Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westministenders. Boris worries about the land of his birth and simply wonders, what the hell next!?

999 replies

RedToothBrush · 11/11/2016 21:26

Of all the Westministers intro I’ve done to date, I think this has been the hardest to write.

My first thought is where on earth to start, and then where to stop with how Trump’s victory affects us in the UK. It completely changes international relations. The political fall out is going to be considerable and potentially radioactive in its toxicity.

To hardened Brexiteers, America falling to Trump represents the domino effect in progress. It will embolden them. And the fear is that on 4th December both Italy and Austria could fall next as they respectively, face a referendum and a re-run of the presidential election.

And then there’s France…

All of this is a threat to the EU. It just leaves everyone, including the UK asking what next? And what of our relationship with the US? Who knows? It makes it look around and say, can we rely on the US, and without the US surely we have no choice but to grow closer to the EU. Perhaps there is a role for us in-between but there really are no guarantees and do we want to make that choice?

The suggestion is that May has no love for Trump. And whilst the hard right might harbour fantasies about becoming the 51st State, which seem to be led by Farage himself, this exposes the one red line that could bring the fury of the country down on the government to its extinction. The NHS. Its not for sale. Its not to be subject to a trade deal.

In a curious turn of events, rumours grow that the government will contend at the Supreme Court that a50 CAN be reversed afterall. Davis had personally been responsible for the original line that its not reversible. This was a political decision to tie us into leaving, and show intent and seriousness to Leavers. Yet it was always a crazy one that is not in the national interest.

Going back on this totally changes the game.

It would be a move that will go down well with Remainers and Liberal Leavers but will enrage the hardliners especially if the ECJ is part of this new tact.

It off loads a pile of risk and it is the prudent and sensible approach. It is much needed to protect the best interests of the country overall. Its also that magic ‘Get Out of Jail Free Card’ for that promised Nissan deal.

The change of tact would also help to appease MPs and much opposition to Brexit. And in doing so, also lessens the chances of a HoC rebellion against May and also reduces the chances of an early election, thus is perhaps a more stabilising way forward. It encourages negotiation of a good deal that other parties and rebels will also find agreeable rather than them feeling like they are being held to ransom on.

It would almost certainly delay things and might interfere with May’s precious timetable.

But there’s France… and the Presidential elections are in April/May

Do we really want to trigger article 50, if post Trump, the domino really is likely to fall there too and Le Pen wins the Presidency? There is suddenly a potential ally for major EU reform. Or even its collapse. Now is not the time to do something rash and drastic but to hold our nerve just a little longer.

It makes sense to everyone to hang fire and delay. If only briefly to see what now happens.

There are dangers in doing this though. The prospect of the ECJ being involved in a case which is in essence about our Constitution, is not only embarrassing but could be explosive. It will raise fears of leavers that Brexit will not happen. It will play to the extremes and the agenda of UKIP. It exposes judges to the press and criticism that they are activists and also trying to stop Brexit. Though Gove seems to have changed his tune and is defending them rather more than he was previously...

With tensions running high will Farage get his 100,000 march? Maybe, maybe not. Only time will tell on that one. He is trying to win through intimidation though, and that makes people fear him if we don’t do his bidding and what’s happening over in the States only emboldens him and makes others fear him more. He is divisive and never will be able to serve the national interest, because of it no matter how honest his delusions of being an ambassador to Trump are.

It just adds to the growing sense of helplessness and growing question of whether the proud tradition of British liberalism can even survive? It becomes appears to many this is ultimately the goal of Mr Farage – and not the EU. The EU is just a protector of it.

Well I don’t believe that Farage does have it all his way and has the monopoly on people power, nor a connection to the public that no one else has.

One of the themes developing on twitter, is one about passion, hope and a new sense of purpose. One to defend British values and not become like Trumpland. We have a warning and an example of how it really could be worse and it’s not a pretty sight.

I remember during the referendum one poster unsure of how to vote, asking simply:
“I don't want to spoil my vote. I want to vote, and vote with conviction”.

It was a question I found difficult to answer at the time. To me it highlighted how much people did want something to believe in and to not having that. We must start to build on that, and provide that alternative.

But I do believe those things to believe in were there all along. The NHS and our open democracy, whatever the flaws and imperfections of our institutions they have endured and survived for a reason – and not just for the benefit of the ‘elite’.

We just took them for granted, and now we are going to have to stand up and make sure people know that by speaking out, and know that while moderates might have it in their nature to compromise there are also some things we just can not loose in the process. We must not be drawn into a battle along violent lines as it will be used against those who do. We can’t loose our soul in trying to defend what is precious, nor should we try and reassure ourselves by finding justification for things that can not and should not be justified.

The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius wrote in notes to himself;

"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”

I think that message rings true now both for Leave and Remain supporters alike. You might have made a decision on 23rd June but you still have other choices to make now.

Choose to stay sane.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
howabout · 15/11/2016 17:49

Funny Stephen Crabbe didn't think any of that when he was in post. Damian Green has already started to sort this out and has signalled his intent to go further. I looked at the Scottish government consultation on taking PIP on last week and was deeply frustrated that everyone accepts the problems but are too timid to get on with sorting them out.

Anyone know if SC is likely to lose out in the Welsh boundary changes?

StripeyMonkey1 · 15/11/2016 17:54

Howabout - Freedom of movement has been a fundamental freedom in Europe for more than 30 years now.

I remember as a law student back in the 1990s being taught in EC constitutional law that there were "four pillars", or freedoms, on which the EU was founded under the Treaty of the European Union (or TEU, which we also sometimes call Maastricht). One of these of course is freedom of movement. The term EU, comes from the TEU: prior to that we referred to the EC (or European Community).

Earlier again we had the Treaty of Lisbon, Treaty of Rome and before that the European Coal and Steel Community. How far back do we need to go to find something Boris understands?

StripeyMonkey1 · 15/11/2016 17:57

Outed myself as a lawyer. I wonder whether the Brexit Arms will still be kind to me!

InformalRoman · 15/11/2016 17:57

howabout The EU describes freedom of movement as a founding principle and a fundamental right.

www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_3.1.3.html

Freedom of movement for workers is one of the founding principles of the EU. It is laid down in Article 45 of the TFEU and is a fundamental right of workers. It entails the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment.

TheNorthRemembers · 15/11/2016 18:08

Red Re: Stephen Crabb. Is it technically a rebellion if all Tory MPs do their own thing and no one is following the PM? Confused

howabout · 15/11/2016 18:08

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_for_workers_in_the_European_Union

cba to dig out my extremely old and well thumbed Treaty copies from the bookshelf so I hope a wiki link suffices. The nuance is in the word "work".

In other news Oxford is soon to launch its first MOOC in economics. As if the World wasn't already full enough of people who have done the intro to get the E on the PPE. Wink

Marmitelover55 · 15/11/2016 18:17

Not sure if this has been posted yet regarding acoissiblevmajor delay:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-dealt-fresh-blow-as-supreme-court-judge-signals-major-delay-on-starting-brexit-a7418986.html

PattyPenguin · 15/11/2016 18:20

As a principle, the clause in the Treaty of Rome seems pretty clear.
"c) the abolition, as between Member States, of obstacles to freedom of movement for persons, services and capital"

InformalRoman · 15/11/2016 18:29

So, howabout are you suggesting that Boris is playing games again?

RedToothBrush · 15/11/2016 18:56

Looking at Stephen Crabb. He has a majority of 4,500 over Labour with just over 16000 votes (A drop of 600 votes from 2010). UKIP are not much of a force here (4200 votes) with only a moderate extra turnout in the EU ref. Lib Dems had 5700 votes in 2010 but vote collapsed in 2015 and Plaid had 3600 votes in 2010 declining to 2500. (UKIP seem to be the beneficiary of those lost Plaid and LD votes).

Its difficult to see who would take the seat from Crabb for that reason. He is more likely to be pushing for a good cabinet posting by threatening to be a pain in the arse (yesterday had an article about backbenchers effectively saying this).

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 15/11/2016 19:03

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-immigration-single-market-angela-merkel-freedom-movement-comments-theresa-may-a7418981.html
Brexit: Angela Merkel indicates UK could restrict freedom of movement and keep access to Single Market

Angela Merkel has suggested she is prepared to discuss the parameters of free movement of people in the European Union as Britain prepares for Brexit.

The German Chancellor said the EU could not divide its four freedoms — movement of goods, capital, people and services — to allow Britain to restrict immigration while retaining tariff-free access to the market of close to 500 million people.

However, she opened the possibility of discussions on the framework of the free movement of people, which became a significant issue for the 52 per cent of Britons who backed leaving the EU

Fits with what the German version of the CBI suggested a while back. Its also not a million miles from what Johnson is suggesting. Have things been going on behind closed doors discreetly?

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 15/11/2016 19:09

Oh hang on.

Wales is set to loose 11 of its 40 seats. And what do you know, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire (Simon Hart) is set to be merged with Preseli Pembrokeshire (Crabb's seat). Both are Con held.

OP posts:
Unicornsarelovely · 15/11/2016 19:13

The problem with freedom of movement of workers in the uk is the universal entitlements to housing benefit and tax credits etc.

This is also why the rest of the EU has been slightly impatient with the UKs posturing about how it's all their fault when they deal with this by having contribution based or registration based entitlement to benefits.

Corcory · 15/11/2016 19:25

The last referendum we had was to enter the Common Market. We didn't vote for a European Union with freedom of movement and all the changes that ensued from the Maastricht treaty.

merrymouse · 15/11/2016 19:26

The nuance is in the word "work".

Obviously I can't speak for anybody as the question wasn't on the ballot paper.

However, I thought that many people voted leave to stop freedom of movement of EU workers because they were under the impression that it was reducing the supply of local jobs.

Unicornsarelovely · 15/11/2016 19:36

Freedom of movement was in the Treaty of Rome in 1957 so it was what you voted for in the 1973 referendum.

I agree Merry - they're taking our jobs and claiming our benefits. Pesky hardworking immigrants.

RedToothBrush · 15/11/2016 19:41

www.channel4.com/news/pms-chief-of-staff-drawn-into-election-expenses-scandal
PM’s chief of staff drawn into election expenses scandal

Prime Minister’s chief of staff Nick Timothy “provided assistance” to a controversial election campaign now under investigation by police, Channel 4 News has established.

Theresa May’s Downing Street aide is in the spotlight amid questions over the Conservatives, campaign to stop Nigel Farage winning a seat in Parliament at the last election.

Channel 4 News, which has been investigating the party’s election spending since February, has obtained new evidence suggesting a “crack team” of Tories including Mr Timothy were involved in Craig Mackinlay’s local campaign from a hotel in Ramsgate.

Makes note of 200 'career politicians' and 'most corrupt politicians' for Mr Banks. (Cos lets face it, most of these aren't going to be on his list in addition to Keith Vaz)

Boris Johnson

Michael Gove
Craig Mackinlay
Nick Timothy
Liam Fox

OP posts:
merrymouse · 15/11/2016 19:45

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/britain-probably-leaving-eu-customs-union-says-boris-johnson

So it's not really clear what is going on, but according to the article nobody really knows what Boris said because some things may have been lost in the English/Czech/English translation.

But honestly everything is completely under control really.

AutumnLeavesAgain · 15/11/2016 19:48

I thought it used to be freedom of movement of workers?

Boredofbrexit · 15/11/2016 19:48

Oh dear.
Maybe Nigel is getting a tad frustrated by lack of intent progress and is shaping up to form a new party himself to lead the uk out of eu. I think he'd have a half decent chance if he shook off the more unsavoury ukip folk. At this rate we'll still be in in 2019/20 and he'll have had plenty of time to set out his stall.
Hmm. The devil you know and all that.

merrymouse · 15/11/2016 19:54

I think he'd have a half decent chance if he shook off the more unsavoury ukip folk.

Which are the ones that aren't unsavoury?

Also, he would still have to face all the same problems - as Obama said yesterday, it's one thing campaigning, quite another governing.

TheBathroomSink · 15/11/2016 20:04

Maybe Nigel is getting a tad frustrated by lack of intent progress and is shaping up to form a new party himself to lead the uk out of eu

It was suggested today that he might go back to the Tories, although I didn't see anything to say they actually wanted him back.

Which are the ones that aren't unsavoury? - as Ukip members go, Carswell isn't totally awful...

Unicornsarelovely · 15/11/2016 20:04

Source : europa.eu.lex

Wording in 1957: ARTICLE 48
1. Freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Community by the end of the transitional period at the latest.

  1. Such freedom of movement shall entail the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment.

Wording from the Lisbon treaty 2007

  1. Freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Union.
  2. Such freedom of movement shall entail the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment.
Both can be limited to 'workers' I.e people with actual paid employment to go to but it depended on the interpretation by national governments.

Tony Blair didn't restrict the right for the newly joined east European countries to benefit from free movement (unlike Germany and France). David Cameron repeated this invitation to newly joined countries when Romania and Bulgaria joined.

This is either total incompetence if successive governments to understand what it's signed up to, or a deeply cynical attempt to import cheap competent workers and blame the associated immigration problems squarely on someone else.

TheBathroomSink · 15/11/2016 20:08

a deeply cynical attempt to import cheap competent workers and blame the associated immigration problems squarely on someone else.

Yep. Businesses wanted cheap labour they didn't have to train or invest in because they were easily replaced.

TheUnworthy · 15/11/2016 21:06

they're taking our jobs and claiming our benefits. Pesky hardworking immigrants.

I dont agree with the sentiment but that is entirely possible isn't it?

A worker in a minimum wage job would also be claiming working tax credits, if they had children, child benefit, child tax credits etc.

I don't think the 'pesky migrants on jobs and benefits too' is the Schrödinger’s immigrant everyone thinks it is.

Swipe left for the next trending thread