How do we resolve the Brexit mess?

[Postman Pep]

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Brexit blow: exports to Japan slump after ‘landmark’ free trade deal

First such accord after leaving EU was predicted to bring £15bn boost but UK now lags rivals

www.theguardian.com

They would be lining up to do a deal with us they said.

 

[Saddleworth2]

play a full part in the Capitalist construct that will perhaps one day lead to an EU state and the watering down of British democracy to what would be possibly be at best a regional tier of government.

though I agree on the point of ‘watering down…British democracy’ (albeit I’m less sure what that means under this Government).

what is this British democracy we speak of? It is a Union of four countries that is governed depending on which party the largest country votes for. Fair enough if the politics of those four countries are well aligned but for decades they haven't been.

it might also prevent Scotland leaving the Union, a move which would be another unwelcome economic hit for all involved.

I don't believe that would be a major factor really. Apathy and fear of the unknown will be far more telling.

 

[blueparrot]

Brexit blow: exports to Japan slump after ‘landmark’ free trade deal

First such accord after leaving EU was predicted to bring £15bn boost but UK now lags rivals

www.theguardian.com

They would be lining up to do a deal with us they said.

They probably were when they knew we were sending Truss in to do deals, they couldn’t wait to get one over on us.

 

[Gabriel]

what is this British democracy we speak of? It is a Union of four countries that is governed depending on which party the largest country votes for. Fair enough if the politics of those four countries are well aligned but for decades they haven't been.

I don't believe that would be a major factor really. Apathy and fear of the unknown will be far more telling.

Those points reflect the inside Scotland perspective, understandably, but my point was more about democracy in general. The proroguing of Parliament and the way this Government, and its forerunner, have behaved are hardly conducive to democratic governance. Similarly, by apathy and fear of the unknown, I suspect you mean amongst the Scottish electorate. Again, however, I was referring more to Westminster. The Conservatives, through their Brexit, have done enormous (perhaps irreparable) damage to the UK economy, so in that light they will hold Scotland in the Union as long as they can; the economic damage of disunion would also have a considerable impact on rUK and it simply cannot afford that. People only talk about the damage it ‘will’ do to Scotland, but if Brexit has told us anything, it is that everyone is affected by such breaks and that notions of superiority are only that, notions.

 

[Rascal]

It could be political suicide but that may largely depend on just how long the country is prepared to accept not only the economic pain but also the social pain that ensues. That pain has barely started and the continued loss in trade means continued lost taxes and that means even further cuts to public services are inevitable. No number of small deals will compensate for the staggering amount of GDP that has been lost, and every other country knows that this UK Government is now desperate for any deal- see Australia, especially after big prize of a US deal died, so they will strike as hard a bargain as possible.

The EU is a long-term project, so it would set certain expectations but would not be punitive; it wants the UK back in and welcoming it back in a penitent state would suffice, though the UK would not have it as good as before. The UK would probably have to commit to joining the Euro, but that is a movable feast- see Sweden. Similarly, it might have to commit to joining Schengen, but Ireland still isn’t part of it either, so that would be another point of discussion. It’s already part of a ‘Capitalist construct’, however, so I’m not sure that in itself would be radically novel, though I agree on the point of ‘watering down…British democracy’ (albeit I’m less sure what that means under this Government).

I sense that the UK will try to move toward a Swiss-style position first, which would not require a referendum, and then see how relations develop. That would certainly not be political suicide and could ‘simply’ be explained as renegotiating the botched terms by which the right-wing Conservatives severed ties. If successful, it might also prevent Scotland leaving the Union, a move which would be another unwelcome economic hit for all involved.

I think we both agree there are a lot of uncertainties to consider and that is before the pro Brexit media ratchet up the hysteria and propaganda

At the time of the referendum, I made a point that remain offered no vision for the future, leave did. Remain offered the status quo leave offered more. If and I still think it's a huge if re-joining became a possibility, then the re-join camp would have to offer a vision for the future that was not a return to the status quo.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I think we both agree there are a lot of uncertainties to consider and that is before the pro Brexit media ratchet up the hysteria and propaganda

At the time of the referendum, I made a point that remain offered no vision for the future, leave did. Remain offered the status quo leave offered more. If and I still think it's a huge if re-joining became a possibility, then the re-join camp would have to offer a vision for the future that was not a return to the status quo.

I disagree.

If we could snap our fingers and return to our pre 2016 status then there might be a chance, but the price of rejoining now would be to sign up for the European Project of greater integration, and that's a non starter for far too many.

Remain had no vision because the vision was a closer union and they didn't want that, and even if they had they couldn't sell it. To get there we need a new generation, this generation are beginning to regret leaving it'll need the next to start the long march back.

 

[Saddleworth2]

Those points reflect the inside Scotland perspective, understandably, but my point was more about democracy in general. The proroguing of Parliament and the way this Government, and its forerunner, have behaved are hardly conducive to democratic governance. Similarly, by apathy and fear of the unknown, I suspect you mean amongst the Scottish electorate. Again, however, I was referring more to Westminster. The Conservatives, through their Brexit, have done enormous (perhaps irreparable) damage to the UK economy, so in that light they will hold Scotland in the Union as long as they can; the economic damage of disunion would also have a considerable impact on rUK and it simply cannot afford that. People only talk about the damage it ‘will’ do to Scotland, but if Brexit has told us anything, it is that everyone is affected by such breaks and that notions of superiority are only that, notions.

You make good points and forgive me for being parochial.
On a wider basis, UK Democracy is fundamentally flawed by institutions like The House of Lords, the first past the post system that makes millions of constituency votes redundant and a complete absence of checks and balances that mean once you have a majority you can do what the hell you like.

There is a complete absence in this country of holding a government to account for anything. Just take a look at the Conservative manifesto of 2019. Their promise to the country:

• Extra funding for the NHS, with 50,000 more nurses and 50 million more GP surgery appointments a year.​

• 20,000 more police and tougher sentencing for criminals.​

• An Australian-style points-based system to control immigration.​

• Millions more invested every week in science, schools, apprenticeships and infrastructure while controlling debt.​

• Reaching Net Zero by 2050 with investment in clean energy solutions and green infrastructure to reduce carbon emissions and pollution.​

• We will not raise the rate of income tax, VAT or National Insurance.​

• We Will Put You First​

• Getting Brexit done. Investing in our public services and infrastructure. Supporting workers and families. Strengthening the Union. Unleashing Britain’s potential.​

Yes its vague as hell in some areas but in others its measurable. When do you ever hear anyone referring to their delivery record against this in the media. Maybe an independent 'fact checker' body should keep the score for every government and make sure its published as a health warning during each new GE campaign. You know like after a Tory PPB you could have a voice that says, 'by independent measurement, voting for Tory may ruin the economy and be a serious risk to your health and wellbeing'.
I shouldn't be flippant about such a serious point I know.

 

[Saddleworth2]

I disagree.

If we could snap our fingers and return to our pre 2016 status then there might be a chance, but the price of rejoining now would be to sign up for the European Project of greater integration, and that's a non starter for far too many.

Remain had no vision because the vision was a closer union and they didn't want that, and even if they had they couldn't sell it. To get there we need a new generation, this generation are beginning to regret leaving it'll need the next to start the long march back.

If nobody ever explains what a closer Union in Europe means then nobody will ever have the chance to want it. The chances of the subject ever getting a grown up conversation in this country are nil thanks to our idiot politicians and supine/biased media.

 

[goalmole]

You make good points and forgive me for being parochial.
On a wider basis, UK Democracy is fundamentally flawed by institutions like The House of Lords, the first past the post system that makes millions of constituency votes redundant and a complete absence of checks and balances that mean once you have a majority you can do what the hell you like.

There is a complete absence in this country of holding a government to account for anything. Just take a look at the Conservative manifesto of 2019. Their promise to the country:

• Extra funding for the NHS, with 50,000 more nurses and 50 million more GP surgery appointments a year.​

• 20,000 more police and tougher sentencing for criminals.​

• An Australian-style points-based system to control immigration.​

• Millions more invested every week in science, schools, apprenticeships and infrastructure while controlling debt.​

• Reaching Net Zero by 2050 with investment in clean energy solutions and green infrastructure to reduce carbon emissions and pollution.​

• We will not raise the rate of income tax, VAT or National Insurance.​

• We Will Put You First​

• Getting Brexit done. Investing in our public services and infrastructure. Supporting workers and families. Strengthening the Union. Unleashing Britain’s potential.​

Yes its vague as hell in some areas but in others its measurable. When do you ever hear anyone referring to their delivery record against this in the media. Maybe an independent 'fact checker' body should keep the score for every government and make sure its published as a health warning during each new GE campaign. You know like after a Tory PPB you could have a voice that says, 'by independent measurement, voting for Tory may ruin the economy and be a serious risk to your health and wellbeing'.
I shouldn't be flippant about such a serious point I know.

The electorate is the body that should be holding the performance of the government to account at each GE, if they knew what they had voted for in the first place.

 

[The perfect fumble]

If nobody ever explains what a closer Union in Europe means then nobody will ever have the chance to want it. The chances of the subject ever getting a grown up conversation in this country are nil thanks to our idiot politicians and supine/biased media.

Well the first would be joining the Euro and the second would be to sign up to the Schengen agreement, the third would be to support some form of European defence force outside of NATO.

There wouldn't be a fourth because too many little englanders would've had a heart attack.

 

[Saddleworth2]

The electorate is the body that should be holding the performance of the government to account at each GE, if they knew what they had voted for in the first place.

But they don't and they don't.

 

[Saddleworth2]

Well the first would be joining the Euro and the second would be to sign up to the Schengen agreement, the third would be to support some form of European defence force outside of NATO.

There wouldn't be a fourth because too many little englanders would've had a heart attack.

The level of ignorance about even the basics would have to be addressed first.

 

[Gabriel]

I think we both agree there are a lot of uncertainties to consider and that is before the pro Brexit media ratchet up the hysteria and propaganda

At the time of the referendum, I made a point that remain offered no vision for the future, leave did. Remain offered the status quo leave offered more. If and I still think it's a huge if re-joining became a possibility, then the re-join camp would have to offer a vision for the future that was not a return to the status quo.

Leave offered a series of fantasies that the English electorate lapped up. These were fantasies which accentuated feelings of difference and which accentuated the past and the future, conveniently eliding over the present as that would mean Leave owning some responsibility for the plight of the people they were trying to convince. The fantasies have quickly become nightmares, yet their creators are still holding out the promise of free jam tomorrow. Alas, now, the electorate don’t even have the bread on which to put it.

I agree that a different vision would have to be set out. That was harder in 2016. It’s terribly difficult to set out a vision of something when you’re only one of many members and especially when you are not entirely sure what direction they are heading. Even now, I still don’t think English politicians could shift wholeheartedly to embracing the EU project (the Scottish could), which is why I think a Swiss-style arrangement is more likely. That would be less of hard sell, and if it could be seen to get GDP back close to what it was, that might even put bread on the table.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

The re-join campaign would have to be honest and tell people that there would be every chance we would have to accept the Euro, freedom of movement, join Schengen, be at the behest of the ECB and play a full part in the Capitalist construct that will perhaps one day lead to an EU state and the watering down of British democracy to what would be possibly be at best a regional tier of government.

Watering down of British democracy seems like a sensible idea.

 

[Saddleworth2]

Leave offered a series of fantasies that the English electorate lapped up. These were fantasies which accentuated feelings of difference and which accentuated the past and the future, conveniently eliding over the present as that would mean Leave owning some responsibility for the plight of the people they were trying to convince. The fantasies have quickly become nightmares, yet their creators are still holding out the promise of free jam tomorrow. Alas, now, the electorate don’t even have the bread on which to put it.

I agree that a different vision would have to be set out. That was harder in 2016. It’s terribly difficult to set out a vision of something when you’re only one of many members and especially when you are not entirely sure what direction they are heading. Even now, I still don’t think English politicians could shift wholeheartedly to embracing the EU project (the Scottish could), which is why I think a Swiss-style arrangement is more likely. That would be less of hard sell, and if it could be seen to get GDP back close to what it was, that might even put bread on the table.

Someone somewhere needs to tell the country the truth and it doesn't look like it will be Starmer or Sunak.
For as long as we pretend that Brexit can be made to work, the gap between us and our neighbours will just get bigger and bigger.

 

[Gabriel]

You make good points and forgive me for being parochial.
On a wider basis, UK Democracy is fundamentally flawed by institutions like The House of Lords, the first past the post system that makes millions of constituency votes redundant and a complete absence of checks and balances that mean once you have a majority you can do what the hell you like.

There is a complete absence in this country of holding a government to account for anything. Just take a look at the Conservative manifesto of 2019. Their promise to the country:

• Extra funding for the NHS, with 50,000 more nurses and 50 million more GP surgery appointments a year.​

• 20,000 more police and tougher sentencing for criminals.​

• An Australian-style points-based system to control immigration.​

• Millions more invested every week in science, schools, apprenticeships and infrastructure while controlling debt.​

• Reaching Net Zero by 2050 with investment in clean energy solutions and green infrastructure to reduce carbon emissions and pollution.​

• We will not raise the rate of income tax, VAT or National Insurance.​

• We Will Put You First​

• Getting Brexit done. Investing in our public services and infrastructure. Supporting workers and families. Strengthening the Union. Unleashing Britain’s potential.​

Yes its vague as hell in some areas but in others its measurable. When do you ever hear anyone referring to their delivery record against this in the media. Maybe an independent 'fact checker' body should keep the score for every government and make sure its published as a health warning during each new GE campaign. You know like after a Tory PPB you could have a voice that says, 'by independent measurement, voting for Tory may ruin the economy and be a serious risk to your health and wellbeing'.
I shouldn't be flippant about such a serious point I know.

I was just viewing the subject as seen from the outside.

Good point on accountability. A fear I have is that the toxicity caused by and now disillusionment with Brexit has served to create even higher levels of apathy, and that means there could be even less accountability.

I’d dearly like to see someone like Martin Lewis create a truly independent body that could fact check and grade both policies and even politicians (all parties).

 

[The perfect fumble]

The level of ignorance about even the basics would have to be addressed first.

It's not all down to ignorance.

There is a coherent political narrative regarding why we didn't support these things when we were a member.

Leave lied through its teeth and spun yarns of sunny Brexit uplands in 2016 because that was the way to win the referendum, but the political argument to leave is a strong one even if the economic one is a crock.

I'm of the opinion that there is a majority in this country to join the Common Market, but that's not on offer. Even if a dispassionate and honest offering of greater European integration could be made to the British people, I think they'd still reject it and in truth I might be one of them.

The great European project is a Franco-German affair, born of two world wars. Our relationship with mainland Europe is very different, we're wary of continental entanglements, we tend to look to the Anglosphere more than we do Europe. That might change over time but it'll need a new generation to do it.

 

[Gabriel]

Someone somewhere needs to tell the country the truth and it doesn't look like it will be Starmer or Sunak.
For as long as we pretend that Brexit can be made to work, the gap between us and our neighbours will just get bigger and bigger.

I think that the country already knows the truth. The problem is that its mainstream politicians cannot bring themselves to admit the truth. That is understandable because it would entail accepting accountability and responsibility. In some ways, that would reflect the kinds of confessions offered on this thread in recent weeks: some confess they wish they hadn’t voted leave; some confess they wish they had done more to convert others.

As I’ve said on here, it’s only by confronting Sunak and Starmer with the bald facts that you’ll get them to shift. They’ll dismiss these figures outright, of course, but if they’re then asked to show their own figures to explain why the others are wrong (which they cannot), then the game is up (or a bogey!).

 

[BrianW]

The problem with 'democracy' is that the UK population and politicians have never understood the concept of subsidiarity. This is not surprising, as the UK is still a unitary state with an unrestrained parliament and government that can, in effect, make what changes it likes, with no real constitution to bar it.

The EU is not, and never has been, like that. It has certain powers, and that's it. It can only increase those powers with the agreement of national governments. As a result, it will never be a super-Westminster.

There are certain aspects of governance which simply cannot be handled by a nation-state on its own terms. Trade with EU nations is one of them. You need some sort of overarching body to determine the necessary standards and rules, and most of Europe accepts the EU is that body. Similarly, it's not much use us trying to sort out the environment on our own. It needs international cooperation to do it and the EU is a sensible vehicle for Europe.

That still leaves absolute tons of stuff for the Westminster Parliament to do. Although the other side of the penny is that much of what it does should, under the principles of subsidiarity, be devolved to lower tiers of government with - and this is crucial - constitutional protection to prevent reversal without a super-majority. It is quite ludicrous that some fellow in Westminster should have the last word over (for example) investment in Greater Manchester public transport or schools. That is much more concerning to me than people in Brussels deciding stuff it is actually quite sensible for them to decide.