The Working Class, Labour and Brexit

.                                                                                                                                                                   Free trade has made certain industries competitive over the years such as steel and shipbuilding. This as particularly the case in areas if the North of England that voted by the highest amount for Brexit. Most notably, in the former industrial heartlands. Britain’s version of the rust belt states that abandoned the Democrats in the United States. The British establishment became systematically unapologetic to these people. Traditionally, these areas of the country were strongly Labour, but Labour overtime became disliked for becoming too London centric and middle class. I think this process was a result of the policies and success of Margaret Thatcher and the rise of new Labour which many traditional Labour voters felt left behind by new Labour.

Due to the embracement of Neo-Liberalism and the migration policies of Tony Blair many working-class voters were driven to Parties such as UKIP, who by their very nature were the same Thatcherites that shafted Northern England in the 1980's, but just slightly Eurosceptic. For the first time in decades Labour was challenged in their safest seats, but they continued to take their voters for granted. Labour failed to recognise this issue under Ed Miliband who himself served Doncaster North that voted 72% leave. Miliband's constituency is typical of a former industrial constituency, the seat is covered in former mining villages and towns with abandoned factories. UKIP frequently targeted the area, for instance, they Farage's UKIP continuously put their conferences in Doncaster. In 2014 we saw the foundation of the Yorkshire Party which gained much of its popularity in the former industrial heartlands. Its appeal its is localism, as opposed to its London centric policies. The Yorkshire Party is perceived as a middle ground between old an new Labour, which many Socialists see it as preferable to the Labour Party.

The year 2015 was an odd year for politics, we received an unexpected Majority for the Conservatives, the election was disheartening for many working-class voters, hence many switched a allegiance to UKIP. The three main Parties, Labour, Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives fought the election a very similar platform to each other of Neo-Liberalism. Labour received a mass backlash in Scotland for the failures of Neo-Liberalism as Labour was left with one seat in Scotland where Labour traditionally relied upon and took for granted. The response within the Labour Party in 2015 was rather extraordinary. We saw the return to the traditional Labour with the unexpected election of Jeremy Corbyn against all odds. He would promise to transform Labour and take the Party back to its roots. Initially, he was only put forward as a candidate by MP's to expand the debate. The shockwaves of the election of Corbyn is only beaten by the Brexit, 2017 election and the election of Donald Trump in the United States. While Corbyn brought Labour back to its roots in terms of policy, many internal problems remained. The Neo-Liberals in the Party constantly made his leadership difficult and they constantly undermined the Labour Party. Labour institutionally remained a Neo-Liberal Party in Parliament and in the media. Corbyn really had no respect from these individuals. Corbyn promised to give power back to the members, which he did. Despite rumours that Corbyn could back leaving the European Union, it was decided in the 2015 conference that Labour will back remain.

During the referendum, Labour was perceived as London centric, of course, Corbyn and much of the Labour leadership was London based, the main exception was John Mcdonnell. Labour once again largely embraced the Neo-Liberal economic policies than the past leadership and failed to give the nation a clear Socialist remain and reform vision and the majority of the electorate would embrace. Corbyn of course personally did more remain rallies than any other MP. Many rumours did arise if Corbyn was actually a true remain voter. he traditionally sat on the back benches with Tony Benn and George Galloway and Jeremy Corbyn voted against every EU treaty. Corbyn also stated on Sky News during the referendum that he was 7 and a half out of 10 for his passion for leaving the EU. However, I think the idea that he voted leave was a conspiarcy hyped up by his opponents in the Labour Party, Corbyn was a Eurosceptic who wanted to reform the EU at the time of the referendum. Many in the traditional heartlands of Labour saw this as more of the same for the Labour Party and saw the Labour Party as a Neo-liberal London centric Party once again that purposely ignores its Northern deprived heartlands. Unlike the remain side who utilised project fear and campaigned for the status quo, the leave side both on the left and the right offered a new and a different future for Britain, people wanted hope and change. After the referendum, many MP's reflected poorly on the failure and blamed the leadership and accepted that Labour left the North behind. The Northern MP for Don Valley Caroline Flint recognised this a knew Labour had to change, her seat Don Valley voted 68.5% leave the EU. This, of course, was quite telling coming from an MP who is considered to be on the right of the Party.

The moderate MP's who were constantly looking for a way to take down Corbyn used Labours failures during the EU referendum who they are also responsible far to undermine the leadership. Corbyns opposition who were initially split between Angela Eagle united in a hope to defeat Jeremy Corbyn. Jeremy Corbyn, recognised the endemic issues in Labour and committed to honouring the referendum and to bring forth an idea of a Lexit. Owen Smith became the opposition to Corbyn during the 2015 leadership election, he centred his campaign on the idea of a second referendum, essentially ignoring the Northern Working Class. Jeremy Corbyn came on top with nearly twice the vote than Owen Smith. Labour rapidly increased its membership following this referendum. Labour was on a course to return to its roots.

After the 2016 Labour Leadership Election, many of the moderates in the Labour Party were forced to embrace much of Corbyns economic ideas such as railway nationalisation which, Blair Brown and Miliband failed to support despite the clear failure of the endeavour of railway privatisation. In 1975 the Labour Party supported the campaign to get Britain outside the ECC and the Common Market. Of course, things have changed since then since the late 1980's and the early 1990's the establishment of the Labour Party had abandoned its Eurosceptic roots. Within the left, the European question was a minor one until David Cameron announced an EU referendum to take place in 2016. This idea returns to the Labour Party out of necessary evil for many. However, the period between the Labor 2016 leadership election and the 2017 general election is an awful period for the Labour Party. People accused as the Party as constantly flip-flopping on major issues at the same the widespread fear that the working class will switch to the Conservatives since the first time is the 1931 general election. However, the same MP's that were undermining Corbyn were offering Neo-Liberal ideas and policies contradictory to the Northern Labour voters. Labour was seen in ideological turmoil between the factions, on the idea of what Labour should be in the future. The same divisions were lighted up by the media. Labour continued to confuse the public with what it stands for and what it is its policy on Brexit.

Theresa May calling a general election after Easter 2017 broke the cycle. Labour offered a meaningful future to the public as stated in its Manifesto, let us face the future. It offered a reformed economic deal that would have brought Britain away from Neo-Liberal economics, it endorsed policies that would not be possible without leaving the European Union. The idea of a Lexit became mainstream. Labour unexpectedly managed win success in both leave and remain seats by offering a new and substantial future. In areas such as Canterbury and Portsmouth South. Labour managed to almost gain an equal split of the UKIP vote with the Conservative Party. Many of traditional Labour voters switched back to Labour, they saw hope in the Labour Party again. Of course, the Party is still too London Centric from the viewpoints of many, but it was a step in the right direction. Many individuals in society began to see the global failings on Neo-Liberalism. The Labour movement while remains, internationalist, but it began to become pro-worker. Activists began to realise many of the internationalist problems with Neo-Liberalism, though the most Pro Europe elements of the Labour Party still failed to provide solutions to these problems in their campaign for peoples vote, which remains a very middle-class movement. The most of the remain elements of the Labour Party recognise the issues with TTIP, I rarely give Trump praise he did end TTIP, though he is not trustworthy and the left in Labour recognises this. The general recognition in the example of TTIP is that it would lead to the mass privatisation of industry and perhaps open up the NHS for further privatisation and that would strip British industry of jobs. Only the most Neo-Liberal elements of the Labour Party who are openly demanding a Peoples Vote are failing to recognise this issue with the EU while claiming that we will do the same post Brexit. The same Politicians voted for CETA in summer 2018 that has the same issues than TTIP, but just with Canada as opposed to the United States. Again these Neo-Liberals have no respect of the working class and the Labour movement. These politicians are hypocrites to the highest level, the same induvial claimed the same with will occur after Brexit with the United States.

In summer 2018 in Jeremy Corbyns build it Britain speech.  He set began to set forward a positive and credible Post Brexit vision based largely on the economic ideas of John Mills. Many problems still remain with internal divisions and with the lack of enthusiasm to abolish the Thatcherite anti-trade union laws. Labour continues to build up a post-Brexit vision for the United Kingdom. As opposed to the Governing Party that have no clear post-Brexit vision, they are lack ideology, morals and competence. As the Conservative Party undermines Brexit and moves to a softer deal, especially after the chequers agreement in June 2018 people will start to look away from the Conservative Party. After continues scandals, the Conservative Party are doomed to failure, with the same rampant divisions than Labour.

To Conclude my arguments in these essays, Labour is slowing moving back into a working-class Party. Labour is still predominately a pro remain London centric party. Labour must break that mould to be successful and to win votes in marginals such as Nuneaton and to win back Scotland. While maintain the vast support the Party gets from cities such as London. The last election proved by the reduction of Conservative Party to give the nation a hung parliament. While the Labour Party is a divided Party the most moderate and Neo-Liberal members of Labour have lost much of their relevance from their lack of ability to adapt to the growth of a new type of politics. Brexit was a backlash towards what was seen as the political establishment enforced by decades of economic decay and negligence. We need to turn the Party into a Party that can unite the British people behind a common vision for the future. Labour must adopt a new economic ideology whatever it does on the European question at this point, or it is doomed to fail like the Conservatives today. I propose that Labour should become more of a localist Party that is a pro-devolution and local rule. We should consider a federal arrangement for the United Kingdom giving more power to regions across the country. Labour to a small extent is still moving in this direction, Labour now backs a one Yorkshire devolution deal, rather than a Sheffield centric Sheffield City region that puts regional centres such as Sheffield first. I hope we can make progress on these issues.

I think the Lord Ashcroft Poll below is important to discuss the current situation. You can see the lower social classes voted leave according to the Lord Ashcroft Poll.

Thoughts about Immigration and Brexit for a Lexit perspective.

Many people in the United Kingdom on the remain side worry about the abolition of freedom of movement after the EU referendum. Before I start anything, I will make some points from my Marxist perspective. Firstly, national borders are regressive barrier constructed by the idea of a nation, that enforces an idea of separateness. Secondly, I believe it’s a fundamental part of human nature to travel and migrate across the globe throughout Human history. I also believe that the idea of a nation state is a regressive construct, but in our society, as of today, it is a necessary evil. However, there were several issues that I had migration in modern Britain such as the importation of low paid workers into Britain. There is also the concern about our green belt sites that are rapidly being built on to respond to our rapidly growing population. The population of the United Kingdom has approximately increased by 8.5 million in the last 20 years. The population increase is dis-proportionally in England. However, this is not my main point as while this can be problematic we can mitigate against all of the negative effects of this. There is also the fact on a whole immigration has a positive effect on the treasury. I think a fair point is that Immigration benefits the population and mass immigration potentially brings problems to a said nation-state especially where there is a systematic lack of investment as we have today. From my own experience of what I see in society Multiculturalism, on the whole, is a positive thing, though it can potentially cause problems in certain communities when there is a lack of integration into great society. I also see a neglection of British traditions and history, how many people know about the importance of the glorious revolution in constructing our democracy. The main question regarding immigration during the EU referendum was largely on the principle of controlling our borders? Of course, there was unsavoury rhetoric as well.
             

I do support the idea that if we have a democracy and a nation-state we should have a choice to have our own policy of immigration and our borders. Of course, there is a major issue with the idea on the question of Europe, net migration is higher with no EU migration and we do have a clause in which we can deport EU migrant that fail to find any work after 3 months. We do choose to fail to use that clause and we do fail to cut non-EU migration despite the no tolerance policy. Even the current Home Secretary Nosferatu (Sajid Javid) calls her tenure as a hostile environment. This policy led to the Windrush scandal where individuals that should be British citizens were deported to their home countries even if they spent all of their lives in the United Kingdom. I do think there is a split in the Conservative Party between those who want to cut immigration based on their own nationalistic justifications and those who see mass immigration as good for business. The first is generally Brexiters the latter are generally being remainers. Which explains the confusion on the Conservative Policy on immigration, as we did see a record high Net Migration in 2016 of over 300,000 despite the rhetoric. The key question of immigration should we ask, does the public care about immigration? I suspect the majority of the population does not, I think the whole affair has been overplayed by our regressive media, which made the subject relevant. The majority who are concerned with Immigration I believe see a problem with the numbers instead of the racial profiles of those who are immigrating into the country. There was also the concern attached regarding the lack of school places, hospital beds, affordable housing, a lack of decent jobs being attributed to immigration. A lot of people dismiss these arguments, but it is simple if we have a larger population, but we do not prove the infrastructure accommodate immigration will cause legitimate problems.

     

 Many individuals address concerns about a lack of jobs or the lack of quality of jobs due to immigration, while we have little intervention in the market this phenomenon is very possible. If people cannot gain the jobs that their desire or required. The political establishment should have turned its head and listen to their concerns, of course, the Neo-Liberal politicians did not. This is partly why many deprived parts of the country voted to leave the EU. The other side of the debate on this subject there is the idea that employers would struggle to recruit in occupations such as fruit picking. There is a strong capitalist argument for this that the left could perhaps embrace while we still have a capitalist economic system. If there are fewer workers competing for the same jobs than employers, in theory, would have more of incentive to do more to attract more workers in methods such as increasing wages. Wages in this country have been very much stagnant in the last 8 years. I would prefer to live in a society with full employment where employers compete for employees and not the other way round. We should not export workers from abroad that cause labour issues in their own countries. There is also the issue of skilled workers to discuss, the issue of nurses and other skilled workers leaving the country have been a problem, hence we as a nation currently need to do more to encourage them to come and work in this country, this certainly needs to be done in terms of wages. Nurses despite their great hard work have been subjected by the reactionary public sector pay gap. There is also the issue that we are not training enough Nurses and medical Doctors for that matter. Abolishing NHS nursing bursaries in 2017 also led to a drastic reduction in the number of individuals who are training to be Nurses. We must focus on training our own professionals first before accepting those from aboard as we do deprive other countries of these vital skills. especially from third world nations.

To finish my series of essays about immigration I will discuss basic ideas of what we should do on immigration. Borders and immigration are necessary evils to combat the disabling forces that affect open borders (I do not think we truly have that in the EU or in the Schengen Area) and to control the market forces that wish to exploit cheap immigrant Labour. While we have the nation-state, Immigration should be moulded and be fluid to meet the nations need. For example, we currently need to encourage skilled migration to migrate to this country as opposed to low skilled Labour. Our Immigration policy must always be humanist and empathetic especially towards refugees fleeing conflict in Africa and the Middle East. We certainly do need to learn from our mistakes especially after the awful and perhaps racist Windrush scandal of 2018 that led to the resignation of Amber Rudd though her predecessors and the current Prime Minister Theresa May is more to blame for the issue people are not criminals for just migrating to this country. We should have a reformed based system similar to what we saw the Commonwealth countries in terms of Immigration policy outside the European Union. Due to our proximity to Europe, I suggest a basic travel visa and a basic work visa that an individual could easily apply for that would be a visa for the European Union giving similar benefits to the freedom of movement and a long-term visa for visits for longer than 3 months.  This could only occur if we have a meaningful hard Brexit deal which is unlikely now. The current proposal is a £6 visa between the EU and the UK, but I think that is for tourism and no other uses. A separate arrangement is required for Northern Ireland, Gibraltar, Akrotiri and Dhekelia. Sorting the Northern Ireland question would be the most difficult arrangement, but I cannot see a deal that will not have any Irish sea border controls. I know they are vague proposals, but I see it as a bit of a compromise.

My thoughts on the current situation of Brexit

The general response amongst the British establishment to Brexit has been inadequate. The result shocked many political pundits and home and abroad. Despite anyone's opinion on the level of debate in the referendum. Questions must be answered about the UK's role in the world, that were not addressed by the referendum or by any plans for a leave vote by the Government and at home as for why there was no much dissatisfaction amongst the electorate. Generally, on the whole, people voted the way that they did is that they were dissatisfied with the direction that the nation was going in (regardless it has to do with the EU or not). Why am I talking about this? Well, I think the people of this country and its political class should come with solutions to these problems. I think as a nation and a society this is the best time to do this, from the ruling party we got nothing but confusion on this subject when so many things are at risk. Another reason why I am mentioning this is that the level of debate is rather toxic in this country at this current time. The concept of Brexit as it was envisioned during the referendum is quickly dying in this country and we need to grasp the situation that we are in, it does not matter who you voted, what matters is what we can do in the future. My view was different compared to more leave voters and was unlikely to occur in the first place, but it is still possible depending on when we do get a Labour Government. On the issue of Europe, I have always concerned myself a Bennite. I fundamentally believe that the European Union is on a track on a unified superstate unless we do not get substantial reform, not only this I see this union an authoritarian corporate Neo-Liberal Union. However, I think I should be open to new solutions while this Bennite vision that I support grows more unlikely every day. Where the leave argument remains dominated by the vilest elements of the right in British society.

While on the other hand, I fully know that we need to compromise with the rest of the Labour Party, I think we need to come with a dialogue with the Pro-Remain Pro Corbyn types who make up the majority of the membership of the Labour Party. Yes, I could open up the old arguments of the referendum, but at this point, I fear it would be too divisive and counterproductive. What is more important at this point is coming up with a Socialist vision for the future of this country. A task that is not going to easy. The tide is inevitably going to favour remain after the complete clusterfuck created by the Conservative Party, moreover, the obvious demographic change will favour remain. For this very reason, I think those in power will favour a deal very similar to the EEA. The terms of such deal will break us away from some of the most draconian aspects of EU membership such on the issue of fishing. Fishing remains to be a hot topic on the debate on European Union membership. Two EEA members Iceland and Norway have significantly more control other their own fishing policy. EEA membership would solve the question over the Northern Ireland border where a similar deal that we see with the Norwegian and Swedish border would come into effect. My main concern with the EEA is that will not have the control over our own laws, regulations and economic policy that I would like to manage by the economy in a potential post-Neo-Liberal Socialist fashion. Moreover, many of the rules of regulations that could be created by the European Union may be forced on us without us having the power to influence it. The United Kingdom obviously has different economic needs than, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. Regardless the EEA is a likely and a pragmatic compromise that we would likely have in place. Though a deal similar to the EEA is highly likely, some people shortly after the referendum campaign proposed some sort of associate membership of the European Union.

 The thoughts that come to mind is what is the source of confusion and the complete failings of our society? Well, I think there as a general lack of awareness about the European Union, the details of its treaties, how it is run, members of the European Parliaments, members of the commission and the EU laws etc. This lack of transparency is a legitimate argument for leaving the Union. However, the same could be said about our political system at home and that narrative is also true. I had always made the case that we should create reforms at home after we leave the European Union, though now I am sceptical that we will at this current time. Where can we start on our political system, well we have an un-elected legislative branch the House of Lords in reforming the Lords an ideal reform would include having Lords elected using PR so let’s say Labour gets 40% of the vote then 40% of appointees should be members of the Labour Party. Another issue that needs to be addressed for certain is the electoral system that is even more outdated than the Discman, First Past the Post, I propose a compromise between the two and something along the lines of AV, yes the AV referendum was a complete failure 2011. That was agreed by the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats as a term for the coalition government. Then there is a subject of political education. The EU referendum brought some of the most toxic debate seen in British Political history an argument from the Pro-Leave side to an extent devolved to the pointless issue of blue passports, which we could have had blue passports as a member of the EU like Croatia and on the remain side free roaming in Europe, which most mobile phone companies have pledged to keep. Then we have the likes of the #FBPE post-Brexit ruthlessly attacking anyone who opposes them. One of them called me a fanboy of Enoch Powell, even if I am the complete opposite of him. Then on the other side, we had Brexiters, fanatically shouting down any concern.

Some of the concern expressed by the remain side were mass hysteria let’s not forget that. Mark Carney during the referendum predicted that there would a recession immediately after the referendum. This of course never occurred. On the subject of Political education, the ruling of the Conservative Party has constantly voted against any proposed political education for children. This, of course, is a very large concern, the average citizen of the United Kingdom is generally ignorant of what the Government is doing and the internal workings of the British Political system. I would argue that the lack of political education in this country is largely the reason why the country is in its current state. If you keep the working class ignorant you keep them down, how does this mean different life chances, one instance that proves this is with an education of said Babies. The baby born in Oxford would have access to the best education in the private sector in the best places in the country such as Eton, why the Baby born in Liverpool may have access to a school that is ranked as inadequate by Ofsted. Of course, this a major generalisation but hopefully, you will get the message. Education promotes another issue, the general intelligence of the population. I always argued that education is key is transforming society for the better in the future. But how can we make changes to society when the population, on the whole, is not aware of the problems of society. I believe we should aim for impartial political education from the age of 10 for Children for starters. Yes, there will always be biased and a major criticism from the right is that teachers are too left-wing and liberal. But it has to be better than what we have now. This issue will not be solved overnight but it is something that we do need to address in the future to improve political debate and to develop new ideas on how to run society. 

 The reason behind the following essays is rather simple, to examine to what we need to do now with Brexit and perhaps more importantly in the long term with our entire political system. Further on the subject of political education, Brexit and transparency in a democracy which is vital for the future of this nature I thought I would use this quote from Tony Benn. "Ask the 5 powerful questions. What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? How do we get rid of you?" This quote is one of my favourites by Tony Benn. In an ideal setting, every democracy should pass on these questions. In reality, they do not.  Of course, on the hot subject of today, the European Union also fails the 5 powerful questions. That is partly the reason that both myself and Benn favoured leaving the European Union. However, what is most important is the average citizen aware of these questions and can the average citizen answer that question? This is another reason I favour political education since if people fail to question the powers who influence all of our lives nothing will change. Perhaps that is why Theresa May said Nothing has changed during her disastrous election campaign in 2017. Questioning those who are in power in this matter is vital, it does not matter if you voted to remain and perhaps desire to see federal Europe or a reformed European Union. On the other side you may have voted leave, for some sort of right-wing Libertarian society promoted by the vote leave and Brexit the Movie or you may see the European Union as an anti-democratic and capitalist institution. We must ask these questions to whoever is in a position of authority. If enough people, ask these questions and hold people to account we could change society rather quickly. This does not have to be in the ballot box this could be in every aspect of society, online, at work, at school, or even in a strip club. I believe those in power use petty differences such as the question of European Union membership to split the British public, so we can no longer do this in a unifying manner.                                                                                                                           

As a follow, up to what I was explaining Yesterday I will continue writing about what is wrong with British Society. The state of the Conservative and Unionist Party is the key issue that needs to be addressed. The question of Europe has been the Achilles heel of the Conservative Party for decades. Much of this infighting, however, was hidden behind the scenes away from the prying eyes of the public. Many of the key members of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) were former members of the Party such as Nigel Farage. Moreover, on this point, two MP's defected from the Conservative Party during the 2010-2015 coalition Government with the Liberal Democrats, Mark Reckless and Douglas Carswell. These defections with the addition of the success of UKIP in the European Elections in 2014 was the final straw for Prime Minister David Cameron. David Cameron had is own fights with major Eurosceptics, the 2005 Conservative leadership election was largely thought on the issue with Europe with the Brexiter David Davis. Of course, the infighting in the Conservative Party on the issue of Europe was not only on ideological lines many MP's aligned themselves along with their career interests, such as Boris Johnson and Michael Gove. Boris Johnson is known for drafting an Article in the Sunday Times that backed remain that was never published. Instead, Boris Johnson published Article backing leave. It should be also noted that during his time as the Mayor of London Boris Johnson opposed a referendum on European Union Membership.
                    

Therefore, the many of the leading Conservatives in the EU referendum did not wholly believe in leaving the European Union. Looking at this perspective we can now understand some of the lies proposed by some of the key Brexiters during the campaign, most people can recite the red bus stating £350 million for the NHS. Theresa May in summer 2018 did try to follow up this proposal with a "Brexit dividend" which was also based on similar lies based on how it will be funded. I suspect the additional money promised to the NHS has more to do with the consecutive NHS winter crises that the country has faced in recent years. Furthermore, the idea that the leading Brexiters did not actually believe in leaving the European can justify the current state of the Brexit negotiations, how can you honestly negotiate when do not believe in what you are negotiating? Not only this, many of the major Brexiters who careerists were clearly (with the exception of Boris Johnson) refuse to resign from the Government when Theresa May proposed essentially a soft Brexit in all but name at Chequers. Some of the Brexiters even went as far as public supporting the proposal, such as Michael Gove and Andrea Leadsom. Before the resignations that followed the Chequers arrangement the vast majority was the cabinet was comprised of remainers and individuals that I would like to call Careerist Brexiters. Henceforth, we never had a cabinet that was really committed to the idea of leaving the European Union. This can partially explain why the cabinet was largely clueless when it came to Brexit and why they lacked an ideological direction on the matter.  David Davis before the proposed Chequers arrangement was the Secretary of exiting the European Union. Unlike Boris Johnson, I am convinced that he actually believes in leaving the European Union. Firstly, I should mention that he has always campaigned to leave the European Union, he even though a Conservative leadership election against David Cameron in 2005.

Compared to the Careerist Brexiters David Davis attracted less publicity in the media. This was a rather common theme during the Referendum. Many of us that supported the Labour Leave campaign chaired by Kate Hoey and John Millis was rather a concern of the media complete ignorance that the media showed the campaign. The left wingers in Grassroots out and Lexit the leave campaign. This certainly lowered the level of debate to what I saw as toxic mudslinging. Labours campaign for remain also had similar treatment by the media, Jeremy Corbyn actually did more pro remain rallies than any other Politician, though Corybn was the most reluctant remainer politician in the country. The failure of the media to engage with alternate narratives condemned Brexit as the media allowed the viewpoints of the most toxic aspects of society to succeed in winning public favour.

On the subject of David Davis, the idea of having a Brexiter negotiating Brexit should have reassured Brexiters and Remainers who wished to see the result honoured that the result of the vote was followed through. Unlike the careerists in the Conservative Party David Davis undermined and condemned Brexit why his weak presence in the cabinet and by his incompetence. Sort of a boy that cried wolf effect occurred in Government as David Davis frequently threatened to resign but failed to follow through with the act. One example, was the scandal with Damian Green where he threatened to resign if Damian Green was sacked over the scandal that he had porn saved on this work computer in Parliament. Negotiation was rather slow during is tenure of the Secretary of State for exiting the European Union in 2018 he only had a total of 4 hours in meeting officials from the European Union. The Brexit negotiations were meant to be the most important negotiations that we had since the Second World war at Yalta and Potsdam. So, the question that must be asked, why the lack of commitment from an individual that is supposed to be fanatically Eurosceptic? Many suggest the issue is with Theresa May and the cabinet holding him back, of course, after chequers and after Dominic Rabb became the Secretary of State for exiting the European Union he was sidelined in favour of Theresa May. So perhaps an element of that argument is valid. I think the main issue with David Davis is his complete incompetence, I think we were too weak-willed to be trusted on in any negotiation. We should be reminded that it took 9 months to have an agreement with the EU, this was on the withdrawal bill. To conclude my point the failure of David Davis is one of the major reasons why we are in the position that we are in with Brexit.

Theresa May became the Tory leader and the Prime Minister in July 2016. Here path to leadership was a confusing mess, perhaps this was an obvious omen. After the EU referendum on the 23rd June 2016, the nation expected Boris Johnson to become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom however, he decided not to run after he was backstabbed by his ally Michael Gove. Was the first Tory leadership a sham? Theresa May was effectively appointed as all of her opposition in the Tory leadership election stepped down. Could this be the source of the problem? There was a lot of uncertainty and confusion after Theresa May became Prime Minister. She emulated Ed Miliband in her first speech as Prime Minister bark and no bite. She aimed to open up Labour divisions at the time in the Labour Leadership Election at the time. The media showed May as the new Strong Iron Lady, the reality was very different. It took a total of 9 months to enact Article 50 and in that time the key slogan she said about Brexit was Brexit means Brexit. They had 9 months to prepare and to create a plan to leave the European Union, they did nothing. This alone should have rung alarm bells about Brexit. After the 2016 Labour Leadership Election Labour crashed in the polls due to Party division and successful media smears of Jeremy Corbyn. This combined with the Prime Ministership of Theresa May, raised questions about a general election. The MayBot constantly ignored calls for an election and ruled them out regularly in interviews. Theresa May spent Easter 2017 hiking in the Alps where she decided to hold a general election in June. On the 18th April 2017 May called a general election. Instantly the British establishment filled with lust fanatically explained that this election will result in a Tory landslide majority. The reality was very different. Due to election rules, the media was forced to have impartial news coverage of the election. The election was a disaster for the MayBot she refused to enter any debates and her Manifesto was drafted by the remainers Gina Miller, Nick Timothy, Fiona Hill and May herself. It was probably the best gift that she could ever give to Corbyn. The election shocked the nation it resulted in a hung Parliament with the Conservatives as the largest Party, Labour led by Comrade Corbyn had the largest swing in the vote since 1945. Strong and Stable, a coalition of chaos, brilliant campaign slogans thought out by May and her advisors. Have become a self-fulfilling prophecy after the 2017 election. Since the 2017 election, the Government has been involved in scandal after scandal, stories of Incompetence on a vast range of issues such as in Northern Rail. This Government has seen a vast array of resignations from people such as Amber Rudd. The MayBot Government has shown complete incompetence when it came to Brexit and has continuously capitulated on the European Union. While at the same time both hard remain and hard Brexit wings of the Tory Party are ready to revolt. In June 2018 Theresa May called a meeting at Chequers. This ideal was extremely controversial, the deal finally clarified in a general matter the negotiating position of the United Kingdom of Brexit, however, this included a softer Brexit platform. This was further clarified in the delayed white paper. This proposed deal led to the resignation of several cabinet ministers. Most notably, the two major Brexiters David Davis and Boris Johnson, the first was completely incompetent the other did not truly believe in leaving the European Union.

 There are a few important questions about this, how did this happen? why did this happen? This is incompetence constructed on purpose? To reverse Brexit perhaps. Whatever the reason, we must find new ways to bring this broken nation together. It matters not if you voted leave or remain, Labour or Conservative. What we need is people to come together the Brexit vote showed how really divided we are, between England and Scotland or between the coastal towns and multicultural metropolitan cities. All I around me is harmful rhetoric and debate that drives people apart, I fundamentally think we need to come together and find solutions to these problems. Yes, the EU referendum should not have occurred in the way it did at the time, but it happened as it did and now we must find a solution to bring the country together. We are one community, a part of one human race. I just hope we get a proper debate about all of this in the future.

Thanks for Reading.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

How to go about forming a unified front in the Brexit negotiations

Let’s say I oversaw Brexit. There are a couple of major issues that need to be addressed. Firstly, the immense division on the issue of Brexit in this country. Secondly, influential members of the British establishment want to reverse Brexit. Thirdly, the prospect of big business moving its money out of the country. Fourthly a post Brexit vision for the future of the United Kingdom and the future of the integrity of the United Kingdom. Finally, the issue with the border with Northern Ireland. Therefore, I would need a proposal to solve this issue. Now I could call for a creation of a council of Britain’s relationship with the EU, its name does not matter. But its importance is what purpose and what this council would do. Firstly, I would need to address who will make up this council. It would be created by the Minister for exiting the European Union. It will be comprised of representatives from all major political Parties with, MEP’s, MP’s, members of the Welsh Assembly, the Northern Ireland Executive and the Scottish Parliament.  We would need representatives from the very local council in the nation. It’s important we get all aspects of our political system on board. We would need 2 representatives from major British Owned Businesses that want to be a part of the council, one appointed by the shareholders and one elected by the employees. We would representatives from Trade Unions as well especially the Eurosceptic ones that tend to get ignored such as PCS. This is just the start of what I think what should have happened after the vote to leave the EU.  Let’s say this council had 9 months to decide a common position that represented everyone in this nation. We needed to get people to unify on one position on Brexit while honouring the result. This was probably one of the most important decisions in our recent history. The idea of this is to create a unified economic plan and a negotiating position for the future. The issue plaguing this nation is that we have a bunch of clueless malicious fools running the country. We needed an actual Government that actually wanted to give every citizen a bright future that is not afraid to do something that is not a part of the common political consensus in this nation.  Nothing of the sort explained above occurred. Many people believed that leaving the European Union would be easy and the transition to leaving the European Union would leave to a right-wing libertarian society on the right and the left believed we can use Brexit to realign our economy. The reality is the Government is a shamble who in turn turned Brexit into a shamble. The Question, why has this happened? Is important to understand the current situation that this nation is in People want certainty and hope, but at this stage, it would be very difficult since most people are now entrenched in their positions.  The following paragraph explains what was wrong with Brexit after the vote to leave the EU.