August 02, 2019 at 07:03PM
Boris Johnson has been British prime minister for barely a week, and the honeymoon appears to be over. His Conservative Party lost a special election, cutting his working majority in Parliament to just one seat at a critical moment for the country.
The narrow defeat in a previously Conservative-held district, the Brecon and Radnorshire area of Wales, was a brutal reminder of Mr. Johnson's weakness in Parliament.
It immediately fueled speculation that Mr. Johnson would seek to increase his majority by calling a general election sooner rather than later. The only question is whether it would be before or after Oct. 31, the deadline for the country to leave the European Union.
"The election campaign is effectively already underway," said Anand Menon, professor of European politics and foreign affairs at King's College London.
The results from Wales made clear that an election is needed. But they also suggested that Mr. Johnson cannot be confident of victory should one takes place in the fall. And that is the quandary for Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson has long been the cheerleader for pro-Brexit forces, and since becoming prime minister he has doubled down on his vow to leave the European Union on schedule, with or without a deal governing future relations with the bloc.
Parliament has thrice rejected the Brexit deal pushed by Mr. Johnson's predecessor, and most lawmakers oppose a no-deal Brexit. With European officials resolute that negotiations cannot be reopened, Mr. Johnson is preparing for a showdown over his plans.
Even with the support of 10 lawmakers from Northern Ireland, a working majority of just one seat leaves the new prime minister especially vulnerable.
The defeat in Wales has also illustrated how Brexit is re-engineering British politics, cutting across traditional party lines with unpredictable consequences as voters focus on the tortured Brexit efforts.
Officials announced early Friday that Jane Dodds, the candidate for the anti-Brexit Liberal Democrats, had defeated the Conservative incumbent, Chris Davies, by 1,425 votes.
Ms. Dodds was helped by an experimental "remain alliance": Two small parties did not contest the seat so as not to divide the anti-Brexit vote. She won even though a majority of voters in the region had voted for Brexit in the 2016 referendum.
Mr. Johnson's energy and upbeat, if blustery, rhetoric has cheered Conservative supporters and given his party a bounce in some opinion polls, one that was reflected in the closer-than-expected result in Brecon and Radnorshire.
Normally, the Conservatives would expect to keep the seat, having won it comfortably in 2017 by about 8,000 votes.
But the circumstances that prompted the election complicated matters for the Conservatives. Their chosen candidate, Mr. Davies, was unseated by a petition from local voters after he was convicted of making a false expenses claim. The party nonetheless chose him to fight for the seat.
But the results also showed mounting challenges for all of the traditional mainstream parties. The main opposition Labour Party, which is equivocal on Brexit, was pushed into an embarrassing fourth place, its vote share squeezed by the anti-Brexit alliance.
Failing that, Mr. Johnson's determination to leave the bloc anyway would face a rebellion in Parliament, where a majority of lawmakers oppose a potentially chaotic "no deal" Brexit.
It is unclear, however, whether lawmakers can find a legally watertight way to stop Britain from crashing out of the European Union come Oct. 31.
Holding an election after such an outcome could help Mr. Johnson scoop up Brexit Party supporters, having delivered on their overriding objective.
But it could entail the serious risk of fighting an election against the backdrop of chaos.
British consumers' reactions react to possible shortages of food and pharmaceuticals is impossible to predict, as are the wider economic, political and constitutional ramifications of a sudden rupture.
"Holding an election after 'no deal' risks exaggerating the ability and willingness of the British people to keep calm and carry on," said Mr. Menon, the political professor.
"We don't react well to a crisis," he added, pointing to the response to a gasoline shortage in 2000 and to the shock of Britain's forced exit in 1992 from an exchange rate system linking European currencies.
When Britain held a general election during a crisis in 1974, the prime minister lost. Voters might have become less tolerant of disruption since then: Last year, when the KFC chain ran out of chicken, some angry customers contacted the police.
Mr. Johnson could face the voters before Brexit is completed, demanding a mandate from them to press ahead, while blaming Parliament and the European Union for obstructing him.
"I think in his ideal world he would like to have definitive proof that Parliament is trying to stymie Brexit,'' Mr. Menon said, ''and that the European Union is blocking him and that he has no alternative."
In terms of election timing, Mr. Menon said, "October is looking increasingly likely."
Boris Johnson has been British prime minister for barely a week, and the honeymoon appears to be over. His Conservative Party lost a special election, cutting his working majority in Parliament to just one seat at a critical moment for the country.
The narrow defeat in a previously Conservative-held district, the Brecon and Radnorshire area of Wales, was a brutal reminder of Mr. Johnson's weakness in Parliament.
It immediately fueled speculation that Mr. Johnson would seek to increase his majority by calling a general election sooner rather than later. The only question is whether it would be before or after Oct. 31, the deadline for the country to leave the European Union.
"The election campaign is effectively already underway," said Anand Menon, professor of European politics and foreign affairs at King's College London.
The results from Wales made clear that an election is needed. But they also suggested that Mr. Johnson cannot be confident of victory should one takes place in the fall. And that is the quandary for Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson has long been the cheerleader for pro-Brexit forces, and since becoming prime minister he has doubled down on his vow to leave the European Union on schedule, with or without a deal governing future relations with the bloc.
Parliament has thrice rejected the Brexit deal pushed by Mr. Johnson's predecessor, and most lawmakers oppose a no-deal Brexit. With European officials resolute that negotiations cannot be reopened, Mr. Johnson is preparing for a showdown over his plans.
Even with the support of 10 lawmakers from Northern Ireland, a working majority of just one seat leaves the new prime minister especially vulnerable.
The defeat in Wales has also illustrated how Brexit is re-engineering British politics, cutting across traditional party lines with unpredictable consequences as voters focus on the tortured Brexit efforts.
Officials announced early Friday that Jane Dodds, the candidate for the anti-Brexit Liberal Democrats, had defeated the Conservative incumbent, Chris Davies, by 1,425 votes.
Ms. Dodds was helped by an experimental "remain alliance": Two small parties did not contest the seat so as not to divide the anti-Brexit vote. She won even though a majority of voters in the region had voted for Brexit in the 2016 referendum.
Mr. Johnson's energy and upbeat, if blustery, rhetoric has cheered Conservative supporters and given his party a bounce in some opinion polls, one that was reflected in the closer-than-expected result in Brecon and Radnorshire.
Normally, the Conservatives would expect to keep the seat, having won it comfortably in 2017 by about 8,000 votes.
But the circumstances that prompted the election complicated matters for the Conservatives. Their chosen candidate, Mr. Davies, was unseated by a petition from local voters after he was convicted of making a false expenses claim. The party nonetheless chose him to fight for the seat.
But the results also showed mounting challenges for all of the traditional mainstream parties. The main opposition Labour Party, which is equivocal on Brexit, was pushed into an embarrassing fourth place, its vote share squeezed by the anti-Brexit alliance.
Failing that, Mr. Johnson's determination to leave the bloc anyway would face a rebellion in Parliament, where a majority of lawmakers oppose a potentially chaotic "no deal" Brexit.
It is unclear, however, whether lawmakers can find a legally watertight way to stop Britain from crashing out of the European Union come Oct. 31.
Holding an election after such an outcome could help Mr. Johnson scoop up Brexit Party supporters, having delivered on their overriding objective.
But it could entail the serious risk of fighting an election against the backdrop of chaos.
British consumers' reactions react to possible shortages of food and pharmaceuticals is impossible to predict, as are the wider economic, political and constitutional ramifications of a sudden rupture.
"Holding an election after 'no deal' risks exaggerating the ability and willingness of the British people to keep calm and carry on," said Mr. Menon, the political professor.
"We don't react well to a crisis," he added, pointing to the response to a gasoline shortage in 2000 and to the shock of Britain's forced exit in 1992 from an exchange rate system linking European currencies.
When Britain held a general election during a crisis in 1974, the prime minister lost. Voters might have become less tolerant of disruption since then: Last year, when the KFC chain ran out of chicken, some angry customers contacted the police.
Mr. Johnson could face the voters before Brexit is completed, demanding a mandate from them to press ahead, while blaming Parliament and the European Union for obstructing him.
"I think in his ideal world he would like to have definitive proof that Parliament is trying to stymie Brexit,'' Mr. Menon said, ''and that the European Union is blocking him and that he has no alternative."
In terms of election timing, Mr. Menon said, "October is looking increasingly likely."