Jo Swinson is a formidable fighter, but an unwillingness to compromise over Brexit could be her undoing

Editorial: Brexit has destroyed many of the familiar conventions of British politics. Routinely writing off the Lib Dems and their leader is another assumption that cannot be relied on

If there is such a thing as a natural political leader, then Jo Swinson certainly qualifies for such a title. She has taken to the role as if born to it.

Since she was elected to head the Liberal Democrats in the summer, Ms Swinson has asserted herself in formidable fashion. Building on the recovery job undertaken by her predecessor, Vince Cable, she lead her party to an impressive result in the European elections, beating both the Labour and Conservative parties (albeit trailing Nigel Farage’s latest Brexit vehicle).

Where once a claim by a Lib Dem leader that they could become prime minister was met with embarrassed giggles all round, there is no such reaction to the audacity of Ms Swinson’s claim. It is rooted in a solid base of support in the polls, and the fact that the British electorate is in a febrile and volatile mood. Brexit has destroyed many of the familiar conventions of British politics. Routinely writing off the Lib Dems and their leader is another assumption that cannot be relied on.

Ms Swinson has set out a clear policy stance on the vital issue facing the country, after climate change – a promise that a Lib Dem administration would “stop Brexit” by revoking the Article 50 procedure. That has helped define her party and attracted a number of former Conservative and Labour politicians and supporters to her side. Michael Gove’s startling admission that a no-deal Brexit at the end of 2020 remains a possibility should add some urgency to her efforts to stop Brexit.

The putative Remain alliance with Plaid Cymru and the Green Party is a further step in the direction of political maturity. Although the net parliamentary impact of the pact will be modest, a weaker leader might have bottled it. Her insistence on appearing in the televised leaders’ debates is admirable, and, in the face of indifference by ITV, as the saying goes, she persisted.

Nor is there any sign of this confident young leader letting up. She has now “categorically” ruled out supporting Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister – even in order to deliver a second referendum, a Final Say on Brexit. She also pushed her party, and then Labour, into supporting the early election on 12 December. We will soon see quite how wise that was.

Ms Swinson, then, has made her mark and is enjoying encouraging poll ratings, both personally and for her party, though competition from Mr Corbyn and Boris Johnson isn’t perhaps so difficult to outshine. Many agree with her that Britain deserves a better choice.

However, there is a danger that she and her party may overreach themselves. If, as Ms Swinson argues, Brexit in any form would be an unmitigated disaster – one so awful that it justifies a clear “revoke” policy – it is difficult to understand her attitude to the leader of the opposition. Why not set her hostility to one side in the national interest, and the culmination of the long campaign for a Final Say?

Whatever may be said about Mr Corbyn – and there is much to criticise and find unacceptable, for example his record on antisemitism – if he is elected as the leader of the largest party in the Commons, he has the constitutional right to try to form an administration. Ms Swinson is entitled to make her objections, and argue for new leadership for the Labour Party. It might work, or it might not, because the leadership of Labour is a matter for that party, not hers, and because it would take an inordinate time to find a new leader at a moment of national emergency.

In short, Ms Swinson’s lack of flexibility about what might prevail in the not unpredictable event of a hung parliament will make governing the country, and securing a Final Say on Brexit, more difficult than it need be.

What’s more, Mr Corbyn may be able to construct some sort of arrangement with other parties (the SNP, the Greens and others) to command a majority in the Commons, and it would not be possible for each of the parties’ involved to exercise veto powers on one another’s party leadership.

There is an opportunity at this general election to deliver a second Brexit referendum, with the option to remain in Europe on the ballot paper. That is much the best way to resolve the Brexit crisis, and the Liberal Democrats actually support the proposal if they fail to form the next government in a seismic Liberal Democrat revolution – a “Jo-quake” engendered by “Jo-mania”.

What was started by the people in 2016 should be concluded by the people in 2020 as a democratic imperative. It is also right that every party, including the Lib Dems, should respect the verdict of the general election – even if Mr Corbyn wins more votes and more seats than Ms Swinson.