In this general election we must vote tactically to stop Brexit

The starting gun has been fired on what will be the strangest general election in my lifetime – and not just because we will be canvassing in the dark, and very possibly the snow.

A general election was always going to be a bad way to resolve the Brexit issue since it is about so many other things. But, in the absence of a majority in parliament to support a Brexit deal or to hold a confirmatory referendum, it is the only way forward. And it is the last chance to stop Brexit.

Doing so will require voters to look beyond tribal loyalties. Best For Britain, which is independent of any party, has used sophisticated and hitherto successful modelling which suggests that, without tactical voting, Johnson will win a clear majority in parliament to press ahead with his damaging “hard Brexit”. However, if 30 per cent of Labour, Lib Dems, Green and nationalist voters vote tactically in their constituencies, Johnson’s majority would be wiped out and we would have a majority for a people’s vote in the next parliament.

Tactical voting is an inevitable response to an unsatisfactory voting system. In my experience of general elections, I’ve been both a beneficiary and a victim of it. But we are not going to get a new voting system before this election and so tactical voting will be crucial.

In practice, there is a lot of granularity. There will be big local issues and personalities, and enthusiastic campaigns that are more or less intensive and focused. Scotland is different too, since the polarities of tactical voting are about maintaining the United Kingdom more than about maintaining our membership of the EU. In turn, the different parties’ supporters have a differing propensity to vote tactically. About 50 per cent of committed Labour and Green voters are willing to support a different party to defeat the Conservatives, but only 25 per cent of committed Lib Dem voters (of which there is a smaller number to start with) are willing to do the same, largely because of their antipathy to Corbyn.

These factors will all make for some big surprises on election night (as there was in 2015 when I and a lot of Lib Dems lost our seats to a last-minute tactical voting surge among people who were frightened of a Labour-SNP victory).

Even seats like the prime minister’s in Uxbridge could be vulnerable to tactical voting. The Brexit Party is a big unknown: while Nigel Farage remains a serious box office attraction, it is far from clear whether his party will be motivated or organised to fight Johnson for a “clean break”, no-deal Brexit.

We saw the force of Remain voting tactically in the European elections when Lib Dem support surged from 8 per cent to 20 per cent and we went from one to 16 MEPs. As party leader at the time, I went into the election privately daring to hope we would win three or four. We attracted votes from Labour’s Alistair Campbell and the Tories’ Michael Heseltine, who both seriously antagonised their tribes but made it clear that their support was tactical, based on a commitment to Remain. It is possible that in the coming election there will actually be seat-based agreements among the smaller parties and independents, which reinforces tactical voting.

Party leaders will, quite understandably, be appealing to tribal loyalties in the usual way: all three major party leaders are seeking a majority. Despite both the prime minister and leader of the opposition being in negative territory in terms of personal popularity (Corbyn much more so), both will want to present it as a choice between them and the other one. Corbyn will not want to talk about Brexit at all; Johnson, the Brexit Party and Jo Swinson will want to talk about it all of the time, albeit from opposing standpoints.

At the outset of the campaign, the slogan “Get Brexit done” currently has an obvious appeal to an electorate that is exhausted and bored by the endless stalemate in parliament. But over the next few weeks the appeal will wane as it becomes clear that a Brexit, as defined by the withdrawal agreement, doesn’t “get Brexit done” at all. We merely pass to the next stage of negotiation with the prospect of another round of drama and uncertainty over “crashing out” and “no deal” as the UK approaches the end of the transitional period within EU rules, with no prospect in sight of a new long-term trade agreement. The transition may be extended and then we may have further uncertainty over the end of the extended transition. And so on. Divorce is messy – very messy.

In the same way, the attempt to portray plucky Little Britain as the victim of Brussels’ bullying has somewhat lost its edge with the amicable conclusion to the Brexit negotiations. Boris, surrounded by the smiling faces of Juncker, Tusk, Varadkar, Merkel and Macron, isn’t a picture of conflict and valiant struggle, as the Brexit Party will gleefully point out. The EU, particularly Ireland, get what they wanted and Boris conceded.

This election will be a challenge to all of us in the political world. I am very anxious to see my party fully recover from the depths of 2015 and 2017 and to build on our two successful elections – local and European – this year, and make big gains at the expense of the two major parties.

I also want to save the country from Brexit. My ambition for the former will be tempered by the latter. Fortunately, these aims coincide in large parts of the country. But they do not yet do so everywhere. Remain vs Leave is the new dividing line in British politics, along with the issues of identity that lie behind it. Voters are smart enough to use tactical voting to get what they want.