Remember, remember the 5th of November. Gunpower, treason and plot. For I see no reason Why Gunpowder Treason Should ever be forgot.
Here we are 401 years after Guy Fawkes was foiled. The failed attempt to kill the King and destroy parliament celebrates stopping what is now regarded generally as an attempted act of terrorism but to others he was a martyr.
This division would form part of the dynamic between various factions following the death of Elizabeth I which eventually led the civil war as Charles I dismissed Parliament to avoid its scrutiny. A division that lead to Irish and Scottish uprisings. A division that lead to the lost of many of our then colonies to another nation.
You start to wonder just how much has changed within British Society.
The dynamics of the era might be different, but following the referendum vote we have a power vacuum into which our uncertain direction and future is fuelling cries of ‘traitor’, there is widespread loathing of Europeans and their values who apparently ‘threaten our way of life’, many are simply given the label of ‘potential terrorist’ purely for their religion, there is ill feeling throughout Ireland, in Scotland, there is talk of revolt and uprising, our parliamentary democracy seems potentially under threat by the power of the crown and the relative stability of the long reign of Queen Elizabeth must end soon and her heir to the throne is a man named Charles.
Strangely enough, many of the rights being quoted in the a50 case originate from this same period of turbulence in British history, or from the direct consequences of it. It is not a coincidence.
So where are we at? The decision on a50 and what it means for our parliament is due before the end of the month. It is not likely to be the final ruling but it will set the tone and direction for what happens next. Is it likely to win?
In my opinion, whilst the constitutional argument might be strong in principle the challenge has a great deal of merit. Several of these might win out but the most compelling of these is: If a50 is triggered and our government is unable to reach an agreement by the end of two years we will leave the EU and rights will be removed as a direct result which is outside the power of the royal prerogative.
Against this, May herself has set up an atmosphere where the court challenge which is a protected right of the people to challenge the government has been framed as ‘subverting democracy’ which raises questions about how the ruling will be accepted if it goes in favour of the claimant. The anger on display on Question time last night is worrying. The government must make a strong point about respecting the ruling even if they challenge it. And conversely if the challenge looses, they must acknowledge its merits and legitimacy to appeal rather than allowing it to be framed as a blank cheque for their agenda.
It must – once again - be stressed that the challenge is not about thwarting Brexit. It is about making sure that Brexit is done properly and with due diligence.
And you have to seriously wonder if May is using due diligence. Donald Tusk said we might get into a situation where it is ‘hard brexit’ or ‘no brexit’. This has been interpreted as an EU threat. Personally I think it is nothing of sort. It’s a warning. For our own good.
The much talked about CETA agreement (Candian Free Trade agreement) all but collapsed on Friday due to a single region of Belgium opposing it. It is now in last chance saloon to save the deal. This is the context behind Tusk’s comment. He also warned that CETA might be the EU’s last FTA as result of the difficulties in trying to pass it.
What he meant was the chances are that no agreement will be possible with the approach the British seem to be taking. This means the alternatives will be a chaotic unmanaged exit with no transitional deal or a realisation that we are better off sticking in the EU afterall.
Understanding this is important. May is missing this in her determination to be tough, and is further alienating European leaders. May has made assurances to Nissan, but the reality is she is in no position to make any such promises as the reality is if she stick so tightly to the line on immigration she has no way of keeping them. The EU will give us no ground at all here no matter what anyone says. The harder May is, they harder they will be.
When Cameron tried to do a deal which restricted migration, the brick wall he hit was the fact he could find no evidence to back up the claim that migration was a problem. When he turned to MigrationWatch for help the best they could come up with was newspaper clippings. The UK lie 13th in the EEA for migration. The EU pointed out that all the problems this highlighted where caused by UK level policy rather than EU policy and Cameron was forced to admit that hostility to migration was much more cultural rather than an economic or one over services. As a commentor in the FT sums up: “In other words, lots of middle English people culturally dislike immigrants even though the immigrant didn’t have any negative impact on them.” Notably Thursday’s questiontime came from Hartlepool – a area with hardly any immigration and where 95.6% of the population are white english born. Its also been a week where there has been uproar over 14 refugee children coming to the UK due to their age, gender and lack of cuteness, whilst announcements over no more money for the NHS have been all but totally ignored. It’s a sentiment that is getting increasingly difficult to argue with especially with the overall tone coming from May’s lips and actions.
Tusk’s speech was also strong on 1930s references and this is largely the motivation behind strong comments from Hollande and Merkel about a deal being hard to get. They simply won’t stand for rhetoric which they believe sounds as if it has fascist undertones. The message was lost in the British press though. On top of this, even if Hollande goes, Saroksy and Juppe have been lining up to talk about moving Calais’s problems to Kent. Something that is entirely possible if we disregard our international commitments to Dublin.
This is why we need the article 50 ruling so badly. And this is why May is so opposed to it. It actually gives her a way to back down and save face. Failing that parliament must up the ante and pressure May with its full force – and it may cost her dear. And this is why the right wing media who make a profit from peddling lies about migration are so opposed to them as May is such a kindred spirit.
It has got nothing to do with an elite conspiracy to derail Brexit. Many, many remainers with heavy hearts think it must happen to prevent a further lurch to the right. It is not because Brexit must be stopped, but because May’s self destructive vision and approach to Brexit must be stopped and replaced by an approach that at least acknowledges the dangers rather than labelling it as treason or a lack of patriotism to do so. Marmitegate has been our warning; Leadsom has this week has been unable to refute the possibility that food prices will go up 27% something that many working class leave voters who feel left behind just can’t afford. That way lies even greater hardship and division.
Brexit MUST have a transitional deal if it is to work at all, however unpopular this might be and however people are afraid that delays will kill Brexit entirely or be seen as a fudge as this is in the national interest. This needs to start being the approach of all and pushed to the public by Leavers and Remainers alike
Brexit MUST not trigger a50 on a certain date because May made a political promise to her supporters and this happens to suit the EU’s agenda too. It must be when we are ready, when we have a better consensus and when we are prepared. The uncertainty over whether we will achieve a smooth change is as damaging as a delay to investment. Brexit MUST also include tackling xenophobic attitudes and confronting our centuries old ingrained mentality as this brand of ‘British Values’ were the ones that lead us not to our greatest moment, but the one that lead us to perhaps our greatest crisis and threat to our future.
I find a certain irony - and also a creeping fear - that the first article 50 ruling should fall at this time of year. Especially since the British celebration is being forgotten increasingly being replaced in favour of the more American Halloween. I wonder what further frights and horrors await us over the next couple of weeks.