Theresa May’s decision to politicise London attack not without risk

It was just after 7am on Sunday when the Conservatives became the first of Britain’s main parties to announce it was suspending its national general election campaign in response to Saturday night’s terrorist attack in London.

Three hours later Theresa May stood outside 10 Downing Street and delivered a blatantly political statement on the attack, declaring that “enough is enough” and promising tougher action to counter terrorism.

She proposed an overhaul of legislation to allow for tougher sentences for less serious terrorist offences, and action to prevent the internet from becoming a “safe space” for terrorists.

And she claimed there was too much tolerance for extremism in Britain, calling for “difficult conversations” within some communities.

London police response phenomenal but broader problem is one of scale

---

Ariana Grande back on stage at One Love Manchester concert

---

Climate changes between Washington and Berlin as pivot looms

---

Irish witnesses describe panic-stricken scene during London attack

---

The prime minister’s tone was strikingly different from her response to the Manchester Arena bombing two weeks ago, when she stressed the need for national unity in the face of terror. Shortly afterwards, home secretary Amber Rudd said there was no need for extra powers to combat terrorism.

So what has changed in the past two weeks?

The attack in London on Saturday night was horrifying, but it was less sophisticated than the Manchester suicide bombing. And the intelligence services on Sunday declined to ratchet up the security threat level to critical as they did after Manchester.

If the security threat level has not changed, the political threat to May has increased dramatically as Thursday’s election approaches. While the three murderers were engaged in their bloody, eight-minute rampage near London Bridge on Saturday night, a raft of polls confirmed that the electoral race was tightening sharply.

Negative territory

One poll put the Conservatives just one point ahead of Labour, and others showed May’s lead over Jeremy Corbyn shrinking. The prime minister’s personal rating has dipped into negative territory, and voters believe Labour is more likely to act in their interests than the Conservatives.

In marginal constituencies in the midlands and the north of England, canvassers from both parties believe the Conservatives are still well ahead. Yet after a calamitous campaign May faces the prospect of returning to Downing Street with a majority only modestly larger than the one she inherited from David Cameron.

The Conservatives believe that Corbyn is Labour's greatest weakness, and that his main vulnerability surrounds the perception that he is weak, particularly on national security. During a special edition of Question Time on the BBC on Friday, the Labour leader floundered when he was asked repeatedly about the circumstances in which he would authorise the use of Britain's nuclear weapons.

Before Saturday’s attack in London, the Conservative-supporting newspapers were hammering Corbyn for his alleged weakness on terrorism and national defence. The attack has given the prime minister an opportunity to demonstrate the contrast between her tough approach and that of the Labour leader.

U-turn

May’s decision to politicise the attack is not without risk, particularly since the public’s perception of her has changed dramatically for the worse since the election campaign began seven weeks ago. She went into the campaign as the embodiment of the “strong and stable leadership” the Conservatives promised for the next five years.

But an ungainly U-turn on a central plank of her party’s manifesto last month shattered that image as effectively as Gordon Brown’s dithering over calling an election in 2007 permanently destroyed his reputation as a steady hand guiding the country.

Voters increasingly view May as weak, untrustworthy and heartless in her promises of cuts to pensioners’ allowances and school meals, and her advocacy of a return to foxhunting.

By putting terrorism on the political agenda, the prime minister has also exposed her own record as home secretary for six years to scrutiny by the opposition and the media. As the minister charged with keeping Britain safe, she cut police numbers by 20,000 and oversaw the replacement of Labour’s control orders for suspected radicals with a weaker surveillance mechanism.

When Corbyn appeared to link the Manchester bombing to Britain’s foreign policy and military interventions abroad, the conventional wisdom held that he had made a colossal blunder. Instead his popularity has continued to rise ever since, and polls show that a majority of voters agree with what he said.

Over the next few days Labour will hold May to account for her record in the home office and for her government’s support for Saudi Arabia, which has funded and encouraged Islamist extremism for decades.

Changed the mood

The Manchester bombing had no discernible impact on the campaign but Saturday’s attack in London has changed the mood ahead of Thursday’s election.

The random nature of the attack in a crowded neighbourhood on a warm summer’s evening and the fact that it required no sophisticated equipment means that something similar could happen anywhere, at any time.

Wavering voters, already doubtful about Corbyn’s fitness for the role of prime minister, may determine that voting Labour this time is a risk they are unwilling to take. And May’s tough talk about terrorism and her promise to show less tolerance towards extremist views could sound reassuring to some voters.

But for many others the prime minister’s decision to make political capital out of Saturday’s tragedy will smack less of strength than of an opportunistic determination to hold onto her job at any price.