Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

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
LurkingHusband · 16/11/2016 16:16

medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714#.nlnm2u1ug

It seems we’re entering another of those stupid seasons humans impose on themselves at fairly regular intervals. I am sketching out here opinions based on information, they may prove right, or may prove wrong, and they’re intended just to challenge and be part of a wider dialogue.
My background is archaeology, so also history and anthropology. It leads me to look at big historical patterns. My theory is that most peoples’ perspective of history is limited to the experience communicated by their parents and grandparents, so 50–100 years. To go beyond that you have to read, study, and learn to untangle the propaganda that is inevitable in all telling of history. In a nutshell, at university I would fail a paper if I didn’t compare at least two, if not three opposing views on a topic. Taking one telling of events as gospel doesn’t wash in the comparative analytical method of research that forms the core of British academia. (I can’t speak for other systems, but they’re definitely not all alike in this way).
So zooming out, we humans have a habit of going into phases of mass destruction, generally self imposed to some extent or another. This handy list shows all the wars over time. Wars are actually the norm for humans, but every now and then something big comes along. I am interested in the Black Death, which devastated Europe. The opening of Boccaccio’s Decameron describes Florence in the grips of the Plague. It is as beyond imagination as the Somme, Hiroshima, or the Holocaust. I mean, you quite literally can’t put yourself there and imagine what it was like. For those in the midst of the Plague it must have felt like the end of the world.
But a defining feature of humans is their resilience. To us now it seems obvious that we survived the Plague, but to people at the time it must have seemed incredible that their society continued afterwards. Indeed, many takes on the effects of the Black Death are that it had a positive impact in the long term. Well summed up here: “By targeting frail people of all ages, and killing them by the hundreds of thousands within an extremely short period of time, the Black Death might have represented a strong force of natural selection and removed the weakest individuals on a very broad scale within Europe,“ …In addition, the Black Death significantly changed the social structure of some European regions. Tragic depopulation created the shortage of working people. This shortage caused wages to rise. Products prices fell too. Consequently, standards of living increased. For instance, people started to consume more food of higher quality.”
But for the people living through it, as with the World Wars, Soviet Famines, Holocaust, it must have felt inconceivable that humans could rise up from it. The collapse of the Roman Empire, Black Death, Spanish Inquisition, Thirty Years War, War of the Roses, English Civil War… it’s a long list. Events of massive destruction from which humanity recovered and move on, often in better shape.
At a local level in time people think things are fine, then things rapidly spiral out of control until they become unstoppable, and we wreak massive destruction on ourselves. For the people living in the midst of this it is hard to see happening and hard to understand. To historians later it all makes sense and we see clearly how one thing led to another. During the Centenary of the Battle of the Somme I was struck that it was a direct outcome of the assassination of an Austrian Arch Duke in Bosnia. I very much doubt anyone at the time thought the killing of a European royal would lead to the death of 17 million people.
My point is that this is a cycle. It happens again and again, but as most people only have a 50–100 year historical perspective they don’t see that it’s happening again. As the events that led to the First World War unfolded, there were a few brilliant minds who started to warn that something big was wrong, that the web of treaties across Europe could lead to a war, but they were dismissed as hysterical, mad, or fools, as is always the way, and as people who worry about Putin, Brexit, and Trump are dismissed now.
Then after the War to end all Wars, we went and had another one. Again, for a historian it was quite predictable. Lead people to feel they have lost control of their country and destiny, people look for scapegoats, a charismatic leader captures the popular mood, and singles out that scapegoat. He talks in rhetoric that has no detail, and drums up anger and hatred. Soon the masses start to move as one, without any logic driving their actions, and the whole becomes unstoppable.
That was Hitler, but it was also Mussolini, Stalin, Putin, Mugabe, and so many more. Mugabe is a very good case in point. He whipped up national anger and hatred towards the land owning white minority (who happened to know how to run farms), and seized their land to redistribute to the people, in a great populist move which in the end unravelled the economy and farming industry and left the people in possession of land, but starving. See also the famines created by the Soviet Union, and the one caused by the Chinese Communists last century in which 20–40 million people died. It seems inconceivable that people could create a situation in which tens of millions of people die without reason, but we do it again and again.
But at the time people don’t realise they’re embarking on a route that will lead to a destruction period. They think they’re right, they’re cheered on by jeering angry mobs, their critics are mocked. This cycle, the one we saw for example from the Treaty of Versaille, to the rise of Hitler, to the Second World War, appears to be happening again. But as with before, most people cannot see it because:

  1. They are only looking at the present, not the past or future
  2. They are only looking immediately around them, not at how events connect globally
  3. Most people don’t read, think, challenge, or hear opposing views
Trump is doing this in America. Those of us with some oversight from history can see it happening. Read this brilliant, long essay in the New York magazine to understand how Plato described all this, and it is happening just as he predicted. Trump says he will Make America Great Again, when in fact America is currently great, according to pretty well any statistics. He is using passion, anger, and rhetoric in the same way all his predecessors did — a charismatic narcissist who feeds on the crowd to become ever stronger, creating a cult around himself. You can blame society, politicians, the media, for America getting to the point that it’s ready for Trump, but the bigger historical picture is that history generally plays out the same way each time someone like him becomes the boss. On a wider stage, zoom out some more, Russia is a dictatorship with a charismatic leader using fear and passion to establish a cult around himself. Turkey is now there too. Hungary, Poland, Slovakia are heading that way, and across Europe more Trumps and Putins are waiting in the wings, in fact funded by Putin, waiting for the popular tide to turn their way. We should be asking ourselves what our Archduke Ferdinand moment will be. How will an apparently small event trigger another period of massive destruction. We see Brexit, Trump, Putin in isolation. The world does not work that way — all things are connected and affecting each other. I have pro-Brexit friends who say ‘oh, you’re going to blame that on Brexit too??’ But they don’t realise that actually, yes, historians will trace neat lines from apparently unrelated events back to major political and social shifts like Brexit. Brexit — a group of angry people winning a fight — easily inspires other groups of angry people to start a similar fight, empowered with the idea that they may win. That alone can trigger chain reactions. A nuclear explosion is not caused by one atom splitting, but by the impact of the first atom that splits causing multiple other atoms near it to split, and they in turn causing multiple atoms to split. The exponential increase in atoms splitting, and their combined energy is the bomb. That is how World War One started and, ironically how World War Two ended. An example of how Brexit could lead to a nuclear war could be this: Brexit in the UK causes Italy or France to have a similar referendum. Le Pen wins an election in France. Europe now has a fractured EU. The EU, for all its many awful faults, has prevented a war in Europe for longer than ever before. The EU is also a major force in suppressing Putin’s military ambitions. European sanctions on Russia really hit the economy, and helped temper Russia’s attacks on Ukraine (there is a reason bad guys always want a weaker European Union). Trump wins in the US. Trump becomes isolationist, which weakens NATO. He has already said he would not automatically honour NATO commitments in the face of a Russian attack on the Baltics. With a fractured EU, and weakened NATO, Putin, facing an ongoing economic and social crisis in Russia, needs another foreign distraction around which to rally his people. He funds far right anti-EU activists in Latvia, who then create a reason for an uprising of the Russian Latvians in the East of the country (the EU border with Russia). Russia sends ‘peace keeping forces’ and ‘aid lorries’ into Latvia, as it did in Georgia, and in Ukraine. He annexes Eastern Latvia as he did Eastern Ukraine (Crimea has the same population as Latvia, by the way). A divided Europe, with the leaders of France, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and others now pro-Russia, anti-EU, and funded by Putin, overrule calls for sanctions or a military response. NATO is slow to respond: Trump does not want America to be involved, and a large part of Europe is indifferent or blocking any action. Russia, seeing no real resistance to their actions, move further into Latvia, and then into Eastern Estonia and Lithuania. The Baltic States declare war on Russia and start to retaliate, as they have now been invaded so have no choice. Half of Europe sides with them, a few countries remain neutral, and a few side with Russia. Where does Turkey stand on this? How does ISIS respond to a new war in Europe? Who uses a nuclear weapon first? This is just one Arch Duke Ferdinand scenario. The number of possible scenarios are infinite due to the massive complexity of the many moving parts. And of course many of them lead to nothing happening. But based on history we are due another period of destruction, and based on history all the indicators are that we are entering one. It will come in ways we can’t see coming, and will spin out of control so fast people won’t be able to stop it. Historians will look back and make sense of it all and wonder how we could all have been so naïve. How could I sit in a nice café in London, writing this, without wanting to run away. How could people read it and make sarcastic and dismissive comments about how pro-Remain people should stop whining, and how we shouldn’t blame everything on Brexit. Others will read this and sneer at me for saying America is in great shape, that Trump is a possible future Hitler (and yes, Godwin’s Law. But my comparison is to another narcissistic, charismatic leader fanning flames of hatred until things spiral out of control). It’s easy to jump to conclusions that oppose pessimistic predictions based on the weight of history and learning. Trump won against the other Republicans in debates by countering their claims by calling them names and dismissing them. It’s an easy route but the wrong one. Ignoring and mocking the experts , as people are doing around Brexit and Trump’s campaign, is no different to ignoring a doctor who tells you to stop smoking, and then finding later you’ve developed incurable cancer. A little thing leads to an unstoppable destruction that could have been prevented if you’d listened and thought a bit. But people smoke, and people die from it. That is the way of the human. So I feel it’s all inevitable. I don’t know what it will be, but we are entering a bad phase. It will be unpleasant for those living through it, maybe even will unravel into being hellish and beyond imagination. Humans will come out the other side, recover, and move on. The human race will be fine, changed, maybe better. But for those at the sharp end — for the thousands of Turkish teachers who just got fired, for the Turkish journalists and lawyers in prison, for the Russian dissidents in gulags, for people lying wounded in French hospitals after terrorist attacks, for those yet to fall, this will be their Somme. What can we do? Well, again, looking back, probably not much. The liberal intellectuals are always in the minority. See Clay Shirky’s Twitter Storm on this point. The people who see that open societies, being nice to other people, not being racist, not fighting wars, is a better way to live, they generally end up losing these fights. They don’t fight dirty. They are terrible at appealing to the populace. They are less violent, so end up in prisons, camps, and graves. We need to beware not to become divided (see: Labour party), we need to avoid getting lost in arguing through facts and logic, and counter the populist messages of passion and anger with our own similar messages. We need to understand and use social media. We need to harness a different fear. Fear of another World War nearly stopped World War 2, but didn’t. We need to avoid our own echo chambers. Trump and Putin supporters don’t read the Guardian, so writing there is just reassuring our friends. We need to find a way to bridge from our closed groups to other closed groups, try to cross the ever widening social divides. (Perhaps I’m just writing this so I can be remembered by history as one of the people who saw it coming.)
merrymouse · 16/11/2016 16:19

m.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/11/time-pay-attention-jared-kushner

As the nights draw in, it's a job to know whether to watch a box set of House of Cards or Game of Thrones or just follow the news.

shirleyknotanotherbot · 16/11/2016 16:40

lurkinghusband Star

RedToothBrush · 16/11/2016 16:55

Trump has apparently hired Frank Gaffney to his transition team.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Gaffney

I'm not sure if he or Bannon is worse. He has an anti-Muslim agenda - which largely seems to stem from a discredited source.

It is being rumoured that the Trump team are seriously looking at this idea of registering Muslims. It remains to be seen if they will pursue this (not least because its unconstitutional), but Gaffney is not someone you want near the White House.

I am hoping this is all one of those internet lie stories and someone will say, of course he has hired this guy.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dwp-gig-economy-damian-green-speech-holiday-minimum-wage-sick-pay-hours-a7421071.html
Jobs of the future may not have stable hours, holiday pay, sick pay, or pensions, DWP secretary says

Jobs of the future may not have stable hours, holiday pay, sick pay, or pensions, the Work and Pensions Secretary has said.

Damian Green described the trend in employment practices towards the so-called “gig economy” as “exciting” and said the changes had “huge potential”.

and

Mr Green said in a speech at the Reform think-tank on Wednesday morning: “Just a few years ago the idea of a proper job meant a job that brings in a fixed monthly salary, with fixed hours, paid holidays, sick pay, a pension scheme and other contractual benefits.

“But the gig economy has changed all that. We’ve seen the rise of the everyday entrepreneur. People now own their time and control who receives their services and when.

“They can pick and mix their employers, their hours, their offices, their holiday patterns. This is one of the most significant developments in the labour market. The potential is huge and the change is exciting.”

On what planet? I thought that the feeling in the public was that they wanted secure employment. This was one of the reasons they voted to leave because they blame this on immigration meaning employers can do this as the labour is available to do this.

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam
Treasury approves new @bankofengland powers to regulate/ limit Loan to value ratios for Buy-to-let, cites potential financial risks

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-boris-johnson-italy-prosecco-fish-and-chips-foreign-secretary-uk-a7420706.html
Boris Johnson gets into Brexit row with Italian minister over prosecco and fish and chips
Italian economic development minister Carlo Calenda said the argument was ‘insulting’

OP posts:
merrymouse · 16/11/2016 16:58

www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-brexit-theresa-may-comments-czech-newspapers-free-movement-european-union-mess-a7420661.html

Carlo Calenda, the Italian economic development minister, gave an account of a conversation with Johnson. “He basically said, ‘I don’t want free movement of people but I want the single market,’” said Calenda. “I said, ‘No way.’ He said, ‘You’ll sell less prosecco.’ I said, ‘OK, you’ll sell less fish and chips, but I’ll sell less prosecco to one country and you’ll sell less to 27 countries.’ Putting things on this level is a bit insulting.”

merrymouse · 16/11/2016 17:04

I suspect Carlo Calenda might be over estimating how effectively the British have managed to export fish and chips.

InformalRoman · 16/11/2016 17:09

Oh great, so everyone is going to be a self employed contractor then?

Boris & TM aren't covering themselves with glory, are they?

“There’s lots of chaos and we don’t understand what the position is,” Italy’s economic development minister, Carlo Calenda, said in an interview. “Somebody needs to tell us something, and it needs to be something that makes sense.”

Calenda can join the queue behind the rest of us.

SapphireStrange · 16/11/2016 17:12

There IS a sector of 'everyday entrepreneur' people who want to, and can, 'own their time and control who receives their services and when... pick and mix their employers, their hours, their offices, their holiday patterns.'

Unfortunately this is a small group and a select one. I suspect people who work like this tend to have high levels of education and confidence; a good background in more traditional workplaces that has allowed them to build up a list of contacts from whom they can now 'pick and mix'; in short, I suspect they are the 'liberal metropolitan elite' who a lot of Leave voters love to hate.

People who voted in protest against perceived 'immigrants taking their jobs' were possibly thinking more of immigrants taking the kind of lower-skilled, lower-paid, precarious, insecure work that will only become more common in this 'gig economy' Damian G is wetting his knickers about.

Does the irony of Brexit EVER end?

LurkingHusband · 16/11/2016 17:16

putting things on this level is a bit insulting.

clearly our EU partners have learned the British value of understatement.

LurkingHusband · 16/11/2016 17:17

Does the irony of Brexit EVER end?

I've started another thread noting that Brexit has caused some UK business to switch from billing in sterling, to billing in Euros.

Does that count ?

merrymouse · 16/11/2016 17:20

The 'gig economy' might be exciting if you are a highly skilled member of the 'rootless elite' but not if you are stacking shelves or somebody in a 'hardworking family' struggling to make ends meet. Did this man go to the party conference?

Are they so befuddled by Brexit that in the rest of the government, anything goes?

SapphireStrange · 16/11/2016 17:20

Lurking, yes.

TheBathroomSink · 16/11/2016 17:34

Are they so befuddled by Brexit that in the rest of the government, anything goes?

Well, that's basically what the Institute for Government said yesterday (Times front page today). No one knows anything, they are thinking and planning days ahead, or weeks at best because there's no long term plan and they are massively short of staff because Cameron downsized them all.

TheNorthRemembers · 16/11/2016 17:56

Re: bin Laden and US. Didn't they only impose no-fly zone over the US following 9/11 once half the Saudi Royals were airlifted out?

Re: wealthy Muslim immigrants. It emerged this week that a Saudi person on the FBI wanted list for financing terrorism and the BCCI scandal is in fact good friend and neighbour of the defender of Christian Europe, Hungarian Prime Minister Orban. Orban's son-in-law has extensive business interests with this fugitive.

I am pretty sure that very wealthy people of all creed will be safe and welcome under Trump as well.

TheBathroomSink · 16/11/2016 18:15

Rudy Guiliani has some interesting business interests too, apparently, like training the Qatari police and giving speeches to an Iranian group which was on a banned list at the time. He lobbied the State Department to get them removed. There's also TriGlobal Ventures, which provides image consulting to Russian oligarchs like Transneft.

Apparently this would normally stop him getting a job like Secretary of State, but I think we can all agree normal went out the window a while ago.

merrymouse · 16/11/2016 18:21

Trump on Twitter:

"Very organized process taking place as I decide on Cabinet and many other positions. I am the only one who knows who the finalists are!"

"finalists"?

TheBathroomSink · 16/11/2016 19:12

merry - because it's all just another episode of The Apprentice to him, isn't it?

InformalRoman · 16/11/2016 19:13

"Finalists" brings a whole new meaning to The Apprentice USA.

InformalRoman · 16/11/2016 19:13

X post with BathroomSink.

RedToothBrush · 16/11/2016 20:19

Written Parliamentary Questions and answers:

Asked by Mr David Anderson (Blaydon) [N]
Asked on: 11 November 2016
Q: 52620
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, whether the boundary of County Londonderry with Ireland is on the western shore of Lough Foyle; and if he will make a statement.

Answered by: James Brokenshire
Answered on: 16 November 2016
The Government’s position remains that the whole of Lough Foyle is within the UK.

Asked by Mr David Anderson (Blaydon) [N]
Asked on: 11 November 2016
Northern Ireland Office
Inshore Fishing: Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland
Q: 52622
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, how the Foyle and Carlingford catchments fishing regime will be enforced and regulated after the UK leaves the EU; and if he will make a statement.

Answered by: James Brokenshire
Answered on: 16 November 2016

The UK Government is committed to withdrawing from the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and putting a new fisheries regime in place. No decisions have yet been taken, although the Government remains committed to sustainable fisheries and the Discard Ban (Landing Obligation), as set out in its manifesto commitments.

The UK is bound by international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which gives coastal states rights and responsibilities over their Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the resources within it.

Why is this important to Brexit?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lough_Foyle#Disputed_status
Lough Foyle is a disputed territory between the Republic of Ireland and the UK after the Partition of Ireland in 1922 both sides claimed that it was in their own territory. Although this dispute is still ongoing there are currently no negotiations as to its ownership. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office underlined its view on 2 June 2009 that all of Lough Foyle is in the United Kingdom, a spokesperson stating; 'The UK position is that the whole of Lough Foyle is within the UK. We recognise that the Irish Government does not accept this position...There are no negotiations currently in progress on this issue. The regulation of activities in the Lough is now the responsibility of the Loughs Agency, a cross-border body established under the Belfast Agreement of 1998.'

Oh dear. Trouble ahead here.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 16/11/2016 20:43

www.ft.com/content/8c33c05a-ac18-11e6-ba7d-76378e4fef24
Brexit demands testing Whitehall, says former top official
Senior staffers prepared to quit amid fears of acrimonious departure process

Britain’s civil servants are struggling to meet Theresa May’s tight timetable for Brexit and feel they do not have “clear political direction”, the former head of the Foreign Office warned on Wednesday.

and

Some officials have told the FT that they are preparing to quit, saying that in spite of their efforts the prime minister seemed intent on leading the country towards a “hard Brexit”. “I’ve done my best,” said one.

Sir Simon, former permanent secretary of the Foreign Office, gave voice to his former colleagues’ frustrations when he said: “Civil servants don’t feel they have clear political direction at the moment.”

He told the Commons Brexit committee that officials were working “incredibly hard” but that Mrs May’s plan to start exit negotiations in March 2017 was looking ambitious. “The afterburners need to be put on,” he said.

and

To the consternation of pro-Brexit Tory MPs, he said border guards, customs officials and trade experts would be among staff Britain would have to recruit once exit was complete.

and

The 30,000 figure, furiously denied by Number 10, is roughly equivalent to the entire European Commission staff in Brussels. It far exceeds the extra 500 being hired by the government to staff new Brexit ministries.

But hiring new customs officers alone after Brexit could increase the civil service headcount significantly: the UK has 5,000 officers dealing with the EU’s external tariff wall, compared with 35,000 in Germany and 16,000 in France.

Meh, just minor points to your 'quickie divorce' Mr Gove (one of the pro-Brexit Tories on the Brexit Select Committee)

The Department of International Trade is a Happy Place
Matthew Holehouse ‏@mattholehouse
Mutiny! In Department for International Trade staff survey, 'leadership' gets 31%, one of lowest in Civil Service. (DExEU is 60%)

Westministenders. Boris worries about the land of his birth and simply wonders, what the hell next!?
OP posts:
TheBathroomSink · 16/11/2016 21:02

I'm impressed DExEU gets 60% - unless they are all grateful for the fact that Davis seems to be keeping a low profile!

Still, probably cuts the odds on Fox being the first boot (since government has now firmly entered reality TV territory) - there's only really Ladbrokes offering at the moment, and they still have Hammond as favourite, but Fox is now 5/1 - I had £5 on him when he was 9/1!

merrymouse · 16/11/2016 21:06

Oh dear. Trouble ahead here.

Presumably this is the kind of detail that Gove wants to gloss over so that he can get a quickie divorce.

RedToothBrush · 16/11/2016 21:22

TheBathroomSink, didn't Davis make a point of only hiring people who agreed with his echo chamber in the first place? They under went 'extreme vetting' before getting a job.

www.ft.com/content/284b6d66-ab57-11e6-ba7d-76378e4fef24
Remake the union to heal Europe’s rifts
The UK can then decide whether to ask its people if they want to rejoin the EU
Nicolas Sarkozy

The approaching political talks will be tough and the associated technicalities complex. Article 50, the mechanism for departing the EU, provides a two-year timeframe to reach an agreement, and failure to do so will result in automatic exit. The question is whether the UK and its 27 partner nations will have enough time to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement enshrining most of the bond they already share, or be forced into a much harsher break-up. Nobody knows the answer yet.

What does seem certain to me, however, is that these talks need to reach coherent outcomes. Nobody can be in and out at the same time, or enjoy privileges without fulfilling responsibilities. This has absolutely nothing to do with retribution: it is simple logic. No European government could agree to grant the UK free access to the single market if Britain does not accept rules, duties and concessions, including the free movement of Europeans, in return.

Respecting the British people’s choice also implies acknowledging that their doubts about the European project cannot be explained away as insular or idiosyncratic. Other European nations could have voted the same way given the chance, simply because the rift between Europe and its citizens is wider than ever before.

And yet the only way forward for Europeans in our globalised world — where competition is becoming ever fiercer, the challenges ever more complex and the threats more numerous — is to stand together. Europe is still a profoundly modern idea but the European project as we know it has grown old. This is why I believe Europe needs an overhaul as well as reforms.

First of all, this implies finally admitting that there is more than one Europe. The Europe of the euro and the Europe of the 27-member union, for example, have different paths to follow.

The Europe of the euro needs to deepen its integration, under sound economic governance, once and for all. The foundation for this was built during the crisis in 2010-11, when the European Stability Mechanism was created and eurozone summits began. This Europe needs to take a few steps further, providing more permanent leadership for its eurozone summits, setting up a central secretariat to serve as Europe’s treasury, and turning the ESM into a fully fledged European monetary fund.

The other Europe, the 27-member union, should revert to its original duties — ensuring the domestic market operates smoothly and focusing on no more than 10 truly strategic issues, such as agricultural and industrial policy to stimulate growth; research policy, which needs to be bolder; competition policy, which needs to be less dogmatic; and trade policy founded on reciprocity. Everything else is best left in the hands of member states.

and

Lastly, Europe needs a new immigration policy. It needs a new Schengen, shared immigration and asylum policies, and consistent employment laws regarding foreigners to end social dumping. Foreigners should not receive non-contributory benefits until they have completed five years’ residence. We need to protect Europe’s borders effectively. We need to join forces to send those who have entered illegally back to their country of origin. We need to rank co-operation aimed at stemming illegal immigration among our foreign policy priorities. Countries that re­fuse to co-operate should be denied EU aid. This must be combined with a European “Marshall plan” for Africa.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread