How will we know whether Brexit is a success(179 Posts)
How will we know whether Brexit is a success or a failure?
I know people will have different views on this and for some people a successful Brexit is just out of the EU, and there is no failure.
But if Brexit is about making things better, then do leavers see any of the following as signs of failure:
1. Fewer doctors per head of population
2. Cancelled radiation treatment because no longer in Euratom
3. Food prices rising by 20%
4. Average farm income being a third less tan 2016?
5. 10% Unemployment
6. Dismantling the NHS
7. Having drugs shortages because of lack of regulation
8. Net emigration from the UK
9. Average class sizes of 30 children
10. UK GDP/person being lower than EU average
11. Average salary was below EU average/Greece/Poland
13. Requiring an IMF/EU bail out?
14. No Trade deal within ten years
15. Having a hard left government as a backlash.
16. Scottish Independence and /or Northern Ireland merging with Ireland
17. A return to violence in Northern Ireland
18. Families with one non-British parent leaving in droves.
19. Voting to rejoin within 20 years
Or what would be a “Failure”
I would be a remainer so here are things which would cause me to re-evaluate and say actually it was better to be out.
1. Average salary being more than Germany
2. A comprehensive trade deal with a top ten economy which is trade without any freedom of movement
3. Improved NHS funding
4. Food banks and Homelessness being below 2008 levels
5. Tax Revenue from the city increasing by 10%
6. British children being Top 3 in Child Happiness Index
7. British Children being the best performing Europeans in PISA (excluding Finland)
What does anyone else think?
It's simple - it's going to be a failure.
The only question is just how bad a failure it's going to be.
And some of the answers won't become clear for decades...
It's simple - it's going to be a failure.
But if the only measure of success is “Just being bloody out”, then we can’t even discuss it.
What is the difference between a good and Brexit for leavers?
Agree with notion that the measure is how bad a failure?
But be prepared for some ridiculous responses and ridicule at posting the question.
Brexit threads don't go well. What does that remind me of ....
The only Brexiteer that I know voted on ideological grounds. The success will be being put of the EU. Everything else is just a cost of achieving the goal.
I would see Scottish independence as A Good Thing, and I sincerely hope it happens.
But that leaves rUK in an even bigger shit hole, so it's not good for anyone else.
There are a few things in your list like dismantling the NHS (it's already failing so badly that it's practically a soft class genocide, the number of people who die as a result of medical negligence/out of date practice is shocking) and net negative migration (UK is horrendously overcrowded and migration figures don't count a lot of straightforwardly beneficial migration like students fir obvious reasons) that I would consider to be good things. Generally whether it is a success or a failure would in my eyes depends on:
1. How many trade deals the UK negotiated outside of the EU, especially free trade.
2. Increasing exports to non-European countries.
3. General increase in quality of life.
4. In the event that the EU suffers another economic crisis/collapses/whatever whether or not the UK suffers significant detriments as a result.
5. As a ulturistic global development point whether Brexit prior the EU to overhaul its system of government and aims. The probables with the EU isn't the vague concept of a fee trade free movement group but the way it has been implemented. Many of the states have suffered disproportionately economically, socially and politically from the current set up. I think that by far the most important thing is the the EU becomes more democratic, less centralised and more liberal.
I think it's hard to top the measurable goals in the OP. I love a good, strong metric.
There is no good Brexit, at the VERY VERY ( unlikely) best the country will recover in 20 or so years.
Just curious as to why anybody thinks Brexit needs to be a success ? Seems a tad judgemental, no ?
Anyway, it's immaterial, since the Prime Minister has assured us that Brexit means Brexit. So that's what it is.
"Success" and "Failure" are rather bourgeois C20th ideas anyway, and probably overrated.
A good outcome for Brexit is it's cancellation before any more harm is done. Anything else is a bad outcome.
I don't agree that any of the first 19 are going to happen. What sort of answers did you think you would get from leavers? That we would be happy with any of your disaster scenarios so that you could berate them for the callousness?
I dont think we will be able to evaluate it for ten to fifteen years or so after actually leaving.
I don't agree that any of the first 19 are going to happen.
Well, your dear leader specifically wrote in her Article 50 letter that we would be leaving EURATOM for some utterly inexplicable reason, so if we don't sort that problem out fairly urgently, then #2 on the list will happen whether you agree with it or not.
I don't agree that any of the first 19 are going to happen.
That’s OK. But some of those have been predictions, and that’s my point. I have found it impossible to get agreement with any Leaver as to whether scenarios like that would be a failure, mostly because, it seems to me, that Brexit’s success will be bulldog British but there is, in their minds no scenario which would make them see failure other than still being in.
So all those catastrophic situations would be seen as a temporary and fair price to pay. (With losing both Scotland and NI was positive bonuses!). And of course Temporary is never defined!
I don’t know whether my sample is representative (hopefully not). And your reply seeing that some situations are not OK suggests you have some boundaries- and I am trying to understand better what they are.
You do know that one could easily make a similarly tendentious list about whole swathes of EU policy, right? For example, will the EU's policies of the last decade be considered a failure if:
1. Ordinary Greek citizens are eating out of bins, with youth unemployment hitting 50% in southern Europe?
2. The EU's external borders are overwhelmed by millions of migrants, triggering the first far-right upsurge in Europe since the days of Hitler?
3. One of the EU's largest member states leaves in disgust despite the immense upheaval that leaving involves?
Etc etc etc...
Couldn't agree more G and T. The disaster that is the EU which is unfolding in many countries is simply overlooked by so many.
Nippy is very keen on the idea that Scotland want to stay in the EU but we voted to stay with the rUK only a couple of years ago so that supersedes anything in my opinion.
Causing the NHS to "fail" was of course one of the reasons for the massive cuts to the combined health and social care budget.
So the govt got to save money immediately on the social care budget (partially fed via local councils). Predictably it's causing a massively increased load on the NHS (less preventative care, more crisis admissions, more bed-blocking).
Now the govt gets to throw its hands up in horror and declare that the structure of healthcare funding is at fault, rather than the decreased per capita spending on healthcare and social care.
And ta da! "The NHS is not fit for purpose and must be replaced with... something else. Here's an ACO I just happened to have up my sleeve. Looks like an American HMO, different label."
I predicted exactly this back when the austerity cuts to social care were made.
(I digress from the OP. But I wasn't going to let RestingGrinchFAce's post go unchallenged.)
You do know that one could easily make a similarly tendentious list about whole swathes of EU policy, right?
Yes, but the really serious question behind it is: do Leavers have any of differentiating between a successful and failed Brexit beyond “Being Out”. If so, what are the measurable indicators of success or failure?
I think there is a failure and success spectrum.
|-- success >
How to assess this? Well the objectives of the EU (and the EEC which preceded it) were to ending the horrific wars between neighbours, which culminated in WWII. The fundamental premise of EU membership is to link European countries economically, so that mutual interest in trade secures lasting peace, co-operation and benefit. So success or failure must be assessed by the extent to which these dual objectives are still being achieved:
•the promotion of peace and the* well-being* of the Union´s citizens, and
•balanced economic growth and benefits of a free single market
You can measure success or failure have been achieved by comparing what was achieved during our 40 year membership and what is achieved afterwards.
*Economic growth* -The EU economy is resurgent.Certainly growth in the 19-country eurozone now quietly outshines the US. The Japan deal will augment that for the EU. It will be years before we can emulate the many trading agreements, so on the economic growth criteria at least we are slipping down the spectrum.
Well-being- On the well being of citizens, it looks like we will slip too.
Peace- It is just to be hoped our performance here at least points us to the success end of the spectrum.
God yes, this whole “don’t talk about Britain, moan about the EU” business is finished now. This is Brexit. Time to make winning into something tangible.
What are the quantifiable differences between a good Brexit and a bad one beyond “being out?”
a few things about the NHS that you are mentioning and I disagree with. First of all, this is a Conservative government and the NHS has been struggling since they are in power, not since Brexit. Of course, Brexit will very probably make things worst because of shortage of highly skilled staff, but overall, the NHS is not in good hands as long as the Tories are in power.
Secondly, we had problems with homelessness, cuts to services to disabled people, massive cuts in education well before Brexit - again, this is caused by Tory policies, not Brexit. Brexit will make matters worst, or indeed the Tories will use Brexit as an excuse for cuts in social services and care in the coming years.
Course they will fish, but what measurements would be appropriate.
The problem is that millions of people voted Brexit to try and help the NHS (see certain buses).
However, many of the leading Brexiteers have made it very clear that the favour a US style health insurance system that would inevitably result in the poor dying and the middle classes paying through the nose for insurance that will turn out not to cover what they thing it does (as is normal with most insurance).
Anyone who voted Brexit to help the NHS was drastically misled
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.