How do we resolve the Brexit mess?

[Gabriel]

I'm of the opinion that there is a majority in this country to join the Common Market, but that's not on offer.

From whom?

 

[The perfect fumble]

From whom?

Not sure what that means.

 

[The perfect fumble]

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.

Are you suggesting we adopt a federal system, with greater political decision making and income generation within regions?

 

[Saddleworth2]

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).

They could have ratings like

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.

i don’t believe the political argument was any more authentic than the economic. Get back control and all that bloody guff. The EU did a great deal that was good for us and it was within our power to say yes or no to any expansion of those powers. Cameron couldn’t win the argument in the bloody Tory party and it was foisted on the public to decide. Bloody criminal. Europe has always been the target of the right wing press do as I said earlier almost impossible to have a grown up political conversation now or ever unless something fundamental changes.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

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.

Indeed. As Tony Benn once said: “No medieval monarch in the whole of British history ever had such power as every modern British Prime Minister has in his or her hands. Nor does any American President have power approaching this”.
Pretending that the EU was some anti-democratic threat to this almost absolute power the UK Prime Minister is hilarious.
Think lockdown policy and how easy it was for the executive to literally do whatever it wanted.
If people cast their minds back to that time and ‘the biggest crisis mankind has known in a generation’ or Covid 19, surely an authoritarian, tyrannical (I have seen the EU called that by some), power crazed EU would have taken over all governments and prescribed actions?
Turns out that it was, like almost every single other major decision about every country in Europe, entirely up to the government of the country to make! Who knew??

 

[The perfect fumble]

They could have ratings like

i don’t believe the political argument was any more authentic than the economic. Get back control and all that bloody guff. The EU did a great deal that was good for us and it was within our power to say yes or no to any expansion of those powers. Cameron couldn’t win the argument in the bloody Tory party and it was foisted on the public to decide. Bloody criminal. Europe has always been the target of the right wing press do as I said earlier almost impossible to have a grown up political conversation now or ever unless something fundamental changes.

All of this is true.

But.

The European Union binds us to a particular form of capitalism, about the only thing Corbyn and Mogg agree on is that prevents us from embarking on either a journey to Socialist Utopia or Singapore on Thames.

 

[goalmole]

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.

We'd do well to be more wary of greater entanglement with the Anglosphere if that means being a bitch to the American agenda rather than be in a largely democratic relationship with our European neighbours even if they do happen to be French or German.

 

[Gabriel]

Not sure what that means.

My apologies. I interpreted it as you saying that something is not on offer, and I’m asking who is doing the offering?

I think that many people would now agree that a renegotiated deal along the lines of the Swiss arrangement would be acceptable to a majority of the UK electorate. If the EU were officially asked for such negotiations, then I think it would agree. Ergo, if that, or something approaching that, is not on ‘offer’, then I can only presume that is because the UK politicians don’t want it and won’t hold it out as an offer to their voters.

 

[BrianW]

Are you suggesting we adopt a federal system, with greater political decision making and income generation within regions?

It depends what you mean by 'federal system.' I believe all decisions should be made at the lowest sensible tier of government. That is subsidiarity. I strongly dislike unitary systems that concentrate all power in one place, especially when the electoral system is crooked and one half of parliament is unelected. That is not my idea of 'democracy'.

 

[goalmole]

My apologies. I interpreted it as you saying that something is not on offer, and I’m asking who is doing the offering?

I think that many people would now agree that a renegotiated deal along the lines of the Swiss arrangement would be acceptable to a majority of the UK electorate. If the EU were officially asked for such negotiations, then I think it would agree. Ergo, if that, or something approaching that, is not on ‘offer’, then I can only presume that is because the UK politicians don’t want it and won’t hold it out as an offer to their voters.

What is clear is that we need some form of trading arrangement with the EU that gives us free(r) access to the EU market. Whatever we negotiate though won't be as good a deal as that which we threw away in our moment of national hubris.

 

[Gabriel]

We'd do well to be more wary of greater entanglement with the Anglosphere if that means being a bitch to the American agenda rather than be in a largely democratic relationship with our European neighbours even if they do happen to be French or German.

The Americans have flat out rejected any such deal with the UK. One of the great ironies is that the lingua franca, both in European politics and European business is English, something that will only intensify and improve in the coming decades.

 

[Gabriel]

What is clear is that we need some form of trading arrangement with the EU that gives us free(r) access to the EU market. Whatever we negotiate though won't be as good a deal as that which we threw away in our moment of national hubris.

That is more than likely true, yet what is renegotiated has to be better than the current situation.

 

[The perfect fumble]

My apologies. I interpreted it as you saying that something is not on offer, and I’m asking who is doing the offering?

I think that many people would now agree that a renegotiated deal along the lines of the Swiss arrangement would be acceptable to a majority of the UK electorate. If the EU were officially asked for such negotiations, then I think it would agree. Ergo, if that, or something approaching that, is not on ‘offer’, then I can only presume that is because the UK politicians don’t want it and won’t hold it out as an offer to their voters.

That might ease the economic consequences of Brexit but it negates the very reasons we left. We would be tied to the regulatory framework of the EU and its model of capitalism but powerless to change it.

Europhiles want to rejoin, Europhobes don't, a Swiss solution satisfies neither of them.

It's a non-starter.

 

[Gabriel]

That might ease the economic consequences of Brexit but it negates the very reasons we left. We would be tied to the regulatory framework of the EU and its model of capitalism but powerless to change it.

Europhiles want to rejoin, Europhobes don't, a Swiss solution satisfies neither of them.

It's a non-starter.

It negates some of the reasons why the UK left, not all, and Europhobes now have to explain how they are going to make up the lost GDP their decisions have cost.

The EU will only expand and consolidate (don’t hear many predicting its imminent disintegration these days), so the UK will soon have an economic entity of around 500 million people (Ukraine plus others) sitting right on its doorstep. It’s powerless to influence it from the outside and weakening itself on the outside, too. Hard to make the best of that either way.

 

[RabidCity]

Great idea - we can start grazing on the grass in the fields - we will just have to kill all the livestock first. Any suggestions as to how to dispose of all those bodies?

Seems to be only positive benefits to me. 3 billion are killed every day. We don't need to worry about the fish though, there's plenty of room in the sea.

https://www.livekindly.com/everyone...oving individuals,care, and lost working days.

 

[The perfect fumble]

It negates some of the reasons why the UK left, not all, and Europhobes now have to explain how they are going to make up the lost GDP their decisions have cost.

The EU will only expand and consolidate (don’t hear many predicting its imminent disintegration these days), so the UK will soon have an economic entity of around 500 million people (Ukraine plus others) sitting right on its doorstep. It’s powerless to influence it from the outside and weakening itself on the outside, too. Hard to make the best of that either way.

For the UK that's the objective reality, but sadly it's not the political reality.

To get where you and I both want to go there needs be a political pathway, but no such pathway exists, let alone a faltering first step.

It'll need a new generation I'm afraid.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

That might ease the economic consequences of Brexit but it negates the very reasons we left. We would be tied to the regulatory framework of the EU and its model of capitalism but powerless to change it.

Europhiles want to rejoin, Europhobes don't, a Swiss solution satisfies neither of them.

It's a non-starter.

That’s overly simplistic. I’m a Europhile, and I want to rejoin, but recognise that we won’t for the foreseeable. In the meantime we’ve got to do all we can to mitigate this insanity. Being tied to the regulatory framework and being powerless to change it is the price we will need to pay for our arrogance and stupidity.

 

[Phil1]

That’s overly simplistic. I’m a Europhile, and I want to rejoin, but recognise that we won’t for the foreseeable. In the meantime we’ve got to do all we can to mitigate this insanity. Being tied to the regulatory framework and being powerless to change it is the price we will need to pay for our arrogance and stupidity.

‘Arrogance’ sums it up beautifully. Believing that the U.K. is somehow more important than it is on the world stage is why the country is where it is right now. A fucking shambles.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

‘Arrogance’ sums it up beautifully. Believing that the U.K. is somehow more important than it is on the world stage is why the country is where it is right now. A fucking shambles.

The mental thing is that our membership of the EEC/EU pretty much coincided with a period where our post-WW2 decline as a nation was arrested and reversed. Now that decline has resumed. Funny that.

And the generation who benefited the most from that forty odd years membership are the ones (more than any other) who have fucked the job up for our children.

Selfish cunts.

 

[BrianW]

It takes guts to admit you were wrong and this goes for nations as well as individuals.

The Germans admitted they were wrong circa 1948 and have since gone from strength to strength. (There are still a small minority of Germans who think Adolf was wonderful, but they are a tiny minority.)

The first step for us is to acknowledge that Brexit was an error. Folly. That does not reverse it, and indeed it cannot be reversed as such. We shall never again enjoy the huge privileges we had as the EU member state with the best deal of all.

But from that starting point, we need to build our way back. The hard truth is there is no realistic alternative.