicians can make a difference. This is a story that a lot of politicians want to hear.

Caro says that the lesson of Johnson’s life is that power corrupts, but power also reveals. David disagrees.

• Johnson wanted to dominate. Compassion was not who he really was, it was just another tool at his disposal.
• To show he deserved power, Johnson had to do what Kennedy couldn’t do: civil rights and the great society.
• It’s not that power reveals the person, but the person reveals the nature of the power. 
• Politicians don’t really change. And they often don’t really hide who they are. 
• When they get to the top, you see not who they are, but what that kind of person can do with power. 

Are Trump and Boris Johnson part of this pattern?

• We haven’t discovered anything about Trump we didn’t know before.
• Much more has been revealed about the institution of the presidency than the man.
• What makes Trump different is that he doesn’t seem to believe that his power is subject to any constraints. This could actually change the institution.
• Boris Johnson is different. For one thing, he is capable of shame. But he is also willing, potentially, to treat the limits of office as if they aren’t there.

Further Learning:

• David’s new book, Where Power Stops
• The Caro biographies of Johnson
• Caro on chasing Johnson’s paper trail
• Yuval Noah Harari
• Michael Howard on Talking Politics

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.