We are clearly in a difficult position brought about 2 years of incompetence by the Conservative Government. People from all aspects of society are extremely dissatisfied by the performance of the Conservative Government. The Minority Government has struggled to keep its Party together with the Conservative Party on this issue with dissatisfied Pro Europeans and Eurosceptics. The Government has struggled to keep its DUP partners on the side of the Government who has kept the Government in power in a supply and demand deal on key votes in parliament. Because of this support for a Peoples Vote and remaining in the EU has increased. Recent polls suggest remain would win another referendum with the results most like reversed. This still indicates the division in the United Kingdom. The most recent polls by Survation indicate a North-South Divide in England on Brexit. With Yorkshire being the most Eurosceptic region in the United Kingdom.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland voted to leave the European Union on the 23rd June 2016. 2016 was a hectic year for the western establishment, the year the establishment failed to get their own way on both sides of the pond. It was a clear backlash against the Neo-Liberal economics which was set up in the 1980s that replaced the new deal style economics in the western world. Many economists call this either supply-side economics and its critics trickle-down economics. The name of this does not matter. What matters is that this economic position has failed the majority of people in the western world today. The promises of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan have not been fulfilled. Many people were left behind for decades the same people left behind lashed out at the establishment that told them that everything will be worse when themselves were the real reason for the anger against the establishment. For this very reason it those in power want to remain in place, the elite must adapt and recognise the ills of the working class. In a divided country there must be a mechanism to unify the nation and to pick up the pieces created by the economic incompetence of the political class. We need to build a society that is not about dog eats dog but a society where everyone cares about each other.
The current negotiations with the European Union could not be handled any worse than it currently is. In power, we have a clueless and directionless party who put their own personal interests and their careers first. The Conservative Party lacks new ideas and different methods to solve and address the issues of the time. They lack imagination and the Conservative Party fails to look outside the box on these issues. The question of Europe has always been the Achilles heel of the Conservative Party, well certainly at least the Post Thatcher years. The 2005 Conservative Party leadership election was thought on the issue of Europe between David Cameron and David Davis. These divisions became so extreme that 2 Conservative MPs Mark Reckless (it’s in the name) and Douglas Carswell defected to UKIP. The fear of more defections to UKIP led to the promise of a referendum by the Conservative leader David Cameron after the 2015 general election. This referendum was called in 2017, it brought out the ancient divisions in the Conservative Party into the public sphere. It led to one of the most toxic debates in history. Furthermore, it brought out career interests in certain Conservative MP's, this was the case with Boris Johnson and Michael Gove. The Question is why is this relevant? It’s quite simple, the future of Brexit and the future of the Conservative Party. The idea that I am advocating is that the issue of Europe will finally bring down the so-called "unified unit" of the Conservative Party. I would argue that these divisions, contributed to the confusion to what it’s the ideological direction and the economic plan for the Conservative Party. We get nothing coherent. I think this sensation resonates with Conservative supporters, I constantly hear many Tory voters that say that the Conservative Party is no longer Conservative. Theresa May when she became the Conservative leader emulated Ed Miliband in her first speech as Prime Minister. Though this was a clear attack on Labour at the time. The Governing Party has run out of ideas of the future, this phenomenon Is common when Parties exist in power for the long term. I would argue that the Conservatives have lacked clear and coherent economic ideas since 1997, even when they were in coalition with the Liberal Democrats where they supported a regressive austerity programme. It is clear we need a solution that will unite all sides of the country on Brexit that will enable a chivalrous debate and that will encourage the formation of new ideas of how to change this country for the better. The divisions within the Conservative Party on the question of Europe has made a proper debate on the key issues that matter virtually impossible. We deserve something better than Immigration vs Economic apocalypse.
The previous Prime Minister David Cameron had his 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.
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 (except for 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 clear 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 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. This was a major reason there were so many lies sold by vote leave and Brexiters. Though many lies that were sold during the referendum were done by Remainers such as in David Cameron’s Pro Remain leaflets that cost the taxpayer £9 million. 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 toxic mudslinging. Labours campaign for remain also had a similar treatment by the media, Jeremy Corbyn did more pro remain rallies than any other Politician, though Jeremy Corbyn 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.
The idea of having a Brexiter (David Davis) 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 his 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 and the other Government ministers working under him is one of the major reasons why we are in the position that we are in with Brexit.
There are several things that the left has been considering at this stage. The Peoples Vote is a subject that is gaining ground amongst some groups, this is very problematic. Firstly, we would most likely vote the same we that we did on the 23rd June 2016, depending on the terms of the vote. Secondly, the Peoples Vote will be even more toxic and divisive than the first one. The first referendum divided people across the country and tore families apart. We should examine the nasty debate from the first referendum while, we did not debate the core issues around EU membership and a future vision for this country, instead both sides used a fear style campaign based on project fear either on immigration or economic apocalypse. I am not opposed to the concept of direct democracy and people having their say on the future relationship on EU membership, however, I am against the idea of having another referendum without honouring the first one and carrying it out. I do understand how problematic that is if we consider the complexity around EU membership, I think as a society we should do more to encourage a discussion on the future direction of this nation. However, I do support the idea of voting on the type of deal that you want, whether that is Theresa May's Chequers, Canada ++++ (whatever that is), or even a No deal. I think it's better to have a general election to deal with these issues, were we can have a real discussion on what we can do post-Brexit, a left-wing vision a right-wing vision, or perhaps on the idea of remaining in the EU. Currently, in this nation, we have so many domestic issues that in the viewpoints of most people in this country are simply more important than Brexit.
We need to take a position against many failing Neo-Liberal globalist institutions across the globe, that includes the European Union and other institutions such as the IMF. We currently have huge global challenges to deal with, which we will need to interact with countries across the world. Therefore, we need to encourage the growth of institutions that bring countries together on issues such as climate change. We are currently doing little to solve these issues. Tony Benn talked about the creation of a Commonwealth of Europe based on co-operation with other countries on these issues. This is an idea that we should pursue. We should also maintain and even better improve the current legislation of the European Union. One example of this is the Environmental Liability Directive.
Many people on the left believe in the idea of a Social Europe, the idea of using the EU to protect workers’ rights for instance. This is a rather noble idea. The European Union in this concept can be used as a barrier and a check and balance to the policies to any regressive Conservative Government in power. Since the late 1980's the majority of the Labour Party has taken this position. The European Union has led to more workers’ rights, take the working time directive for example which are not terrible ideas. We should be aiming to maintain these and improve on these laws post-Brexit. The British people have a responsibility to elect a Government that will protect these rights. We should go about also empowering Trade Unions and encouraging the idea of collective bargaining as a viable check and balance.
I think that complaining about the lack of democratic accountability within the European Union and the institutions associated with it without looking at the failures at home. This will not be turned into a discussion on how the European Union operates, I think it's more important at this point to look at affairs at home. We have a lack of transparency in Government, Parliament and in our institutions. We have a political system that is biased towards London and the South East. We have an unelected second chamber the House of Lords, we have the House of Commons that is not entirely representative on the views of the British people due to the First by the Post electoral system. We also have an unelected Monarch, in many ways our constitution is still quite medieval in its nature. Many people during the referendum saw the European Union as being a foreign institution above Parliament. It was not foreign institution since we did have a role moulding the current European Union at it is today, but it was another institution that acted with and above parliament. This often-clouded judgement on who to blame for a specified issue, sometimes the EU was a fault and sometimes It was the British Government for a policy that some members of the British public did not approve on. Take Immigration and then, EU competition rules that would limit what a left-wing Government could nationalise. In Post Brexit Britain we need to make it clear who we should hold to account we so can create a better future. I do recognise that many politicians did take the EU for granted this way, so people blamed the EU for a problem at home or a problem that the British Government can solve with the EU.
The reality is this nation is a broken nation, in a broken global economic order and the debate on Europe should be how to fix these problems. We have major internal social, economic and political problems. We have major economic problems such as low productivity, a decline in real wages. economic deprivation, a trade deficit with most of the globe. Our Political system is in dire need for reform just look at the Monarchy, the house of commons, local devolution, the voting system and the House of Lords for starters. For our own societal problems, we can look at, education, our media, our culture, or identity and just the general anger and confusion that the public has. Consecutive Governments has failed to solve these major problems. Many people feel disconnected to Westminster and to the rest of Greater London, people feel more English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish/ Northern Irish than they did in the past, there is a general confusion about British identity, many people have claimed Brexit was a result of an English Identity crisis, the reality is there is a British identity crisis. This idea has come about from individuals that feel disconnected from society. People feel left behind. Much of the wealth in our economy was concertinaed in London and in the city of London, approximately 80% of the wealth of this nation is created in London from the financial sector. Much of this wealth does not touch most of the British population. We still live under the Neo-Liberal style economics introduced in the 1980's in this country by Margret Thatcher as she transferred this economy to a service sector economy rather than an industrial manufacturing-based economy.
Many of the former Manufacturing areas of the United Kingdom still are some of the most economically deprived areas of the United Kingdom. Many areas receive a lack of investment from both the Government and the private sector. In some former Industrial towns, wages have decreased on average since 2010. Many people felt that they had their futures were stolen and their local areas robbed of their wealth. Many older individuals in Northern Industrial towns and cities believe they were better off before the 1970's before Thatcherism and before we joined the European Community. I think the main problem we see currently is the vast economic imbalances we see in this country, the British economy is too based towards London and regional centres, Investment in our economy has remained stagnant for decades, working rights have been stagnant due to the destruction of the rights of the trade unions, the lack of skilled high paid work, the commercialisation of education. I could name many more issues such as our trade deficit we are in a situation that we are completely stagnating as a society compared to other nations in the west. Many of these issues go side by side with economic liberalisation in the west and a lack of any form of intervention to deal with the negative effects that go side by side with the rise of the East Asian economies. We need to look for a brand new and radical economic direction in this country that benefits most of the British population. We certainly need to move away from supply-side economics that has failed to deliver on its promises that the wealth from the rich will trickle down to the poorest in society. The question that we must ask ourselves is how to achieve this? Corbyn's Labour Party offers a Neo-Keynesian economic vision for the country, a reformed version of the post-war economic conscious that is suited a modern world that must deal with global issues.
We should also look at the ideas of reforming and/or creating an alternative organisation to the European Union at its current state. How do we change the European Union as it is presently constituted and if we can what do we change it to? That is a very difficult question to answer even for Yanis Varoufakis or can we create another institution that workers in a more democratic and benevolent manner without the Neo-Liberal economics attached. This has always been the position of Tony Benn on Europe to create an alternative Commonwealth of Europe based on voluntary co-operation on key issues that affect the continent of Europe at large and this is the idea I think the left should be open to. Regardless, we are going to need to work with DiEM25 the only organisation that currently would reform the EU in a progressive way if it had the chance. The major problem we have with all of this is that there is a lack of a discussion of Europe in this country. There is a lack of coverage on the media in Britain on European affairs. We focus too much of immigration and the migrant crisis, we don't talk about that Italy has not had direct control over its treasury for years, we don't talk about the EU forcing austerity measures on countries such as Cyprus.
We need to take a position against many failing Neo-Liberal globalist institutions across the globe, that includes the European Union and other institutions such as the IMF. We currently have huge global challenges to deal with, which we will need to interact with countries across the world. Therefore, we need to encourage the growth of institutions that bring countries together on issues such as climate change. We are currently doing little to solve these issues. Tony Benn talked about the creation of a Commonwealth of Europe based on co-operation with other countries on these issues. This is an idea that we should pursue. We should also maintain and even better improve the current legislation of the European Union. One example of this is the Environmental Liability Directive.
Many people on the left believe in the idea of a Social Europe, the idea of using the EU to protect workers’ rights for instance. This is a rather noble idea. The European Union in this concept can be used as a barrier and a check and balance to the policies to any regressive Conservative Government in power. Since the late 1980's the majority of the Labour Party has taken this position. The European Union has led to more workers’ rights, take the working time directive for example which are not terrible ideas. We should be aiming to maintain these and improve on these laws post-Brexit. The British people have a responsibility to elect a Government that will protect these rights. We should go about also empowering Trade Unions and encouraging the idea of collective bargaining as a viable check and balance.
I think that complaining about the lack of democratic accountability within the European Union and the institutions associated with it without looking at the failures at home. This will not be turned into a discussion on how the European Union operates, I think it's more important at this point to look at affairs at home. We have a lack of transparency in Government, Parliament and in our institutions. We have a political system that is biased towards London and the South East. We have an unelected second chamber the House of Lords, we have the House of Commons that is not entirely representative on the views of the British people due to the First by the Post electoral system. We also have an unelected Monarch, in many ways our constitution is still quite medieval in its nature. Many people during the referendum saw the European Union as being a foreign institution above Parliament. It was not foreign institution since we did have a role moulding the current European Union at it is today, but it was another institution that acted with and above parliament. This often-clouded judgement on who to blame for a specified issue, sometimes the EU was a fault and sometimes It was the British Government for a policy that some members of the British public did not approve on. Take Immigration and then, EU competition rules that would limit what a left-wing Government could nationalise. In Post Brexit Britain we need to make it clear who we should hold to account we so can create a better future. I do recognise that many politicians did take the EU for granted this way, so people blamed the EU for a problem at home or a problem that the British Government can solve with the EU.
The reality is this nation is a broken nation, in a broken global economic order and the debate on Europe should be how to fix these problems. We have major internal social, economic and political problems. We have major economic problems such as low productivity, a decline in real wages. economic deprivation, a trade deficit with most of the globe. Our Political system is in dire need for reform just look at the Monarchy, the house of commons, local devolution, the voting system and the House of Lords for starters. For our own societal problems, we can look at, education, our media, our culture, or identity and just the general anger and confusion that the public has. Consecutive Governments has failed to solve these major problems. Many people feel disconnected to Westminster and to the rest of Greater London, people feel more English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish/ Northern Irish than they did in the past, there is a general confusion about British identity, many people have claimed Brexit was a result of an English Identity crisis, the reality is there is a British identity crisis. This idea has come about from individuals that feel disconnected from society. People feel left behind. Much of the wealth in our economy was concertinaed in London and in the city of London, approximately 80% of the wealth of this nation is created in London from the financial sector. Much of this wealth does not touch most of the British population. We still live under the Neo-Liberal style economics introduced in the 1980's in this country by Margret Thatcher as she transferred this economy to a service sector economy rather than an industrial manufacturing-based economy.
Many of the former Manufacturing areas of the United Kingdom still are some of the most economically deprived areas of the United Kingdom. Many areas receive a lack of investment from both the Government and the private sector. In some former Industrial towns, wages have decreased on average since 2010. Many people felt that they had their futures were stolen and their local areas robbed of their wealth. Many older individuals in Northern Industrial towns and cities believe they were better off before the 1970's before Thatcherism and before we joined the European Community. I think the main problem we see currently is the vast economic imbalances we see in this country, the British economy is too based towards London and regional centres, Investment in our economy has remained stagnant for decades, working rights have been stagnant due to the destruction of the rights of the trade unions, the lack of skilled high paid work, the commercialisation of education. I could name many more issues such as our trade deficit we are in a situation that we are completely stagnating as a society compared to other nations in the west. Many of these issues go side by side with economic liberalisation in the west and a lack of any form of intervention to deal with the negative effects that go side by side with the rise of the East Asian economies. We need to look for a brand new and radical economic direction in this country that benefits most of the British population. We certainly need to move away from supply-side economics that has failed to deliver on its promises that the wealth from the rich will trickle down to the poorest in society. The question that we must ask ourselves is how to achieve this? Corbyn's Labour Party offers a Neo-Keynesian economic vision for the country, a reformed version of the post-war economic conscious that is suited a modern world that must deal with global issues.
We should also look at the ideas of reforming and/or creating an alternative organisation to the European Union at its current state. How do we change the European Union as it is presently constituted and if we can what do we change it to? That is a very difficult question to answer even for Yanis Varoufakis or can we create another institution that workers in a more democratic and benevolent manner without the Neo-Liberal economics attached. This has always been the position of Tony Benn on Europe to create an alternative Commonwealth of Europe based on voluntary co-operation on key issues that affect the continent of Europe at large and this is the idea I think the left should be open to. Regardless, we are going to need to work with DiEM25 the only organisation that currently would reform the EU in a progressive way if it had the chance. The major problem we have with all of this is that there is a lack of a discussion of Europe in this country. There is a lack of coverage on the media in Britain on European affairs. We focus too much of immigration and the migrant crisis, we don't talk about that Italy has not had direct control over its treasury for years, we don't talk about the EU forcing austerity measures on countries such as Cyprus.
"Another way would be to have a looser, wider Europe. I have an idea for a Commonwealth of Europe. I am introducing a bill on the subject. Europe would be rather like the British Commonwealth. We would work by consent with people. Or we could accept this ghastly proposal, which is clumsy, secretive, centralized, bureaucratic and divisive. That is how I regard the Treaty of Rome. I was born a European and I will die one. But I have never put my alliance behind the Treaty of Rome. I object to it. I hate being called an anti-European. How can one be anti-European when one is born in Europe? It is like saying that one is anti-British if one does not agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer." Tony Benn 20th November 1991
We should join EFTA until we can have a unified position of what we should do in the long-term future. The aim should be to transition out of European federalist institutions Another reason why we should do this is that EFTA is likely to resemble a reformed European Union without the Euro and the elements of centralisation that currently exist in the European Union. Britain joined EFTA as a founding member of EFTA in 1960, it was designed to be an alternative to the European Union without the political attachments of the European Union. Therefore, this could be a compromise with both sides on the EU question. We should not join the EEA this will require us to join the Schengen Area. EEA agreement states, that while any European country that becomes a member of the EU shall join the EEA, any new EFTA member may apply for us to become a part of it. We would, in theory, have a Switzerland style deal. EFTA will keep us in the single market but outside a Customs Union, countries such as Iceland are in EFTA. This will solve the issue with the Northern Irish border and will maintain the status quo at large economically while bringing more power back home to Westminster e.g. on fishing and agriculture. Then we should have a real debate on what should we do with regards to Europe. We also should note that revoking article 50 to anyone who wants to stop Brexit may require another negotiation. Being outside the EU itself we would not be tied to the European Union and hence any re-negotiation in the future in these terms will put us in a stronger position. Joining the EFTA would require little negotiation and the transition into it would be rather smooth compared to the likelihood of what the Tories are likely going to do with Brexit. In EFTA for the next few years, we should aim in my opinion to have a meaningful free trade deal. Where we return decision making to Westminster and devolved administrations. We should also create a brand new British alternative to the ECJ during this process with a similar role. EFTA will give us the ability to make our own trade deals. EFTA countries such as Iceland and Switzerland have separate trade deals with countries such as China. ETFA (European Free Trade Organisation) has its own free trade deals with countries such as Mexico, Japan, Turkey, Canada and South Korea. As a member of EFTA, we would have access to these trade deals as stated in article 56 of the EFTA Convention. EFTA would make deals with certain countries such as the United States difficult due to regulatory alignment with EFTA and the EU for many goods but not legally impossible as it currently is for the United Kingdom as a member of the European Union. EFTA is informal free trade talks with, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam and the MERCOSUR countries (Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay and Argentina). Potentially we would have access to trade deals in rapidly growing economies across the world as a member state of ETFA.
Unlike joining the EEA or a separate single market and/or a customs arrangement the European Union has no control over who joins and leaves EFTA. That is determined by the EFTA council and the EFTA member states. The main difference between EFTA and EEA in these respects is that the EEA is aimed to mimic EU membership while outside the EU and EFTA is a free trade agreement throughout the continent of Europe. EFTA member states stated they are open to the idea of British membership though Norway is sceptical due to the fear of British domination in EFTA. It is easy to see why Britain’s population is larger than all the 4 EFTA countries combined. There has been a mixed response from Switzerland due to fears that Britain’s membership could harm the Swiss financial services sector. Lichtenstein was also fearful that the British dependencies and overseas territories could threaten its status as a tax haven. There are still some negotiations and compromises needed for EFTA membership through the basic terms of joining are stated in EFTA convention though we already meet them as current members of the European Union. As a member of EFTA, we would theoretically be able to veto any new rules while we are a member. With approximately 20 months of failure to gain a workable deal with Brexit, we are in a difficult position. The Government has made no are little preparation to a No Deal Brexit. An exit out of the European Union that I never advocated. Into World Trade Organisation rules with the EU and the rest of the world. The World Trade Organisation is also currently under threat from Donald Trump. The President of the United States has continuously threated to pull out of the World Trade Organisation. The very founding member of the World Trade Organisation and the most powerful nation on the Earth leaving the World Trade Organisation could threaten its very existence. We should proceed with caution with the World Trade Organisation. Russia has also repeatedly blocked our applications to join the Word Trade Organisation Post Brexit, it would be potentially catastrophic if that occurred under a No Deal scenario. We also have a Hung Parliament with a minority Conservative Government that remains in power because of the support it receives from the Democratic Unionist Party. There is barely a majority for the Chequers deal that the Conservative leadership is supporting. With the current situation in Parliament, any divisive Brexit deal will get voted down, the Labour leadership have committed to vote down and Brexit deal that the Government would likely to have in hope for an early general election.
It took approximately 9 years for the EU to fully negotiate its trade deal with Canada negotiating trade deals with the European Union does not happen overnight. Any deal that the Conservative Party will drafted up quickly and will leave a lot to be desired. An article 50 extension to extend the negotiations is extremely unlikely as it must pass through both parliament and the European Union. Many leading figures in the European Union such as Guy Verhofstadt have constantly ruled an extension of Article 50. I think the EFTA solution can be a better compromise between all parties rather than the extremely unpopular Chequers style deal.
Many Conservative MP’s back a Canada style trade deal. This idea is extremely problematic. Many of the supporters of this deal call it Canada +++ which would be a deal like the one between Canada and the European Union. The Canada deal, in theory, reduces tariffs by 97% on average. However, this comes with heavy corporatist baggage. Many critics have called the CETA (Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement) trade deal between the EU and Canada TTIP’s (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) little sister. This Neo-Liberal Corporatist trade deal, it promotes corporatism encourages privatisation and undermines workers’ rights. Future Governments will not be able to reverse Privatisation in the NHS because of CETA without a legal challenge. This has already happened because of this; Virgin Care sued the NHS for £2 million after losing out on a £28 million contract in June 2018 to provide Children’s medical services. This occurred due to the CETA Multilateral Investment Court. This is the main worry that we should have for a Canadian style deal that is promoted by certain Tory Brexiters. It could both encourage privatisation and encourage further degradation of workers’ rights.
Britain is a great importer and not an export as we once were in the past. We have a trade deficit, especially with the European Union. Approximately 50% of our imports go to the European Union. Our productivity has been almost entirely stagnant in the last 30 years. Investment in % of GDP by both the private and public sector into Britain has steadily declined in the last 30 years after the deindustrialisation of the United Kingdom. We have an over bloated financial services sector that is concentrated in London. Our economy needs to be rebalanced in the long term and this should be the aim of any Government with an economic plan. The leader of the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn has already addressed this in his build it Britain speech, where he promoted a programme to create brand new industries in some of the most deprived parts of the country. Many of the policies of Labour in the 2017 Manifesto for the many and not the few promoted policies that will lead to the growth of new industries in these areas. Some of the fastest growing local economies in the UK are in local councils that have embraced Pro Corbyn economic policies such as in Rotherham and Preston. As we transition out of the EU we need to implement these economic ideas.
While we transition out of the EU through the EFTA we need to look at several issues that we need to solve. 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 of 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 every 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. This council needs to work side by side with the Government and to be accountable to Parliament to help the country form economic policy will negotiating a free trade deal 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, People want certainty and hope, but at this stage, it would be very difficult since most people are now entrenched in their positions. With my position it will assist in achieving that, we need to gather the best intellectuals from a range of different parts of our society
Eventually, we should aim to have a free trade agreement that will be put the United Kingdom out of a single market and a customs union. Instead, we would have a low tariff deal with a customs arrangement. This will take years to negotiate and implement over time. We have not negotiated a trade deal independently in the last 40 years. We need more times to develop our civil service and our infrastructure to implement a new deal. Due to the number of years (most likely around 5 years) have past then I would be time to hold another referendum on our future relationship with the European Union. The Euro would most likely not be a requirement to join the European Union at this stage, due to its internal issues in the Eurozone and the likelihood of Italy leaving the Euro in the next few years. At this time the European Union and the amount of pressure it would be under in the next few years it would be most likely that the EU would be very different at this time so that option could be still on the table.
A key part of the debate on the European Union is to do with Immigration. Despite being overexaggerated we do need a reformed immigration system with the EU as we transition out. Borders and immigration are necessary evils to combat the disabling forces that affect open borders 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 like 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 compromise.
I know this is a rather long essay I hope you have managed to read it all. The purpose is to have a basic overview of our current situation with Brexit and what we should ideally do now. I understand that the reader may not think that due to the length of this, however, this subject is such a complex fractured mess it is almost impossible to do that, in this essay, I will miss out many key details on what we could do with Brexit and what we should do. This is likely not going to happen. I think we will most like have Chequers or a deal like Chequers with a customs union for the foreseeable future. I think it’s time we in this country try to be rather ambitious with new ideas how we can change not just British society at a local level, but we should look further afield to change affairs in Europe and beyond. Thanks for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment