Hmm, so what you’re all telling me is that my prediction that the UK would after Brexit be, “5% poorer and 10% happier” is going to be a bit wide of the mark ?
Meanwhile Sweden (Yes Sweden !) is lurching to the right. And the EU fails to adequately address the wave of sub-Saharan Africans as it struggles to square it’s instinctive but toxic empathy with the reality that it has to look after its own citizens first. But migration is just a dripping tap - commentators here and elsewhere can happily label it as hysteria until the sink overflows. And admittedly Britain is the EU country that had widespread riots and looting in recent years.
What I’m saying is that middle England may just stick with their initial decision to unhook themselves from Crazy Merkel’s toxic empathy. If I was Theresa May I’d be doubling down on a push to the right on issues like migration.
Indeed, and by tieing themselves to unrestricted immigration from the Commonwealth. That’ll show johnny european foreigner he can’t mess with the plucky english!
I always see the Brexiteers referred to in this thread as ‘English’ but it’s easy to forget that the Welsh voted to leave as did large numbers of both Scotland and NI.
This seems to be very much a UK decision.
It’s also worth remembering that much of the “home” counties voted remain.
This is very much a vote based on the demographic make up of the population, those who benefited most from the “free market” voted remain, while those who were largely ignored by the elite and were losing out due to the “race to the bottom” voted leave.
If the referendum was about allowing immigration (both form EU & non EU), the results would have been similar, as in no to further immigration.
I think it would have a been wider No to immigration. They thought they were voting against Muslim immigration but they’re going to get more from the commonwealth. They’re only marginally reducing it by stopping Merkel’s whims.
And if Brexit goes wrong you have a good chance to see race riots / pogroms in North of England. England has a recent history of rioting and a long history of religious pogroms. There is effectively apartheid going on in places like Bradford. And the kind of people in the indigenous community who might do it would be delighted to get payback for the sexual abuse and grooming scandals. That won’t be forgotten quickly.
Yes Evil G’s post is a worthy attempt at fleshing out the mechanics of what may happen should cirxumstances play themselves out in a particular manner.
However, it is one which appears to afford a degree of reverence to the legal and administrative practices that underpin the functioning of the EU and the manner in which it may conduct a relationship with the U.K. Ie yes that scenario is a possibility (and kudos to him/her for sticking his/her neck out and stating exactly what they believe will happen), but it is one (IMO) that is predicated on the adoption/maintenance of a particular political stance on the part of those charged with responsibility for charting the course of the post Brexit UK and EU.
In other words, (IMO) a degree of pragmatism and goodwill on the part of those involved woukd be quite capable of overcoming any obstacles that are likely to be encountered. For example consider the manner in which a Framework Decision is adopted and applied to Irish law. Generally work practices change absolutely within Givernment Departments,sometimes within the courts maybe within the Gardai, to name a few. There is generaly a ‘window’ period during which uncertainty applies, ongoing legal advice is required and back and forth continues over a period between the contacts in the respective agencies and member states with a view to ironing out such difficulties. The processes themselves may be held up for a time but they don’t grind to a halt. New processes are established, new precedents are set and newer, broader knowledge is accumulated. Quite simply, people find solutions.
Obviously this is heightened and magnified in the case of Brexit but given the fact that people’s livelihoods rather than mere administrative or legal practices will be at stake I would be confident that timelines for solutions could be a lot shorter than those associated with the workload of the average civil servant.
However, this is obviously based on the existence of the political will to do so. And there obviously exists the likelihood that the EU side may understably not wish to find solutions that could potentially render Brexit somewhat more succesful than would otherwise be the case. Likewise, it may not actually be in the personal interest of the individuals charged with negotiating on behalf of the U.K. to see Brexit succeed…and that some ‘systemic collapse’ up north or wherever might be just the ticket in PR terms.
Nontheless, my position is that such an outcome would be as a result of a political failure on the part of the individuals in question rather than any real inability on the part of people to arrive at solutions (in the short term) that would allow them to get on with the day to day business of living and trading with each other.
No they didn’t. London voted to remain.
All of Essex, nearly all of Kent and about half of Sussex voted leave.
There is a ring of leave-voting districts that almost encircles London.
People can understand why places on the east coast of England with low levels of education voted leave.
It is much harder to understand why Aylesbury - which is extremely prosperous and has done very well from low trade barriers and inward migration - voted to leave.
This is a perfect example why many people in the UK have lost faith in the elite and their leaders as they are being stigmatized as being “uneducated” because they voted the wrong way.
Many people have absolutely no idea what the “man in the street” is thinking and in many cases do not care, so just dismiss them as “uneducated”.
Educational attainment is highly correlated with voting to remain.
Having moved to England just after the vote this is the thing that I most struggle with. The media here is just a partisan punch and judy show. In conversation the topic is barely mentoned by the average Brit and when it is broached I find their grasp on the EU is extremely limited, and don’t even get me started on their ignorance of their own country! And many of these are professionals I’m talking about, many of whom have worked abroad!
National media is a battlefield, whereas sometimes just listening to the local radio is where you’ll find out what the public are thinking. In a recent local radio vox pop both leave and remain voters up my way all expressed the desire to “just get on with it, stop mucking about.” I don’t believe there really is an appetite outside the remain bubbles for a “peoples vote”, if anything it’s probably rubbing people up the wrong way. Corbyn’s absolutely right to not push on this.
I reckon on the ground ending of Freedom of Movement is the great masses redline around which they’ll coalesce if pushed. Many conflated non-EU immigration with Freedom of Movement. Yeah, they haven’t fully understood it means the dream of retiring to the Playa da Blackpool becomes harder but then they mentally never viewed those stomping grounds as foreign anyway!
This is why I reckon we’re heading for a customs deal, and tough shít DUP, you’re getting an Irish sea border. If the DUP collapse the government they’ll get one with Corbyn anyway so that’s why I reckon the DUP will spin it as a compromise somehow. Call it damage limitation after bringing forward the prospect of a border poll by a few generations!
In a democracy, a poor(ly educated) man’s vote has the same weight as a rich (educated) man’s vote.
It’s very dangerous to dismiss the less educated people, the Brexit vote is a classic example.
The uneducated weren’t, and aren’t being, dismissed. They are being courted, and pandered to, by large swathes of “the elite”.
Most of the tabloid media, and 50% of so called “quality” sectors like the BBC, pander to the utter fantasy held by those who haven’t the faintest idea of what the EU is, or how it works, (the uneducated), that the EU is a significant factor in the problems which they perceive, and that leaving the EU will somehow make their lives in anyway better.
The problem is not that the uneducated are being dismissed. The problem is that they are being lied to.
They’re not being dismissed. They’re just being told that they won’t like the probable consequences of their poorly informed votes, while at the same time, action is being taken to try to limit those consequences.
In a democracy, people have the freedom to vote to go to hell in a handcart. That doesn’t mean they have the freedom to stop others saying “I told you so.”
There’s enough educated people in support of Brexit to make assertions about the inherent uneducatedness of taking a pro-Brexit position to be, well, dumb.
Given the number of Mickey Mouse degrees in surfing and media studies churned out since the 1990s, reliance on the notion that the average graduate now has more wisdom than the average graduate in 1975 is a bit shaky.
I wonder if you’d taken a poll in the year 2000 in Greece about the wisdom of joining the Euro ? I’d wager a higher proportion of Greek graduates than shepherds were in favour. Funnily enough despite their lack of educational attainment and knowledge of how the EU worked the shepherds were right.
It certainly looks like Brexit will be a cock-up founded on misleading assertions on what was achievable.
But how will a history student look back on the EU in 50 years time. It’s a top-down political project with sclerotic governance. Every crisis over the last 10 years follows the same pattern - Greece, Ukraine, Migration :
- set piece crisis prime ministerial meetings with 90% pre-agreed outcomes
- late night decisions which turn out to be muddled fudges
- every minister rushes out to claim victory to his awaiting national broadcaster
Do you really think that’s sustainable for 20 more years ?
This approach of highlighting the number of supposedly educated people in favour or against something is becoming standard schtick at this stage. It’s a ploy that assumes that everyone not the same as ‘us’ aspires to be just like us.
It’s basically an attempt at psychological manipulation that assumes a desire on the part of most people to self identify as ‘progressive’ etc or more correctly not ‘non progressive’ or whatever noun fits that description (in Ireland it usually entails reference to De Valera or the 1950s etc). It’s a component of what Chomsky described as the manufacturing of consent. Clintons ’ deplorables’ comment fits into the same category and has less to do with a belief that those in possession of a university degree are more capable of interpreting the world than those without, and more to do with an assumption about the herd instinct of the majority. Indeed, as GB alludes to above, it’s becoming more and more likely that people who never attended third level education may in fact be a lot more capable of independent thought than those who did.
Basically the millennial version of Mrs Bucket/Bouqet…
Following on from Evil_g’s excellent prediction. If only to laugh at myself in a year’s time for being so naive it’s time for my own prediction on this. What is actually going to happen? Let’s look at the options, regardless of how realistic they are.
- Withdrawal of A50 and stay in the EU. This, while technically possible, doesn’t seem like it is probable.
- It would mean repealing of the UK withdrawal act.
- Getting agreement from all 27 other EU states.
- All of this has to be done before March, I find it difficult to believe this is possible.
- A new referendum? Not happening. Unless there was a concerted effort to organize it in the next week or two, we are out of time. There is simply no time left to organize it.
- The referendum would need to be held early March at latest. Counting back.
- 10 weeks or so campaigning and we are at new year.
- This means passing a bill to authorize having a new referendum and giving this referendum the legal force to repeal the withdrawal Act before Christmas. This is one gift Santy is not bringing.
- Delay A50. Technically possible but highly improbable except to buy a few weeks.
- A50 can be delayed by the EU easy. The complication is the EU elections in May. Could anyone really stomach Farage being reelected an MEP in May?
- It would also mean editing the withdrawal act in the UK. Can this get through UK Parliament? Not at this time.
- I can’t see this getting through the UK & EU at this time. If it can’t be done soon, then there will be no time left to organize it.
- Transition deal.
- A minor complication here is that there is no transition deal on the table yet. It hasn’t been written yet. This in itself makes this the probability of a transition deal low.
- This needs to be agreed by UK and EU Parliaments and also possibly by each individual country. This takes time. Time which we don’t have.
- This will not be a Chequers deal. It will need to be one that is already written that keeps everything as close to what the current status as possible. There is no time for anything else.
- This is still possible, but the probability is dropping daily.
- After a transition deal all that is really agreed to is to come back to the same set of options a year later.
- Migrate to Norway style deal:
- A deal that transitions to Norway Plus customs union keeps almost everything the same as they are without strictly being in the EU is possible.
- This has already been ruled out by the UK, but that is just words and it remains a possibility. Is it possible to get this through the UK Parliament? In politics, who knows? I doubt it though at this time.
- Canada style trade deal:
- There is no time left to write it let alone getting it through all the necessary Parliaments.
- I can’t see how this can be done in the time left.
- It also means significant disruption to aviation and everything else in the EU.
- No deal Brexit.
- This is the default option. Unless there is an absolute extraordinary effort put in to change direction, this is what is happening.
- Everything done so far has made this more probable. A hard date has been written into UK law which is difficult to get around. UK politicians have spent the last couple of years sowing mistrust and have dug themselves into a hole.
What do I think is going to happen? Next March 29th UK is leaving the EU in a messy way: option ‘7’. This is going to cause a rapidly escalating amount of disruption. Will cops start enforcing checks of driving licenses on day 1? No, of course not. After a year they would to a certain degree. Will truck drivers be forced to buy different insurance and apply for new driving licenses after a few days/weeks? Probably.
Will Cabotage law be enforced for aviation? On day one, maybe not, on day 100 probably yes.
What about flight slots which are owned by the EU into JFK airport that UK airlines are currently using? Will the EU insist that, hey we paid for them, we own them, hand them over. Eventually, yes.
There will be growing disruption in so many different aspects of day to day life as to make this option unsustainable.
After the escalating disruption we are still left with options 5,6 and 7. Continuing with ‘7’ will become unsustainable, ‘6’ doesn’t solve the major sources of disruption and we are left with only one option: A Norway style deal.
The tone will not be pleasant. “UK, you do remember that payment to clean up obligations that you refused to pay a few months ago? Well, here is a pen and here is a revolver, take your pick!”
Some time next summer the UK will be forced to apply for a Norway style membership of the EU. This will probably happen after a hastily arranged and nasty general election. It will be seen as a humiliation and the long consequences are impossible to predict.
They don’t need to agree on a Canada or Norway solution- that is for the transition period. They just need to agree the withdrawal agreement (i.e. Irish border).
Politically, if they get a WA, I think it would make political sense to have a second referendum on whether a Norway or Canada deal is the way to go. Hard to argue “BRINO” and “vassal state” while also arguing “Will of the people”. Plus if given the choice, Norway model would definitely win over Canada (there is that 48% body to begin with). Plus they’ve 3 years of a transition in which to arrange the referendum.