I try not to overstate things. I am aware that some might not agree with that claim, but I genuinely try to keep things in proportion; or at least, in the proportion that I see them in.
That said, tomorrow is one heck of a day for the future of the UK. The government is, in an action that shows their complete contempt for the democratic process, bringing all 15 of the House of Lords amendments to the bill paving the way for Brexit from the European Union to the Commons in a single day. In the process they do four things.
First, they deliberately limit debate on the most important issues in UK politics at present. So much for ' bringing back control'.
Second, as those with things to say get more and more frustrated as the day progresses (and that is inevitable) the government will increasingly lose goodwill, so the chance of winning its votes.
Third, if the government does lose votes then the future direction of Brexit, and indeed the government itself, is open to question.
And, of course, they could win. Which means it is likely we will Brexit, and quite possibly hard Brexit. And as we now know, that will cause untold harm to the UK for generations to come.
None of that overstates anything: whatever happens this week is monumental for Britain.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I think the determination to achieve a ‘hard Brexit’ has been the purpose of a large swathe of, certainly the loudest, and perhaps a numerically larger proportion of, this dysfunctional May Government than many understand. The measure of this is not what is said – but how little has been done for Britain to be prepared for anything at all. Currently we are totally unprepared for virtually anything the morning after exit. I do not think the hard-Brexit element cares much (or understands) the real consequences. They believe they can thrive in the chaos.
I agree: I think they think they’re alright and ‘sod the rest’
Why assume the hard Brexit supporters are malevolent? Where there is chaos the outcome cannot be guaranteed and for these politicians it could mean their nightmare, a Corbyn government. More plausible is that there has been no planning because the expectation is that an agreement will be reached which does not require new infrastructure. Whatever we hear is for public consumption and is likely to be a game of charades. Most likely the UK will agree to whatever the EU finally offers. Of course a hard Brexit may occur but this would be an accident not the intention.
Go and read Naomi Klein
Or to put it in simple terms; nobody has the slightest idea what they are doing. That sounds about right: Britain today.
there is no debate anymore. The british people voted to leave the EU. The government is facilitating this. The EU are working against the people of the UK in trying to stop the UK leaving like bullies in a school yard.
Anyway its no longer relevant and the UK will not leave the EU, against the will of the people. The new editor of the Daily Mail is against brexit. Its all over we wont leave. Now how will society cope with our government ignoring the will of the people.
What is your argument?
The argument is that brexit wont happen because the daily mail is moving away from pro brexit. the public will lose even more trust when they realise they have been lied to by the politicians.
I agree
But it’s right not to do it, nonetheless
There is a clear step plan for remaining in the EU without defying the will of the people:
1. November – negotiations between the UK and the EU will conclude and the “deal” will be agreed.
2. December – Parliament debates and decides on the agreed deal – a simple yes or no, deal or no deal, decision.
3. January – the EU unconditionally announces that the UK may withdraw its Article 50 notice at any time before the 2-year deadline (29 March?), in which case everything goes back to how it was before this all kicked off..
4. February – a people’s vote (you could call it a referendum but people are sick of referenda so let’s call it something else) is held and the public decide between (a) leaving on a clearly defined basis that has been decided by Parliament, not the jibberish that was put out in the run up to the 2016 referendum and (b) staying as we were.
5. Following a landslide decision, the Article 50 notice is withdrawn.
Simples!
If only
Brexit is not the “will of the people” and its disingenuous to suggest otherwise http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been/
George Kerevan, ex SNP MP, has a contrarian take on May & Brexit, in The National, and thinks there’s a kind of “method” in her madness. Doesn’t look like it though, but can they really be as stupid and disorganised as they appear?
http://www.thenational.scot/news/16281356.May_is_smarter_than_you_think_____and_that_s_bad_news_for_Scotland/
Yes, they can be as bad as they look
Theresa May as Machiavelli? The problem with that adventurous interpretation of politics (which, with all due respect looks ‘prima facie’ implausible), is that the thin foothold on office the Conservatives still hold, is to a significant degree in the hands of the Labour Party. Why is Theresa May still in office? Ask Jeremy Corbyn.
The major Westminster political parties, as currently and foreseeably aligned politically, no longer represent the UK public’s political alignment on the big political issues; the capacity of sub-party interests even to consolidate around agreed, temporary majority interests or purposes, has effectively collapsed; in both major parties.
Machiavelli?
“The worst that can happen to a prince when the people are hostile is for him to be deserted; but from the nobles [the 1%], if hostile, he has to fear not only desertion but even active opposition. The nobles have more foresight and are more astute, they always act in time to serve their interests, and they take sides with the one whom they expect to win” (‘The Prince’, Sect. IX)
That Machiavelli? That will probably work; but for whom?
We seem to be accumulating historic ‘Moments’. First ‘Gramsci’; then ‘Minsky’ and now ‘Paulos’ (“uncertainty is the only certainty there is …”.) Or maybe it should be ‘Heisenberg’. 😉
John D – I guess they’re called moments because they tend not to last very long.
I suspect Brexit will not be a moment quickly lost in time
John D – As an after thought, if the Brexiteers get what they want, they have their Cadbury moment.
Hmmm. I believe that you are understating it. For me, this is the day the last vestiges – and I do mean vestiges – of our “democracy” disappear. After this, it is the streets. Unless the government falls.