Irish Republicans killed Mrs Thatcher’s close associate, Airey Neave MP, at the beginning of the 1979 general election campaign. Mrs Thatcher told the Commons, “Airey’s death…will enhance our resolve that the God-given freedoms in which he believed, and which are the foundation of our parliamentary democracy, will in the end triumph over the acts of evil men.” No one suggested that the campaign should be stopped.
Of course it is right to mourn Mrs Cox without regard to party or political opinion. But it is wrong to react to her death by taking as many days as possible out of the few that remain in this vital referendum campaign. As so often in the history of attempts to keep us in the EU, this causes a feeling of bad faith, which would create further division if Remain were to win...
The killing of Jo Cox does not justify suspending democratic debate over the EU
Charles Moore
19 June 2016
The Teelegraph
It's right to mourn, but politics must go on
In the Sunday Telegraph, David Cameron urged us to vote for a country which “looks to the future with hope, optimism and confidence’” Hear, hear. But we have heard no hope, optimism or confidence from the Remain side in the entire campaign.
True, some Remainers have praised the high ideals of the EU’s foundation, but only nostalgically. Literally none – that I have seen, at least – has praised any forward movement by the EU in the 21st century. None has supported the widening of the euro, or the EU’s strategy for the migrant crisis, or the famous Five Presidents’ report which calls for much greater EU integration.
Until his 'deal’ in Brussels four months ago, Mr Cameron told us that he was fighting for a “reformed Europe”.
However, this claim was clearly unsustainable, so he changed the subject. In his article yesterday, he did not even mention the negotiating “triumph” which, he said at the time, permitted him to recommend a Remain vote. Hardly anyone voting Remain now believes reform is coming. Indeed, a Remain vote would work against reform, a victory for the status quo.
Instead, the Remain campaign has been a political version of the gloomy clouds which have enveloped much of Britain this June. I cannot ever remember a sitting Chancellor of the Exchequer being so keen to tell voters how little his country can achieve if it breaks free, and setting out what appalling measures he will introduce to punish it if it does. Mr Cameron and George Osborne warn of “economic self-harm’” yet it is they that propose to administer it. To quote Angela Merkel, though I suspect she may have been thinking of something else: “Exaggerations…do not foster an atmosphere of respect.”
A feeling of bad faith
So it is cheek – actually, worse than cheek – for the Prime Minister to preach to us over the body of poor Jo Cox about the kind of country we wish to be. Mrs Cox was a promising young MP. It is those who intend to vote Leave on Thursday who want MPs to be re-empowered. The leaders of Remain, by contrast, seek endorsement for a system that neuters MPs and the millions who vote for them. It was thus almost instinctive for the Remain side to use the murder of Mrs Cox as a way to stop the debate. As he laid flowers in memory of Mrs Cox in Birstall, Mr Cameron said that MPs are elected “to act in the national interest”. This is not fully possible if the nation lacks democratic self-government.
Once upon a time, MPs’ reaction to a fellow parliamentarian’s death showed a different spirit. The last murder of a sitting MP was that of Ian Gow in July 1990. He was more important, in parliamentary terms, than Jo Cox, and his killing was wholly political rather than mad – it was the work of the IRA. Yet Parliament was not recalled for tributes. No party stood down from the by-election caused by his death.
Mrs Thatcher also lost colleagues to murderers
No decent political leader saw an end to an electoral contest as the right response to the killing of someone chosen through such a contest. The Conservatives, by the way, lost the post-Gow by-election in Eastbourne: no sensible person argued that this was an affront to his memory.
Irish Republicans also killed Mrs Thatcher’s close associate, Airey Neave MP, at the beginning of the 1979 general election campaign. Mrs Thatcher told the Commons, “Airey’s death…will enhance our resolve that the God-given freedoms in which he believed, and which are the foundation of our parliamentary democracy, will in the end triumph over the acts of evil men.” No one suggested that the campaign should be stopped.
Of course it is right to mourn Mrs Cox without regard to party or political opinion. But it is wrong to react to her death by taking as many days as possible out of the few that remain in this vital referendum campaign. As so often in the history of attempts to keep us in the EU, this causes a feeling of bad faith, which would create further division if Remain were to win.
Her death could divide, not unite
The Swedish example
We have been here before. In Sweden in 2003, there was a referendum about whether it should join the euro. Three days before polling, the foreign minister, Anna Lindh, was stabbed to death by a Sweden-born lunatic of Serbian descent who had extreme political views.
Anna Lindh was a strong supporter of joining the euro. That campaign was going badly, so desperate efforts were made to turn the horror at her murder towards a pro-euro vote. All formal campaigning ceased. One enthusiast for the new currency overreached by suggesting that the new Swedish euro coin, which would come in if his side won the referendum, should depict Ms Lindh’s head. When Swedes voted, 55.9 per cent of them rejected entry to the euro. Sweden happily retains its own currency to this day.
Pro-euro Anna Lindh was stabbed to death in September 2003 during Sweden's referendum about whether it should join the currency
Britain at its best would Leave
Mr Cameron says that Mrs Cox represented “Britain at its best”. Although few of us had heard of her before her tragic death, he is very likely right. But in this campaign he has inspired us with nothing about Britain at its best, and interpreted any desire for national independence as Britain at its worst. Let’s have the “hope, confidence and optimism” to Leave.
The killing of Jo Cox does not justify suspending democratic debate over the EU
Of course it is right to mourn Mrs Cox without regard to party or political opinion. But it is wrong to react to her death by taking as many days as possible out of the few that remain in this vital referendum campaign. As so often in the history of attempts to keep us in the EU, this causes a feeling of bad faith, which would create further division if Remain were to win...
The killing of Jo Cox does not justify suspending democratic debate over the EU
Charles Moore
19 June 2016
The Teelegraph
It's right to mourn, but politics must go on
In the Sunday Telegraph, David Cameron urged us to vote for a country which “looks to the future with hope, optimism and confidence’” Hear, hear. But we have heard no hope, optimism or confidence from the Remain side in the entire campaign.
True, some Remainers have praised the high ideals of the EU’s foundation, but only nostalgically. Literally none – that I have seen, at least – has praised any forward movement by the EU in the 21st century. None has supported the widening of the euro, or the EU’s strategy for the migrant crisis, or the famous Five Presidents’ report which calls for much greater EU integration.
Until his 'deal’ in Brussels four months ago, Mr Cameron told us that he was fighting for a “reformed Europe”.
However, this claim was clearly unsustainable, so he changed the subject. In his article yesterday, he did not even mention the negotiating “triumph” which, he said at the time, permitted him to recommend a Remain vote. Hardly anyone voting Remain now believes reform is coming. Indeed, a Remain vote would work against reform, a victory for the status quo.
Instead, the Remain campaign has been a political version of the gloomy clouds which have enveloped much of Britain this June. I cannot ever remember a sitting Chancellor of the Exchequer being so keen to tell voters how little his country can achieve if it breaks free, and setting out what appalling measures he will introduce to punish it if it does. Mr Cameron and George Osborne warn of “economic self-harm’” yet it is they that propose to administer it. To quote Angela Merkel, though I suspect she may have been thinking of something else: “Exaggerations…do not foster an atmosphere of respect.”
A feeling of bad faith
So it is cheek – actually, worse than cheek – for the Prime Minister to preach to us over the body of poor Jo Cox about the kind of country we wish to be. Mrs Cox was a promising young MP. It is those who intend to vote Leave on Thursday who want MPs to be re-empowered. The leaders of Remain, by contrast, seek endorsement for a system that neuters MPs and the millions who vote for them. It was thus almost instinctive for the Remain side to use the murder of Mrs Cox as a way to stop the debate. As he laid flowers in memory of Mrs Cox in Birstall, Mr Cameron said that MPs are elected “to act in the national interest”. This is not fully possible if the nation lacks democratic self-government.
Once upon a time, MPs’ reaction to a fellow parliamentarian’s death showed a different spirit. The last murder of a sitting MP was that of Ian Gow in July 1990. He was more important, in parliamentary terms, than Jo Cox, and his killing was wholly political rather than mad – it was the work of the IRA. Yet Parliament was not recalled for tributes. No party stood down from the by-election caused by his death.
Mrs Thatcher also lost colleagues to murderers
No decent political leader saw an end to an electoral contest as the right response to the killing of someone chosen through such a contest. The Conservatives, by the way, lost the post-Gow by-election in Eastbourne: no sensible person argued that this was an affront to his memory.
Irish Republicans also killed Mrs Thatcher’s close associate, Airey Neave MP, at the beginning of the 1979 general election campaign. Mrs Thatcher told the Commons, “Airey’s death…will enhance our resolve that the God-given freedoms in which he believed, and which are the foundation of our parliamentary democracy, will in the end triumph over the acts of evil men.” No one suggested that the campaign should be stopped.
Of course it is right to mourn Mrs Cox without regard to party or political opinion. But it is wrong to react to her death by taking as many days as possible out of the few that remain in this vital referendum campaign. As so often in the history of attempts to keep us in the EU, this causes a feeling of bad faith, which would create further division if Remain were to win.
Her death could divide, not unite
The Swedish example
We have been here before. In Sweden in 2003, there was a referendum about whether it should join the euro. Three days before polling, the foreign minister, Anna Lindh, was stabbed to death by a Sweden-born lunatic of Serbian descent who had extreme political views.
Anna Lindh was a strong supporter of joining the euro. That campaign was going badly, so desperate efforts were made to turn the horror at her murder towards a pro-euro vote. All formal campaigning ceased. One enthusiast for the new currency overreached by suggesting that the new Swedish euro coin, which would come in if his side won the referendum, should depict Ms Lindh’s head. When Swedes voted, 55.9 per cent of them rejected entry to the euro. Sweden happily retains its own currency to this day.
Pro-euro Anna Lindh was stabbed to death in September 2003 during Sweden's referendum about whether it should join the currency
Britain at its best would Leave
Mr Cameron says that Mrs Cox represented “Britain at its best”. Although few of us had heard of her before her tragic death, he is very likely right. But in this campaign he has inspired us with nothing about Britain at its best, and interpreted any desire for national independence as Britain at its worst. Let’s have the “hope, confidence and optimism” to Leave.
The killing of Jo Cox does not justify suspending democratic debate over the EU
Last edited:
