Those who warn of Brexit unrest invite it

There’s a famous (or infamous) method of negotiation or interrogation called ‘Good cop, bad cop’. You’re probably familiar with the idea. An individual whose cooperation is sought is approached by an apparently reasonable negotiator whose friendly advice is to co-operate because if he doesn’t then his colleague, who has a nasty temper, may fly into a rage — in which case our friend cannot answer for what this dreadful fellow might do. The good cop holds himself out as anxious to protect the individual from somebody much worse than himself. He does not of course condone this person’s behaviour in any way, but he’s sadly beyond his control.

I notice that elements on the Leave side of the Brexit debate are now deploying this good cop/bad cop routine. Here’s Iain Duncan Smith talking to the BBC early last month. ‘You think the country’s divided right now, wait until you hold that second referendum. There’s a very large chunk of people who will feel utterly betrayed and very angry and I just caution, look across the Channel — we are not that far away from that kind of process happening.’

This is desperate stuff.

Newspaper commentators, too, have taken up the cry. Read Tom Harris in the Telegraph. Treading more carefully than IDS, he mentions that ‘Remainers pushing for a rerun… dismiss all warnings of civil unrest and riots on the streets’ but then agrees we should not allow ourselves to be intimidated: ‘the police can handle that,’ he says, adding, worriedly, ‘(or should)’. Is he suggesting the police might not be able to?

Most popular

Ameer Kotecha

Lindt has cheapened itself

Anyway, Mr Harris continues, ‘[a] convulsive and defining break between the democratic process and great swaths of the populace would seem to be the minimum expected consequence of such an act, and the cynical observer might conclude that this would suit a certain type of politician very well indeed… We are in uncharted territory, heading for unknown shores.