What Jo Swinson lacks in substance, she fails to make up for in tone

In other news . . . last week the Lib Dems got a new leader. Jo Swinson, the MP for East Dunbartonshire, beat her rival Sir Ed Davey by a clear margin. Perhaps having a knighthood is not an advantage when it comes to the 105,000-strong Lib Dem membership.

After struggling for years, the Lib Dems are enjoying a revival. They made big gains in the local and European elections (admittedly from a low base). They have a new recruit in the form of Chuka Umunna, the MP for Streatham, who came over from Labour after a brief detour in Change UK. This week they are expected to notch up another seat in the Brecon and Radnorshire by-election. Some national opinion polls have put them ahead of Labour.

Yet I would suggest that Swinson has got off to a poor start as the Lib Dem leader. Parties tend to get a boost in the ratings with a new leader – the “honeymoon” period. There is a fair-minded sense that they should be “given a chance”. But while Boris Johnson has clearly achieved this for the Conservatives, the verdict for Swinson has been more modest – polling showing the Lib Dems just notching up a point or two. Not so much a bounce as a twitch.

Swinson was out of Parliament for a couple of years after she lost her seat in the 2015 general election before winning it back in 2017. But her brief experience in the “real world” consisted of being a consultant on workplace diversity. She is the first female leader of the Lib Dems and is only 39. So this gives her a chance to make the most of the “identity politics” which so preoccupies the media.

I’m not sure how much ordinary people care about it though. Some may find her extremist stance rather alarming. For instance, on transgenderism, she argues that a man could simply declare himself to be a woman (or vice versa) for that to then be the reality which the rest of us must accept. Little concern is retained for the free speech of anyone refusing to go along with such nonsense. George Orwell said: “If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” The Leader of the Lib Dems wants to send round the cops.

But the main attention is on Brexit. On this dominant matter of our time, Swinson made the most hopeless gaffe. She told the BBC that she demanded a referendum, but that if Leave won again she would still vote in the House of Commons against the result being implemented. A few days later she told Sophy Ridge that she would “recognise” the result.

Then she was asked what her policy would be if and when Brexit took place? Would the Lib Dems favour rejoining the EU? She said they would not. Instead she wants “regulations to align as much as possible”. Presumably, that would mean asking to join the Customs Union and Single Market while not becoming full EU members. Would she also like us to rejoin the Common Fisheries Policy and the Common Agricultural Policy so our regulations could “align as much as possible” in those areas?

In other words, it would be the vassal state option. We would follow the rules but have no say in them. It would be like being a non-voting member – still obliged to pay a hefty membership sub. That would not be terribly liberal or democratic. During the referendum, remainers and leavers agreed that it would be the worst possible outcome.

Apart from the errors of substance, the tone has been wrong. In an article for the Times she wrote that “all that Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson can offer is hate.” That is an unfair claim to make against Farage but when it comes to Boris it is quite absurd. He exudes optimism, positivity and bonhomie. But the timing also strikes a sour note. When someone takes on a new role it is best to make some initial message of congratulations and good wishes. I suspect that her predecessor, Sir Vince Cable, would have had the sense to observe such courtesies.

None of this is to deny that the Lib Dems may well have a buoyant few weeks. As Jeremy Corbyn vacillates over Brexit, and Johnson presses full steam ahead, that leaves the Lib Dems as the Party for Remainers. They could well get one or two more defectors among MPs.

The question is whether there will be some historic breakthrough for them. Could they reverse the situation we have had since 1922 of Labour being the main challengers to the Conservatives?

We have had false dawns before. The SDP/Liberal Alliance was close to Labour in votes in the 1983 general election, but not in seats. They had earlier had some spectacular by-election wins and poll ratings. The Liberal Party’s victory in the Orpington by-election in 1962 caused huge excitement at the time. With the Party’s keen young leader, Jo Grimond, there was talk of “The Strange Rebirth of Liberal England.” In the general election a couple of years later it didn’t amount to much – they went up from six seats to nine. Grimond’s successor, Jeremy Thorpe, had plenty of ambition and flair but had never had more than a handful of Parliamentary colleagues.

So for any Lib Dems surge to be sustained would seem pretty challenging, if history is any guide at all. It is not impossible. But thus far Swinson shows no sign of providing either the quality of leadership or the sense of purpose that would be required.