BRITAIN'S SNAP ELECTION

"I have just chaired a meeting of the cabinet, where we agreed that the government should call a general election, to be held on June 8."

Theresa May

April 18, 2017

Yesterday morning, the black door of No. 10 Downing Street opened and Prime Minister May took a few steps to a waiting podium where she made the above announcement. In the old days, that would have been it. But the government of David Cameron and Nicholas Clegg ushered in the era of fixed dates for general elections, spaced five years apart. The policy was formalized in the Fixed Terms Parliaments Act of 2011, which requires a two-thirds majority in Parliament for an out of cycle election. Mrs. May referred to that Act in her statement yesterday, saying, "Tomorrow I will move a motion in the House of Commons for a general election to be held on the eighth of June."

In a vote earlier today, Mrs. May more than got the two-thirds approval she needed. The vote was 522 in favor of a June election and 13 opposed.

Since becoming Prime Minister last July, shortly after the June 23 Brexit vote, Mrs. May has repeatedly said that she would not be calling a snap election. So why did she change her mind? Mrs. May explained:

There was, of course, much more to her statement, and you will want to read or listen to the full statement for yourself. For us, the most compelling argument she made in favor of a June election was this:

Some of the quotes in this series are chosen because they express insights we wish to share and because, as often as not, they are springboards to useful discussions. Others we publish because they are milestones that mark important developments in even more important processes. Mrs. May's call for a June election is in this latter category.

As for how the June election will turn out, most observers today seem to feel that Mrs. May and her government are headed for a win, perhaps a fairly big win. But a lot can happen in two months, and in this topsy turvy world, it would be foolish for anyone to count electoral chickens before they hatch. Mrs. May herself has noted that all elections are risky. That said, we are inclined to share the hope expressed by The Financial Times that her gamble pays off. "While there are grounds for apprehension," the FT wrote yesterday, " it will be better for both the UK and the EU if Mrs. May has the flexibility she needs to negotiate."

There is not much more that needs to be said here. We are bound to return to this and other Brexit issues sooner rather than later. One should note, however, that the UK's June 8 election isn't the only election with potentially significant implications for the future of relationships among the countries that are now part of the European Union. This Sunday's election in France is bound to leave its mark on the process as well. À bientôt.