What If: George was PM during Covid?

0:00Hi, who here loves when their nails are perfectly done? Me, I'm Sarah Gibson Tuttle, and I started Olive in June because, let's be real, we all deserve to have gorgeous nails, but who wants to spend a fortune or half their day at the salon? And that's why I created the Manny System, so you can have that salon-perfect manicure right at home. And guess what? The best part? Each Manny only costs$2. Yep, you heard me. Two dollars. No more 30, 40, 50 dollar salon trips that eat up your day. Now you can paint your nails whenever you want, wherever you want. And trust me, you're going to be obsessed with your nails and everyone is going to ask you, where did you get your nails done?

0:39And here's a little something extra. Head over to OliveandJune.com and get 20 % off your first Manny system with code PERFECTMANNY20 at OliveandJune.com slash PERFECTMANNY20. That's code PERFECTMANI20 for 20 % off at oliveandjune.com slash PERFECTMANI20. You're all set for a nail glow up. Let's get those nails looking fabulous, shall we? That new thing? Yeah, we've got it. The Drop by GNC, bringing you all the newness that matters. Handpicked by the pros who actually know what's up and what's proven to work. We keep you on top of the trends and dialed into what's next. Whether you're crushing it at the gym, leveling up your game, or thriving every day.

1:18The Drop by GNC is where the latest solutions in health and wellness land first. Nonstop innovation and fresh finds daily. Explore what's new and what's next on The Drop by GNC. You don't need a passport to taste the world's most luxurious beef. Just head to Benihana. Introducing the Wagyu of the World menu. From the rich flavor of American Masami Ribeye to the bold Australian New York Strip to the legendary Melt-in-Your-Mouth A5 Japanese Wagyu, This is the finest beef on the planet, expertly grilled right at your table. Why settle for an ordinary steak dinner when you can taste the world in one bite?

1:56Only at Benihana. Book your table at benihana.com. The Chancellor of the Exchequer. Getting a lesson from the Shadow Chancellor on how to balance the books is like getting a lesson from Dracula on how to look after a bloodbath. Egg balls. A steady-as-she-goes budget. What kind of ship does he think he's on, the Titanic? Hello, Mary Celeste. Welcome to EMQs from Political Currency with Ed Balls and George Osborne.

2:29So hello and welcome to EMQs, Ex-Minister's Questions. This is a special What If EMQs coming out the weekend after Easter. So we hope you had a very restful Easter break and a break from parliament, which has also been on recess. And if you're following Ed's advice, you've stolen all the chocolates from your kids that they didn't eat on the day and eaten them yourself. I seem to remember it was the advice on one of our earlier episodes. And thrown raw eggs over your house. Yes. If you want to carry on a vital British tradition. Okay. And we also hope that you've enjoyed our Inside the Room, the Libya crisis series, which has been on over the last fortnight.

3:12If you didn't get our reflections episode because you're not a gold subscriber or a kitchen cabinet member, what can I say? You've missed out. You are missing out on the best egg of all over Easter. It wasn't a curate's egg. It was good in its entirety, not just in parts. I've never understood what a curate's egg is. I know. I know the expression is it's good in parts, but why is a curate's egg only good in parts? And also, I don't like the idea, I mean, an egg that's not completely good is an egg that, to my mind, is completely bad. But in what sense does the curate lay an egg? Okay. We need an EMQ.

3:51I mean, this is your opportunity to send us in EMQs. We'd love to have questions about our Libya series. But if there are any curates out there, could you send us in a question in a voice note with an explanation? What is this curate saying? And what's the difference between a curate and a vicar and a priest? Anyway, you should know that, George, as an English citizen. What's the difference between a curate and a vicar? Curate's like the assistant, the junior. Is that right? Kind of in training, the rising star will become the vicar in due course, but currently the curate. Okay, well, I don't know the answer, so I will check afterwards to see whether you just made that up or it's true.

4:35or maybe it's partly true like a cure at seg. Thank you for your confidence. Let's turn to our what ifs. So remember these are, just to give the context, these professional historians do not engage in what ifs. You know, what if Napoleon hadn't existed or, you know, what if he'd won the Battle of Trafalgar? They don't, you know, we're not allowed to do those kind of things in professional history. But when you say we, well, because I used to study history at university. How long ago was that? That was quite a long time ago. but I think it's very interesting politics because it actually forces you to think through the consequences of an individual and consequences of a particular system at a time and so anyway we enjoy it and I think so do you from the reaction we've had to previous what ifs so we're going to crack on and we're going to start with a good what if question from Muhammad.

5:25Hi George and Ed first off it's a great podcast I don't quite take you to bed with me but I do take you out on my runs. So to the question, what do you think would happen if MPs weren't allowed to abstain and had to vote either way for or against every question before the House? Let's park the practicalities and traditions for a moment and assume every MP has to vote, aye or no? Thanks both. So Mohammed said put aside the practicalities and the traditions, just assume every MP has to vote. So that's the challenge. And I think the practicality is important here. I think there's a really good reason why we allow abstaining.

6:06I think abstaining is actually an important choice to have within our political system. Because imagine, if not, the moment you have an opposition day debate, the opposition puts down a motion. It's entirely open to the government as a whole, government MPs, just to abstain. They don't have to vote yes or no. quite often opposition motions kind of go through. Sometimes they get voted down. It doesn't matter. The moment you say everybody has to vote, what it means is that every vote, every motion becomes performative. Every time people are thinking, well, you know, can I put a motion down which you've got to vote yes or no on?

6:41So you write it as a trap. If you don't vote yes, then you voted no. Aha. It means that all votes come about politically trying to embarrass your opponent. It means the government then responds by always putting motions down to try and capture the opposition. And in the end, I think it would be quite reducing of the quality of parliamentary debate. There are times when you do have those moments and you can put a campaign out saying, you know, they voted against our motion. It's slightly hard to say they abstained on our motion because actually they abstained because who cares what your motion was all about.

7:15So the ability not to engage is an important part of the parliamentary process. And I think, Mohamed, it would reduce the quality of parliamentary debate. I don't think I agree with you, Ed. Let's set aside a reason why someone might abstain because they're not there. I mean, I don't think you want a parliament where everyone has to be there the whole time. Let's assume we're talking here about deliberate abstentions, i.e., a conscious decision to abstain rather than just you're not there. Because on any vote, there are loads of people abstain because they're just physically not there. And then you go to your point.

7:51I would say that, you know, fundamentally what a parliament does is it passes laws and regulations and budgets or indeed authorizes executive actions like a war, like the kind of conflict we talk about in Libya. Everything else that happens in Parliament, which are the kind of things you're talking about, opposition motions and expressions of opinion about things, are basically quite performative anyway and a bit of a waste of time. But they fill up the day and they allow everyone to have a kind of conversation about some kind of topic that's going on in the world. It's only very recent, and I don't think it was the case when you and I were in Parliament, that governments abstain on opposition motions.

8:36This was something that was brought in under the Conservatives. Figures started under Theresa May, but it might have been the beginning of Boris Johnson. They didn't have the majority to stop. It was hard because, you know, these motions were basically designed to split the government back benches. And so the kind of in the end, it was like, well, who cares about this opposition motion? We're just going to abstain. And who cares if it passes? we're just going to ignore it because when the government abstains the opposition motion in theory passes but when you and i were an mp you know the governments we were part of would have been absolutely you know appalled that this opposition motion had passed and in some ways like the house of commons had stated an opinion and that would have been really damaging but i think a view was taken like we'll bear the pain for the first couple of weeks of everyone saying oh the house of commons has taken a view what do you think just go well that's because we abstain who cares and it sort of defanged the opposition motion a bit and as a result oppositions have had to get a bit cleverer as you saw with the um conservative humble address motion to get peter mandelson's um message or messages to and from peter mandelson published so i think anything where governments can abstain anyway is a bit performative so then you get to like if parliament is passing real laws and you know if the votes that count in parliament are ones that change something, then they are kind of yes, no questions.

10:02Either you want this law changed or you don't. Either you want this budget passed or you don't. And the only thing that I would say there's a value in an abstention for is I think it does provide a route for a government MP to register a pretty strong disapproval of what their government's doing, which is, you know, quite unusual still in the British system, without having to go the full, like, I am going into the opposition lobby with my enemies, essentially my political enemies. If I'm a Labour backbench government MP, I really don't like what Keir Sullivan's doing, but am I really going to have to, you're going to make me walk through the lobby with Kemi Badenoch and her shadow cabinet, which is quite an unpleasant experience.

10:47It happened to me once or twice when they all kind of jeer at you a bit. But, you know, so I do like the root of a kind of abstention option for a government backbencher because I think it does probably allow for more genuine dissent to be heard in parliament rather than just being kept under wraps inside a party. See I actually think our two positions are reconcilable here but I'll make you one concession. The question for Mohammed is do you have to vote yes or no in every motion? You've just made a good argument as to why government backbenchers should have the opportunity. If say there's a piece of criminal justice legislation and the opposition abstains, actually, that's weak.

11:31And the reason why they're doing that is because, as you say, they can't get a united position. Well, you know, allowing the government to expose the weakness of the opposition through abstention is quite helpful. The example, though, of the government abstaining in an opposition day motion, maybe what you have to do there is find a way for that to be more costly. The only thing I'm just saying is if what you don't want is Parliament to be reduced to sort of the clickbait of stupid motions, what normally would happen is if the opposition puts down a motion, you amend it, and you amend it to move it away from a stupid motion to a good government motion, well then by voting for the amendment, then the opposition day motion falls.

12:16And so in that sense, the government has succeeded. So they don't have to abstain to change it. I think you'll find that quite, I don't know, actually I'm not up to date with what this Labour government does, but I think the previous Tory governments had given up on opposition days and would send their people home. In that case, let's say that our rule changes, governments have to amend opposition day motions in order to force a vote. If not, then something bad happens. But as you say, you don't want to force a vote in every occasion, and that is Mohammed's question. So I think you agree with me, actually.

12:50You started off saying you disagreed, but it turns out you agree with me. Sure I do. But anyway, I'm going to abstain on that. How dull. Our next question is one which is sent to me by someone who thought this was a really good question. It's somebody in government. They said they wanted to be anonymous. But it's such an interesting question that I thought we should get this voiced by one of our producers. So that is what we have done. Hi, Ed and George. My question is, what if after Donald Trump's near-miss shooting, he had found God and declared his mission to unite America, end gun violence, support disaffected youth, never say anything hostile about anyone and deliver world peace?

13:31Instead of fight, fight, fight, what if there'd been unite, unite, unite? Well, this is a proper what if. And I would be a bit suspicious of Donald Trump, the zeal of the convert. In fact, I'm generally pretty suspicious of converts. One of my general rules in life is that people who strongly believe one thing and then switch to strongly believing another thing are people who you have to be a little bit careful around. And I think of Donald Trump, who clearly in what was an utterly traumatic moment in which, of course, someone was killed. There's a real what if in history. Maybe we should address that in a future episode.

14:08If that bullet had been, you know, half an inch the other way and killed him. Think of how the last couple of years would have been very different, potentially. But in terms of him emerging from it as a great unifier, a peacemaker, I would have been a bit suspicious. If I'm going to have Donald Trump, I think I might want the utterly transactional Donald Trump than the man on a mission Donald Trump. Because I think that might end up being even more dangerous for the world, at least with things like the conflict in the Middle East and so on. you know, you sort of feel like he's negotiable with.

14:44Whereas if he suddenly kind of got God in a peacemaking sense, I think he might be even more dangerous. So I think I'll stick with the Donald Trump we have on offer. Although let us not forget, this is the Donald Trump who in his past has appeared with Hillary Clinton at fundraisers and given money to the Democrats. And so, you know, he has made transitions before you know he has always had a bit of a journey but hold on ed i don't think he was kind of fairly cynical then and i suspect you know i i'm not sure his motives have dramatically changed but this is america you know it was an amazing moment he is you know within kind of centimeters of losing his life if in that moment he just says you know this has had a profound effect upon me and it changed the way I just think about mortality and I'm going to unite America now and I think we've got to get rid of gun violence we've got to sort this out I mean you know if he pulls it off from that moment he's a shoo-in Biden doesn't stand down there's no point I mean he's going to win a landslide he wins with an amazing mandate and political narrative you know have gun reform in America.

16:00Sorry, would he have won with that if he'd said all that? So his voters were angry. They wanted someone to express their anger. Yeah, but that comes to the big question about Donald Trump. So you're totally right. That is the question. If Donald Trump is simply the figurehead of the MAGA movement, and in his moment of conversion, they are betrayed. So the MAGA guys say this is betrayal, and the Democrats say you can't believe him and he kind of loses to the Democrats, maybe. On the other hand, Donald Trump believes that his base follows him. This is like the ultimate test. If in fact they all say, Donald, it's you we want, then maybe he takes his base into this landslide win.

16:46So I think it's genuinely a debate as to how that would have gone in American politics. Would he be deified and become the father figure? Or does he get exposed as a fraud, splits his base and loses? I mean, it's a what if, but I don't think the answer to that question is obvious. And there was a split second where he had a decision to make and he decided to double down. But if he'd gone the other way, if John F. Kennedy had just survived his assassination in 1963, we know in death he became a you know almost monarchical figure in american politics but if he had just survived are you sure the same thing wouldn't have happened well i think it's very interesting it's actually if kennedy had survived we might not have got as deeply into vietnam or america might not have got as deeply into vietnam but we also might not have had all the civil rights legislation and the great society of lyndon johnson so absolutely i think also you know Wouldn't Trump say that, we should just point out, Trump would say today, no, my mission is to unite America.

17:50And I never say anything hostile about anyone. And I am delivering world peace. I think he wouldn't accept the alternative path. He would say he's on the alternative path. You know, he said in his inauguration address, I was saved by God. You know, didn't he? He thought there was divine intervention and his path was changed. I'm not sure, though, his actions in Minneapolis felt as though they were uniting the nation. So there was a different path. Anyway, that was a very good anonymous question. Thank you for that. We'll be back shortly after this break.

18:34Every idea starts with a problem. Warby Parker's was simple. Glasses are too expensive. So they set out to change that. By designing glasses in-house and selling directly to customers, they're able to offer prescription eyewear that's expertly crafted and unexpectedly affordable. Warby Parker glasses are made from premium materials like impact-resistant polycarbonate and custom acetate. And they start at just$95, including prescription lenses. Get glasses made from the good stuff. Stop by a Warby Parker store near you.

19:11so welcome back we have a very relevant what if from harry which again has been voiced by one of our producers and this kind of lays down a real challenge to george i think my question is a what if about something i heard george mention on a previous episode about how he would have been a strong contender for pm if the eu referendum had gone the other way given the fixed term parliament act at the time was still in place it would have meant an election being due by spring 2020, the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. How do you think this would have been handled? Would the election have been delayed to the summer?

19:45A further point, if I may, as a former Chancellor, do you think the level of COVID support would have been different if you had still been in the government, given the mass amount of borrowing that was required for furlough and other business support schemes? Well, this is a really good question, Harry. I I have not actually completely thought this through, I'll confess, before. So the argument here is that if the referendum had gone the other way and David Cameron was stepping down, as he had already announced, I'm pretty certain I would have been a candidate in that leadership contest. And I think it would have been me versus Boris Johnson.

20:20And he obviously would have had many strong cards to play, but I would have had the support of essentially the bulk of the conservative establishment at the time. as was proved by the fact that the bulk of the Conservative establishment backed Theresa May over Boris Johnson initially. So although I know Boris then pulls out, but he pulls out partly because that's the case. Anyway, we won't get into like whether I could have won that contest or not. But the question then is fast forward five years, I definitely would not have got rid of the fixed term Parliament Act, which I think is actually a useful tool for prime ministers to avoid this sort of utter speculation that Keir Starmer's going to find himself in in about a year and a half's time.

21:01It's like, when are you calling the election prime minister? When are you calling the election prime minister? And, you know, made life very hard for Rishi Sunak in the final months of his premiership. And then he does call an early election and it's a mistake, or at least he, you know, gets a very bad outcome. Who knows if he'd clung on? But he would have had more time as prime minister. So I definitely would have kept the fixed-term parliament because I thought it was a good thing for a prime minister. But as a result, assuming that my premiership would not have stopped the COVID virus spreading or coming to Britain, which I'm not so head in the clouds to believe that I would have done.

21:38The question is, what would have happened? In fact, it's actually not particularly ad hominem to me because it's quite easy to imagine a situation where they hadn't abolished the Fixed-Term Parliament Act. and the general election would have fallen due in the middle of the first lockdown. I think what would have happened with anyone as prime minister at that time, if that act had been in place, is that the election would have been delayed. Now, it would have been a huge deal to delay a general election. I mean, they did delay the local elections. They were all put off for a year. But obviously a general election, it's a huge deal to delay.

22:12And there are precedents in our history. The general election was delayed in the Second World War and I think in the First World War as well. So, you know, it was also delayed in the in the summer of 2001 by a month because of the the foot and mouth outbreak. Yes. But the difference there, Ed, is that Tony Blair was calling it after four years. He had five years and he only had so he wasn't breaking. you didn't have to amend the quinquennial act which is a quite obscure piece of legislation but probably the most important piece of legislation in in britain which is the requirement to have a general election every five years so you'd have to amend that and you'd have to get parliament to agree to that but i think in the mood of i think it would have been utterly impossible to conduct a general election in those first couple of months of covid they would not have had the infrastructure to do the postal votes and whatever required.

23:06And there was a quite a strong feeling of national unity at the time. Remember all the banging of the kitchen pans to support the nurses. The Labour opposition at the time was, you know, fully supportive of what the government was doing. Boris Johnson, despite being quite a divisive character in politics at that moment, was getting large audiences for his, you know, big television addresses. I think that they would have postponed it potentially to the autumn. They would have said, we'll come back and do this in September, October. It would have been a big moment. I think that's what would have happened.

23:37The question is what you would have done. Yes, well, I would, I think, yeah, because I think the advice would have been, it'll be utterly chaotic to try and hold a general election now, and it will stop us in our national effort to control this disease. Remember that first lockdown, there was none of the kind of cynicism or the debate about whether the lockdown was right or wrong. You know, the impact on education and the like was only starting to be felt. There was a sort of novelty to it and a strong sense of national unity, which was not there in the lockdown a year, whenever it was like nine months later, the second lockdown.

24:14And I, what do you think? I'm afraid, George, you are entirely ducking the content of the what if here. And I think Harry's question certainly does as well. If you had been the prime minister at the beginning of 2020, regardless of the fixed term Parliaments Act, which you haven't repealed, you would definitely have postponed the election and Parliament would have supported you in that. You would have had furlough in the way Rishi Sunak did it. I mean, there may have been some differences, but you'd have gone big deal. And you would have said, you know, because of the tough decisions you've made on fiscal policy, I've got the national debt falling and I can afford to do this.

24:45All that would have happened, but you wouldn't have been Prime Minister. The reason you wouldn't have been prime minister is even when you won the 2014 referendum, what happened afterwards was that the SNP became more popular in Scotland and you responded by what David Cameron did actually against your advice on a sort of English laws for English votes sop to Conservative backbenchers. And Theresa May, even though the referendum was just won, goes out in the autumn of 2016 with a sort of, you know, her citizens of nowhere get Brexit done, throwing red meat to the backbenchers. if the referendum had been just won in 2016, it would have been just won on the basis of the votes of Labour, Liberal Democrat and SNP voters.

25:37The Conservative Party voters in the country would have voted to leave the European Union. Even more so, that would have been the case of Conservative Party members and MPs. And I think in those circumstances, the idea that the Conservative party in parliament would be willing when David Cameron stands down to elect a Remainer. I just think they would have been determined to set the record straight by electing a Brexiteer. So I just think Boris Johnson would have been the prime minister. And therefore, David Cameron, to stop that, just has not to stand down and try and wait long enough. So the question then becomes, Has David Cameron waited long enough between 2016 and 2020 to stand down so that you can at that point become the leader without that internal party backlash?

26:30Or has the internal party backlash in the Conservative Party become even more severe, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20? But by the time Cameron goes, you've got no chance and Boris Johnson is the candidate. And I think I'm probably saying that the only conceivable outcome other than Boris Johnson being the prime minister in 2020 is that David Cameron is still the prime minister, not you. Therefore, you're still the chancellor. You tell him to postpone the election and you do the furlough as chancellor, not as prime minister. OK, lots of very good points. Actually, I agree with what you're saying. Although you forget at the time how deeply suspicious Tory MPs were of Boris Johnson in 2016, 17, 18.

27:11And it took the failure of the May government to kind of force, like, we've got to have this guy. Right. And then, frankly, when they actually got the chance to get rid of him, they did. Right. I mean, the Tory MPs. What's true is I don't think I would have been necessarily the natural remainer sort of establishment candidate. it's quite possible after a referendum which we narrowly won i agree the kind of you're saying the poison would have been in the blood anyway i'm saying whether it's boris johnson or not they're gonna they're gonna vote for a brexiteer not a remainer well but you know the party then chose remember liz truss was a remainer well you know so two of the four post-brexit prime ministers voted remain yeah but her campaign in 2022 is a brexit campaign against remainer soon No, that was a great irony.

27:59By that point, Sunak the Brexiteer has become the Remainer in Conservative Party narrative, and she's the other way around. Well, obviously, Sunak should have voted Remain, and Liz Truss should have voted Brexit, if you know them both. But anyway, they didn't. But no, it's certainly true that someone else could have taken on the Cameron mantle. I might have been tarnished not so much with the Brexit vote, but with being too close to Cameron. That would have been the thing. Actually, you know, the more I've talked about this, though, However, whoever is prime minister in May 2020, I'm sort of thinking this really now, your civil servants are saying to you, oh, prime minister, we've got to delay the general election because, you know, we can't get the ballot papers out.

28:43Right. And you're sitting there going, hold on. I have got like an 80 percent approval rating. You know, I've got the whole nation behind me. I've had my biggest ever pre-election bung in history. I'm paying most of the country to not go to work. The opposition is entirely neutered, right? And this is only going to get worse. You know, this disease we don't have a cure for. I've already got all the internal papers on how difficult the vaccination program is going to be. We're going to run out of money for this furlough scheme at some point. you know i i could actually imagine going i think we will get those but democracy must continue we will not allow this disease to defeat the british way of life actually the more i think about it you would have been mad not to call the general election at that point give yourself another five years you as chancellor or as prime minister well any prime minister in fact the more you think about it boris jordan should have had i guess he just had a general election 2019 so maybe maybe not but um very interesting let's take a break and then we've got time for one more question

29:54taking care of your eyes shouldn't be a hassle that's why warby parker is a one-stop shop for all your vision needs our prescription glasses and sunglasses are expertly crafted and unexpectedly affordable. Stop by a nearby store or use our app to virtually try on frames and get personalized recommendations. Did we mention we offer eye exams and take vision insurance too? For everything you need to see, head to your nearest Warby Parker store or visit warbyparker.com today. That's warbyparker.com. You don't need a passport to taste the world's most luxurious beef. Just head to Benihana. Introducing the Wagyu of the World menu.

30:32From the rich flavor of American masami ribeye to the bold Australian New York strip to the legendary melt-in-your-mouth A5 Japanese Wagyu. This is the finest beef on the planet, expertly grilled right at your table. Why settle for an ordinary steak dinner when you can taste the world in one bite? Only at Benihana. Book your table at benihana.com.

31:00welcome back now our final what if today is from simon hi ed and george love the podcast as a former civil servant and longtime student of the eu and britain's often turbulent relationship with it i've often wondered whether things would have been different if john major had agreed a referendum on the masters treaty or indeed if tony blair had honored an earlier commitment to a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty? I'd be really interested in your thoughts. Well, I think this is a really good question, because this is a real what if that could have happened. I mean, there was lots of pressure on John Major to have a referendum on the Maastricht Treaty, and Denmark had had one.

31:39And he decided not to, even though he had huge problems with his conservative backbenches at the time. So he may well have agreed to a referendum. And Tony Blair, as Simon's rightly reminding us, did promise a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, which was originally a kind of constitutional convention and then got renamed the Lisbon Treaty. And that was Blair's out. And he said, oh, you know, things change, so I don't need to hold the referendum. But everyone thought of it as a broken promise. So I think you have to assume, given what later happened with Brexit, that there was a pretty high chance that either of those referendums on Maastricht or Lisbon would have been defeated.

32:18I sorry, you know, the country would have voted no. And of course, there was a no vote in Denmark to the Maastricht Treaty. And I think didn't France vote on the Lisbon Treaty and vote against? So, I mean, I think for this, what if you have to go in these two stages? So you have to say, look, without the nuclear option of actually leaving, which was the 2016 nuclear option. So it's actually a relatively cost-free vote. John Major definitely loses a referendum on the Maastricht Treaty, and Tony Blair definitely loses a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, unless they had gone about it in a very, very different way in the years before.

33:00But I'm pretty sure Tony Blair loses. Do you think that John Major definitely loses in 1993? I mean, I loses the conservative vote but does he lose in the country i think by the time you get to lisbon tony blair does good question but i'm not sure you lose on on maastricht euroskepsism is definitely a minority in the early 90s and you know i think he would have presented maastricht as a kind of negotiating triumph he got britain out of the euro he got britain out of the schengen you know it was you know one of the kind of ironies is maastricht is actually a pretty pretty impressive British negotiating effort.

33:34I guess it also depends on the temperature of the government. You know, do people want to get rid of John Major at that point? The problem is, by then, the RM debacle would have happened and people might have wanted to kick John Major out. Well, unless you have to have the referendum before you sign the treaty as opposed to ratify the treaty. But let's talk about... Yeah, what would happen then? So, first of all, if John Major loses the referendum, does he then say, okay, we will not join the euro? And is that enough to then move things on? I think you would have had a run British version of what happened with Denmark, which was you go back and negotiate.

34:11It's a pain in the ass for everyone else in the European Union. They go, why are we having to do this and so on? But you can't have one member state not ratify the treaty because all member states have to ratify the treaty for it to take effect. It's not a majority vote when it comes to ratification. So in the end, they came up with, I think it was called the Danish Protocol, which kind of gave some specific concessions for Denmark. And I think the same was the case, although it's less well known in the referendums in France and in the Netherlands around Lisbon. And France was given some sort of token concessions.

34:45I think Britain would have had the same sort of thing. And then probably the government at the time wouldn't have put it to another referendum. No. And also, I think if you think about Amsterdam 1996, which is like a big step forward for the European Parliament and co-decision, probably there is kind of caution. The European Union goes slower on that kind of constitutional reform because they don't want to have another repeat of a big round with Britain. No, but Lisbon happens after Amsterdam. No, no, so I'm talking about if John Major has lost the Maastricht one in 93. Yeah. So it probably slows down Amsterdam 96.

35:23No, it is an interesting question. But in the end, I'm not sure Britain could have got, I mean, you know, without rewriting the Brexit referendum. I thought Britain's position in the EU by the time of the Brexit referendum was pretty good, which was we had a budget rebate. So we weren't making a huge net contribution compared to some other countries. we were out of the Schengen border control thing and we were out of the euro and we had the relationship with the EU which we wanted but you know obviously 52 % of the country don't agree with me so if you jump ahead to Tony Blair I mean the reason why in the end he didn't have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty he was because essentially the Lisbon Treaty was already collapsing because of those negative votes in other referendum in other countries and so if Britain had voted against I mean, weren't we just putting another nail in the coffin of those kind of convention reforms?

36:17Wasn't he talked into offering a referendum by Jack Straw? Wasn't that the kind of background to all of this? I mean, he never really wanted to offer a referendum. He had offered a referendum on the euro already. Yes. But on the actual treaty, the convention as it was called, not the Lisbon Treaty, but it became the Lisbon Treaty after France vetoed it because of its referendum. I think he was always looking for a reason. I remember that statement. I was a Tory MP at the time. It caused no end of problems for the Tory party because we had promised a referendum. We carried on promising it. And then David Cameron, before the 2010 election, had to say, well, we can't because the treaty's now been adopted by everyone.

36:55So that is the what if question. If Tony Blair had allowed the country to vote no against more deeper European integration, would that have been enough to take away the pressure within the Conservative Party and from Nigel Farage? Would you have had so many new MPs in 2010 elected? elected. I remember somebody saying to me, if you became a candidate for the Tories in 2010, this is despite Cameron modernisation, unless you were anti-membership of the European Union, it was very hard to get selected as a Conservative MP in 2010. I don't think that's true, because I think in 2010, I think there were a tiny number, I think there were only about seven or eight Tory MPs who had publicly ever stated they wanted to leave the EU.

37:44And it was a bar to being on the front bench if you said that. I thought the 2010 intake was the most sceptic Tory intake ever. By the time you get to 2011, when you and I vote against a referendum in Parliament, there are 100 plus Tory MPs voting against the government position, the majority of whom are new MPs. Yes, because it becomes a kind of costless way of demonstrating. But one of the interesting, we can come back to another point. I think one of the interesting things is how Euroscepticism, people who are Eurosceptic, which is we don't want more transfer of powers to Europe, end up becoming Brexiteers, which is we want to leave the EU.

38:19and people who never advocated in their life suddenly say, I want to leave the EU because they're kind of faced with this choice of in or out and feel essentially, I think, the political pressure to go for out. But that wasn't there. They were in a more nuanced position. They were actually in a more like David Cameron position, which is he was always more Eurosceptic than me in one sense, which was he didn't want more transfer of powers. But he wants to stay in the EU. Anyway, very good question, Simon. I remember saying to Matthew Dancona in about 2011 or 2012, I said, I understand George Osborne.

38:51He wants to be in the European Union. And I understand Michael Gove. He doesn't want to be in the European Union. And I understand the philosophy which drives both of their approaches. But I said, I don't understand the underlying philosophy which drives a David Cameron position. And Matthew Dancona said to me, but your big mistake there is to think that David Cameron has an underlying philosophy. And he doesn't really. He just thinks he should be prime minister. Oh, he did. He was definitely more, he had a sort of natural Tory Euroskepsism to him. Did he? I mean, the irony that, you know, in the end, the premiership falls on.

39:21But anyway, he did. He did. And does. Okay. So thank you for your question, Simon. That's all we've got time for in this special What If edition of EMQs. Yeah, do keep sending in questions, not just of what ifs, because we'll be back to the normal routine of questions. To questions at politicalcurrency.co.uk. Include, of course, what ifs if you want. And of course, any on the Libyan episodes that you might have listened to over Easter. We'll be back on Thursday with our main show catching up on what's been going on in the last couple of weeks and of course if you've got time do catch up with our inside the room the libya crisis series and remember if you enjoyed our inside the room on libya but you're not yet the gold subscriber or kitchen cabinet member you might think oh i just wait had to wait a bit and i heard it all but you did not hear it all because you missed our big bonus episode on reflecting on that period and that's only available to gold subscribers and kitchen cabinet members and if you become a gold subscriber you get episodes ad free emqs early and if you become a kitchen cabinet member you also got a newsletter our mug our members only chats we've even had kitchen cabinet members come along to our recordings and we really enjoyed that as well so do join us see you on thursday for the main show see you then

40:40thanks for listening to political currency this has been a persephonica production

40:54that new thing yeah we've got it the drop by gnc bringing you all the newness that matters handpicked by the pros who actually know what's up and what's proven to work. We keep you on top of the trends and dialed into what's next. Whether you're crushing it at the gym, leveling up your game, or thriving every day, The Drop by GNC is where the latest solutions in health and wellness land first. Nonstop innovation and fresh finds daily. Explore what's new and what's next on The Drop by GNC. Chicago, when winter winds or city noise have you craving a real escape, Belize is waiting. Imagine crystal blue waters, world-class snorkeling, ancient Maya sites, and jungles alive with adventure.

41:34All just a few hours away. And thanks to nonstop United Airlines flights from Chicago O 'Hare to Belize City, getting there is easy. Flights take just over four hours, making paradise closer than you think. Start planning your getaway now at TravelBelize.org. That's TravelBelize.org. The warmth of Belize is only one nonstop flight away.