good_1da

Cliff notes on the thread: Hot mess Inside a dumpster fire Inside a train wreck

Two completely different things... EU is a political project which we have withdrawn from. Europe is a continent in the northern hemisphere which the UK is still very much a part of. Britain will continue to trade and cooperate with other countries including those in the EU. Nobody is banging on about imperialism and empire, except ardent remainers who use it as a tactic of negative framing. I will try to make this my last post.

The Leave side of the argument was concerned with the bigger picture. The EU was on a path to ever closer union. The crises in the Eurozone had expedited this process. The EU was now encouraging the Eurozone to integrate further - as most member states accepted that it must. And the EU does not recognise itself as a union with multiple currencies. Britain was no longer at the inner core and was moving at a different speed and to a different destination to other members. The UK was becoming an increasingly marginal and peripheral player. As demonstrated by David Cameron's failed attempts to get substantive treaty changes back in 2016. And also demonstrated that change from within was unlikely. Given this reality, Leavers came to the conclusion that a withdrawal from the EU was necessary. With the EU no longer having a say in UK Law-making and a return to a bilateral relationship. As I say, a Remainer saying, "I have a strong attachment to the EU, and I believe in the European project" is not wrong, its just a different perspective. And not one I personally share. I will make this my last post also.

Why is the idea of UK laws being made in the UK so strange to you? We have our own Parliaments and Assemblies for the purpose of law-making, why do we need another layer of bureaucracy? Australia, Canada, New Zealand, USA, etc, do perfectly fine, they don't have other countries playing a role in their law-making yet they still have trade agreements and cooperate with other countries.

In the words of writer Dominic Sandbrook (who voted remain)... "As for my fellow Remainers - well, where do you start? Snobbish, sneering, risibly prey to conspiracy theories, many ardent Remainers made complete fools of themselves. They didn’t try to understand their fellow Britons, and refused to accept defeat with good grace. And if they had succeeded in subverting the referendum, as they hoped, they would have dealt our democracy a very heavy blow."

I realize there is plenty of scorn and derision around. The reason I am more optimistic than some, is the opportunity English devolution represents for an area like the North-East. The region now has directly elected Mayors with devolved powers and a budget for Transport, Infrastructure, Skills and Jobs. This has helped to address the demographic deficit that was long felt in the North after Scottish devolution in the 90s. My area elected a Mayor who campaigned to buy back the local airport which was about to be lost for housing We now have an investment plan for the area... Buy back the local airport.....completed (now 75% owned by the combined authority) Upgrade of airport............on going Modernise the railway station to include first link to London in decades.......on going The compulsory purchase of the defunct steel works site from Thai banks........completed Investment to clean up the site after 100+ years of steel making.......on going Investment in transport infrastructure around the site.......on going A Freeport........to be decided. The result will be a very large plot of land for new businesses and new jobs in green energy, renewables, offshore wind-farm production, etc. As well as upgrades to key transport links. I think this approach represents a better way forward. To move away from centralised Westminster decision making and the two party system that form of governance has tended to favour.

I often hear people making this kind of linkage...that somehow Brexit and Trump is all part of some shared ideology...it is a complete falsehood. Opinion poll after opinion poll has shown the vast majority of leavers do not have the time for an anti-democrat like Donald Trump and would never have voted for him had they had the chance. A recent poll taken during the Biden-Trump election showed not a single UK constituency would vote for Donald Trump. Trump is seen by the vast majority of the British public for what he is, a crazy guy completely unfit for high office. https://www.politico.eu/article/not-a-single-uk-constituency-would-vote-for-donald-trump-poll/

I used the word 'presume' rather than another because I was just trying to soften the language and dial down the rhetoric a bit. I didn't want everyone getting annoyed at each other. I appreciate your considered responses to the thread.

I presume the proposed legislation would still have to be debated and passed through the UK parliament. So, our directly elected MPs would still have political authority to scrutinise and amend the legislation. But I do think the civil service and its powers to prepare legislation should receive more coverage on TV and in the press. Their role is far more important than is generally assumed.

An example of the negative framing and caricature of leavers I was talking about. An example of the long-standing class condescension of the liberal intelligentsia I was talking about. Perhaps this is why nobody make films or documentaries about the working classes any more. A tradition Britain once had a pound history of. The working classes have now been airbrushed out of existence by elites who prefer to fixate on identity politics instead.

The UK rejected a form of governance I profoundly dislike. That is the fundamental benefit for me. I just believe that government at all levels should be as directly elected as possible. Maintaining the important connection between the people and those who represent them. And, that we must have a chance to unelect our representatives when they don't meet our expectations. IMHO the EU does not meet these criteria. Most obvious example, the EU Commission President and the Commissioners are not directly elected even though they have powers to propose legislation that can be binding in every country. And, there is no direct way to vote them out. In the UK, we already have many types of democratic and directly elected government... UK Parliament (House of Commons, House of Lords) Scottish Parliament National Assembly for Wales Northern Ireland Assembly Combined Authority Majors/Metro Majors Executive Mayors Councillors on Local Councils Police and Crime Commissioners That is a hell of a lot of layers. With endless debating and investigative work of committees to scrutinise decisions. It’s not perfect, but it is about as transparent and representative as it gets. IMO it is quite enough government for any nation. I am not trying to convince Andrew or anyone else of the merits of Leaving the EU or the strategic reasons why people voted Tory in 2019. I am simply pointing out that the negative framing of leavers (e.g led by crooks, or racists harking back to empire) is typical of a long-standing class condescension by the liberal intelligentsia. It is also a convenient way for these liberal elites to avoid addressing real world challenges and the role their interests play in them. e.g UK population growth (expected to reach 71+ million by 2030).

Regarding the visa situation, I agree with you 100%. My understanding is the EU-UK trade agreement that was signed is a fairly slim document. And the fine detail is pretty sparse. I am sure the detail will be revisited many times by our current and future UK governments in partnership with the EU. And, many of the unintended consequences, anolomlies and absurdities that emerge will be fixed. As for our current government, I don't share your pessimistic view that we are on the road totalitarianism. The current Conservative government are kept in check by the fact that they know their majority was leant. This is unique position. If they cannot deliver the levelling up agenda (and by that I mean more investment directed into improverished areas) then they will lose those seats the next time round.

You propose a star chamber of 'excellent minds' to make the right decisions on our behalf. To me this such a scary concept. It's the road totalitarianism. At what pont will the 'excellent minds' decide regular people can't be trusted with any decisions? Who would decide what an 'excellent mind' was or is? Who would watch over these superiour beings with their 'excellent minds?' What a chilling, Orwellian, nightmarish, dystopian world that would be.

The EU is a capitilist club. it does not exist separate from capitilism. It was originally created in the cold war to revive the pre-war industrial monopolies of France, Germany, and Belgium. And, in that way it continues to be a success. Neoliberalism is hardwired into it. It now has deep intergration with American captilism. You are falling for the con trick, the pretense that the EU is somehow progressive. And, all those MEPs in the European Parliament have no power to affect even minimal changes in the make up and functioning of the EU. The SSI plant was not a dying plant as you say. It had just had 2 billion investment from Thai banks. It was profitable again. Then China dumped a load of steel to take out its competitors which hammered world steel prices. The SSI plant wanted to temporarily close, but keep the furnace running until prices stabilised. Once the furnace is out it would be over. Temporary nationalisation. A few million pounds to save an important strategic UK industry. EU state aid rules wouldn't allow it. Anyway, I remain optimistic for the future. Despite the spanner thrown by the pandemic. I hope the UK will now drive to be more self sufficient in goods and clean energy, and support local suppliers. Endlessly long supply chains are an environmental disaster. Hopefully our desperate attempts to obtain PPE and ventilators have taught us a lesson. And, I believe in 10 years time leaving the EU will be seen in a similar way to not joining the single currency. That, on balance, we made the right decision.

I can't agree with this point. Sure, for investors in Build-to-Let tower blocks in London or Manchester its been a profitable few decades. Indeed Tony Blair and his family have done very well acquiring Buy-to-Lets in Greater Manchester. But the majority of the country booming during the Blair-Brown era, really??? It ended with a massive financial crisis. The fact is, many UK towns have been on there knees for decades...high poverty rates, low life expectancy...cultural wastelands. Watch 'I, Daniel Blake' or a documentary series like 'The Mighty Redcar' to get a truer picture of the Britain that many experience on a daily basis. The closure of the giant SSI Steel plant effected many I know. 3000+ jobs lost because EU state aid rules prevented it from being saved. IMHO EU-city-centric thinking was never going to address the problems and a reboot was necessary. I'm guessing you wanted the status quo. But was that really an option? The EU is ever changing. Integration, fiscal and political ever deepening. EU politicians like Guy Verhofstadt have written essays about total political integration being the final destination. Eventually local parliaments become museums, nation flags packed away, our diverse languages, cultures and traditions homogenised. The very things that make Europe special gone forever. That's the advantage to me of leaving the EU. To avoid the ghost of Christmas future. Bring democracy home. All future decisions taken by the people we elect. Democracy directly accountable and as local as possible. Note, all the Conservative MPs elected in NE in 2019 were local born people. The NE grew tired of Labour parachuting lawyers into safe Labour seats. For me, leaving the EU was just the start in pursuing a fairer less London-city-centric country. And, the cheapest and probably most useful to the rest of the World is the Oxford one. Which I assume was developed by people born in the UK, EU and the rest of the world.