UK election
That the result of the British election has come as a shock to Theresa May is stating the obvious, but what perhaps may not be as obvious is the underlying message it has given to the Tories and its leadership. Does the verdict of the voters, and a record number of them were young voters, indicate a rethink of British position on Brexit?
The purpose of calling elections, having assured that there would be no election before the schedule one in 2020, after she took over as the party leader last year, Theresa May had hoped to strengthen her party's grip on power to be able to successfully negotiate Britain's exit from the EU. She wanted a strong hand for a hard Brexit negotiation. The opposite has happened, she has been dealt a weak hand, having lost the majority in the parliament.
We saw two interesting elections held in Denmark and very recently in France. Interesting because the verdicts were a rejection of populism and isolationism, which we saw manifest in US under Trump. The voters had given measured and informed judgement in Denmark, France and now in Britain. The people's choice in France and Denmark has set the direction of the government through their verdict. It is for Theresa May to read the essential message that the result carries.
The Tory loss has been attributed primarily to a weak campaign by Theresa May and her overconfidence. The result is also perhaps the start of the revival of the Labour Party. Three British women of Bangladeshi origin have also done very well on the Labour ticket and we congratulate them on their win.
As for Bangladesh, is there anything we can learn from the way the campaign was conducted on both sides in the general elections in Great Britain or from the manner in which top politicians carried themselves about, and how no major parties shifted from their fundamental alliance and attempted unholy alliances just for poll-time benefits?
Comments