Even by her Sphinx-like standards, Theresa May’s announcement of a snap general election was a well-kept secret. It was also an abrupt reversal: since entering Number 10 after the vote for Brexit, the UK prime minister has insisted repeatedly there was no need for an election before the scheduled date in 2020. Nonetheless, this is the right decision.
 

Britain is embarking on the most important constitutional change in its postwar history. The Brexit negotiations, set to begin in earnest after the French and German elections, will be tough, and they will require trade-offs that many voters will find hard to accept. Since triggering Article 50, the government has shown welcome signs of realism — recognising that business needs a transitional period when Britain leaves the EU and acknowledging that many jobs cannot be filled without migrants.

A strong mandate will help Mrs May to remain on this pragmatic course. It lessens the risk of her being held hostage at every stage of the negotiations by minority pressure groups. With polls giving her Conservative party a 21-point lead over the dysfunctional Labour opposition, she appears likely to win by a landslide.

The prime minister is disingenuous, though, to claim the election has become necessary because of “game-playing” by opposition parties. In fact, resistance has been lame to the point of culpability. Mrs May wants to avoid the fate of her predecessor John Major, whose authority was destroyed by Eurosceptic rebels. Today, a growing number of pro-Brexit zealots are clamouring for a crash exit from the EU rather than Mrs May’s vision of a “deep and special partnership”.

How she chooses to interpret these words if and when she is handed a commanding majority is unclear. Mrs May was notionally against Brexit before last year’s referendum but is now a committed advocate. The decision to call a snap election is intended to free her from unwanted interference from the Remainers among her MPs, just as much as from hardliners on the right.

David Fuller's view

This is a welcome move by Theresa May and her reasons are certainly not “disingenuous”, as suggested two paragraphs above.  She needs her own election victory and a strong majority to represent Britain most effectively in the important Brexit negotiations with the EU. 

While the PM favours a mutually beneficial Brexit Agreement, this may not be possible, at least initially.  The EU is a troubled, protectionist organisation, determined to extract the highest possible price from any country which decides to leave.  Therefore, instead of negotiating in line with the EU’s extortionist terms, Mrs May must be prepared to walk away (effectively, hard Brexit) before a sensible new trade relationship can be agreed. 

It would obviously be more difficult to do this with a slender overall majority of 17 seats, as EU Brexit negotiators certainly know.  Currently Conservatives have 330 seats, Labour 229, Scottish National Party 54, Liberal Democrats 9, Democratic Unionist Party 8, Independents 4 and Sinn Fein 4. 

Of the Parties currently holding less than 10 seats, my guess is that Liberal Democrats will see the biggest percentage gain, attracting some protest votes from disillusioned Remainers. The others could gain a seat or two, at best, as could UKIP or the Greens.  I think seats held by the Scottish National Party will decline below 50 in a rebuff to Nicola Sturgeon.  Divided Labour will see the biggest losses, falling well below 200 seats.  Conservatives are likely to have a significantly increased majority approaching 400 seats.

(See also: Theresa May announces snap general election on June 8 to ‘make a success of Brexit’, from The Telegraph)