Gisela Stuart on Democracy and Brexit – The Vitality of Democracy Book Review
Former Labour MP and Vote Leave Chair reflects on the role of Democracy, UK and EU
99 years of Conservative rule ended in Birmingham Edgbaston on the 1st of May, 1997.
Once home to Neville Chamberlain, the constituency was the first televised New Labour gain under Tony Blair. Gisela Stuart, its first-ever Labour Member of Parliament, recalled to me that campaign director Alistair Campbell instructed her to discard what she had prepared, take the speech ready for whoever was the first TV gain, and as the honour fell upon her, declare the following:
‘This result has sent Britain on a course for a brighter future
We will look back on May the 1st, 1997 as the day education became Britain’s first priority
As the day we started a real attack on unemployment
And as the day the NHS was saved’
These words would replay repeatedly during the night and beyond, orchestrated to symbolically represent the core message of New Labour’s 1997 campaign.
When the BBC questioned whether the victory was merely a result of voter frustration with the Tories, Stuart disagreed. Instead, she argued it was about something deeper:
‘It was a kind of total disillusionment, but also, they had lost trust – and I see the labour victory as one of opportunity to restore that trust between people and politicians.’
Stuart’s early focus on trust between voters and politicians deepened through years of public service, ultimately culminating in her role as chair of the Vote Leave campaign during the Brexit referendum.
In her 2022 book, The Vitality of Democracy, Stuart continues to explore the evolving relationship between voters and politicians in liberal democracies.
The book opens with a stark warning: democracy, once thought to be on an inevitable upward trajectory, is now in decline. Like many in her generation who witnessed the Soviet Union’s fall, she laments the failure of liberal democracy to spread globally as once expected.
Stuart focuses primarily on the UK and established liberal democracies. Her answer to combat this decline is to emphasise participation, that democracy thrives only through active involvement from both voters and elected representatives. As she puts it, ‘It will only work if everyone is prepared to participate and accept collective decisions.’
Declining participation in democracy manifests itself in low voter turnout. Disheartened or disillusioned, voters either feel uninspired or see the outcome as a ‘forgone conclusion,’ Stuart argues.
She uses the 2001 election as an example: while Labour retained most of its seats from 1997, voter turnout dropped from 71.3% to just 59.4%. Her book recalls how some viewed this drop as confirming people’s quiet support for the government programme to carry on, while others believed it reflected a broader disillusionment with both parties. Perhaps 2024’s 59.8% turnout is a fresh example.
For democracy to thrive, participation must have consequences — a point Stuart stresses when discussing the aftermath of the Brexit referendum.
Stuart’s main criticism of the post-Brexit period lies in the lack of ‘losers’ consent’—the acceptance by the losing side of the majority’s choice. For her, this principle is essential for democracy to function smoothly.
Yet, this principle was upended by the politicians Stuart condemns for refusing to accept the referendum result. Instead of politicians seeking to understand voters’ motivations, Stuart blames them for labelling Leave voters as ‘old, stupid, or racist’ while aiming to reverse the result. Her chief complaint is toward politicians of both parties for not forming a new consensus post-Brexit and carrying forward the will of the majority.
Despite leading the winning side, Stuart remains cautious about referendums, arguing they rarely foster a centre-ground consensus. ‘The battle for the centre ground [...] is almost impossible in binary referendums,’ she writes.
If one is needed, clear choices and consequences must be established; it should never be a last resort when issues remain unresolved.
To make the consequences clear, Stuart offers the following suggestions:
Parliament should set clear principles for calling a referendum.
If a two-stage referendum is needed, both stages should be outlined in advance.
Before any referendum, consult the public extensively, including civil society and local communities.
Those who lead the campaigns must be responsible for or be part of implementing the outcome.
Though she does not dwell on her role in the Vote Leave campaign, Stuart is clear about why Leave won.
While the economic argument worked for Edward Heath in the 1973 European Communities Referendum, it could not work for the Remain campaign in 2016. In keeping with her other public appearances, Stuart argues that the driving factors for many people were identity, culture, and belonging.
Stuart’s own disillusionment with the EU began when representing the British parliament in the 2002-3 Praesidium of the Convention, a group tasked with drafting the EU constitution.
From her time on the Praesidium, Stuart recalls a striking conversation with Tony Blair before Christmas 2002. Blair believed that the formation of the EU constitution, and particularly a President of the European Council, was more significant than even the soon-to-be legacy-defining Invasion of Iraq:
“Blair argued that the agreement to create this new role was the most significant decision facing us. When I suggested that maybe the invasion of Iraq might be more important, he countered that events in Iraq would unfold now, whatever we decided – but that we could, and must, shape what happened in Europe.”
One can imagine that Blair wishes his unfulfilled shaping of the EU was his defining moment rather than, for many still today, his actions in Iraq.
Unlike Blair’s support for the EU, Stuart soon perceived the union and its commission officials as having little interest in accountability, something she viewed as a necessity for the voters of Europe, let alone Britain. Later on, her experience was detailed in the 2003 Fabian Society Pamphlet The Making of Europe’s Constitution.
And when given a binary choice to Remain or Leave 13 years later, she could not defend the argument to remain. As David Owen reminded her, ‘You are an elected Member of Parliament. You cannot not have a view on this.’
The Vitality of Democracy offers an insightful exploration of the challenges facing liberal democracy today, from declining support to voter disillusionment. Stuart’s reflections on the Brexit referendum provide historical insight and lessons for future democratic engagement, delivered by a voice central to the most significant British decisions of the 21st century.
The Vitality of Democracy by Gisela Stuart (2022)