Britain's former finance minister Philip Hammond said on Sunday he would vote against Prime Minister Boris Johnson's bid on Monday to force an election, saying parliament should be focused on trying to secure a deal to leave the European Union.

Britain's former finance minister Philip Hammond said on Sunday he would vote against Prime Minister Boris Johnson's bid on Monday to force an election, saying parliament should be focused on trying to secure a deal to leave the European Union. "I shall be voting against him. This is not the time to be holding a general election, it is a time for cool heads and grown up government," Hammond told Sky News, adding that parliament should instead be scrutinising the Brexit deal. "The government should stop making threats, stop throwing tantrums and get on with the grown up business of doing its business," he said.

I will not back government's election bid, says UK former finance minister

British Prime Minister <a href="https://www.wionews.com/.../who-is-boris-johnson-brexit-warrior-trumps- friend-chinas-frenemy-237975">Boris&nbsp;Johnson</a>&nbsp;has&nbsp;no&nbsp;meeting&nbsp;scheduled&nbsp;with his Irish counterpart Leo&nbsp;Varadkar&nbsp;to discuss Brexit,&nbsp;Johnson's&nbsp;spokesman&nbsp;said on Monday.

A report in the Sunday Telegraph newspaper said an offer to meet the Irish leader to talk about the so-called <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/brexit-why-is-there-an-irish-backstop-188953">Irish backstop</a> had been accepted and dates were being discussed.

British&nbsp;Prime Minister Boris&nbsp;Johnson&nbsp;has accepted an offer to&nbsp;meet&nbsp;Irish leader Leo&nbsp;Varadkar&nbsp;to discuss&nbsp;Brexit&nbsp;and the Northern Irish backstop, the Sunday Telegraph said citing UK government sources.

"The UK has accepted&nbsp;Varadkar's offer to&nbsp;meet&nbsp;and dates are being discussed," a UK source told the newspaper.

Johnson&nbsp;has told the European Union there is no point in new talks on a withdrawal agreement unless negotiators are willing to drop the Northern Irish backstop agreed by his predecessor Theresa May.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-plays-brexit-hardball-with-stubborn-european-union-pound-falls-to-a-two-year-low-239235">The EU has said it is not prepared to reopen the divorce deal</a>&nbsp;it agreed with May, which includes the backstop, an insurance policy to prevent the return to a hard border between the British&nbsp;province of Northern Ireland and EU-member Ireland.

May's agreement, rejected three times by the&nbsp;British&nbsp;parliament, says the United Kingdom will remain in a customs union 'unless and until' alternative arrangements are found to avoid a hard border.

The Telegraph said it was hoped a meeting&nbsp;between Johnson and Varadkar could take place before the G7 summit in France later in August.

The&nbsp;spokesman&nbsp;also said&nbsp;Johnson&nbsp;had been clear he still wanted to get a Brexit deal but hoped the European Union understood the British government's determination to leave the bloc on October&nbsp;31, "no ifs or buts".

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has no meeting scheduled with his Irish counterpart Leo Varadkar to discuss Brexit, Johnson's spokesman said on Monday. A report in the Sunday Telegraph newspaper said an offer to meet the Irish leader to talk about the so-called Irish backstop had been accepted and dates were being discussed.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has no meeting scheduled with his Irish counterpart Leo Varadkar to discuss Brexit, Johnson's spokesman said on Monday. A report in the Sunday Telegraph newspaper said an offer to meet the Irish leader to talk about the so-called Irish backstop had been accepted and dates were being discussed. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has accepted an offer to meet Irish leader Leo Varadkar to discuss Brexit and the Northern Irish backstop, the Sunday Telegraph said citing UK government sources. "The UK has accepted Varadkar's offer to meet and dates are being discussed," a UK source told the newspaper. Johnson has told the European Union there is no point in new talks on a withdrawal agreement unless negotiators are willing to drop the Northern Irish backstop agreed by his predecessor Theresa May. The EU has said it is not prepared to reopen the divorce deal it agreed with May, which includes the backstop, an insurance policy to prevent the return to a hard border between the British province of Northern Ireland and EU-member Ireland. May's agreement, rejected three times by the British parliament, says the United Kingdom will remain in a customs union 'unless and until' alternative arrangements are found to avoid a hard border. The Telegraph said it was hoped a meeting between Johnson and Varadkar could take place before the G7 summit in France later in August. The spokesman also said Johnson had been clear he still wanted to get a Brexit deal but hoped the European Union understood the British government's determination to leave the bloc on October 31, "no ifs or buts".

Irish backstop: No meeting scheduled between Johnson, Varadkar

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson wrote to all government employees on Friday to tell them that preparing for a no-deal exit from the European Union is his and their top priority, according to a copy of the email seen by Reuters.

Johnson has promised voters Britain will leave the EU on October 31 with or without an exit deal, demanding that Brussels drop parts of the existing proposed deal relating to the Irish border and negotiate a fresh exit arrangement.

But the EU is adamant that the legal terms of the deal cannot be rewritten, raising expectations among politicians and financial markets that Britain is headed for an unmanaged divorce from the bloc in less than three months.

"I would very much prefer to leave with a deal – one that must abolish the anti-democratic Irish backstop, which has unacceptable consequences for our country," Johnson said in the email.

"But I recognise this may not happen. That is why preparing urgently and rapidly for the possibility of an exit without a deal will be my top priority, and it will be the top priority for the Civil Service too."

Previously, pro-Brexit campaigners have criticised the ranks of Britain's civil service, which adopts a politically neutral stance while working to enact government policy, saying they were biased towards remaining in the EU and trying to obstruct the exit process.

Many investors say a no-deal Brexit would send shock waves through the world economy, tip Britain into a recession, roil financial markets and weaken London's position as the pre-eminent international financial centre.

"I know many of you have already done a great deal of hard work in mobilising to prepare for a No Deal scenario, so that we can leave on 31 October come what may," Johnson wrote in the email, first reported by Sky News.

"Between now and then, we must engage and communicate clearly with the British people about what our plans for taking back control mean, what people and businesses need to do, and the support we will provide."

Although advocates of a no-deal exit say that Britain would swiftly recover from any disruption and benefit over the long term from improved economic flexibility, sterling and other economic indicators reflect a broadly pessimistic outlook.

Data on Friday showed the British economy shrank unexpectedly for the first time since 2012 in the second quarter, dragged down by a slump in manufacturing.

Johnson, however praised the work of government employees in the 650-word bulletin issued on Friday afternoon, and promised a reforming agenda beyond Brexit, highlighting plans for improved public services.

"The Government I lead is fully committed to leaving the European Union by 31 October 2019 and getting a grip of the vital issues that affect people’s lives: the NHS, education and crime," he wrote.

"While there are no grounds for complacency, there is every reason for optimism."

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson wrote to all government employees on Friday to tell them that preparing for a no-deal exit from the European Union is his and their top priority, according to a copy of the email seen by Reuters.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson wrote to all government employees on Friday to tell them that preparing for a no-deal exit from the European Union is his and their top priority, according to a copy of the email seen by Reuters. Johnson has promised voters Britain will leave the EU on October 31 with or without an exit deal, demanding that Brussels drop parts of the existing proposed deal relating to the Irish border and negotiate a fresh exit arrangement. But the EU is adamant that the legal terms of the deal cannot be rewritten, raising expectations among politicians and financial markets that Britain is headed for an unmanaged divorce from the bloc in less than three months. "I would very much prefer to leave with a deal – one that must abolish the anti-democratic Irish backstop, which has unacceptable consequences for our country," Johnson said in the email. "But I recognise this may not happen. That is why preparing urgently and rapidly for the possibility of an exit without a deal will be my top priority, and it will be the top priority for the Civil Service too." Previously, pro-Brexit campaigners have criticised the ranks of Britain's civil service, which adopts a politically neutral stance while working to enact government policy, saying they were biased towards remaining in the EU and trying to obstruct the exit process. Many investors say a no-deal Brexit would send shock waves through the world economy, tip Britain into a recession, roil financial markets and weaken London's position as the pre-eminent international financial centre. "I know many of you have already done a great deal of hard work in mobilising to prepare for a No Deal scenario, so that we can leave on 31 October come what may," Johnson wrote in the email, first reported by Sky News. "Between now and then, we must engage and communicate clearly with the British people about what our plans for taking back control mean, what people and businesses need to do, and the support we will provide." Although advocates of a no-deal exit say that Britain would swiftly recover from any disruption and benefit over the long term from improved economic flexibility, sterling and other economic indicators reflect a broadly pessimistic outlook. Data on Friday showed the British economy shrank unexpectedly for the first time since 2012 in the second quarter, dragged down by a slump in manufacturing. Johnson, however praised the work of government employees in the 650-word bulletin issued on Friday afternoon, and promised a reforming agenda beyond Brexit, highlighting plans for improved public services. "The Government I lead is fully committed to leaving the European Union by 31 October 2019 and getting a grip of the vital issues that affect people’s lives: the NHS, education and crime," he wrote. "While there are no grounds for complacency, there is every reason for optimism."

UK's Boris Johnson tells civil servants their top priority is preparing for no deal Brexit: Report

Is it too late to hold an election before Brexit? Yes, probably

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/british-mps-vote-against-all-alternative-brexit-options-206122">With Britain's parliament deadlocked over the way forward on Brexit</a>, speculation was growing on Sunday that Prime Minister Theresa May could call a snap election to try and break the impasse.

Last week, after her Brexit deal was rejected by parliament for a third time, May's comment that she feared "we are reaching the limits of this process in this House", was seen by many as a hint she could be moving towards an election.

The Sunday Times reported her media chief, Robbie Gibb, and her political aide Stephen Parkinson were pushing for an election.

But the deputy chair of her Conservatives, James Cleverly said on Sunday the party was not planning for an election, while justice minister David Gauke warned it would not solve the issue over the way forward on Brexit.

In 2017, May lost her party's majority in parliament in an election she did not need to call. It has since been reliant on the support of Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party, which has voted against her Brexit deal all three times.

HOW CAN AN ELECTION BE CALLED?

Britain's next national election is not due to be held until 2022, but there are two ways an earlier vote can be called:

1) Two-thirds of parliament's 650 lawmakers would have to vote in favour of holding an election.

2) If a motion of no confidence in the government is passed by a simple majority of lawmakers and no party can succeed in winning the confidence of the House of Commons over the next 14-days, an election is triggered.

Many of May's Conservatives oppose the idea of an election. If she cannot persuade enough of her party to support an election, May could be forced to back a no-confidence vote in her own government in order to try to trigger one.

WHO WOULD LEAD THE CONSERVATIVES INTO AN ELECTION?

Last week, in a bid to win Conservative lawmakers over to her deal, May promised to step down before the next phase of Brexit negotiations if her deal was approved by parliament. She has previously said she would not contest the 2022 election.

May's deal was rejected for a third time on Friday. Even if she were to agree to go sooner, a Conservative leadership contest is likely to take weeks at a minimum.

On Sunday, Conservative deputy chairman James Cleverly told Sky News it was "the inevitable possibility" that May could have to lead the party in a snap election if one were held.

WHAT WOULD THE CONSERVATIVES' POSITION BE ON BREXIT?

One of the biggest difficulties about an election would be the question of what the Conservative Party's election manifesto would say on Brexit.

The party is deeply divided on the issue. Half of May's lawmakers voted in favour of a 'no deal' Brexit when parliament voted on alternative Brexit options last week, while 34 supported seeking a customs union with the EU and eight backed a confirmatory public vote on any deal.

Many lawmakers are likely to be unhappy standing on a manifesto which pledged to implement May's deal. More than 100 Conservative lawmakers opposed the deal when it was first voted on in January, 75 voted against it at the second try and 34 at the third attempt on Friday.

WHAT DO THE OPINION POLLS SAY?

A poll by Opinium published on Sunday put May's Conservatives and the opposition Labour Party level on 35 percentage points each.

A separate poll by Deltapoll in the Mail on Sunday gave Labour 41 percent, a lead of five percentage points over the Conservatives, who were on 36 percent.

HOW QUICKLY COULD AN ELECTION BE HELD?

Britain is due to leave the EU on April 12 unless it sets out an alternative way forward on Brexit. The government would need to seek a longer delay to the Article 50 negotiating period in order to hold a national election.

It is likely the EU would agree to this, although it is not guaranteed. May has said any longer delay would mean Britain taking place in European Parliament elections.

According to a possible timetable set out by the Institute for Government, an election could be held as soon as mid-late May. If is triggered by a no confidence vote, it would be slightly later due to the 14-day period.

With Britain's parliament deadlocked over the way forward on Brexit, speculation was growing on Sunday that Prime Minister Theresa May could call a snap election to try and break the impasse.

With Britain's parliament deadlocked over the way forward on Brexit, speculation was growing on Sunday that Prime Minister Theresa May could call a snap election to try and break the impasse. Last week, after her Brexit deal was rejected by parliament for a third time, May's comment that she feared "we are reaching the limits of this process in this House", was seen by many as a hint she could be moving towards an election. The Sunday Times reported her media chief, Robbie Gibb, and her political aide Stephen Parkinson were pushing for an election. But the deputy chair of her Conservatives, James Cleverly said on Sunday the party was not planning for an election, while justice minister David Gauke warned it would not solve the issue over the way forward on Brexit. In 2017, May lost her party's majority in parliament in an election she did not need to call. It has since been reliant on the support of Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party, which has voted against her Brexit deal all three times. HOW CAN AN ELECTION BE CALLED? Britain's next national election is not due to be held until 2022, but there are two ways an earlier vote can be called: 1) Two-thirds of parliament's 650 lawmakers would have to vote in favour of holding an election. 2) If a motion of no confidence in the government is passed by a simple majority of lawmakers and no party can succeed in winning the confidence of the House of Commons over the next 14-days, an election is triggered. Many of May's Conservatives oppose the idea of an election. If she cannot persuade enough of her party to support an election, May could be forced to back a no-confidence vote in her own government in order to try to trigger one. WHO WOULD LEAD THE CONSERVATIVES INTO AN ELECTION? Last week, in a bid to win Conservative lawmakers over to her deal, May promised to step down before the next phase of Brexit negotiations if her deal was approved by parliament. She has previously said she would not contest the 2022 election. May's deal was rejected for a third time on Friday. Even if she were to agree to go sooner, a Conservative leadership contest is likely to take weeks at a minimum. On Sunday, Conservative deputy chairman James Cleverly told Sky News it was "the inevitable possibility" that May could have to lead the party in a snap election if one were held. WHAT WOULD THE CONSERVATIVES' POSITION BE ON BREXIT? One of the biggest difficulties about an election would be the question of what the Conservative Party's election manifesto would say on Brexit. The party is deeply divided on the issue. Half of May's lawmakers voted in favour of a 'no deal' Brexit when parliament voted on alternative Brexit options last week, while 34 supported seeking a customs union with the EU and eight backed a confirmatory public vote on any deal. Many lawmakers are likely to be unhappy standing on a manifesto which pledged to implement May's deal. More than 100 Conservative lawmakers opposed the deal when it was first voted on in January, 75 voted against it at the second try and 34 at the third attempt on Friday. WHAT DO THE OPINION POLLS SAY? A poll by Opinium published on Sunday put May's Conservatives and the opposition Labour Party level on 35 percentage points each. A separate poll by Deltapoll in the Mail on Sunday gave Labour 41 percent, a lead of five percentage points over the Conservatives, who were on 36 percent. HOW QUICKLY COULD AN ELECTION BE HELD? Britain is due to leave the EU on April 12 unless it sets out an alternative way forward on Brexit. The government would need to seek a longer delay to the Article 50 negotiating period in order to hold a national election. It is likely the EU would agree to this, although it is not guaranteed. May has said any longer delay would mean Britain taking place in European Parliament elections. According to a possible timetable set out by the Institute for Government, an election could be held as soon as mid-late May. If is triggered by a no confidence vote, it would be slightly later due to the 14-day period.

With Brexit deadlocked, speculation grows that Britain may be heading for general election

On the Andrew Marr show on 11 June, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne described the Prime Minister, Theresa May as a &lsquo;dead woman walking&rsquo;. Osborne had his own reasons for glee at May&rsquo;s terrible miscalculation in calling a snap election on 8 June, having been previously sacked from the Cabinet, as May cosied up to the party&rsquo;s Eurosceptics for a &lsquo;hard Brexit&rsquo;. The latter would mean a departure from both the Single Market and the Customs Union &ndash; a move that, May sensed, required a greater parliamentary majority and legitimacy for herself and her party. It was the logical outcome of the Conservative Party&rsquo;s shift to the right, the supposedly acceptable response to the resurgence of xenophobic populism in the UK.

&nbsp;

But Osborne&rsquo;s necrotic comments were not hyperbole. Predictions at the start of the election campaign were that May might increase her majority in Parliament from 17 to upwards of 100. On Friday 9 June morning, against all expectations and most pollsters, Jeremy Corbyn, the allegedly &lsquo;unelectable&rsquo; leftist, had added 30 new seats for Labour. Better than any leader since Clement Atlee, he had increased the party&rsquo;s share of the popular vote to over 40 per cent. The Conservatives lost a total of 13 seats, missing an overall majority in the House of Commons by 8 seats. Far from achieving a &lsquo;strong and stable&rsquo; basis for Brexit, May had unwittingly set up one of the most spectacular and important electoral upsets in modern British history.

&nbsp;

Theresa May&rsquo;s robotic mantra of the need for &lsquo;strong and stable&rsquo; government summarises, in almost comic fashion, the many ways in which this election turned the UK on its head. Because if there is one expression you could never use for a &lsquo;hung parliament&rsquo; where no party holds a majority, it is &lsquo;stability&rsquo;. But there were other ironies which showed how the results had global implications. Throughout the election campaign which was accompanied by two serious terrorist attacks in Manchester and London, the parties of the right made a play of Corbyn&rsquo;s historical conversations with members of the IRA. Yet two days after the election, May was building an alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) of Northern Ireland, whose 10 seats would allow her to govern. The DUP had strong links to Protestant paramilitary forces, principally the Ulster Volunteer Force, from the mid-1980s. And in forging a relationship with the DUP, May threatened to undo British government neutrality in Northern Ireland, which was key to peace via the Good Friday agreement. Overnight, Corbyn&rsquo;s insistence that radical extremism needed to be tackled not with the suppression of rights, but by understanding its root international causes in UK colonial/postcolonial intervention, seemed to make perfect sense. And his logic was supported further by the publicised connections between MI6 and the Libyan bomber in Manchester, and by the UK&rsquo;s continued arms deals with Saudi Arabia.

&nbsp;

At least the DUP, reflecting Northern Ireland&rsquo;s overwhelming support in the EU referendum for Remain, was likely to argue May should follow a softer Brexit line. In other ways then, and against all claims of &lsquo;stability&rsquo;, the government&rsquo;s Brexit negotiations are thrown into disarray and further uncertainty. It is clear that the majority in the House of Commons would no longer back the &lsquo;hard&rsquo; Brexit that May had nurtured on the back of post-imperial sentiments and a nod to popular xenophobia. The entire Brexit strategy has been premised so far on her penchant for being a &lsquo;difficult woman&rsquo; in Brussels negotiations. But the only element of the election that allows May to hang on to power at all, are the newly won Conservative seats in Scotland. Furthermore, Ruth Davidson, the Conservative leader in Scotland, is strongly in favour of a &lsquo;soft&rsquo; Brexit, remaining if possible in the Single Market.

&nbsp;

Negotiators on the EU side will now look at the UK with uncertainty. May seems illegitimate both in the UK, and in the context of changing international relations. There are suggestions that not only could the negotiations themselves be delayed, but that the 27 EU states might even entertain a total reconsideration of Brexit itself, should the UK government choose to revoke the signing of article 50 and stay in the Union. The 2016 referendum, after all, was legally only &lsquo;advisory&rsquo;. And there is no doubt that the surge of dissatisfaction with Theresa May&rsquo;s Conservatives on 8 June was driven, in part, by the &lsquo;48%&rsquo; &ndash; the relatively well educated, demographically younger, and more left-wing supporters of Remain.

&nbsp;

The constituency that feels most cheated are the 18 to 25-years-olds &ndash; the population of the UK that is perhaps most clearly connected to promises of overseas work, whose horizons are increasingly global, being connected to the like-minded like never before via social media and travel. Although denigrated by the right-wing tabloids as a man who would take Britain &lsquo;back to the 1970s&rsquo; via old-fashioned socialism, Jeremy Corbyn managed to harness this constituency in a way that made a remarkable difference to the outcome of the election. It has also had a knock-on effect elsewhere in the world. Donald Trump, whose diminutive hand held that of Theresa May&#39;s, has now postponed his planned visit to the UK for fear of protests led by the very same constituencies that came out to vote for Corbyn. The &lsquo;special relationship&rsquo; too then, between the USA and UK, like Anglophone influence in the EU, has never seemed more uncertain.

&nbsp;

Perhaps the 2017 General Election in the UK shows something broader. Political scientists and commentators have looked at the rise of authoritarian populism in the USA, UK, India, Russia and Turkey as part of a possible global shift towards anti-cosmopolitanism, in the face of global economic crisis. The UK election of June 2017, alongside the Presidential elections in France of this year, suggest that important parts of Europe, at least, are bucking this trend. Most importantly, they show that a younger generation of voters and leaders are emerging to contest this global shift to the right, and to lay the possible foundations for a new kind of politics.

Jeremy Corbyn's success came from successfully appealing to the young adults of Britain who suffered most from Brexit

On the Andrew Marr show on 11 June, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne described the Prime Minister, Theresa May as a ‘dead woman walking’. Osborne had his own reasons for glee at May’s terrible miscalculation in calling a snap election on 8 June, having been previously sacked from the Cabinet, as May cosied up to the party’s Eurosceptics for a ‘hard Brexit’. The latter would mean a departure from both the Single Market and the Customs Union – a move that, May sensed, required a greater parliamentary majority and legitimacy for herself and her party. It was the logical outcome of the Conservative Party’s shift to the right, the supposedly acceptable response to the resurgence of xenophobic populism in the UK. But Osborne’s necrotic comments were not hyperbole. Predictions at the start of the election campaign were that May might increase her majority in Parliament from 17 to upwards of 100. On Friday 9 June morning, against all expectations and most pollsters, Jeremy Corbyn, the allegedly ‘unelectable’ leftist, had added 30 new seats for Labour. Better than any leader since Clement Atlee, he had increased the party’s share of the popular vote to over 40 per cent. The Conservatives lost a total of 13 seats, missing an overall majority in the House of Commons by 8 seats. Far from achieving a ‘strong and stable’ basis for Brexit, May had unwittingly set up one of the most spectacular and important electoral upsets in modern British history. Theresa May’s robotic mantra of the need for ‘strong and stable’ government summarises, in almost comic fashion, the many ways in which this election turned the UK on its head. Because if there is one expression you could never use for a ‘hung parliament’ where no party holds a majority, it is ‘stability’. But there were other ironies which showed how the results had global implications. Throughout the election campaign which was accompanied by two serious terrorist attacks in Manchester and London, the parties of the right made a play of Corbyn’s historical conversations with members of the IRA. Yet two days after the election, May was building an alliance with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) of Northern Ireland, whose 10 seats would allow her to govern. The DUP had strong links to Protestant paramilitary forces, principally the Ulster Volunteer Force, from the mid-1980s. And in forging a relationship with the DUP, May threatened to undo British government neutrality in Northern Ireland, which was key to peace via the Good Friday agreement. Overnight, Corbyn’s insistence that radical extremism needed to be tackled not with the suppression of rights, but by understanding its root international causes in UK colonial/postcolonial intervention, seemed to make perfect sense. And his logic was supported further by the publicised connections between MI6 and the Libyan bomber in Manchester, and by the UK’s continued arms deals with Saudi Arabia. At least the DUP, reflecting Northern Ireland’s overwhelming support in the EU referendum for Remain, was likely to argue May should follow a softer Brexit line. In other ways then, and against all claims of ‘stability’, the government’s Brexit negotiations are thrown into disarray and further uncertainty. It is clear that the majority in the House of Commons would no longer back the ‘hard’ Brexit that May had nurtured on the back of post-imperial sentiments and a nod to popular xenophobia. The entire Brexit strategy has been premised so far on her penchant for being a ‘difficult woman’ in Brussels negotiations. But the only element of the election that allows May to hang on to power at all, are the newly won Conservative seats in Scotland. Furthermore, Ruth Davidson, the Conservative leader in Scotland, is strongly in favour of a ‘soft’ Brexit, remaining if possible in the Single Market. Negotiators on the EU side will now look at the UK with uncertainty. May seems illegitimate both in the UK, and in the context of changing international relations. There are suggestions that not only could the negotiations themselves be delayed, but that the 27 EU states might even entertain a total reconsideration of Brexit itself, should the UK government choose to revoke the signing of article 50 and stay in the Union. The 2016 referendum, after all, was legally only ‘advisory’. And there is no doubt that the surge of dissatisfaction with Theresa May’s Conservatives on 8 June was driven, in part, by the ‘48%’ – the relatively well educated, demographically younger, and more left-wing supporters of Remain. The constituency that feels most cheated are the 18 to 25-years-olds – the population of the UK that is perhaps most clearly connected to promises of overseas work, whose horizons are increasingly global, being connected to the like-minded like never before via social media and travel. Although denigrated by the right-wing tabloids as a man who would take Britain ‘back to the 1970s’ via old-fashioned socialism, Jeremy Corbyn managed to harness this constituency in a way that made a remarkable difference to the outcome of the election. It has also had a knock-on effect elsewhere in the world. Donald Trump, whose diminutive hand held that of Theresa May's, has now postponed his planned visit to the UK for fear of protests led by the very same constituencies that came out to vote for Corbyn. The ‘special relationship’ too then, between the USA and UK, like Anglophone influence in the EU, has never seemed more uncertain. Perhaps the 2017 General Election in the UK shows something broader. Political scientists and commentators have looked at the rise of authoritarian populism in the USA, UK, India, Russia and Turkey as part of a possible global shift towards anti-cosmopolitanism, in the face of global economic crisis. The UK election of June 2017, alongside the Presidential elections in France of this year, suggest that important parts of Europe, at least, are bucking this trend. Most importantly, they show that a younger generation of voters and leaders are emerging to contest this global shift to the right, and to lay the possible foundations for a new kind of politics.

Revolution of the young: The 2017 Election in the UK

A British author ate his book during a live TV show after his prediction that the opposition Labour party would poll less than 38 per cent votes went wrong.

Matthew Goodwin, 35, a professor of politics at the University of Kent, is the co-author of &#39;Brexit: Why Britain voted to leave the European Union&#39;.

He said in a tweet last month that he did not think Jeremy Corbyn&#39;s Labour party would poll 38 per cent in the general election on June 8. However, the Labour party won 40.3 per cent of the vote.

&quot;I&#39;m saying this out loud. I do not believe that Labour, under Jeremy Corbyn, will poll 38%. I will happily eat my new Brexit book if they do,&quot; he had tweeted.

After the results came in, Goodwin was trolled by Labour supporters for his tweet.

Appearing on Sky News yesterday, he was asked if he is a man of his word, to which he replied: &quot;Well indeed I am. I was surprised that Jeremy Corbyn got two percentage points more than I had expected, and I did say that I would eat this book,&quot; Metro news reported.

&quot;Two percentage points makes a big difference, I am a man of my word, so what I am going to do is just sit here and eat my book, while you guys carry on,&quot; he said as he began eating pages of his book, the report said.

Goodwin scrunched up a piece of paper and uncomfortably shoved it into his mouth and said: &quot;It is actually a hardback, there are lots of chemicals but I have got to get through the whole thing.&quot;

He then gave a slightly sad thumbs up to the camera. Later, a Sky News producer tweeted that Goodwin did not swallow the page he was munching on, the report added.

(PTI)&nbsp;

After underestimating Corbyn's success by 2%, Goodwin delivered on his promise and chewed pages from his Brexit book

A British author ate his book during a live TV show after his prediction that the opposition Labour party would poll less than 38 per cent votes went wrong. Matthew Goodwin, 35, a professor of politics at the University of Kent, is the co-author of 'Brexit: Why Britain voted to leave the European Union'. He said in a tweet last month that he did not think Jeremy Corbyn's Labour party would poll 38 per cent in the general election on June 8. However, the Labour party won 40.3 per cent of the vote. "I'm saying this out loud. I do not believe that Labour, under Jeremy Corbyn, will poll 38%. I will happily eat my new Brexit book if they do," he had tweeted. After the results came in, Goodwin was trolled by Labour supporters for his tweet. Appearing on Sky News yesterday, he was asked if he is a man of his word, to which he replied: "Well indeed I am. I was surprised that Jeremy Corbyn got two percentage points more than I had expected, and I did say that I would eat this book," Metro news reported. "Two percentage points makes a big difference, I am a man of my word, so what I am going to do is just sit here and eat my book, while you guys carry on," he said as he began eating pages of his book, the report said. Goodwin scrunched up a piece of paper and uncomfortably shoved it into his mouth and said: "It is actually a hardback, there are lots of chemicals but I have got to get through the whole thing." He then gave a slightly sad thumbs up to the camera. Later, a Sky News producer tweeted that Goodwin did not swallow the page he was munching on, the report added. (PTI)

Author eats his book on live TV after incorrect UK poll prediction

British Prime Minister Theresa May reached an &quot;outline agreement&quot; on Saturday with the ultra-conservative Democratic Unionist Party in order to be able to govern after a humiliating election that has left her authority in tatters.

She also confirmed to German Chancellor Angela Merkel in a phone call that Britain was ready to begin Brexit negotiations &quot;as planned in the next couple of weeks&quot;, reassuring EU leaders who had expressed doubts after May&#39;s electoral losses.

May&#39;s Conservatives lost their parliamentary majority in Thursday&#39;s vote and need the support of the 10 MPs from Northern Ireland&#39;s DUP to have a majority.

&quot;We can confirm that the Democratic Unionist Party have agreed to the principles of an outline agreement to support the Conservative government,&quot; a spokesman for May said.

The spokesman indicated this would not be a formal coalition but a minority government with looser DUP support on a &quot;confidence and supply basis&quot;.

&quot;We welcome this commitment, which can provide the stability and certainty the whole country requires as we embark on Brexit and beyond,&quot; he said.

The details of the agreement &quot;will be put forward for discussion and agreement&quot; at a cabinet meeting on Monday, a day before the new parliament meets, the spokesman said.

There was no mention of what concessions the DUP may have asked for, amid growing concern about the influence of a party opposed to abortion and gay marriage, and which has proved hugely controversial in the past over the homophobic and sectarian views of some of its representatives.

May earlier on Saturday lost her two closest aides as she struggled to reassert her leadership after a crushing election setback.

The Conservative leader has been warned that her days are numbered after calling Thursday&#39;s vote three years early hoping to strengthen her hand going into Brexit negotiations with Brussels, only to lose her majority.

Senior party figures have cautioned against any immediate leadership challenge, saying it would cause only further disruption as Britain prepares to start the Brexit talks as early as June 19.

But media reports suggest they had demanded the departure of May&#39;s joint chiefs of staff, Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill, as the price for allowing the 60-year-old vicar&#39;s daughter to stay in office.

They were replaced by Gavin Barwell, a former housing minister who lost his seat in the election.

&#39;Toxic&#39; atmosphere&nbsp;

May put on a brave face after Thursday&#39;s vote, expressing sorrow for the MPs who lost their seats but refusing to acknowledge how her election gamble backfired.

&quot;From hubris to humiliation,&quot; said the left-leaning Guardian, while the Times headline read: &quot;May stares into the abyss&quot;.

The resignations of Timothy and Hill, on whom May had been heavily reliant since her previous job at the interior ministry, will be a personal blow.

Timothy said he took responsibility for the Conservative manifesto, including a plan for elderly social care that caused a backlash among core voters.

A party spokesman confirmed the resignation of Hill, a combative character who one former colleague said had helped create a &quot;toxic&quot; atmosphere at the heart of the government.

May is preparing to name the rest of her cabinet, after revealing Friday that her five most senior ministers would stay in their posts.

Several Conservative lawmakers have warned she cannot carry on indefinitely, after throwing away a 17-seat majority in the 650-seat House of Commons.

But former party leader Iain Duncan Smith said a leadership contest now would be a &quot;catastrophe&quot;.

&#39;DUP has got to go&#39;

The Conservatives won 318 seats, down from 331 in 2015 after the opposition Labour party under socialist leader Jeremy Corbyn scored hefty gains.

Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson, who is gay, was among the first to express disquiet over a deal with the ultra-conservative DUP.

&quot;I sought, and to be fair to the prime minister, received a categoric assurance that in talking to the DUP that there would be no suggestion of any rollback on LGBTI rights in the rest of the UK,&quot; she told reporters.

Several hundred people -- many Labour voters -- protested in central London against the potential alliance, with one organiser leading chants of &quot;racist, sexist, anti-gay, the DUP has got to go&quot;.

Joining forces with the hardline Protestant party also threatens London&#39;s neutrality in Northern Ireland, which is key to the delicate balance of power in a province once plagued by violence.

On Brexit, the DUP supports leaving the EU but opposes a return to a &quot;hard&quot; border with Ireland -- which could happen if May carries through her threat to walk away from the talks rather than accept a &quot;bad deal&quot;.

The new parliament will be sworn in Tuesday, but the real test for May is likely to come when MPs vote on her programme after it is outlined in parliament by Queen Elizabeth II on June 19.

European Council President Donald Tusk has warned there is &quot;no time to lose&quot; in starting Brexit talks, after May on March 29 started the two-year countdown to ending Britain&#39;s four-decade membership.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

British PM Theresa May told?German Chancellor Angela Merkel in a phone call that Britain was ready to begin Brexit negotiations 'as planned in the next couple of weeks'

British Prime Minister Theresa May reached an "outline agreement" on Saturday with the ultra-conservative Democratic Unionist Party in order to be able to govern after a humiliating election that has left her authority in tatters. She also confirmed to German Chancellor Angela Merkel in a phone call that Britain was ready to begin Brexit negotiations "as planned in the next couple of weeks", reassuring EU leaders who had expressed doubts after May's electoral losses. May's Conservatives lost their parliamentary majority in Thursday's vote and need the support of the 10 MPs from Northern Ireland's DUP to have a majority. "We can confirm that the Democratic Unionist Party have agreed to the principles of an outline agreement to support the Conservative government," a spokesman for May said. The spokesman indicated this would not be a formal coalition but a minority government with looser DUP support on a "confidence and supply basis". "We welcome this commitment, which can provide the stability and certainty the whole country requires as we embark on Brexit and beyond," he said. The details of the agreement "will be put forward for discussion and agreement" at a cabinet meeting on Monday, a day before the new parliament meets, the spokesman said. There was no mention of what concessions the DUP may have asked for, amid growing concern about the influence of a party opposed to abortion and gay marriage, and which has proved hugely controversial in the past over the homophobic and sectarian views of some of its representatives. May earlier on Saturday lost her two closest aides as she struggled to reassert her leadership after a crushing election setback. The Conservative leader has been warned that her days are numbered after calling Thursday's vote three years early hoping to strengthen her hand going into Brexit negotiations with Brussels, only to lose her majority. Senior party figures have cautioned against any immediate leadership challenge, saying it would cause only further disruption as Britain prepares to start the Brexit talks as early as June 19. But media reports suggest they had demanded the departure of May's joint chiefs of staff, Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill, as the price for allowing the 60-year-old vicar's daughter to stay in office. They were replaced by Gavin Barwell, a former housing minister who lost his seat in the election. 'Toxic' atmosphere May put on a brave face after Thursday's vote, expressing sorrow for the MPs who lost their seats but refusing to acknowledge how her election gamble backfired. "From hubris to humiliation," said the left-leaning Guardian, while the Times headline read: "May stares into the abyss". The resignations of Timothy and Hill, on whom May had been heavily reliant since her previous job at the interior ministry, will be a personal blow. Timothy said he took responsibility for the Conservative manifesto, including a plan for elderly social care that caused a backlash among core voters. A party spokesman confirmed the resignation of Hill, a combative character who one former colleague said had helped create a "toxic" atmosphere at the heart of the government. May is preparing to name the rest of her cabinet, after revealing Friday that her five most senior ministers would stay in their posts. Several Conservative lawmakers have warned she cannot carry on indefinitely, after throwing away a 17-seat majority in the 650-seat House of Commons. But former party leader Iain Duncan Smith said a leadership contest now would be a "catastrophe". 'DUP has got to go' The Conservatives won 318 seats, down from 331 in 2015 after the opposition Labour party under socialist leader Jeremy Corbyn scored hefty gains. Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson, who is gay, was among the first to express disquiet over a deal with the ultra-conservative DUP. "I sought, and to be fair to the prime minister, received a categoric assurance that in talking to the DUP that there would be no suggestion of any rollback on LGBTI rights in the rest of the UK," she told reporters. Several hundred people -- many Labour voters -- protested in central London against the potential alliance, with one organiser leading chants of "racist, sexist, anti-gay, the DUP has got to go". Joining forces with the hardline Protestant party also threatens London's neutrality in Northern Ireland, which is key to the delicate balance of power in a province once plagued by violence. On Brexit, the DUP supports leaving the EU but opposes a return to a "hard" border with Ireland -- which could happen if May carries through her threat to walk away from the talks rather than accept a "bad deal". The new parliament will be sworn in Tuesday, but the real test for May is likely to come when MPs vote on her programme after it is outlined in parliament by Queen Elizabeth II on June 19. European Council President Donald Tusk has warned there is "no time to lose" in starting Brexit talks, after May on March 29 started the two-year countdown to ending Britain's four-decade membership.

Britain's May reaches 'outline' power deal, Brexit talks to begin in 'next couple of weeks'

&nbsp;

Stuart Wilks-Heeg, head of politics, University of Liverpool

Theresa May is in deep, deep trouble. We know why she called the election; she wanted a bigger majority and a strong mandate ahead of the Brexit negotiations. At the time, it looked like she couldn&rsquo;t fail, and now it seems that she has failed spectacularly. The campaign has fatally undermined her leadership, and the one thing that could have saved her &ndash; if she came through with a strong majority for the Conservative party &ndash; hasn&rsquo;t happened. I think she is finished politically &ndash; whether she resigns, or is pushed out by her own party remains to be seen.

Kathryn Simpson, lecturer in politics and public services, Manchester Metropolitan University

Dubbed the Brexit election, this general election provided very little clarity and specific details on what Brexit negotiations would be and what a post-Brexit UK would look like. And the electorate has recognised this.

There will not be the <a href="https://theconversation.com/strong-and-stable-leadership-inside-the-conservatives-election-slogan-77121">strong and stable government</a> by the time Brexit negotations begin on June 19. That will have a robust impact on Brexit.

The Brexit clock started ticking when May triggered Article 50 in March. Taking six weeks out of the <a href="https://blogs.surrey.ac.uk/politics/2017/03/24/an-article-50-timeline-infographic/">two-year Brexit negotiating window</a> to conduct a general election was risky, as it has eaten into the time available to deal with the EU. Now, with so much uncertainty about how the next government will be formed, more time will inevitably be lost.

Daniel Fitzpatrick, lecturer in politics, Aston University

In an election called to secure a clear mandate for Brexit, the result is no obvious mandate for any party. The mandate for the Conservative version of hard Brexit is in tatters, while a second independence referendum in Scotland is moot given the swing away from the SNP towards the unionist parties &ndash; the Scottish Conservatives particularly.

Political commentators are fond of naming elections, as a shorthand for the dominant issue of the day: the 1983 &ldquo;Falklands&rdquo; election, the 2005 &ldquo;Iraq&rdquo; election. Psephologists will tell you that such retrospective rationalisations do little to convey the complexities of voting behaviour.

But, rarely has an election been characterised so one-dimensionally before the campaign even begun. Although labelled the &ldquo;Brexit election&rdquo; by the Conservatives, Theresa May did little to establish that narrative beyond her supposed leadership credentials, which, to put it mildly, faltered. It figured surprisingly little in the election campaigns of the other mainstream parties, except for the Liberal Democrats.

Taking a largely ambivalent stance on EU, Labour has gained Remain seats in London and the South East and retained and won back marginal Leave seats in the North. It looks like neither the so-called Leave or Remain vote offers a reliable indication of the new electoral map. It has figured in certain parts of the country, but nowhere near as decisive as imagined.

William McDougall, lecturer in politics, Glasgow Caledonian University

The Conservative party are performing much better in Scotland than anywhere else. In that sense, Scotland is again having its own election, different from the rest of the UK. This is probably due to the fact that the Scottish Conservatives have been able to run a separate campaign, disassociating themselves from Theresa May and the poor campaign the Conservatives have run in the UK as a whole. They&rsquo;ve been able to focus on an anti-independence, anti-SNP message. But that does mean that it&rsquo;s less clear what else the Scottish Conservative MPs stand for. Once they start voting in Westminster, we&rsquo;ll have a clearer idea of where they stand on other policies.

The Scottish Conservatives could now play quite a vital role in the Westminster parliament. It could make all the difference for May as she attempts to hold on to power. It&rsquo;s ironic: people often say that Scotland never gets to influence UK election results, and now it could be the Scottish Conservatives who keep the party on top. It puts Ruth Davidson in a strong position within the Conservative party, although it might not have an impact on the direction of Brexit: the new Scottish Conservative MPs are likely to behave themselves in that respect.

John Garry, professor of political behaviour, Queen&rsquo;s University Belfast

It seems that the two big parties have swept away all the others in Northern Ireland. Apart from an independent unionist candidate retaining her seat, the hardline unionist party, the Democratic Unionist Party, have had a great electoral night at the expense of the Ulster Unionist Party, which has lost its two seats. On the nationalist side, it has been a dreadful election for the moderate Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP), which has lost its three seats. The more hardline nationalists, Sinn Fein, have dramatically increased their support.

With the cross-party Alliance also winning no seats, the overall picture emerging is of a more polarised politics in Northern Ireland. This bodes ill for the kind of compromise and conciliation that will be needed to re-establish a power sharing government &ndash; a process that was effectively put on hold once Theresa May called this snap Westminster election.

It is ironic that both the DUP and Sinn Fein, which are finding it difficult to form a government in Northern Ireland, were regarded as potentially key players in the election night commentary on government formation at Westminster. Would Sinn Fein change its policy of abstention and possibly prop up a Jeremy Corbyn premiership? &ldquo;No&rdquo;, was <a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3758550/gerry-adams-congratulates-jeremy-corbyn-after-shock-election-2017-exit-poll-result/">the quick response</a> from the Sinn Fein leadership. It&rsquo;s more plausible that the DUP could play a crucial role in sustaining a Conservative administration.

Darren Lilleker, associate professor of political communication, Bournemouth University

Exit polls have generally been fairly accurate in recent UK elections. If that is the case in 2017, the result is cataclysmic for the Conservatives. Labour would not only have increased its number of seats in parliament but also undermined the stranglehold of the neo-liberal societal narrative on public attitudes. This could represent a sea-change in the nation&rsquo;s politics.

Labour supporters are somewhat triumphalist. It is still a bit early. It will be almost impossible for Labour to have a majority, and it&rsquo;s still unknown if the Conservatives will be the majority party in a minority government. But if the rumours are true, Labour have the momentum.

Why might this be? This is the most interesting question. It would appear that the Conservative message of offering strong and stable government may well have failed, whereas the more nebulous &ndash; but <a href="https://theconversation.com/manifesto-check-do-labour-party-tax-and-spending-plans-add-up-77883">also unproven</a> &ndash; Labour platform has traction. What&rsquo;s more, the UKIP vote has collapsed, while at the same time we see the emergence of the two-party state. UKIP voters have not exclusively moved to the Conservatives while other party voters seem dispersed &ndash; the electoral terrain never seemed less certain.

Todd K. Hartman, lecturer in quantitative social science, University of Sheffield

After catching their breath, the first question most people were asking was whether they could trust the results of this exit poll.

The <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-election-exit-poll-puts-conservatives-short-of-a-majority-experts-react-79169">short answer is yes</a>. While the official seat count may differ in either direction due to sampling error, exit polls have provided reliable estimates in past elections.

Exit polling is done at selected polling stations within constituencies with sufficiently large samples to reduce uncertainty around the estimates. They include responses from tens of thousands of voters, while most national opinion polls have sample sizes of around 1,200.

The exit polls only include responses from actual voters. Opinion polls must rely on vote intentions and the likelihood that a particular respondent will actually cast their ballot on election day.

However, like most opinion polls, exit polls are not based on probability samples and are thus not entirely representative of the voting public. This process of sampling introduces error, which is why the exit poll estimates may be different than the certified seat counts.

James Tilley, professor of politics, University of Oxford

Poll leads for the Conservatives over the past couple of weeks have varied enormously. Much of the variation, although by no means all, has been due to the way that the pollsters predicted people&rsquo;s likelihood to turnout.

The polls with the highest leads for the Conservatives tended to predict low voting rates among younger people and people in working class jobs. We&rsquo;ve seen this pattern of non-voting for the past few elections, arguably because these groups had become disillusioned with Labour. The polls with the lowest leads for the Conservatives assumed that these two groups would turn out to vote at higher levels than in 2015. The argument here was that Labour under Jeremy Corbyn is a more attractive proposition to more economically left-wing people. So who was right?

Obviously, we won&rsquo;t know the actual result and we won&rsquo;t know exact rates of turnout by age and social class for several months until the British Election Survey reports back, but the exit poll does seem to suggest that young people have turned out in larger numbers than at the past few elections.

Generally campaigns are not thought to matter enormously, but this may be the exception that proves the rule. Labour has evidently either converted some people who said they would vote Conservative a few months ago, or mobilised people who said that they wouldn&rsquo;t vote.

<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/79169/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" width="1" />It&rsquo;s likely that both conversion and particularly mobilisation have been higher among younger voters. While it&rsquo;s not a successful night for Labour in that it is still predicted to have 50 fewer seats than the Conservatives, at this stage it appears a clear success for the Labour campaign strategy.

&nbsp;

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-election-results-stun-conservatives-outcome-hangs-in-balance-experts-react-79169">original article</a>.

&nbsp;

It appears Theresa May?s snap election gamble has backfired

Stuart Wilks-Heeg, head of politics, University of Liverpool Theresa May is in deep, deep trouble. We know why she called the election; she wanted a bigger majority and a strong mandate ahead of the Brexit negotiations. At the time, it looked like she couldn’t fail, and now it seems that she has failed spectacularly. The campaign has fatally undermined her leadership, and the one thing that could have saved her – if she came through with a strong majority for the Conservative party – hasn’t happened. I think she is finished politically – whether she resigns, or is pushed out by her own party remains to be seen. Kathryn Simpson, lecturer in politics and public services, Manchester Metropolitan University Dubbed the Brexit election, this general election provided very little clarity and specific details on what Brexit negotiations would be and what a post-Brexit UK would look like. And the electorate has recognised this. There will not be the strong and stable government by the time Brexit negotations begin on June 19. That will have a robust impact on Brexit. The Brexit clock started ticking when May triggered Article 50 in March. Taking six weeks out of the two-year Brexit negotiating window to conduct a general election was risky, as it has eaten into the time available to deal with the EU. Now, with so much uncertainty about how the next government will be formed, more time will inevitably be lost. Daniel Fitzpatrick, lecturer in politics, Aston University In an election called to secure a clear mandate for Brexit, the result is no obvious mandate for any party. The mandate for the Conservative version of hard Brexit is in tatters, while a second independence referendum in Scotland is moot given the swing away from the SNP towards the unionist parties – the Scottish Conservatives particularly. Political commentators are fond of naming elections, as a shorthand for the dominant issue of the day: the 1983 “Falklands” election, the 2005 “Iraq” election. Psephologists will tell you that such retrospective rationalisations do little to convey the complexities of voting behaviour. But, rarely has an election been characterised so one-dimensionally before the campaign even begun. Although labelled the “Brexit election” by the Conservatives, Theresa May did little to establish that narrative beyond her supposed leadership credentials, which, to put it mildly, faltered. It figured surprisingly little in the election campaigns of the other mainstream parties, except for the Liberal Democrats. Taking a largely ambivalent stance on EU, Labour has gained Remain seats in London and the South East and retained and won back marginal Leave seats in the North. It looks like neither the so-called Leave or Remain vote offers a reliable indication of the new electoral map. It has figured in certain parts of the country, but nowhere near as decisive as imagined. William McDougall, lecturer in politics, Glasgow Caledonian University The Conservative party are performing much better in Scotland than anywhere else. In that sense, Scotland is again having its own election, different from the rest of the UK. This is probably due to the fact that the Scottish Conservatives have been able to run a separate campaign, disassociating themselves from Theresa May and the poor campaign the Conservatives have run in the UK as a whole. They’ve been able to focus on an anti-independence, anti-SNP message. But that does mean that it’s less clear what else the Scottish Conservative MPs stand for. Once they start voting in Westminster, we’ll have a clearer idea of where they stand on other policies. The Scottish Conservatives could now play quite a vital role in the Westminster parliament. It could make all the difference for May as she attempts to hold on to power. It’s ironic: people often say that Scotland never gets to influence UK election results, and now it could be the Scottish Conservatives who keep the party on top. It puts Ruth Davidson in a strong position within the Conservative party, although it might not have an impact on the direction of Brexit: the new Scottish Conservative MPs are likely to behave themselves in that respect. John Garry, professor of political behaviour, Queen’s University Belfast It seems that the two big parties have swept away all the others in Northern Ireland. Apart from an independent unionist candidate retaining her seat, the hardline unionist party, the Democratic Unionist Party, have had a great electoral night at the expense of the Ulster Unionist Party, which has lost its two seats. On the nationalist side, it has been a dreadful election for the moderate Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP), which has lost its three seats. The more hardline nationalists, Sinn Fein, have dramatically increased their support. With the cross-party Alliance also winning no seats, the overall picture emerging is of a more polarised politics in Northern Ireland. This bodes ill for the kind of compromise and conciliation that will be needed to re-establish a power sharing government – a process that was effectively put on hold once Theresa May called this snap Westminster election. It is ironic that both the DUP and Sinn Fein, which are finding it difficult to form a government in Northern Ireland, were regarded as potentially key players in the election night commentary on government formation at Westminster. Would Sinn Fein change its policy of abstention and possibly prop up a Jeremy Corbyn premiership? “No”, was the quick response from the Sinn Fein leadership. It’s more plausible that the DUP could play a crucial role in sustaining a Conservative administration. Darren Lilleker, associate professor of political communication, Bournemouth University Exit polls have generally been fairly accurate in recent UK elections. If that is the case in 2017, the result is cataclysmic for the Conservatives. Labour would not only have increased its number of seats in parliament but also undermined the stranglehold of the neo-liberal societal narrative on public attitudes. This could represent a sea-change in the nation’s politics. Labour supporters are somewhat triumphalist. It is still a bit early. It will be almost impossible for Labour to have a majority, and it’s still unknown if the Conservatives will be the majority party in a minority government. But if the rumours are true, Labour have the momentum. Why might this be? This is the most interesting question. It would appear that the Conservative message of offering strong and stable government may well have failed, whereas the more nebulous – but also unproven – Labour platform has traction. What’s more, the UKIP vote has collapsed, while at the same time we see the emergence of the two-party state. UKIP voters have not exclusively moved to the Conservatives while other party voters seem dispersed – the electoral terrain never seemed less certain. Todd K. Hartman, lecturer in quantitative social science, University of Sheffield After catching their breath, the first question most people were asking was whether they could trust the results of this exit poll. The short answer is yes. While the official seat count may differ in either direction due to sampling error, exit polls have provided reliable estimates in past elections. Exit polling is done at selected polling stations within constituencies with sufficiently large samples to reduce uncertainty around the estimates. They include responses from tens of thousands of voters, while most national opinion polls have sample sizes of around 1,200. The exit polls only include responses from actual voters. Opinion polls must rely on vote intentions and the likelihood that a particular respondent will actually cast their ballot on election day. However, like most opinion polls, exit polls are not based on probability samples and are thus not entirely representative of the voting public. This process of sampling introduces error, which is why the exit poll estimates may be different than the certified seat counts. James Tilley, professor of politics, University of Oxford Poll leads for the Conservatives over the past couple of weeks have varied enormously. Much of the variation, although by no means all, has been due to the way that the pollsters predicted people’s likelihood to turnout. The polls with the highest leads for the Conservatives tended to predict low voting rates among younger people and people in working class jobs. We’ve seen this pattern of non-voting for the past few elections, arguably because these groups had become disillusioned with Labour. The polls with the lowest leads for the Conservatives assumed that these two groups would turn out to vote at higher levels than in 2015. The argument here was that Labour under Jeremy Corbyn is a more attractive proposition to more economically left-wing people. So who was right? Obviously, we won’t know the actual result and we won’t know exact rates of turnout by age and social class for several months until the British Election Survey reports back, but the exit poll does seem to suggest that young people have turned out in larger numbers than at the past few elections. Generally campaigns are not thought to matter enormously, but this may be the exception that proves the rule. Labour has evidently either converted some people who said they would vote Conservative a few months ago, or mobilised people who said that they wouldn’t vote. It’s likely that both conversion and particularly mobilisation have been higher among younger voters. While it’s not a successful night for Labour in that it is still predicted to have 50 fewer seats than the Conservatives, at this stage it appears a clear success for the Labour campaign strategy. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

UK election results stun Conservatives: Experts react

&nbsp;

By&nbsp;Rajendra K. Jain*

In calling for a snap UK elections on 8 June 2017 &ndash; the third one in two years &ndash;Prime Minister Theresa May hoped to &ldquo;guarantee certainty and security for years ahead&rdquo; by significantly increasing her majority in Parliament. What she sought was a &ldquo;strong and stable&rdquo; mandate to steer Britain through an uncertain period and ending 44 years of association with the European Union. With a significant 20-point lead, her logic seemed almost infallible at the time of the announcement.

&nbsp;

In the desultory six-week electoral campaign, there was no serious discussion on either Brexit or the key bread-and-butter issues confronting the country. Theresa May ran a dismal campaign. She increasingly came across as an uninspiring, insipid leader who was media-shy and clearly uncomfortable when confronted with difficult questions. She was assailed for making a major policy U-turn on care for the elderly. She also came under severe criticism for her poor handling of recent terror attacks in Manchester and London and for her role as Home Secretary when she oversaw cuts to the police force. On the eve of elections, her significant lead had declined to around 7 per cent.

&nbsp;

The results of recent general elections represent one of the biggest political upsets in British history and a hung parliament for the seventh time since the beginning of the 20th century. In what became a two-party contest, both the Green Party and the right-wing, Euroskeptic United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) were wiped out.

&nbsp;

With 649 of 650 seats declared so far, the Conservative Party won 318 seats and loss of a clear majority (down from 331 seats and a majority of 17 seats). The Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Party got 261 seats for the Labour Party (a gain of 31 seats and a larger voice in Parliament). The smaller parties won Scottish National Party (35 seats), Liberal Democrats (12 seats), and Democratic Union Party (10 seats).

&nbsp;

Theresa May, therefore, grossly miscalculated and ended in a worse situation than in what she was before the elections. By hindsight, the snap general elections seem almost foolhardy: there was no need whatsoever as Theresa May and her party would have remained in office until 2020 if they had not been held.

&nbsp;

As the leader of the largest party with the greatest voting share, Theresa May is making efforts to cobble together a government with the support of the Northern Ireland-based Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).

&nbsp;

While the President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker expressed hope that the election result would have &ldquo;no major impact&rdquo; on Brexit negotiations, and that divorce talks could start as per schedule on 19th June. The EU&rsquo;s chief negotiator Michel Barnier also tweeted that the &ldquo;timetable and EU positions are clear&rdquo; and negotiations should start &ldquo;when the UK is ready&rdquo;. Negotiations will have to be concluded by April 2019, i.e. two years after Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty was triggered. This is fixed in treaty law.

&nbsp;

The EU-27 have mandated a two-stage process: first negotiating the terms of divorce and exit formalities prior to envisaging the architecture of future relations with the UK. London, however, would prefer simultaneous or parallel discussions on divorce terms and future or transitional arrangements in place. There may not be enough time to successfully complete both things.

&nbsp;

Brexit is irreversible. But still, there is no clarity whether it would be a &ldquo;hard&rdquo; or &ldquo;soft&rdquo; Brexit. The former would result in the UK giving up full access to the European single market and customs union, regaining control over borders (and thereby immigration) and freedom to negotiate new trade deals and apply laws within its own territory.

&nbsp;

A &ldquo;soft&rdquo; Brexit, on the other hand, would result in the UK retaining as much of the existing arrangements as possible with unfettered access to the single market. However, London would not get a voice in EU decision-making: no seat in the European Council, no MEPs in the European Parliament and no Commissioner. Such an arrangement would be somewhat like the one that Norway has.

&nbsp;

One of the biggest obstacles to a smooth Brexit is the hardening position of the EU about Britain&rsquo;s Brexit bill. Brussels&rsquo; opening demand has recently been significantly enhanced from the initial &euro;60 billion to &euro;100 billion to cover post-Brexit farm payments and EU administration fees in 2019 and 2010.

&nbsp;

Other difficult questions which need to be addressed include the role of the European Court of Justice during transitional arrangements and whether the UK should stay in all or none of the EU&rsquo;s regulatory regimes.

&nbsp;

Election results will make already complex negotiations more difficult. With a hung parliament and a weak prime minister, it would now become extremely difficult to make the kind of painful and controversial compromises necessary for a Brexit deal. It also leaves the new prime minister with very little wriggling room in dealing with right-wingers in her party. She will be compelled to constantly negotiate on most crucial issues both within the party and with the DUP, which prefers soft borders between the north and south of Ireland.

&nbsp;

Europe has clearly been shocked by the UK election results. We are heading towards a period of greater uncertainty. There is, as Commissioner G&uuml;nther Oettinger put it, a real danger that &ldquo;negotiations will turn out badly for both sides&rdquo;. Plagued as the EU has been with recurrent crises, the continent would like to concentrate on other pressing problems and revive hope in the future of the European project. Brexit is not merely about the future of the UK, but about the future of Europe as well.

&nbsp;

Jain is&nbsp;Professor of European Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

Election results will make already complex negotiations on Brexit more difficult

By Rajendra K. Jain* In calling for a snap UK elections on 8 June 2017 – the third one in two years –Prime Minister Theresa May hoped to “guarantee certainty and security for years ahead” by significantly increasing her majority in Parliament. What she sought was a “strong and stable” mandate to steer Britain through an uncertain period and ending 44 years of association with the European Union. With a significant 20-point lead, her logic seemed almost infallible at the time of the announcement. In the desultory six-week electoral campaign, there was no serious discussion on either Brexit or the key bread-and-butter issues confronting the country. Theresa May ran a dismal campaign. She increasingly came across as an uninspiring, insipid leader who was media-shy and clearly uncomfortable when confronted with difficult questions. She was assailed for making a major policy U-turn on care for the elderly. She also came under severe criticism for her poor handling of recent terror attacks in Manchester and London and for her role as Home Secretary when she oversaw cuts to the police force. On the eve of elections, her significant lead had declined to around 7 per cent. The results of recent general elections represent one of the biggest political upsets in British history and a hung parliament for the seventh time since the beginning of the 20th century. In what became a two-party contest, both the Green Party and the right-wing, Euroskeptic United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) were wiped out. With 649 of 650 seats declared so far, the Conservative Party won 318 seats and loss of a clear majority (down from 331 seats and a majority of 17 seats). The Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Party got 261 seats for the Labour Party (a gain of 31 seats and a larger voice in Parliament). The smaller parties won Scottish National Party (35 seats), Liberal Democrats (12 seats), and Democratic Union Party (10 seats). Theresa May, therefore, grossly miscalculated and ended in a worse situation than in what she was before the elections. By hindsight, the snap general elections seem almost foolhardy: there was no need whatsoever as Theresa May and her party would have remained in office until 2020 if they had not been held. As the leader of the largest party with the greatest voting share, Theresa May is making efforts to cobble together a government with the support of the Northern Ireland-based Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). While the President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker expressed hope that the election result would have “no major impact” on Brexit negotiations, and that divorce talks could start as per schedule on 19th June. The EU’s chief negotiator Michel Barnier also tweeted that the “timetable and EU positions are clear” and negotiations should start “when the UK is ready”. Negotiations will have to be concluded by April 2019, i.e. two years after Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty was triggered. This is fixed in treaty law. The EU-27 have mandated a two-stage process: first negotiating the terms of divorce and exit formalities prior to envisaging the architecture of future relations with the UK. London, however, would prefer simultaneous or parallel discussions on divorce terms and future or transitional arrangements in place. There may not be enough time to successfully complete both things. Brexit is irreversible. But still, there is no clarity whether it would be a “hard” or “soft” Brexit. The former would result in the UK giving up full access to the European single market and customs union, regaining control over borders (and thereby immigration) and freedom to negotiate new trade deals and apply laws within its own territory. A “soft” Brexit, on the other hand, would result in the UK retaining as much of the existing arrangements as possible with unfettered access to the single market. However, London would not get a voice in EU decision-making: no seat in the European Council, no MEPs in the European Parliament and no Commissioner. Such an arrangement would be somewhat like the one that Norway has. One of the biggest obstacles to a smooth Brexit is the hardening position of the EU about Britain’s Brexit bill. Brussels’ opening demand has recently been significantly enhanced from the initial €60 billion to €100 billion to cover post-Brexit farm payments and EU administration fees in 2019 and 2010. Other difficult questions which need to be addressed include the role of the European Court of Justice during transitional arrangements and whether the UK should stay in all or none of the EU’s regulatory regimes. Election results will make already complex negotiations more difficult. With a hung parliament and a weak prime minister, it would now become extremely difficult to make the kind of painful and controversial compromises necessary for a Brexit deal. It also leaves the new prime minister with very little wriggling room in dealing with right-wingers in her party. She will be compelled to constantly negotiate on most crucial issues both within the party and with the DUP, which prefers soft borders between the north and south of Ireland. Europe has clearly been shocked by the UK election results. We are heading towards a period of greater uncertainty. There is, as Commissioner Günther Oettinger put it, a real danger that “negotiations will turn out badly for both sides”. Plagued as the EU has been with recurrent crises, the continent would like to concentrate on other pressing problems and revive hope in the future of the European project. Brexit is not merely about the future of the UK, but about the future of Europe as well. Jain is Professor of European Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

Electoral Mayhem: The UK, Brexit and Europe

The UK&#39;s general election has seen the rise of that country&#39;s first ever female Sikh MP--Preet Gill has claimed a large victory in the peripheral seat of Birmingham Edgbaston. 
&nbsp; 
Indian-origin Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi has become the first Turban wearing to be elected to the British Parliament&rsquo;s House of Commons in the UK General Elections.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
Both the Sikh candidates, Gill and Dhesi &ndash; are from Jeremy Corbyn&rsquo;s Labour Party. 
&nbsp; 
Gill won a total of 24,124 votes, nearly 7,000 more votes than the Conservatives&#39; Caroline Squire, while Singh won the seat by polling 34,170 votes and defeated Conservative Party candidate by nearly 17,000 votes. 
&nbsp; 
Ms Gill, who has been a Labour councillor in Sandwell, said after being selected: &quot;I am delighted I have been given the opportunity to become next MP for Edgbaston, where I was born and raised. 
&nbsp; 
&quot;I want to engage with the people of Edgbaston and with hard work, passion and determination I think we can achieve great things together.&quot; 
&nbsp; 
Bhai Amrik Singh, chair of the Sikh Federation, was quoted by the BBC as saying: &quot;We are delighted to have the first Sikh woman MP in Preet Kaur Gill in Birmingham, Edgbaston.

&quot;She will be a fantastic MP, a credit to the Sikh community and an excellent role model.&quot;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
On a good note...Well done to Preet Kaur Shergill and Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi 
????? <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/sikh?src=hash">#sikh</a> <a href="https://t.co/MJBjw69u48">pic.twitter.com/MJBjw69u48</a>
&mdash; Dings Singh (@Dingssingh) <a href="https://twitter.com/Dingssingh/status/873112776754946048">June 9, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Big up Preet Kaur Gill (first Female Sikh MP) &amp; Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (first turban wearing Sikh MP).Huge for the British Sikh community??
&mdash; Joel???????????? (@joelbruv) <a href="https://twitter.com/joelbruv/status/873165542881984512">June 9, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
History Made! UK elects its first Sikh female MP (Preet singh) &amp; its first turbaned Sikh MP (Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi) <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/UKElection2017?src=hash">#UKElection2017</a> <a href="https://t.co/OfoWbu9Rdo">pic.twitter.com/OfoWbu9Rdo</a>
&mdash; Sidhant Sibal (@sidhant) <a href="https://twitter.com/sidhant/status/873077707222859777">June 9, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Gill won a total of 24,124 votes, nearly 7,000 more votes than the Conservatives' Caroline Squire, while Singh won the seat by polling 34,170 votes and defeated Conservative Party candidate by nearly 17,000 votes

The UK's general election has seen the rise of that country's first ever female Sikh MP--Preet Gill has claimed a large victory in the peripheral seat of Birmingham Edgbaston. Indian-origin Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi has become the first Turban wearing to be elected to the British Parliament’s House of Commons in the UK General Elections. Both the Sikh candidates, Gill and Dhesi – are from Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party. Gill won a total of 24,124 votes, nearly 7,000 more votes than the Conservatives' Caroline Squire, while Singh won the seat by polling 34,170 votes and defeated Conservative Party candidate by nearly 17,000 votes. Ms Gill, who has been a Labour councillor in Sandwell, said after being selected: "I am delighted I have been given the opportunity to become next MP for Edgbaston, where I was born and raised. "I want to engage with the people of Edgbaston and with hard work, passion and determination I think we can achieve great things together." Bhai Amrik Singh, chair of the Sikh Federation, was quoted by the BBC as saying: "We are delighted to have the first Sikh woman MP in Preet Kaur Gill in Birmingham, Edgbaston. "She will be a fantastic MP, a credit to the Sikh community and an excellent role model." On a good note...Well done to Preet Kaur Shergill and Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi ????? #sikh pic.twitter.com/MJBjw69u48 — Dings Singh (@Dingssingh) June 9, 2017 × Big up Preet Kaur Gill (first Female Sikh MP) & Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (first turban wearing Sikh MP).Huge for the British Sikh community?? — Joel???????????? (@joelbruv) June 9, 2017 × History Made! UK elects its first Sikh female MP (Preet singh) & its first turbaned Sikh MP (Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi) #UKElection2017 pic.twitter.com/OfoWbu9Rdo — Sidhant Sibal (@sidhant) June 9, 2017 ×

UK election: Preet Gill first female Sikh MP, Tanmanjeet Singh first turbaned lawmaker

It&rsquo;s going to be a long night as the UK goes to the polls for its snap 2017 general election. So should you stay up all night or take a democracy nap? Here are the key moments to look out for and the seats which might indicate early on whether Theresa May has secured the thumping majority she originally envisaged.

The polls close at 10 pm

The doors will shut and ballot boxes will be sealed up and transported to one of the counting centres across the UK. In some places, this involves travelling a significant distance, so delays can occur. In Scotland, helicopters have been used to transfer boxes from remote islands to the mainland.

Counting clerks will then work through the night to count the votes in most cases. If you&rsquo;re feeling tired by this point, remember that many of these officials will have begun work at 6.30am (or earlier) setting up the poll.

Will there be an exit poll and will it be reliable?

IPSOS-Mori&rsquo;s exit poll will be reported on the BBC and Sky News at 10 pm as soon as polls close.

At the last election, the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32428768">exit poll</a> caused quite a stir. Announced on the BBC at 10 pm, it forecast that the Conservatives would be the largest party. It took an immediate bashing with Paddy Ashdown infamously stating that he would &ldquo;eat his hat&rdquo; if it was correct. He had to eat his hat.

As it turned out, that poll was much closer to the eventual reality than polls that took place before the election. The exit poll is, therefore, a crucial clue as to how things will unfold.

We should nevertheless take exit polls with a pinch of salt. They&rsquo;ve been wrong before, as they were in <a href="http://www.conservativehome.com/video/2012/04/the-1992-election-bbc-exit-poll-predicts-a-hung-parliament.html">1992</a>. They are based on samples which may not be representative of the whole population, but exit polls do have the advantage of asking people what they really did, rather than what they intend to do at some point in the future.

When might we expect local results?

A local returning officer is responsible for the counts in their area and declarations will drip through during the early hours of the morning.

<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/does-sunderland-always-declare-election-results-first/">Sunderland</a> traditionally works hard to make its announcement first. Constituents in Houghton &amp; Sunderland South might hear their result as early as 11 pm. The result in Sunderland Central generally comes an hour later. After that, things will go quiet. Then there will be a rush of results between 3 am and 5 am. A handful of constituencies will be as late as noon on Friday.

The distribution of estimated declaration times

<figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/172325/area14mp/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png"><img alt="" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/172325/width754/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png" /></a>

<figcaption>When to expect results, based on information from the Press Association. Author provided</figcaption>
</figure>

<h2>&nbsp;</h2>

When will we know who has won?

Ah, that&rsquo;s the million dollar question. &ldquo;Winning&rdquo; usually means getting 326 seats. This would allow the party leader to have a majority of the seats in parliament. They would then be able to form a government and pass policies without needing the support of another party.

There won&rsquo;t be enough declarations for a party to have won 326 seats until 4 am. And as many seats will go in different directions, it will be much later before a party has won enough constituencies to form a government.

But political scientists and the media will be identifying underlying trends from the early results to get a sense of the overall outcome. Armed with information about the underlying demographic and political makeup of constituencies, we can expect changes in voting patterns to be similar in similar constituencies (on average).

My University of East Anglia colleague Chris Hanretty estimated that Remain had only a 0.03 probability of winning the Brexit referendum by 2:03 am. It was zero by 3 am. That was long before the politicians (and media channels) cottoned on to what was unfolding. Watch for such forecasts again.

When will we know who the next PM is?

If there is decisive victory with one party winning an overall majority, then that party leader will be quickly confirmed as prime minister on Friday morning. 
But if no party reaches the magic 326 seats, then there might be some wait. Negotiations will begin between parties about whether they could form a coalition to take them over that threshold. In 2010, it took five days for the Cameron-Clegg coalition to form. There was some surprise in Britain that this process took so long. But in some countries it takes much longer &ndash; 541 days after the <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379411001430">Belgian elections</a> which took place at around the same time.

And what if Theresa May wins a majority &ndash; but a much less handsome one than David Cameron in 2015? Given that a landslide was originally predicted for this election, she might even face an internal coup.

Could any seats give an early indication?

If the Conservative party shows signs of winning seats off other parties then they are on track to stay in government. Chris Hanretty has helpfully identified a list of those predicted gains for the Conservatives.

The table below lists the first 25 of these to be called. If they turn blue as expected, Theresa May will be on course to stay in power with an enhanced majority (and 365 seats, according the <a href="http://www.electionforecast.co.uk">electionforecast.co.uk</a> predictions).

<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="1000" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" scrolling="yes" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Ptot9/1/" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" width="100%"></iframe>So should I stay up &hellip; or go to bed?

<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/78822/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" width="1" />The hard-core psephologist stays up and stays the course. The more sensible, normal person stays up for the 10 pm exit poll, necks a hot chocolate and gets some kip. Be up early for 4 am and you should still have plenty to see. But then again, British politics has been rather unpredictable lately.

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-sleep-or-not-to-sleep-everything-you-need-to-know-about-ge2017-election-night-78822">original article</a>.

Key moments to look out for and the seats which might indicate early on whether Theresa May has secured the thumping majority she originally envisaged

It’s going to be a long night as the UK goes to the polls for its snap 2017 general election. So should you stay up all night or take a democracy nap? Here are the key moments to look out for and the seats which might indicate early on whether Theresa May has secured the thumping majority she originally envisaged. The polls close at 10 pm The doors will shut and ballot boxes will be sealed up and transported to one of the counting centres across the UK. In some places, this involves travelling a significant distance, so delays can occur. In Scotland, helicopters have been used to transfer boxes from remote islands to the mainland. Counting clerks will then work through the night to count the votes in most cases. If you’re feeling tired by this point, remember that many of these officials will have begun work at 6.30am (or earlier) setting up the poll. Will there be an exit poll and will it be reliable? IPSOS-Mori’s exit poll will be reported on the BBC and Sky News at 10 pm as soon as polls close. At the last election, the exit poll caused quite a stir. Announced on the BBC at 10 pm, it forecast that the Conservatives would be the largest party. It took an immediate bashing with Paddy Ashdown infamously stating that he would “eat his hat” if it was correct. He had to eat his hat. As it turned out, that poll was much closer to the eventual reality than polls that took place before the election. The exit poll is, therefore, a crucial clue as to how things will unfold. We should nevertheless take exit polls with a pinch of salt. They’ve been wrong before, as they were in 1992. They are based on samples which may not be representative of the whole population, but exit polls do have the advantage of asking people what they really did, rather than what they intend to do at some point in the future. When might we expect local results? A local returning officer is responsible for the counts in their area and declarations will drip through during the early hours of the morning. Sunderland traditionally works hard to make its announcement first. Constituents in Houghton & Sunderland South might hear their result as early as 11 pm. The result in Sunderland Central generally comes an hour later. After that, things will go quiet. Then there will be a rush of results between 3 am and 5 am. A handful of constituencies will be as late as noon on Friday. The distribution of estimated declaration times When to expect results, based on information from the Press Association. Author provided When will we know who has won? Ah, that’s the million dollar question. “Winning” usually means getting 326 seats. This would allow the party leader to have a majority of the seats in parliament. They would then be able to form a government and pass policies without needing the support of another party. There won’t be enough declarations for a party to have won 326 seats until 4 am. And as many seats will go in different directions, it will be much later before a party has won enough constituencies to form a government. But political scientists and the media will be identifying underlying trends from the early results to get a sense of the overall outcome. Armed with information about the underlying demographic and political makeup of constituencies, we can expect changes in voting patterns to be similar in similar constituencies (on average). My University of East Anglia colleague Chris Hanretty estimated that Remain had only a 0.03 probability of winning the Brexit referendum by 2:03 am. It was zero by 3 am. That was long before the politicians (and media channels) cottoned on to what was unfolding. Watch for such forecasts again. When will we know who the next PM is? If there is decisive victory with one party winning an overall majority, then that party leader will be quickly confirmed as prime minister on Friday morning. But if no party reaches the magic 326 seats, then there might be some wait. Negotiations will begin between parties about whether they could form a coalition to take them over that threshold. In 2010, it took five days for the Cameron-Clegg coalition to form. There was some surprise in Britain that this process took so long. But in some countries it takes much longer – 541 days after the Belgian elections which took place at around the same time. And what if Theresa May wins a majority – but a much less handsome one than David Cameron in 2015? Given that a landslide was originally predicted for this election, she might even face an internal coup. Could any seats give an early indication? If the Conservative party shows signs of winning seats off other parties then they are on track to stay in government. Chris Hanretty has helpfully identified a list of those predicted gains for the Conservatives. The table below lists the first 25 of these to be called. If they turn blue as expected, Theresa May will be on course to stay in power with an enhanced majority (and 365 seats, according the electionforecast.co.uk predictions). So should I stay up … or go to bed? The hard-core psephologist stays up and stays the course. The more sensible, normal person stays up for the 10 pm exit poll, necks a hot chocolate and gets some kip. Be up early for 4 am and you should still have plenty to see. But then again, British politics has been rather unpredictable lately. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Everything you need to know about UK election

&nbsp;Until the Brexit referendum, Gary Hill had never voted.

Now the 58-year-old roofer plans to back Prime Minister Theresa May&#39;s Conservatives in Thursday&#39;s election because he wants Britain out of the European Union.

The EU divorce has broken the mould of British politics, luring new voters like Hill to the ballot box and deeply eroding old party loyalties. That makes turnout - and the election result - all the harder to call.

May, who last year campaigned quietly to stay in the European Union, is now leading the march for the exit. If she can poach Brexit-supporting voters from the opposition Labour Party and the United Kingdom Independence Party, her big gamble on a snap election could pay off.

In contrast, if opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn - who voted against EU membership in 1975 - can entice enough younger pro-EU supporters out to vote Labour in the hope of a &quot;softer&quot; Brexit, he could be in with a chance.

&quot;As long as they get us out of Europe I&#39;m not bothered&quot; about other issues, Hill, perched on a wall below Wakefield&#39;s imposing cathedral, told Reuters.

&quot;I&#39;ve never agreed with Europe. They&#39;ve got too much power over us now - we need to get it back.&quot;

Nearly 3 million more people voted in the referendum than at the 2015 national election, with the biggest increases in leave-supporting areas, like Wakefield in northern England.

The city, held by the Labour Party since 1932, voted 66 percent in favour of leaving the EU. Turnout was more than 10 percentage points higher in the referendum than in the 2015 election.

&quot;The big unknown&quot;

Whether people like Hill will turn out again, and how far socialist leader Corbyn will succeed in attracting his own cohort of new voters, is driving uncertainty about the election result.

Since May called the election in April, her party&#39;s poll lead has narrowed. But different polling methods have produced a dramatically wide range of forecasts - from May losing her majority in parliament to winning a landslide victory.

&quot;(Turnout) is the big unknown, it is one of the reasons why there is a difference between all the polls at the moment,&quot; said Anthony Wells, director of political and social research at pollsters YouGov.

Wakefield&#39;s Brexit-supporting Conservative candidate Antony Calvert, hoping to overturn a 2,613-vote Labour majority, is aware he needs to get people like Hill to vote again on June 8.

&quot;These are not habitual voters, these are one-off voters. What we are seeing is people still talking about Brexit all the time, and we need to just ensure that is motivating people to the ballot box next Thursday,&quot; he said.

Wakefield is among the seats anti-EU UKIP is not contesting. It won 7,862 votes there in 2015.

May has made much of Brexit in the election campaign, pitching herself as the only leader capable of delivering a successful divorce. Corbyn has said the issue of Brexit is settled but many in his party oppose leaving the EU.

Tribal Politics

Gillian Cruise, a lifelong Labour voter in Wakefield until she switched to the Conservatives in 2015 because of their promise to hold the referendum, has now volunteered to campaign for May&#39;s party.

The 49-year-old is angry at the city&#39;s incumbent Labour lawmaker, who voted in parliament against starting the formal Brexit process.

&quot;We told her that we wanted to leave and she threw it back,&quot; said Cruise. Some are following her to the Conservatives, but others cannot bring themselves to abandon their roots.

&quot;There are still a lot that voted to leave the EU that just can&#39;t bring themselves to vote Conservative because it is so ingrained in them to vote Labour,&quot; she said.

&quot;Those are the people that I want to talk to.&quot;

Pro-EU group Open Britain is campaigning for candidates who will fight what it describes as May&#39;s &quot;hard, destructive&quot; Brexit. Gina Miller, whose legal action forced the government to give parliament a vote on triggering Brexit, is running a campaign to support pro-EU candidates.

In 41 seats, parties have stood aside to try to help a fellow &quot;progressive alliance&quot; candidate win.

But Wells said such attempts to encourage tactical voting would have little impact because of the collapse in support for smaller parties such as the Liberal Democrats, with most seats a straight race between Conservatives and Labour.

(Reuters)

If May is able to?poach Brexit-supporting voters from the opposition Labour Party and the United Kingdom Independence Party, her big gamble on a snap election could pay off

Until the Brexit referendum, Gary Hill had never voted. Now the 58-year-old roofer plans to back Prime Minister Theresa May's Conservatives in Thursday's election because he wants Britain out of the European Union. The EU divorce has broken the mould of British politics, luring new voters like Hill to the ballot box and deeply eroding old party loyalties. That makes turnout - and the election result - all the harder to call. May, who last year campaigned quietly to stay in the European Union, is now leading the march for the exit. If she can poach Brexit-supporting voters from the opposition Labour Party and the United Kingdom Independence Party, her big gamble on a snap election could pay off. In contrast, if opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn - who voted against EU membership in 1975 - can entice enough younger pro-EU supporters out to vote Labour in the hope of a "softer" Brexit, he could be in with a chance. "As long as they get us out of Europe I'm not bothered" about other issues, Hill, perched on a wall below Wakefield's imposing cathedral, told Reuters. "I've never agreed with Europe. They've got too much power over us now - we need to get it back." Nearly 3 million more people voted in the referendum than at the 2015 national election, with the biggest increases in leave-supporting areas, like Wakefield in northern England. The city, held by the Labour Party since 1932, voted 66 percent in favour of leaving the EU. Turnout was more than 10 percentage points higher in the referendum than in the 2015 election. "The big unknown" Whether people like Hill will turn out again, and how far socialist leader Corbyn will succeed in attracting his own cohort of new voters, is driving uncertainty about the election result. Since May called the election in April, her party's poll lead has narrowed. But different polling methods have produced a dramatically wide range of forecasts - from May losing her majority in parliament to winning a landslide victory. "(Turnout) is the big unknown, it is one of the reasons why there is a difference between all the polls at the moment," said Anthony Wells, director of political and social research at pollsters YouGov. Wakefield's Brexit-supporting Conservative candidate Antony Calvert, hoping to overturn a 2,613-vote Labour majority, is aware he needs to get people like Hill to vote again on June 8. "These are not habitual voters, these are one-off voters. What we are seeing is people still talking about Brexit all the time, and we need to just ensure that is motivating people to the ballot box next Thursday," he said. Wakefield is among the seats anti-EU UKIP is not contesting. It won 7,862 votes there in 2015. May has made much of Brexit in the election campaign, pitching herself as the only leader capable of delivering a successful divorce. Corbyn has said the issue of Brexit is settled but many in his party oppose leaving the EU. Tribal Politics Gillian Cruise, a lifelong Labour voter in Wakefield until she switched to the Conservatives in 2015 because of their promise to hold the referendum, has now volunteered to campaign for May's party. The 49-year-old is angry at the city's incumbent Labour lawmaker, who voted in parliament against starting the formal Brexit process. "We told her that we wanted to leave and she threw it back," said Cruise. Some are following her to the Conservatives, but others cannot bring themselves to abandon their roots. "There are still a lot that voted to leave the EU that just can't bring themselves to vote Conservative because it is so ingrained in them to vote Labour," she said. "Those are the people that I want to talk to." Pro-EU group Open Britain is campaigning for candidates who will fight what it describes as May's "hard, destructive" Brexit. Gina Miller, whose legal action forced the government to give parliament a vote on triggering Brexit, is running a campaign to support pro-EU candidates. In 41 seats, parties have stood aside to try to help a fellow "progressive alliance" candidate win. But Wells said such attempts to encourage tactical voting would have little impact because of the collapse in support for smaller parties such as the Liberal Democrats, with most seats a straight race between Conservatives and Labour. (Reuters)

Theresa May's election gamble could depend on turnout in Brexit heartlands

uk-election

Uk Election, News on Uk Election, stories on Uk Election, articles on Uk Election, Uk Election stories at Wion, Uk Election news, Uk Election latest news

uk election