A sad day
June 30, 2016
on
on

So it actually happened: the UK has opted for a withdrawal from the EU. Maybe like me you can remember the days when the EEC (as it was known then) consisted of just nine members; in the intervening years we have witnessed robust negotiations where preferential allowances and some ‘extra sausage’ has been granted to the UK. Now it’s hardly credible but they seem to have lost their appetite for the whole venture.
The result came as a shock with no clear roadmap of the way ahead. Thousands of existing contracts will need to be renegotiated, a task that will no doubt drag on for years. The German Central Association of Electrical and Electronics industries (ZVEI) acknowledged that theUK market accounted for sales of almost 10 billion Euros annually for the German electronics industry. In its initial response to the referendum result the ZVEI called for “A new European idea, one that is attractive to all generations”.
For me however, the old European idea still hasn’t lost its appeal: to be part of a strong community where member states can benefit from a growing economic and political influence in a global economy. Where the removal of trade barriers and regulations creates space and opportunities for businesses and citizens equally and where unified worker and consumer rights benefit both young and old alike.
What’s missing seems to be the political will to fully support and promote the idea. For a successful community all participants need to take their share of common responsibilities, to some extent renounce national allegiances in favour and respect to the wishes of the greater majority. When populist governments, parties and politicians exploit public uncertainties and fears by resorting to redundant nationalist solutions, it will always be completely out of tune with EU philosophy – old or new.
It’s sad that a rise in such feelings of nationalism played a part in the Brexit result; as for the economic implications, I guess we will just need to crack on…
The result came as a shock with no clear roadmap of the way ahead. Thousands of existing contracts will need to be renegotiated, a task that will no doubt drag on for years. The German Central Association of Electrical and Electronics industries (ZVEI) acknowledged that the
For me however, the old European idea still hasn’t lost its appeal: to be part of a strong community where member states can benefit from a growing economic and political influence in a global economy. Where the removal of trade barriers and regulations creates space and opportunities for businesses and citizens equally and where unified worker and consumer rights benefit both young and old alike.
What’s missing seems to be the political will to fully support and promote the idea. For a successful community all participants need to take their share of common responsibilities, to some extent renounce national allegiances in favour and respect to the wishes of the greater majority. When populist governments, parties and politicians exploit public uncertainties and fears by resorting to redundant nationalist solutions, it will always be completely out of tune with EU philosophy – old or new.
It’s sad that a rise in such feelings of nationalism played a part in the Brexit result; as for the economic implications, I guess we will just need to crack on…
Read full article
Hide full article
Discussion (54 comments)
PPihkala 8 years ago
Graham Driver 8 years ago
steven@laycock.com 8 years ago
Steve Leeper 8 years ago
Graham Driver 8 years ago
Of course the younger generstion undestand so much better...because thy have never experienced anything other.
Raymond Frost 8 years ago
Geoff Ward 8 years ago
It was a close vote 48% voted to stay. What are you doing for the tens of millions of people who voted to stay ? You are playing straight into the hands of those who votes to leave. I expect that most of your UK audience reading this is 1) in favour of staying in the EU and 2) turned off by your comments.
Throw us a line - we're drowning
Jonathan Pearson 8 years ago
My parents voted for a 'common market'. It's not that we've lost the appetite for sausage, but the flavour has changed beyond all recognition. The EU project (project has never been defined) is a noble idea and worked when it was a small collection of countries of similar wealth.
The EU has failed to secure its borders and the Euro has failed in Greece. Its accounts have never been audited and it is a corrupt undemocratic ‘gravy train’.
Britain is a small island and the influx of 0.3M migrants per year has made it an unpleasant place to live. The NHS can't cope, the roads are jammed, we don't have enough housing etc. It's a no brainer that someone paid £1.50 per hour in Romania will come to Britain where they get paid more like £7 per hour plus tax credits and sometimes free housing.
We have lost touch with democracy. We need to know who is making our laws and be free to vote them out, and we can't do that with the EU.
We, the British enjoy the friendship of our friends on the continent, but we despise the political elite. It's time to take back control and work towards the original aim of a free trade zone with harmonised standards. We cannot absorb millions from failed ex-communist countries. Their people need to stay at home and rebuild their countries whilst trading with the EU. In time their lives will improve. Freedom of movement might work for a large country, but not for a small island.
Join us! Have a referendum and reform the EU into a body that works. Britain will NEVER want to be part of a 'United States of Europe. We don’t mind if the continent wants to form one country, but we still need to trade with each other.
Now do you understand about the sausage?
J. Verduyn 8 years ago
The fact that the financial accounts have not been fully signed off by the auditors for more than 19 years speaks for itself! In my view the 4.5% of the enormous budget that is in dispute by the Auditors is the "gravy train" of this organisation.
If the EU was a Company they would have been closed down by the Taxman years ago .
Next consider the waste: For example the monthly circus moving MEPs for a couple of days every month from Brussels to Strassburg and then back again!
Thirdly, With 27 Member countries we now are seeing block voting by countries in the EU that have similar interests, as is happening at the European Song Festival. Block voting is against the interest of countries like Britain, Netherlands and Denmark to name a few.
I live in the UK, but having Dutch Nationality I was not allowed to vote. I am for the EU in principle, but I would would have voted "IN" after serious reform of this EU organisation. Jan Verduyn
nervejam 8 years ago
Gordon Sim 8 years ago
The EU commission appears to run with the a USA mandate which is not good for any of us.
With the likes of TTIP, TISA and CETA the us wants to control most things and these trade deals will allow that to happen if care is not taked due to ISDS and other terms.
We are all europeans but sadly many politicians from all sides have the name of greed and power etched all over them.
The future holds and enormous amount of good will on all sides and with those of working for Climate Change and against Fracking and Monsanto I think the future looks very interesting indeed.
Exit the dark and into the light.
N. Brackenbury 8 years ago
boatman 8 years ago
Gordon Sim 8 years ago
Paul Phillips 8 years ago
Nobody in the UK is enthusiastic about the EU. Opinions range from - it is in serious need of reform but on balance we should stay - to - it is forcing us to do things which are not in our interest and we have to leave. Most people in the UK are keen to be in a version of the EU which promotes those old European ideas but which does not try to become our ruler and force us into an ideaology which we cannot support.
The UK Prime Minister asked for reforms and negotiated very hard but in the end there was almost no change of real substance on offer. I think that most "Leave" voters saw this as evidence that the argument to "reform from within" is a false hope. What surprised the EU so much is that the UK people followed through on their threat to leave if there is no reform.
These are not ideas of nationalism. They are ideas basic to Democracy. The EU is afraid of Democracy which is why they want to put more barriers up for those who want to change the status quo. The EU elite do not want to be accountable to the people but If they do not listen then the EU will not survive.
Nigel Bond 8 years ago
Once all the sensible regulations had been devised, the rule makers kept their jobs, which left them with nothing else to do but to start making nonsense rules.
Latterly the meglamaniacs have flourished, seeking to establish a central power-base for the sake of simply having power. The member states (i.e. their populations) therefore have less and less power. This devalues the politics of individual states, such the populations become more and more disinterested in their domestic political systems as their choice of Government doesn't actually acheive much any more.
The main reason amongst the UK population for voting out was based on movement of people. It is fine for mainland Europe to champion free movement when most of the migrating population(s) are happy to simply pass thru their states to get to (the prosperous) UK.
Unless/until living standards are uniform accross Europe, free movement won't work.
As for better guards to make it impossible for a state to leave .... where to next after that?
As for a minority wanting to leave, I wonder what the result would have been if the vote had been accross the whole EU? The main fear of the EU over Brexit is that other reforendums may come about. If their fears are well founded, then surely democracy demands they be allowed to vote.
(Of course the EU did envisage possible exits, and hence the inclusion of Article 50)
I didn't vote. Brexit is causing me much grief already. Brexit is bad for me, but good for UK. Hopefully good for EU as well, once/if the lunatics are swept aside in favour of decent thinking people. If only the EU machine was run by us engineers!
Colin 8 years ago
Andrew Coad 8 years ago
Regardless, all UK citizens are Europeans and nothing can change that. The UK will continue to collaborate on all important issues and contribute to the betterment of society within Europe as a whole. In time, Brexit will seen as the event that stopped democracy inexorably slipping out of reach from the average citizen. This is a good thing. For everyone.
Thack 8 years ago
Tom Vireo 8 years ago
steven@laycock.com 8 years ago
It is held together by international treaties! It is not a supranational unelected body... Google "Council of Ministers" and "European Parliament"...
Nigel Farmer 8 years ago
purple-bobby 8 years ago
The UK had roughly 9.5% of the MEP in the EU, but it is rather difficult to find which MEP would be the one to consult with an issue. They seem to belong to meaninglessly named groups. With elected local council and to some extent national MP, you have one person based on locallity (who can then pass your issue on to the correct group).
Thack 8 years ago
mkstevo 8 years ago
Nigel M Allinson 8 years ago
Sad day, yes. The referendum should hever have been called. All our politicians lied to us but especially the ones who wanted to leave. They used fear, nationalism, false promises and racism to stir up opinion. The old voted for leave. The people in areas where immigration is not high voted for leave. They had no plans – but as one journalist put it “Arsonists don’t carry water”.
The EU is not perfect. It will be hard in negotiating with us as nationalism, and nasty right-wing nationalism, is on the rise across Europe.
The future for the young looks bleak
N. Brackenbury 8 years ago
I'm 69 and voted Remain, my three sons are between 20 and 27 and all voted Brexit. Most of their friends couldn't care less and didn't vote at all.
As for 'Nationalsim', anyone who is white, male, supports his/her own country first and is not a committed Socialist, is called a right wing nationalist.
The problem with many Remain voters is that they cannot accept that the EU needs some very serious reform. The EU hierarchy have created a legal structure that prevents the 'people' from finding a way to achieve this.
jcdammeyer 8 years ago
Part of the reason was the statement that "if Canada is divisible, so is Quebec".
Having just returned from holidays in The Netherlands and Berlin, Germany the thought of a country divided up with walls is rather disheartening. Just think if the areas that voted to stay did that. A wall around London, a wall between Scotland and England, a wall on the Nothern Ireland border.
I doubt that will happen. But the Trump rhetoric both in the USA and in the UK (or the far right parties in France and The Netherlands) all sound like the support Hitler received post WW-I. History, will never repeat in exactly the same way thank goodness but if we don't study it we are doomed to repeat it in some flavour.
Living in The Netherlands from 1992 to 1994 showed us the beginnings of the EU. The free trade/movement between EU countries is now several orders of magnetude better than between Canada and the USA.
It costs me more to sell/ship my Electronic Lead Screrw product from Vancouver BC to Vancouver Washington than it would from Seattle to Vancouver Washington. That gives Americans a decided competitive advantage even with NAFTA and soon the TPP.
I look at the EU from the persepective of a Canadian with Provinces that have non-restrictive trade and movement of people. Even then occasionally the Provinces try to be petty little countries. But overall Canada has free trade, common currency and other aspects controlled by the Federal MPs. It's a representation by seats rather than population which means we've had to deal with 10 years of a Prime Minister trying to turn us into the USA with 39% of the popular vote. Not much different with our new Prime Minister as far as representation goes but this time a far more inclusive government.
Ultimately, if Britons (or Americans) are used to a two party system where the government operates under a clear popular majority, the EU can appear to be un democratic. But in reality the difference between a dictatorship and a democracy comes down to the majority looking our for and taking care of the minority.
Adversely affecting the lives of 16 million UK residents and almost 500 million members of other EU Countries isn't even close to democracy.
Since a referendum isn't legally binding the UK could use the demographic results of the Brexit vote to support the concept of a real democracy where regional disparities are included and refuse to invoke article 50. And then pass legislation to prevent it from happening again without a clear majority of 75% in all voting regioins.
David Ashton 8 years ago
>And then pass legislation to prevent it from happening again without a clear majority of 75% in all voting regions.
I'd support raising the bar a bit, to say 60%, to make it more decisive. But to refuse it if only Scotland did not acheive 60% would be equally divisive.
Brian Stott 8 years ago
Your opiniins are counter to the popular winning vote. The UK can decide for themselves and our ignorant guesses are best wasted space on persinal and topical other more trivial media.
Thack 8 years ago
Colin 8 years ago
Gordon Sim 8 years ago
As one of the older generation I voted to stay only because of the environmental concerns as the EU appears to give better protection for this. I expect most europeans do not know what is going on with the EU.
The EU commission appears to run with the a USA mandate which is not good for any of us.
With the likes of TTIP, TISA and CETA the USA wants to control most things and these trade deals will allow that to happen if care is not taked due to ISDS and other terms.
We are all europeans but sadly many politicians from all sides have the name of greed and power etched all over them.
The future holds and enormous amount of good will on all sides and with those of working for Climate Change and against Fracking and Monsanto I think the future looks very interesting indeed.
Exit the dark and into the light.
Thack 8 years ago
I voted to leave for four reasons. Firstly, I don't think the EU is sufficiently democratic.
Secondly, I don't think the EU is particularly competent: look at economic mess in the Eurozone, and look how the migrant crisis was mishandled.
Thirdly, the relentless expansionism worries me a lot, as it looks an awful lot like political dogma, rather than a considered country-by-country accession; also it's causing too much tension in Russia.
Fourthly, and perhaps most importantly, I don't want another layer of government on top of the national governments.
It's important to remember that the EU is NOT Europe. Europe is a continent of 50 countries, 870 million people, a history going back thousands of years, and a smorgasbord of different cultures. I am proud to be part of that. The EU is a political construct going back just 20 years (before Maastricht it was the EEC). To leave the EU is simply to leave an inept bunch of politicians trying to construct a layer of government overarching the member countries.
We Brits will always be children of Europe. Europeans will always be our friends and neighbours. But the EU as a political entity holds no attraction for me.
Colin 8 years ago
As I have lived outside the UK for more than 15 years, I was not eligible to vote.
Thack 8 years ago
David Ashton 8 years ago
mkstevo 8 years ago
Personally I voted to leave. Not because I'm racist but I fear that as a small island, only a certain number of people can be supported by the island. We have very limited housing as it is and further pressure by migration only makes the situation worse. Were the Government to embark on a mammoth building project, building one new home for every ten existing homes this could be eased, but they have shown no willingness to build anything like the required amount. That may be good for the core voter who already owns a home and sees the value rise day by day, but it is of no use to the young nor to any migrant worker.
I also feel that the EU should either become a fully federal state with a central Government, a single economic policy with a single tax collection regime and possibly even a single common language, or it should return to being the economic trading partnership it originally started life as.
As to why Britain voted the way it did? The political campaign run by those on the 'Leave' side bordered on the xenophobic, with pictures of limitless migrants making their way to the UK to steal our benefits and rape our women (well, it felt like that at times...). The 'Remain' campaign was actually far worse. It promised old people would be left penniless, the ill would be left untreated, that ISIS would be praying for us to leave and World War Three was imminent following a vote to leave (I wish I was exaggerating here). If you asked any of the 'Remain' camp to explain why any of the above might happen they simply shrugged and resorted to 'The Emperor's New Clothes' routine that of "Well if you're too stupid to understand..." None of this was particularly well received by the UK public. The Prime Minister refused to debate the issue, relying on soundbites (which were either quoted or misquoted as above) leaving debating to the mad and the bad, none of which helped. This left us making our own minds up as we saw fit. I voted for the reasons I've outlined. Many others having been fed lines about the EU banning paddling pools, bent bananas and working vacuum cleaners (take your pick) for years without anyone in the Government having the gumption to scotch these mostly unfounded stories, believed them to be true and voted against the EU and 'it's meddling ways'.
Yes it's a shame in many ways, but it could be the start of a new dawn, for the UK, for Europe and for the rest of the world.
David Ashton 8 years ago
David Cameron was allegedly trying to enact a law to limit union strike actions to those receiving at leat a 75% poll and at least 60% of that vote. He would have done well to impose the same conditions on Brexit. Such a slim margin is bad for Britain, bad for the EU and bad for the world.
The EU has maybe got too big, too powerful, too quickly. It IS sad that the UK has left. I think the important thing is for the parties to move on, and not be vindictive or let egos get in the way. The UK and EU can still have a very productive relationship if it is handled properly.
steven@laycock.com 8 years ago
It is time that the UK Parliament takes its responsibilities and does the right thing. It is very clear what the "will of the people really is", Parliament must not invoke Article 50.
I suggest the moaning "Leavers" watch the following video to get a clear view of the EU from Michael Dougan @ Liverpool University on facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/1293361974024537/
Thack 8 years ago
I voted leave, and it is increasingly clear to me that I did exactly the right thing. My conviction is growing, not shrinking.
It is important to me that everyone in Europe knows that this is NOT an anti-Europe vote, it is specifically a vote about the EU - a political construct that no-one asked for.
PPihkala 8 years ago
steven@laycock.com 8 years ago
What was awful was the quality of the info given by both sides and the BBC's coverage was gravely disappointing. It was so dumbed down on both sides...
Thack 8 years ago
Personally I don't think it should have gone to referendum. Nevertheless, it did, so we must abide by the outcome.
For myself, I am very optimistic about the future of the UK outside the EU, but as an intimate part of Europe and its peoples. Europe is a wonderful place; the EU is an inept political construct which has outlived its usefulness. I wouldn't be sad to see the EU collapse; or more specifically, I'd be happy to see it revert to the EEC, which I think everyone thought was a good thing.
Remember: the EU is NOT Europe.
steven@laycock.com 8 years ago
By the way, living over here the picture I see is very different from that presented in the UK. Comparing foreign news including US channels, the worries are for the UK not the EU. Few here worried about the Eurozone crisis but from a UK perspective the end was nigh.
Very odd.
Thack 8 years ago
The EU seems inept primarily because so many countries in the Eurozone are in significant difficulties economically - Greece is the obvious example, but most of the other southern Europe countries have high debt, high unemployment, low GDP, low growth, etc. So it isn't working well economically - or at least it works for only a few. As a proportion of the world economy, it is shrinking relentlessly.
It seems inept because freedom of movement between countries of radically different economic strengths means workers from poor countries (e.g. Romania) will travel to rich countries (e.g. Britain), because the minimum wage in Britain is two or three times the average wage in Romania. This is good for Romanians (they can send plenty of money back to their families) but bad for low-skilled Britons because they cannot compete on wages (the cost of living in the UK being much higher than in Romania). Thus low-skilled Romanians take jobs from low-skilled Britons, who have to survive on benefits. This situation seems impossible to resolve while ever we have freedom of movement combined with radically different economic statuses: workers from poorer countries always have an advantage over workers from richer countries.
It seems inept because the migrant crisis was handled incredibly badly, with migrants being left where they landed (Greece); migrants being moved in large enough numbers to cause cultural difficulties (Germany); and fences being hastily erected along the borders inside the Shengen zone - contrary to its basic principle.
It seems inept because it is less democratic than most of the member countries. I can only elect my MEP, and he represents so many people he is less likely to hear my voice than is my UK MP. Furthermore the European Council, the Council of the European Union, and the European Commission are all appointed, not directly elected (appointed by elected politicians, of course, but this is a very indirect form of democracy). These bodies have many of the powers that would normally reside with the directly elected Parliament in the UK, which means that my MEP - my only directly elected representative - has less power than my MP in the UK Parliament. This is a serious democratic deficit.
As well as inept, it also seems slightly sinister in its relentless expansionism into Eastern Europe, which seems much more like some kind of political dogma than a case-by-case assessment of each country's readiness for accession. It is causing tensions with Russia.
What seems even more sinister is the insidious growth of a European judicial system which has the legal right to override all national courts. Furthermore there is no legal limit to its scope, so once it has ruled in an area it then retains supremacy in that area indefinitely. Nobody ever asked me about this and I'm very uncomfortable about it. (I'm not a lawyer and some details of this paragraph may be inaccurate, but the principle is what I'm concerned about.)
I hope this gives you some idea of why I am not keen on the EU.
I hope you also realise that I love Europe - that vibrant kaleidoscope of countries and cultures.
steven@laycock.com 8 years ago
Please watch this video it explains some things very nicely: https://www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/vb.130437690316977/1293361974024537/?type=2&theater
Thack 8 years ago
As it happens, it didn't change my mind very much, although it made my opinions more informed and more nuanced.
You see, I don't think the facts that he discusses are really in dispute. For me it's very much about how much value I place on each fact, and on each argument.
Let me try to explain. I'm an engineer, and in science and engineering there are vast numbers of hard facts, which allow us to make reliable predictions about what will happen. Importantly, there is no element of judgement when it comes to the laws of physics. A 1 newton force acting on a 1 kilogram mass will produce an acceleration of 1 metre per second per second. We know this is true, and it is always true. Nobody needs to make a judgement on it.
But the world of politics and human affairs is simply not like that. There are no laws of physics involved. Every rule and law is made up by humans. Everything that happens is caused by humans doing something. Everything that is human-constructed can be unconstructed or changed as we wish.
Therefore every interpretation of the facts must boil down to a matter of judgement. Furthermore, these judgements are always coloured by the inherent optimism or pessimism of the person involved. For instance, I've noticed that all my "Remain" friends see the risks arising from Brexit, feel frightened by them, and thus want to avoid them by remaining in the EU. A perfectly reasonable position to take, yes?
I, on the other hand, see them differently. Half of my career was in R&D, and to me these risks might or might not happen, and if they do then we jolly well get stuck in and sort them out. There is no concept of "too hard" - we work at it until the job is done, or until we find a clever way of delivering the requirement using a different technique.
You might say that I am blindly optimistic, and perhaps you are right. But to me there is one compelling reason to be so. In the world of physics, pretty well the entire body of our scientific theories and knowledge tells us that we will never be able to accelerate a mass through the speed of light. There may be "cheats", but right now we are as certain as can be that we can't do it.
But in the world of politics and human affairs, there are no laws of physics. Literally nothing is impossible. Given the will, we can achieve literally anything within that sphere, because (unlike with the universe) we make up all the rules!
So, yes, I am optimistic that every problem mentioned can be overcome, and far more easily than travelling faster than the speed of light, or achieving perpetual motion, etc.
Brexit is clearly not something that can be "right" or "wrong" beyond dispute, because it always boils down to individual judgement in the end. And people's interpretation of the evidence, the value they place on each of the possible consequences, and their inherent optimism or pessimism will all colour their eventual decision.
steven@laycock.com 7 years ago
Thack 7 years ago
Firstly, there is little doubt that the EU politicians are behaving unprofessionally and, to be honest, like children. There seems to be a clear agenda to "punish" Britain for leaving, and today's announcements about Eire seem to confirm that. It's obvious why they are doing it, of course - they mustn't encourage any other members to take the same route. Also, I expect they are bitter about losing such a lot of money in annual payments. But to listen to Barnier, there is an unmistakeable petulance to his mood. It's pathetic, and disappointing. Perhaps I was naive to think that the EU's politicians could behave like adults and professionals.
Talking of ineptitude, I've long been of the view that Britain could thrive outside the EU *provided* it had good, strong leadership. But the recent general election - probably the most misjudged in decades, combined with the worst Conservative election campaign in living memory - has rocked my optimism to the core. Theresa May is profoundly weakened, the government is split, and despite all her talk, she most certainly isn't up to the job of providing the kind of strong leadership the UK needs.
Speaking in complete candour, I am no longer as optimistic about the UK's future. However, let me emphasise that my view would be the same whether or not the UK remained in the EU. In fact, I think the malaise in the UK goes much deeper than that which some people think will arise from Brexit. We have a population which is increasingly interested in individualism and entitlement, rather than society and their responsibilities; we have become so risk averse it costs a fortune to do any kind of job, large or small, thanks to crippling bureaucracy. We are work-shy, relying on immigrants to do all the jobs that involve, you know, actual work. And the young adults are rightly called "snowflakes", taking offence at everything and demanding that they don't have to listen to anything other than that which they already agree with. They complain about how hard up they are, despite having material wealth beyond the dreams of their parents and grandparents. The only legitimate cause for complaint they have is the absurd cost of housing.
In that context, Brexit is neither here nor there. In twenty years it will be seen as a footnote.
But I'm afraid in the period since Britain invoked Article 50, the EU has absolutely not presented itself in a good light. Instead of behaving like statesmen, they've behaved like children. The EU (the political body) is rife with incompetence and unprofessionalism at every level. As a result, I'm still completely convinced that leaving the EU is the right thing to do.
I'm not as convinced as I was that Britain will thrive, although I remain hopeful and I know that, when the chips are down, Britain can do some extraordinary things. We've got what it takes; all except for the leadership we need.
steven@laycock.com 6 years ago
I was wondering what your thoughts are now. I honestly would like to know.
To me it seems, as I predicted, that the "Brexit project" has been a failure. We have the best deal already with the EU and we we be best remaining. Anything we do not like about the EU we should change from the inside.
I think the UK will eventually thrive. We must stop looking towords our past. However, the sooner we have some good politicians on both sides the better.
I agree with your "complete candour" comments.
Thack 6 years ago
BACKGROUND
Firstly, I have not changed my mind about Brexit. I've read my posts above, and I still think the same things. The EU hasn't changed. Of course, there is no right or wrong about this: you either care about the democratic deficit, the "ever greater union", the inequity of the Euro, or you don't. To me, those things are important; to you, other things are important. Neither of us is "right" - we just care about different things.
The total shambles currently in Parliament is an inevitable outcome of two things: firstly, the terrible mistake of putting the question out to referendum in the first place: it was a dreadful idea. Secondly, Gina Miller's legal moves have given Parliament (rather than the government) the authority to decide on how Brexit proceeds. She did it knowing that the majority of MPs oppose Brexit, and hoped they might stop (or at least soften) it. She was right - MPs are having to enact something they don't agree with - often profoundly so. Hence all the arguments and chaos.
LABOUR'S CUSTOMS UNION, OR A SECOND REFERENDUM?
Labour's idea of Brexit, which involves staying in "a customs union" is - in my opinion - not worth having because we couldn't negotiate our own trade deals. That's the whole point of Brexit - if we can't negotiate our trade deals we'd be better off staying in the EU. So, I don't want Labour's version of Brexit. I'd be willing to accept a "no deal" Brexit, but Parliament will certainly block that one, and it looks like May's deal will be blocked by Parliament as well.
Any second referendum is going to be horrendously complicated. It would need three questions:
1/ Accept the deal and leave the EU with the terms therein
2/ Reject the deal and leave on WTO terms
3/ Reject the deal and stay in the EU
But then someone will argue that there are two "reject" choices, so there should be another "accept" choice for balance.
And someone else will argue that there are two "leave" choices, so there should be another "remain" choice for balance!
In any case, with three questions it is very unlikely any of them will get more than 50% of the votes cast, so it would be hard to claim that there was any kind of democratic mandate from it.
I just can't see a second referendum happening for those very reasons: how could we frame the question and the choices such that everybody thinks it's fair?
A GENERAL ELECTION
Some people think that if Parliament can't agree it should call a general election. My main concerns are:
1/ Both Labour and Conservatives are pro-Brexit, they just disagree on the type of Brexit. So it isn't much of a choice for the 48% of remainers - will they realistically all want to vote Lib Dem (the only anti-Brexit main party)?
2/ A change of government doesn't really fix anything. The clock is still ticking to Brexit day, the EU has insisted there is no more negotiation to be done, so it might well be that we'll spend weeks over a general election, only to find we're still in exactly the same place as before.
THEREFORE.....
So, another referendum looks unlikely. A general election and a Labour victory MIGHT get the EU negotiating again, although I have my doubts. Hence we have no idea what will happen next. If I was forced to bet, I'd reluctantly place my money on Parliament accepting May's deal in the end, in order to avoid a hard Brexit.
A RANT...
One thing that really gets my goat is the number of policitians who say "Nobody voted to be poorer". Well, I did! Or rather, I voted to leave fully expecting a short- to medium-term hit on our economy. I did so because I think some things are more important than money. Also, we in Britain are as rich now as we've ever been, and I know we can live on less because that's just what we did for every decade prior to this one. So I'm willing for us to take an economic hit, as I'm moderately optimistic we can do better in the longer term.
FAILURE?
It's hard to know whether you are right that the Brexit project has been a "failure". I don't think we can know that until after March 2019. And probably not until a few years have passed.
THE BREXIT RETROSPECTROSCOPE
You said: "We must stop looking towords our past." I'm not sure where that is coming from. I don't look to our past, and you won't find any hint of that in my previous posts. As I've said before, I think we are better off now than ever before, and I think forwards is the only direction of interest. So far I haven't met any Brexiters who hark back to a "golden age" - the media talks about them, but I haven't met one yet.
Sorry this is such a long reply!!
All the best,
Thack
Lines Francis 8 years ago
I see EU as a strong block but with weakness here an there.
Also feel sorry for ethnic British as open immigration is putting a strain on them in terms of financial ,social ,jobs and others which the did enjoy for decades.
It is from the taxes collected from the older generations that helped to build the British as it is.It`s better to have a selective migration program rather than every tom dick n harry coming in to the nation.It is very important that this should be reviewed very well to take care of well being of country and security. This applies for the rest of EU countries too.
Salamina 8 years ago
Also EU was responsible for allowing the bribery of Greek politicians to promote its German equipment deals (as all over Europe) since it takes two to tango someone gives and someone accepts. He who does not accept was pushed of the government table. Lets just wait and see what will happen in Europe with the Diesel gate. Will the Commission oblige VW to pay as in USA ? I am patiently waiting since I own one of these cars.
So the British showed that they value their country, their independence and their long history of difficult victorious campaigns. Best luck lads. We might follow soon one way or another.