With any election, the time of the year can be a significant factor, as turnout can be appreciably affected by the weather. A cabinet source recently told The Mirror, “Labour struggles to get their people out more than we do which gives us an advantage”. However, there are many other factors to be considered, especially in the wake of Brexit and the pandemic.

Fixed Term Parliament Act

The reason the government can even consider holding the next election before 2024 is due to the repealing of the Fixed Term Parliament Act. In March 2021, a joint committee of MPs and peers concluded that the act was “flawed and would require major amendment even if it were to be retained”.

The government’s intention was clear, the committee said – “to return to the system in place before the 2011 Act”. Committee chair, Lord McLoughlin said the “bill means the Monarch may grant a general election on the request of the prime minister of the day”. The dissolution and calling of parliament bill is currently at second reading stage in the House of Lords. It is making swift progress towards giving the government the freedom to call an election when it sees fit.

Boundary changes

According to the Boundary Commission for England, revised proposals on boundary changes will be published, and a four-week consultation process will be conducted “late 2022”. A final report, including recommendations, will be published in June 2023.

One school of thought is that the government will wait until after the boundary changes come into effect. The reason being that, if the 2019 election had been conducted under the new boundary arrangements, with every voter voting the same way, the Conservative Party would have gained 15 seats, and Labour would have lost a further nine. Even if voting patterns were to change, the Financial Times concluded that the government would gain ten new seats following boundary adjustments.

However, others have argued that the government will call an election before the changes come into effect while existing boundaries remain. Crestview Strategy’s vice president, Nicholas Varley, argued that to call an election after the boundary changes would be “an act of lunacy” on the government’s part. He argued that it takes years for MPs to “build their reputation with local voters and a change in boundaries would mean years of hard work by MPs in this parliament are deemed worthless”.

“What will be causing sleepless nights is the idea that no one in the campaign team at Conservative Central Office, or even Conservative Members of Parliament themselves, can be certain of which voters will be voting in which constituency in an impending general election. If you do not know who your electorate is how can you run a campaign? And, we aren’t just talking about not knowing the electorate in a handful of constituencies, we are talking about 90 percent of constituencies looking different.”

The Brexit effect

Brexit could be a significant factor in any decision re the timing of the next election, and the government would need to be looking in two directions simultaneously. Firstly, there’s the damage already being caused by Brexit, and we haven’t even seen the worst of that yet.

Any perceived Brexit bounce that may have come from the government getting Brexit ‘done’ has surely now dissipated. If the election was to come too soon, the issues of supply chain problems, fuel shortages, empty shelves, lack of drivers, etc. etc. will be fresh in the public memory. Even if they believe the government line that those issues are due to covid, not Brexit, it’s same problem – the government has mishandled both in spectacular fashion.

Secondly, there’s the future of Brexit – the ongoing negotiations and severely troubled relationship with the EU. Not only is Brexit not done, but if the result of the latest UK posturing results in a trade war, then the picture could look considerably worse. In which case, a delay might be the best course of action for the government, in order to put as much space between themselves and the damage as possible.

That’s before they even factor in the renegotiations that are due to take place in 2025 when the trade and co-operation agreement is up for review. Assuming, of course, that it hasn’t been torn up altogether by then.

Then there are the promised Brexit benefits that have failed to materialise. The much-heralded new deal with Australia has not, as previously suggested, been signed sealed and delivered. Even the rollover EU deals are proving problematic, as the devil in the detail was overlooked. The uplands are not looking so sunny

… and then there’s covid

With regard to covid, a number of factors must surely be considered. Firstly, any capital the government may have gained from the so-called vaccine bounce has almost certainly now been lost. Then there’s the forthcoming covid inquiry that will likely reveal significant government mistakes – including many that could have been avoided and saved lives. The billions spent – in many cases wasted – will not go unnoticed, and again, the government may well want to put some distance between the fallout and the next public vote.

As for the current state of play, the UK is falling behind its neighbours in tackling covid. Despite appearances to the contrary in some quarters, covid has not gone away. The number of new cases is growing out of all proportion to similar countries, with daily case levels dangerously close to 50,000. Add in all those bereaved families and that’s a lot of people with a huge axe to grind, not even mentioning those still waiting for any sign of ‘levelling up’.

The view from Westminster

The recent government reshuffle has only added to speculation in Westminster that the PM would call an early election. However, when asked recently to comment on the possibility of a 2023 election, Conservative Party chair Oliver Dowden refused to be drawn. He recently told Sky News, “The PM has told me to make sure that the Conservative Party machine is ready to go for an election whenever it comes”. He added, “It’s not my job to call an election. We know full well that the usual electoral cycle would take us through to 2024 but that’s entirely up to the prime minister”.

In response, government figures played down Dowden’s comments, telling The Times that Boris Johnson would be more likely to wait until 2024 when the next general election is officially due.

As for the opposition, Labour strategists are increasingly considering the possibility that Johnson might even go for an election as early as spring next year. The thinking being that the government will want to act before the tax rise of businesses and workers – aimed at providing additional funding for the NHS – comes into play in April 2022.

At the recent Labour Party conference, the shadow foreign secretary, Lisa Nandy, said the party was ready for an expected election in 2023. “We could be in power in 18-months’ time. Never believe it’s not possible”.

What do the punters say?

Although the odds vary, all gambling sites agree that an early election is becoming increasingly more likely. Smarkets betting exchange said, “The chances of it being held in 2023 have continued to rise, now up to around 38 percent and that seems to make a lot of sense”.

The odds on a 2024 (or later) election range from Oddschecker on 4/7 (a 63 percent probability) to Gambling.com on 3/10 (a 77 percent probability). The odds on a 2023 election range from Oddschecker on 6/5 (a 45 percent probability) to Gambling.com on 7/2 (a 28 percent probability).

With the UK paying off the pandemic deficit, Brexit damage becoming more obvious and the impact of boundary changes, there is much to consider when making this decision. Johnson has already made it clear he wants to serve as PM longer than Thatcher. Of course, that decision will not just be down to the voting public, but also down to his own party. Trust is at an all-time low and needs to be earned. Recent events have opened the public’s eyes to the lies, the cronyism and the waste of life and taxpayers’ money.

In 2023–2024, Britain will hit record borrowing according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Resolution Foundation. Both organisations predict that ahead of the next election, there will be enormous pressure on the government to balance the books.

So, from wherever you are standing, the government has some major decisions to make about whether it will be viewed more kindly sooner, or later. An election in 2023? I wouldn’t put my money on it just yet. But then I wouldn’t bet against it either!

Definitely not so he can pretend there's been better growth in the economy next year & use that to put in tax cuts in the Autumn 2022 budget, in case of an election in 2023.

Definitely not.

They'd never play politics with the economy.
They're a 'safe pair of hands' after all…

— (Social) Liberal Leigh🕷️🇪🇺🇬🇧 #FBPE #FBPPR 🔶 (@Liberal_Leigh) October 16, 2021

Frost had seemed determined, even before his speech in Portugal on Tuesday, to throw a spanner into the negotiating works. He had accused the EU of “not listening”, said the deal required significant changes, and demanded the removal of the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in overseeing the protocol.

Irish foreign minister, Simon Coveney warned that the EU was “close to the end of the road” and accused the UK government of deliberately creating a “red line” barrier to progress. Declan Kearney, of Sinn Féin, had an accusation of his own, suggesting the government was throwing a “dead cat” on the table. He added that the EU was about to call the UK’s bluff. All before either Frost or the EU had made their official statements.

The speech, peppered with digs at the EU and half-veiled threats, was a withered olive branch delivered with menace. It seemed designed to rile the EU27 and the Commission into hardening their position | Anthony Robinson@AnthonyBylines @BylineTimes https://t.co/NDdz9qFblT

— Yorkshire Bylines (@YorksBylines) October 13, 2021

Frost’s Lisbon speech

A day ahead of the EU’s expected response to his earlier ‘command paper’, Frost confirmed his view that a hard Brexit was vital in order for Brexit, and Britain, to succeed. He viewed the removal of the UK from the customs union and single market as crucial to the success of the Brexit project – even if that wasn’t the impression given when the country was being asked to decide five years ago. Frost claimed it would be an “historic misjudgement” not to rewrite the Brexit deal.

Frost’s speech suggested that the protocol “could have worked” had it been “more sensitively implemented”, and that “the protocol represents a moment of EU overreach when the UK’s negotiating hand was tied”. Frost continued to imply that the protocol was imposed on the UK, rather than being a deal that was designed and agreed by the UK government, and “hailed by them as a masterpiece of statecraft”. Frost described the protocol as “the biggest source of mistrust” between the UK and the EU, apparently with a straight face.

For Brexit-ologists, Lord Frost's argument that a so-called hard Brexit – removal from all single market/customs union – was always vital for the project to succeed is notable. It makes sense, but was very much not what was billed before the referendum, beyond the zealots.

— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) October 12, 2021

Guardian political correspondent, Peter Walker, questioned whether the views expressed by Frost were his own, or those of number 10. The question of whether Frost is playing bad cop, or if his approach is “part of a wider strategy”, remains on the table. Perhaps alongside all those cards we were supposed to be holding.

Reactions to Frost speech

Baroness Chapman, Labour’s shadow Brexit minister, claimed that the government was “desperate to use a tussle with Brussels to distract from their domestic failures – whether on covid, the energy crisis, or the needless culling of thousands of pigs”. She said an opportunity had been missed “for the government to reset relations with our partners in the EU after a fractious start to our new relationship”.

Northern Ireland spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats, Alistair Carmichael, said, “The same minister who just months ago was trumpeting the government’s botched Brexit deal now says it’s intolerable and has to be changed. After all the upheaval British businesses have suffered and all the challenges they face now, they need certainty and support from the government, not more pointless posturing”.

Former prime minister (now deputy PM) of Ireland, Leo Varadkar said the UK government had “acted in bad faith”. He suggested that, “the message must go out to all countries around the world that this is a British government that doesn’t necessarily keep its word and doesn’t necessarily honour the agreements it makes”. Not exactly a glowing reference for ‘global Britain’, ahead of any future trade negotiations.

Former secretary general of the European Commission, David O’Sullivan, told LBC that Frost was “hardly credible”, and asked, “Why did he sign a text that he now wants to replace nine months later?” If former Number 10 adviser, Dominic Cummings is to be believed, the prime minister was also misrepresenting, and misunderstanding, his deal.

According to Cummings, “babbling” Boris had no intention of honouring the agreement he signed in haste. Not only did he not have a “scoobydoo” about the contents, but his only interest had been in winning the election. This claim was rejected by a Downing Street spokesperson, who insisted changes to the treaty were only sought after it became clear how Brussels was implementing the deal.

So Cummings is *openly* admitting that he and others agreed to the Protocol to win a general election, with no intention of abiding by it. Reminder: that is the Northern Ireland peace process they were playing with to win an election.

— John Cotter (@John_Cotter) October 12, 2021

The EU’s proposals

Following a briefing with the European parliament, the college of commissioners and all 27 EU ambassadors, Šefčovič announced the new proposals in a press conference on Wednesday. He described the proposals as a “robust package of creative, practical solutions designed to help Northern Ireland deal with the consequences of Brexit”.

Apparently, the revised proposal had been highly contentious, with one senior EU diplomat adding that there was “blood on the floor” following efforts to get the revised proposals accepted. Several countries have expressed their displeasure, and patience with the UK is said to be wearing very thin across Europe. Some countries, not least France, are already looking at retaliatory measures. For now, however, they have been reassured by the fact that the Commission has already prepared legal action, ranging from infringement proceedings to a full-blown trade war.

The EU’s proposals are meant as a starting point to discussion, with Brussels keen to continue a dialogue, if not a negotiation. The four-part proposal consists of:

Food safety and phytosanitary rules – changes will allow for unhindered access to food products, including ‘national identity’ goods such as sausages.
Customs – an “express lane” will facilitate the movement of goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland; customs formalities for more businesses and goods are to be cut in half; plus an 80 percent reduction on the controls and checks on a range of retail goods.
Governance – the participation of Northern Ireland authorities will be boosted, addressing concerns that NI has no say in legislation.
Medicines – proposals for legislative amendments to EU law will ensure that life-saving drugs can be move easily between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The EU stands united behind Northern Ireland, while also protecting our internal market.

I invite the UK government to engage with us earnestly on our package of enhanced opportunities. With these proposals, I believe we could be in the homestretch when it comes to the Protocol. pic.twitter.com/ECyhYYWB4I

— Maroš Šefčovič🇪🇺 (@MarosSefcovic) October 13, 2021

Šefčovič emphasised that the “EU stands united behind Northern Ireland, while also protecting our internal market”. He added, “Now I invite the UK government to engage with us earnestly and intensively on all our proposals. With them I’m convinced we could be in the home stretch when it comes to the protocol”. Discussions will continue later this week in Brussels.

That internal market protection Šefčovič spoke of does, of course, include maintaining the role of the ECJ. As he confirmed, “it’s very clear that we cannot have access to the single market without the supervision of the European Court of Justice.”

Whatever happened to Frost’s “excellent” deal?

I'm very pleased and proud to have led a great UK team to secure today's excellent deal with the EU.

Both sides worked tirelessly day after day in challenging conditions to get the biggest & broadest trade deal in the world, in record time.

Thank you all who made it happen.

— David Frost (@DavidGHFrost) December 24, 2020

Lord Frost’s dislike of his own deal is not a new development. Over recent weeks and months, we have grown accustomed to his criticism of the deal he previously described as “excellent”. It would appear that other Brexit-loving ministers are similarly changing their tone. No longer do we hear of the sunlit uplands, or the rosy post-Brexit future that awaits us. Rather, we hear excuses for the Brexit deal they rushed through parliament, with blame, as always, being directed at the EU.

According to staunch Brexiter Bernard Jenkin recently, the deal was signed “at a time when the government was weak and gripped by a constitutional crisis” and the nasty EU “took advantage”. Whether the Brexiters truly believe the EU is at fault or not, they are running out of excuses. They may be blind to the realities of Brexit. The rest of the world is not.

They cannot bring themselves to admit their great project is a disaster. Blaming is all they have left https://t.co/FaPHTfnzqy

— ALASTAIR CAMPBELL (@campbellclaret) October 12, 2021

Whether the UK government ever intended to honour the Brexit deal they supposedly signed in good faith, is becoming increasingly hard to accept. Even Frost himself suggested the government knew at the time that the deal was imperfect, and that it was signed merely to “Get Brexit Done”. Or more accurately, to get the election done. Every other issue, in true Conservative style, could be kicked down the road and dealt with, or blamed on the EU, later.

Frost has claimed that the EU “doesn’t always look like it wants the UK to succeed”. I’m sure the Brexit faithful will probably agree with him, but from where I’m standing, the boot is on the other foot. The state of relations between the EU is down to the UK, and Frost in particular. As for the state of the country, it looks like it’s Frost, Johnson and the Brexiters that don’t want the UK to succeed. If they do, in fact, care about our country’s future, they sure have a strange and damaging way of showing it.

When I said we would Get Brexit Done, I meant we would sign a shit deal that we had no intention of honouring, in order to win an election.#Newsnight

— Parody Boris Johnson (@BorisJohnson_MP) October 11, 2021

At the Conservative Party conference on Monday, Lord David Frost, chief Brexit negotiator, made a speech to a “pretty empty hall”, writes Bremain Chair Sue Wilson MBE for Yorkshire Bylines. In his speech, Frost claimed that Britain was entering a “renaissance” and promised to show “Brexit was worth it”. He didn’t say how long we might have to wait.
Lord Frost threatens, again, to ditch the Northern Ireland protocol

Shortly afterwards, the media was full of articles that, at first glance, could have been written weeks or even months ago. Not for the first time, headlines spoke of threats to ditch the Northern Ireland protocol and trigger article 16.

Frost (emotional about his role freeing Britain) and gets round of applause when threatens to trigger Article 16 of Northern Ireland Protocol. /2

— Peter Foster (@pmdfoster) October 4, 2021

According to FT journalist Peter Foster, Frost’s threat to trigger article 16 received a round of applause from the undersized audience. Perhaps they were old enough to remember it from earlier speeches and were enjoying a touch of Brexit nostalgia.

Frost also suggested the EU needed to make “significant changes” to the deal negotiated by (checks notes), Lord Frost himself:

The Brexit deal U-turn

We have grown accustomed to Frost, and Boris Johnson, having a complete change of heart about how wonderful, or terrible, the deal they negotiated back in December 2020 turned out to be. What was new this time was that, apart from everything all being the EU’s fault, now MPs must share the blame.

Apparently, it was MPs that forced Frost to negotiate a bad deal by passing legislation in 2019 – described as the “surrender act” – preventing a no deal scenario. According to Frost, “of course we wanted to negotiate something better”. Strange, but there seems to be no reference anywhere to Frost pointing out the shortcomings of his deal when selling it to parliament, or the public, back in 2020.

Frost continues to insist the EU is interpreting the Brexit deal in a “heavy handed” fashion. Moreover, he is still harking back to his ‘command paper’ demands from July, despite the fact that they proved unworkable then, as they do now. Frost also suggested the EU had failed to respond to his earlier proposals, despite a prompt response from European commission president, Ursula von der Leyen. Her reply was short and to the point: “we will not renegotiate”.

Lord Frost again complains the UK hasn't had a response to its 'command paper' on Northern Ireland. This is @vonderleyen the day after he sent it. I don't know which part of this is still unclear to @DavidGHFrost. ~AAhttps://t.co/z2k0fD9TH2 pic.twitter.com/dBZAQRQPRe

— Best for Britain (@BestForBritain) October 4, 2021

As Frost waits for “a formal response from the EU”, he urged them “to be ambitious”, adding that it was “no use tinkering around the edges”.

EU response to Frost’s threats

Following Frost’s speech, a spokesperson for the European commission commented:

Despite the EU-bashing rhetoric we associate with Frost, he was once a Remain supporter. Back in 2016, Frost was tasked with presenting the Remain side of the EU referendum argument in a debate organised by think tank, Open Europe. Whether he believed his own arguments at the time, or believes them now, we may never know. Whether the British public will believe him may also be open for discussion.

What we can be sure of is that EU member states know grandstanding when they see it and will not be impressed. They will make every effort to be as flexible as EU rules allow, but will stand firm.

Frost may now say the “long bad dream” of EU membership is over, but for those suffering the damaging after-effects, it is Brexit itself that is providing the nightmares.

Lord Frost told the Tories today that “the long bad dream” of EU membership is over

Well, we can now only dream about petrol stations which are open, supermarket shelves which are full, and governments which regarded it as their job to make the country better not worse!

— Andrew Adonis (@Andrew_Adonis) October 4, 2021

Most people know that travelling during the covid pandemic has been challenging, with rapidly changing rules and regulations to follow, writes Bremain Vice Chair Lisa Ryan Burton for Yorkshire Bylines. On a recent visit to the UK from Spain, the differences in attitude and approach to mask-wearing and the risk from covid was noticeable and unnerving. Particularly as the UK’s approach has implications for the rest of the world.As a UK national resident in Spain, like many of us after 20 months of not being able to travel, I was desperate to get back to the UK. Not only to catch up with my adult children, parents, and extended family, but to visit my distribution business in England to see my team face to face for the first time in two years.

Visiting the UK for the first time in almost two years

In August 2021, the UK government eventually recognised the EU digital covid certificate. Before this change, travelling to the UK required ten days isolation and three tests minimum. This meant to see family for a week, at least three weeks away was needed. My family live in England, Scotland, and Wales, so even if I had travelled previously, restrictions between the four nations made visiting them almost impossible.

I recently experienced differences in attitudes between the Spanish and British on mask-wearing while visiting one of the tourist areas in Spain. While it was wonderful to see businesses open again and tourists return, I saw practically no mask-wearing amongst the tourists. This was a stark difference to visiting a Spanish town, where even in a moderately quiet street almost everyone would wear a mask.

I therefore knew it would be interesting to see how attitudes differed in Britain. My flight was into Birmingham, and my first experience was when I got into a black cab. The driver immediately stated, “You don’t need to wear your mask if you don’t want to”.

Almost no indoor or outdoor mask wearing in England

I arrived at my hotel late and had to check-in at the bar/restaurant, and I was taken aback. I had not seen so many ‘unmasked’ people in an indoor environment for over 20 months. None of the bar staff wore masks; people were around the bar, being served at the bar, passing through to use the bathrooms, sitting at tables and mingling outside – with not a mask in sight.

For the first time since Spain made face coverings mandatory in all public places in May 2020, I felt strange, awkward and out of place wearing one. I checked in, got a drink, and sat at an outside table.

Over the next few days, I noted that very few people were wearing masks. It felt as if there were no covid restrictions at all in place; the world had reverted to normal. No one was breaking covid regulations though because, since 19 July 2021, England doesn’t have any.

The government website now states, “Lifting restrictions does not mean the risks from COVID-19 have disappeared, but at this new phase of the pandemic response, we are moving to an approach that enables personal risk-based judgments”.

Personal risk-based judgments? My feeling was that if I were a vulnerable person to covid, which I thankfully am not, my risk assessment would be bleak. How can you protect yourself when there seems to be no social responsibility within the community, or indeed a desire to protect each other?

Face coverings in Scotland and Wales

I then flew to Scotland to spend a few days there with my family. In Scotland, it is still a legal requirement to wear a mask in public indoor settings.

While there, I visited restaurants, shops, and tourist attractions. It was a very different experience. I once again felt that I was living in a pandemic. Although few people on the streets wore masks, face coverings were enforced in shops, tourist attractions, restaurants, and bars, including staff. There was no bar service, and people wore masks when not at their tables or when moving around. But when I got a private taxi, the driver again said I did not have to wear a mask, which was in contradiction to the law.

For the last leg of my journey, I flew back to Manchester for a day before catching a train to Cardiff, Wales. Once again, people behaved as if there were no risk of covid transmission. The train had three carriages, no bookable seats and was completely packed with some passengers standing. At a rough calculation, approximately one in 20 were wearing masks; that demographic was primarily elderly.

Mask-wearing and covid restrictions are slightly different in Wales too. It is still a legal requirement for face coverings to be worn in all indoor public places, public transport, and taxis, but not in the hospitality sector.

I saw no mask-wearing in restaurants or bars; however, there was high compliance with mask-wearing in supermarkets and most shops, although I did notice that in some small, privately owned shops, masks were not enforced. Once again, a taxi driver told me that I didn’t have to wear a mask if I didn’t want to, even though it is a legal requirement in Wales.

UK has one of the worst covid responses in the world

As a fully vaccinated person, to travel to the UK, I had to pay for a test 72 hours before arrival in Britain, order a day two test before departing Spain, and fill in a passenger locator form. However, what is the point of a day two test? There is no requirement for isolation before the test or indeed if it returns a positive result. For my return to Spain, I only had to fill in a passenger locator form and have my EU covid digital certificate.

It comes as no surprise that the UK has had one of the worst covid responses in the world and even now has the worst infection rate by far in Western Europe. It is currently ranked 12th worst in the world for infection levels.

What happened to that ‘world beating’ vaccine success story? Britain had a great start, but public health messaging was always chaotic, and frankly, it seems the government is too. That head start has been wasted.

Returning to the relative safety of Spain

Spain, like Italy, had a dreadful start to the pandemic but has done its best to learn from mistakes and has taken coronavirus very seriously. Some 76.9 percent of Spain’s population is now fully vaccinated; that includes 12 years and above. An impressive 90 percent of the ‘vaccinable population’ has had at least one dose. Yet, the level of social responsibility and adherence to the rules remains high. Spain is recovering quickly and is expected to have the fastest growing economy in the bloc, this year and next. A solid, consistent approach has done the country well. On 1 October, Spain had 2,037 new cases, the UK had 34,589.

It was great to go home to see the family, but it was good to come home to my host country. Some may think the strict rules and public adherence are excessive now, or a form of ‘control’. I see it as part of our social responsibility. After all, covid isn’t over for any of us until it is over for all of us.