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

[RedToothBrush]

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.

I'm sure people have seen this: www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/16/european-ministers-boris-johnson-prosecco-claim-brexit

Not just Boris's prosecco claim, isn't the whole Leave economic strategy that people will be nice to us because they don't want to lose exports?

RTB How do Remainers feel about a comprehensively restructured EU, as outlined in your post above? Are closed borders and immigration controls acceptable or do you think this spoils the current set up?

Bored - I think Remainers will all have different views.

For me, I think the EU needs to be restructured, both to accommodate the UK and also for the good of other European countries. This restructure should take account of the views of the people living in Europe, whether I personally agree with all of them or not, in order for it to work. If this means tighter borders in relation to immigration from outside the EU, and more internal controls, then so be it.

From CNN: Obamas last trip will be to address a divided Europe.

cnn.it/2gfHKE8

Personally, I have no problem with the EU being fluid and dynamic. The world changes so the EU must change. It's also quite possible that a majority could have voted Remain and events would have dictated that the UK would leave the EU at some point in the next 10 years.

However, I have a massive great big problem with leaving the EU because of a referendum that seemed to be about misconceptions about immigrants and non-existent cabbage regulations. The question asked was too vague and nobody on the Leave side seemed to have a plan, or any comprehension of the difficulties of leaving the EU. They still don't.

To be fair, I don't think either side had a coherent idea of what leaving or remaining should mean. Mainly, I am anti-referendum.

Huh, I either didn't know that about Davis's department red or I've forgotten! That could explain it, anyway.

Bored. I really can't speak for 'Remainers' as such as I think there is such a diverse set of opinions out there.

Personally I don't think I could be against it if it meant we were still part of some kind of European Organisation, but it would not be my ideal way forward by any means.

It certainly sounds better than the political and economic shambles of Brexit

I would like FoM with regard to education programmes to be retained without much restriction and a loose joint European approach to science.

Beyond that, I'm not sure I would be terribly happy, but as I say, its a better opinion than the one we are currently considering which is a car crash of epic proportions.

My overall position is that I am in broadly in favour of FoM generally, but do see that there is issues with training that the government is not taking a harder line on. They have never invested in people nor promoted nor enforced investment in people.

I find it disgusting that Minister for the Department of Work and Pensions today, was going on about the virtues of employers not having a wider responsibility to workers as this hardly encourages businesses to invest in people on a long term basis. This means short term, part time work is likely to be the norm even more and workers will be far more open to exploitation and will not see improved employment rights and benefits.

I was under the impression that job security and stability was one of the things people wanted and yet the government appear to be wanting exactly the opposite. The lack of support that the government have given to long term secure jobs is one of the reasons that I think we have a negative attitude to immigrants in the first place. They are blamed for the development of the 'gig economy' when actually its about government policy too. Damien Green's excitement took over the opportunities to expand the gig economy, just highlights that.

So I rather think that reducing immigration isn't going to solve all the problems that people see it causes anyway.

But yeah, I could be persuaded by Sarkosy, if only in desperation for a half decent deal.

I'd say I pretty much agree with merry, the referendum was a bad idea, badly executed. There's almost nothing that shouldn't have been done differently, not just in the last couple of years but going back about 25 years ago that we never got to this stage. But, given that we did get here, the leaders we have on all sides needed to be far smarter and more courageous about what they did.

Well, it will be a real rum do if we spend years and billions preparing to leave, and all the while the social fabric is ripped apart as folk are pitted against each other for then to find, by the time we get there that the EU has changed sufficiently to be acceptable to Leavers and Remainers alike. But I don't think left to its own devices that the EU would have changed, or that we could have changed it from within. No pain no gain. Maybe?

The gig stuff RTB, I see that really taking a grip in London, about 5 years now. It's an extension of the sharing economy really- no one has 'ownership' of anything anymore. Co-living, co-working...they are all about the same thing - you physically lend your presence to somewhere or something for a smidge of time then you walk away and someone comes to remove the trace of you before another arrives to take your place.

Possibly, Bored much of the problem has been about how Brexit has been managed as much as the actual result.

It also depends on what other fallout comes from it.

I do think there would have been a trigger point from something else if it hadn't been the UK.

The gig stuff RTB, I see that really taking a grip in London, about 5 years now. It's an extension of the sharing economy really- no one has 'ownership' of anything anymore. Co-living, co-working...they are all about the same thing - you physically lend your presence to somewhere or something for a smidge of time then you walk away and someone comes to remove the trace of you before another arrives to take your place
Bit like Stalinist communism but with different clothes, more make up and you get to have your own debt.

On the EU, 'adapt and survive' would seem a bit more sensible than hissy fits and flags.

I do think the EU would have changed, and I don't think the agreement that will eventually be reached will be sufficiently different to justify all that will be expended to reach it - but then I suppose that is why I voted remain - time will tell.

I have faith in a broad middle swathe.
And on that I must depart, school night.

I see things in a completely different light wrt Putin, LurkingHusband.

I think the view of Putin as some sort of omnipotent and omnipresent puppetmaster and paymaster of unstoppable neo fascist groups is a myth that gives far too much credit to him and provides a handy scapegoat for people who actually have a very undemocratic agenda of their own in Europe. To an observer based in the US, the demonisation of Putin himself has been extremely noticeable. He is a metaphorical effigy who is burned several times every day in the American media. Russia is the whipping boy in the plot of practically every action series on TV. Meanwhile, China has quietly bought US debt, but the implications of this are hard to explain to a generation of TV viewers who were brought up in America during the Cold War.

The influence of postwar emigrant groups from eastern bloc states on US policy in the pre and post Soviet era is significant. These emigrant communities frequently had their origins in pro-Nazi groups or even in full military members of the Nazi regime, such as the 14th Galician SS, a Ukrainian SS division that was evacuated wholesale from Italy at the end of WW2 to Britain, Canada and the US. I know some non-Banderite Ukrainian refugees (the grandparents of friends of my DS) who were stunned to find that Ukrainian community groups here were composed entirely of and run by people who had actually worn SS uniforms and done the work of the Third Reich. The grandfather spent time as a slave of the Third Reich, working on a German farm and in an armaments factory.

The pushing of NATO eastwards was a means of superimposing a US-financed and US-led structure that gave the US influence over European foreign policy in an era when the newly reunified Germany looked as if it would become the dominant force (after a period of adjustment) in economic terms and possibly capable of establishing its own independent foreign policy towards the Russian Federation and carrying Europe including the UK with it. US policy has always emphasised a division between Europe and Russia.

Looking at the eastern Ukraine situation as an Irish person, I see many similarities between that and the creation of the state of Northern Ireland. There is a population with a culture that identifies with that of its larger neighbour, many family relationships and linguistic and cultural ties, religious ties (to the Moscow Patriarchate), a shared historical perspective centered on resistance to Nazi invasion and enormous suffering under the Nazi regime. Compare to Northern Ireland's sectarian divide, strong allegiance to Britain on one side and pride in contribution to all of Britain's wars, shared historical anti-Catholic/European perspective, hence fear and loathing of the RC republic and refusal to countenance unification with the independent Republic. I can also see the Republic of Ireland's continuous support of the beleaguered nationalist/RC minority population in NI as mirroring the approach of the Russian Federation in complaining about the situation of ethnic Russian 'non-citizens' in the Baltic states.

House of Lords report synopsis -
www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/eu---foreign-affairs-defence-and-development-policy-sub-committee-c/news/eu-russia-report-publication/
'The Committee found that the Foreign Office has lost expertise and analytical capacity on Russia and the region, and that the UK and other Member States were unable to read events on the ground and offer an authoritative response. The Government needs to reconsider how it can regain these skills.'
The report speaks of 'sleepwalking' into the Ukrainian crisis. It's easy to be dominated by the US agenda in these circumstances.

Sanctions:
'The EU should renew and tighten them in the short term if there is no progress on the Minsk Protocol and the situation in eastern Ukraine continues to deteriorate. Under those circumstances, the EU should target President Putin’s inner circle and broaden sanctions to the financial sector. However, in the long term, sanctions are detrimental to the EU's interests and the progressive removal of sanctions should be part of the EU’s negotiating position.'
Now Russia only needs to wait it out. Brexit has actually weakened the position of all western parties relative to Russia because the UK will be forced to go cap in hand to Russia asking for a trading relationship. Meanwhile, Russia continues to make friendly noises towards China, and this is important in the face of Trump's thoughts on US-China relationships.

'Notwithstanding the differences between Russia’s political system and the EU’s values, and the rivalry that this engenders, the committee believes that the EU must strive to establish a set of ground rules within which the two sides can work to their mutual benefit in relation to the shared neighbourhood and wider international political and economic issues. This will require firmness and unity on the EU side, but also an understanding of legitimate Russian concerns.'
[Lord Tugendhat]

Report in long pdf form:
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201415/ldselect/ldeucom/115/115.pdf
The move from acknowledgement of and respect for Russia's 'near abroad' to the concept of 'Common Spaces' or the 'Shared Neighbourhood' (i.e. eastern Europe) should be noted.
This House of Lords report is a catalogue of major problems in perceptions, assumptions, expectations, in analysis, and in policy.

Shining out loud and clear from the document is the fact that the EU and individual member states have lost the capacity to understand Russia. What has replaced intelligent analysis is reliance on shibboleth, very visible in recent years in the US media as I noted. The US has regained the driving seat in the relationship with Russia. Voices like German business and industry leaders who seek closer ties to Russia, and who opposed sanctions, have been frozen out. The US had a free hand to impose regime change in Kiev, which it accomplished, hand picking the successor to the elected president ('Yats' Yatseniuk).
www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 (Transcript of eavesdroped phone call between Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt, US Ambassador to Kiev)
Trump's election has been greeted very appropriately by Merkel. I think Germany will start making friendlier noises in Russia's direction now.

Paragraph 107, 108
Wrt Russia's continued insistence that assurances regarding NATO were disregarded:
'.. it is asserted that the western powers pledged that NATO would extend no further east. This promise was broken by three rounds of further enlargement, adding 12 eastern European countries to the Alliance. Sir Rodric Braithwaite GCMG, former British Ambassador to the Soviet Union and Russia, informed us that assurances were given in 1990 by the US (James Baker, US Secretary of State) and Germany (Helmut Kohl, German Chancellor), and in 1991 on behalf of the UK (by the then Prime Minister, John Major, and the British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd) and France (by French President Francois Mitterrand). Sir Rodric Braithwaite said that this “factual record has not been successfully challenged in the West.”131
Former US Defence Secretary Robert McNamara has also averred that the US “pledged never to expand NATO eastward if Moscow would agree to the unification of Germany."

This is disputed. The dispute rings a little hollow:
'Sir Andrew Wood GCMG, former British Ambassador to Russia and Associate Fellow of the Russia and Eurasia Programme, Chatham House, said that such a promise “was never asked for and never put down in writing. In any case, even if it had been—which it was not—it would be invalid; you cannot bind the future.”136 The Minister for Europe said that “NATO has carried out enlargement in a transparent way communicating with Russia through such fora as the Permanent Joint Council” and furthermore, “sovereign states have the right to decide their own security policy and that no one country should have a veto over those choices.”'

This looks to me like ex post facto fudging of the issue, with the EU and western European NATO members being carried along by American policy plus pressure from eastern European states that the US made strong overtures to. The US has divided and conquered.
Nothing was written?
The future can't be bound?

On the "gig economy", I entirely agree with what sapphire posted:

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.

My husband is a freelancer along these lines, as are a few people I know. Critically, most of them are able to survive the lean times because they have assets (eg a UK property rented out) or a high-earning partner in permanent employment (ie me, in my DH's case). If you have neither, you are in a horrible position of having to take every scrap that is thrown to you. My DH's business works because he can pick and choose and only take the well-paid "gigs" - his income is nice to have, but the children will still eat if he doesn't earn.

It was an extraordinary intervention by Damien Green - if Labour had any balls (they don't) they would be all over it. I am continually astonished that anyone can continue to support Corbyn's labour, even though I know the Corbynites are out there because there are quite a few on my FB timeline.

RTB How do Remainers feel about a comprehensively restructured EU, as outlined in your post above? Are closed borders and immigration controls acceptable or do you think this spoils the current set up?

Sarkozy is a wolf in lamb's clothing. I honestly fear that if he is the right wing candidate, we hand the presidency to Le Pen. I cannot believe that left wing voters will vote for Sarkozy; they will stay home. They might grit their teeth and vote for a centre right politician like Juppé but given a choice between hard right and even harder right ....

RTB How do Remainers feel about a comprehensively restructured EU, as outlined in your post above? Are closed borders and immigration controls acceptable or do you think this spoils the current set up?

Personally I'm fairly neutral on FOM but the benefits outweigh the perceived cons. I think there are some massive issues - Schengen is one within Europe. However most of the issues we see bandied here about like benefits/nhs/etc could be easily solved if our own government actually used their rights to remove people who aren't supporting themselves.

I'd positively welcome the EU evolving itself, everything has to grow and adapt. But if this really was all about immigration I'd far rather the government stopped this shit show and invested some of those billions into solving immigration problems that are within their own abilities.

www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/38360-trump-in-the-white-house-an-interview-with-noam-chomsky
An interview with Noam Chomsky on Trump, with references to Brexit, and speculation about Europe distancing itself from both the UK and US in foreign policy.

Isn't the "gig economy" pretty much the Handy model? A core staff of well paid senior management supported by specialist outside contractors (professional / technical) and temporary or part-time help. The specialist contractors bear the risk of job insecurity, and it's really not great for the temporary staff and part-timers - no career progression or job security.

Did anyone watch the "Timeshift" a few weeks ago, about the lost world of Britains docks - and dockers ?

Before containers, dockers all turned up into a big building where the days work was doled out by the gangmasters. If you've ever seen a cattle market, imagine that - but bigger.

It was a system open to abuse, didn't guarantee work, and favoured the employers.

Somehow that is the picture I get in my head when I hear the phrase "gig economy".

Everyone witters on about steel, and coal communities being devastated. It's worth bearing in mind the first to go was the port and dock communities - and how quickly. Less than a decade really. All gone. Or rather all turned into luxury waterside penthouse flats with a spectacular view of the river, and your own private jetty.

Lurking I have just read your post in full. Really good writing and I feel the same :( I thought Brexit and Trump would happen and I am so afraid every day.

mathanxiety
CeciledeVolanges

I feel I have to point out my post of Wed 16-Nov-16 16:16:00 was actually a copy'n'paste from the link in the head of the post. Any credit is due the author (who I happen to think has a point).

Informal: Absolutely. Its labyrinthian. Every cafe is full of people on laptops, buying one coffee an hour, instead of in company provided offices. So the cafe owner provides. The coffees will be a work related expense and way down the line reduce the tax take, instead of provided by the employer. There won't be in work benefits or pensions so where needed these will be topped up/provided by the state, instead of the employer. Its a win win for big business before we even go into their convoluted tax arrangements.

Lurking: And many of those waterside flats are empty, held as investments.

Lurking: And many of those waterside flats are empty, held as investments.

That said, one of the nicer days out in the UK - especially if you're more central - is a day out around Liverpools dockside. The museum and art gallery, and connection to the L1 precinct. It's a bit conflicting really.

(I can't spend too long in Liverpool. Apropos another thread, it takes about 2 hours, and I start hitting the "t"s and "r". 4 hours, and people are asking me for directions !)