Bombing shifts UK's political narrative

If the Manchester bombing was a horrible tragedy for Britain, it was a political boon, however unwanted, for Prime Minister Theresa May.

Monday’s terrorist attack has changed the narrative of Britain’s election, just two weeks away — and in her favour. As the incumbent prime minister, May inevitably speaks both to and for the nation from 10 Downing Street. And having been home secretary for six years before becoming prime minister, she is knowledgeable and comfortable with the issues of security, policing and terrorism.

Earlier on Monday, before the bombing, her predicted easy glide to victory in the June 8 elections had unexpectedly run into trouble of her own making, as her plans to reduce social benefits for older people breathed new life into the electoral prospects of the divided opposition Labour Party.

May, a Conservative, was forced to backtrack in the face of accusations that she wanted to impose a “dementia tax” on the elderly. At the same time, criticism was mounting that her experience in government has been too narrow and her circle of advisers too small.

Janan Ganesh, a political columnist for The Financial Times, said in a column Monday that “May’s wobbles bode badly for Brexit,” meaning the negotiations over Britain’s pending withdrawal from the European Union. Given her narrow experience, he said: “The question is no longer what this government stands for, but whether it is any good. Or at least, whether it is good enough, given the work ahead.”

Then came the bombing. The events in Manchester have both allowed and required May to reassert herself as Britain’s reassuring grown-up, a trusted pair of hands on security issues — especially in contrast with her main rival, the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

“It changes the narrative completely, at least for a time,” said Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London. “It’s almost bound to play to the strengths of an incumbent prime minister, especially one responsible, in her previous job, for security.”

The risk for May, he said, is that news could emerge that the government had bungled somehow, that “someone fell down on the job and this perpetrator was allowed to slip through.” Still, he said, “I honestly doubt that would make much difference now. Most people have an innate sympathy, and realise that the security services have a difficult job and can’t prevent 100%.”

The timing also favours her. All election campaigning has been suspended for a few days out of respect for the Manchester victims; it will resume nationally on Friday. But in the meantime, May will be seen till Saturday representing Britain at the Nato summit in Brussels and then the G-7 summit in Italy.

While the Conservatives will not want to be seen as taking advantage of the horror, the party was already trying before the bombing to change the national conversation, away from the U-turn by May on social policy and toward Corbyn’s old sympathies with Sinn Fein and the Irish Republican Army.

The right-wing press, which supports the Conservatives, published material from Corbyn’s decades-old file held by MI5, the domestic intelligence agency, which investigated his perfectly legal associations with Irish Republicans.

In a television interview on Sunday, Corbyn refused numerous times to specifically condemn the IRA’s bombing campaign in Britain; instead he insisted on condemning “all the bombing by both the Loyalists and the IRA.”
After the Manchester bombing on Monday, “security will be more prominent in people’s minds,” said Steven Fielding, a professor of political history at the University of Nottingham.

“We don’t know how prominent, or for how long, but it will be closer to the front of important issues.” He noted that over the weekend, “as the Tories were struggling with issues over the dementia tax,” there was suddenly “a discussion of Corbyn and the IRA.”

Corbyn’s weaknesses
Security in general, Fielding said, is “already seen to be a weakness of Corbyn,” who has insisted that he is not a pacifist and that he would renew Britain’s nuclear deterrent, even though he could not imagine ever using it.

“So there can only be more questions about him” after the Manchester bombing, Fielding said, even if the Conservatives bend over backward not to be seen to be exploiting a tragedy for political purposes.
Bale noted that “attacks now on Corbyn for being soft on terrorism” would probably backfire on the Conservatives for being “opportunistic and in bad taste.” But the right-wing news media is likely to raise the issue again as election day comes closer, given the Conservative strategy to make this election as much as possible about leadership and a straight choice between May and Corbyn.

May will, of course, have the benefit of holding office in a time of crisis, said Tony Travers, a professor of government at the London School of Economics.

“Criticism levelled at her that she was a Home Office PM and perhaps did not have the breadth to understand all the issues a prime minister must is suddenly reversed when there’s a terrorist attack, when the Home Office and security are the prime interest of the state, and it fits her,” he said.

But the Manchester attack will tend to fade in people’s minds before they actually vote, he argued, saying that “the underlying forces that produce general election results are years in the making and are rarely affected by what happens in campaigns.” And in general, he said, Britons believe that “the best way of making ourselves resilient is to keep on and get back to normal.”

Bale agreed, noting that the murder of Jo Cox, a popular member of Parliament who opposed Britain’s exit from the European Union, just a few days before the June 2016 referendum, did not have a large impact on the vote.

“It’s very easy to see these absolutely terrible events as game changers, but they rarely are,” he said. “And partly, sadly, because they’re more common than they used to be.”