What did people write about during the so-called ‘phoney-war'? I do not know. I have not checked. But I bet there was a mighty lot of posturing.
And then what did they write about when Blitzkrieg began? Did it matter? It was too late to write about things by then: the ghastliness of reality was, I suspect, all consuming.
I feel like we are in a phoney-war. We know May is set on a path. We know she will fail. We know chaos will ensue. I just wish someone had a plan for the chaos.
This is a task that most especially falls to the Opposition. It is their job to have a plan when the government. For all practical purposes it is their only job. And they are failing at it.
There are only four possible outcomes to this situation. The obvious ones are hard Brexit, May's deal and Remain. The fourth might be a variation on Norway, even now. But that's it at most.
So Labour have to decide. They reject hard Brexit. They reject May's deal. So what then? Who knows? They will not say. Nor will they say how they might get anywhere. There is no plan.
Next weekend we may have a debate between Corbyn and May, on television.
She is deluded. She will argue her plan can work when it is dead in the water.
He is deluded enough to think he can either force an election or have Labour's six points agreed by the EU. Neither is likely. The second is impossible.
Both are deluded enough to think theirs are the opinions that matter. Actually, there are a whole range more views that people would like to hear. That's because they'd like to think there are politicians without delusions in the UK.
That might be a wildly optimistic aspiration. But I suspect I am not alone in sharing it.
What we know is that after years of failed policy, paper waving, false assurance and failed Opposition we have reached the point were the existing political hierarchy has collectively failed us. If faced with the choice ‘Corbyn or May' I would have considerable difficulty choosing either. And Cable is no alternative.
The time for reform has arrived.
But are we prepared for what might come next? I doubt it. And yet the need for a new politics of sustainable possibility for all has never been greater. And we may suffer greatly for its absence. Now is still the time to talk. Really talk, that is. But our two ma8n party leaders won't.
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 really don’t understand this line about Labour not having a plan. It seems clear to me that Labour are moving towards a Norway+ (ie single market & customs union) position at a speed that allows them to pull the majority of the leave supporting Labour voters with them. They want to be the next government so they have to move slowly and cautiously. At present the polls show their support waning as they move towards a softer brexit position, which doesn’t really justify them moving any faster.
No it is not at all clear that is where they are heading – unless Stephen Kinnock is actually leading
Labour are just as divided on Brexit as the Tories are – perhaps more so. The contradictions and inconsistencies shown by senior shadow cabinet members, is shockingly incompetent and indicates they have no unified coherent policy to speak of.
Taking a remain stance supported by half the voting population, is a gift the Labour party – if grasped – would almost certainly guarantee victory in a general election. They would have to get rid of the unelectable Corbyn first, of course.
The cynic in me seriously doubts Labour want to be in government at the moment.
Labour is certainly not ready for government at the moment
Agreed.
Rawnsley in today’s Observer says that the game now in BREXIT is ‘speed chess’ and that Labour had better be ready to play.
This one is going to go right down to the wire because the obvious things to do is to stop BREXIT. Yes – that’s right folks just stop it. But no one wants to say it. So I will (I know – big deal).
All we can do now is wait until common sense prevails or we leave/no deal/stay. Your/our instinct to run the other way is strong.
But run where to?
We must stand and watch for now.
Essentially though I would recommend that you vote for Corbyn. Because he is the lesser of both evils until such a time a truly courageous political entity comes into play. The Tories are still destroying this country whist we all argue about BREXIT. Let’s not forget that.
Stopping it is the really logical thing to do
So our leaders are not doing it
And they wonder why people do not trust them
I imagine neither want to be the one accused of precipitating the inevitable ensuing civic disorder.
I take the point about the lesser of two evils.
But then Corbyn was the very first to call for Article 50 to be declared, after a life time of expressed dislike for the EU (Euroscepticism is far too mild a description for his views). It will take a lot to convince me and I suspect many others that Corbyn in power would not promptly proceed with a Brexit pretty much as hard as any other Brexiter. He’s made a point of not changing his mind over the years – a virtue even.
But there are others around him who would be seen very differently… I just can’t see how that change might will happen. Which is bad news for both Britain and Labour.
Agreed
This evening the Big Brexiteers (Tory) seem to have found the key to getting May’s Deal accepted by The Commons. Namely aerate the threat if the Deal is killed there must then be the choice of No Deal or No Brexit. I suppose that should bring enough MP votes to accept The Deal. The secondary objective being to avoid at all costs a new referendum while polls look like moving toward Remain.
A couple of weeks ago you seemed to think the May’s plan met Labour’s Six Points. I’m nowhere near as pessimistic as you about this thing and I think Labour is keeping its powder dry. Keir Starmer has far more about him than you seem to credit. He’s quietly steered the party his way. Don’t despair.
I am depairing
And a comment made 30 minutes after an announcement is a reaction, not informed comment
Wise to recall that
I wonder what the ‘+’ sign after Norway is supposed to imply.
I suspect it to be meaningless.
Rather like the ‘Plus’ in ‘Jobcentre Plus’. On that signage ‘Tesco Plus’ would be a supermarket with empty shelves.
‘Norway +’ is likely to be Norway without any of the advantages of living in a country with social policies.
And no fjords either.
I suspect that you are right Andy.
The ‘+’ in this case can only mean something that will take something away from the British people. We hear a lot about how the current deal leaves us somehow at the mercy of the EU when in fact the British people are more at the mercy of their own sodding Government under this deal.
It’s the same Government that has brought us austerity, Universal Credit and a nation (?) at each other’s throats.
A ‘+’ meaning a minus? Oh yes! This what the modern Tories are all about.
If there was only one topic (Brexit) on which to choose a government, your stance might hold a little bit of water, Richard. But when one takes into account the incompetent and cruel policies of this government and its immediate predecessors your ‘difficulty’ is easily resolved, vote Labour. One of the major problems with the Brexit shambles is that plenty of serious failings by the Tories are going more or less unreported – even Ian Hislop said so.
But Labour could be so much better than the limited vision it has offered so far
That is what I am saying
At present I don’t think anyone – either in the Tory or the Labour Party – wants to lead the country. Not as things are. Not even – don’t laugh! – Theresa May!
It’s probably too soon for any Labour politician to say ‘we must Remain,’ but surely there will be one. Even if he (or she) isn’t well-known at present – that is, if Labour survive as a political party after the coming crisis.
And whether or not we’re looking at a ‘gilet jaune’ moment before Brexit or after is anyone’s guess. But it’s coming.
Some random, self-indulgent observations which don’t add anything to the debate.
With so many variables and contradictions it’s anyone’s guess as to how it will eventually pan out – say over the next 5-7 years. So why do we, ‘innocent bystanders’, keep on reacting to the latest news snippet? It’s become something of an addiction or at least a game. And it’s starting to resemble the medieval ‘angels & pinhead’ debate.
As with Trump, Brexit is proving to be a boon for the media & the chattering classes (your truly included). Some people must be making a fist-full of cash out of it.
Not usually a big fan of SWL but I rather liked his snake oil analogy (which many will already have seen): “You have been feeling unwell for some time. Someone suggests you take some snake oil that they say will make you feel much better. Another person, who happens to be a doctor, says snake oil will do you harm and your ills have other causes that cannot be fixed quickly. You really want your problems cured soon. A third, wise person tells you to compromise: try the snake oil but with half the recommended dose. A compromise seems sensible, so that is what you do. Your temperature soars to 104 and you end up in A&E.” (https://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2018/11/brexit-of-course-everyone-hates.html).
Too late now but, before charging off into the unknown like some latter day Don Quixote, Cameron & cronies could’ve learned something from Quebec’s 1980 ‘Neverendum Referendum’ (https://ahua.ac.uk/neverendum-referendum) and even more from the Swiss (https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/directdemocracy/swiss-criticism_-the-brexit-vote-wasn-t-direct-democracy—it-was-drivel-/44155278).
I’m now Brexited-out. Barista, un Marocchino per favore.
Make mine an Americano
Large….
Black
No sugar
*The time for reform has arrived.*
I can’t help thinking here of the Extinction Rebellion, the international movement who have been protesting in London against climate breakdown.
They believe it is necessary to replace our failed democracy with a Citizen’s Assembly chosen by sortition (https://www.sortitionfoundation.org/).
It seems unlikely that they will succeed in this aim, and yet it also seems that unless they do succeed, mankind is unlikely to avoid societal breakdown and subsequent extinction, given the absolute urgency of the climate problem and the clear inability of politicians to take appropriate action.
What will come next will be determined by those who fight for it hardest. I’m ready 🙂 We should reflect too upon the Paris riots and that this dissatisfaction with the political classes is not a situation limited to the UK.
75,000 fuel tax protesters in France this weekend.
75,000 climate change protesters in Brussels today.
All have been ignored by the political class.
They haven’t done any real damage. Try smashing up the City, stop it from functioning for a few days, and see if that has an effect.
Our two main party leaders are in ruts, blinkers on. Mulish. They do not lead. It’s a right mess for all to see, surely?
It seems May has managed to convince herself, and herself alone, that what she’s doing is ‘right for the country’.
Corbyn has managed to convince the few but not the many that his waiting game is clever.
I have no way of judging their true intellectual ability, as they have shown little evidence of that publicly so far.
I have, however, been watching the uncharismatic and rather introverted Starmer. He can think, plan and explain. Not a slogan man, not a robot…we’ll see.
Le Crunch is coming, and it will be a battle between a parrot and a fox.
Not sure I’ll want to watch something as predictably dull as that.
But we definitely do not want a Gilets Jaunes moment.
Mostly disorganised, naive, manipulated, unfocused, and chaotic as a result.
Out of chaos comes order? Why not try ordering chaos first. Less painful.
The best person for the job is to be found in Scotland, and is not a member of the Westminster parliament. Nor does she wish to be. Nicola Sturgeon is undoubtedly the leading UK politician. She has two plans: remain in the EU or join EFTA, and Scottish Independence. Like most people in Scotland, there is no dislike of the English [I’m English], but the Westminster parliament is not working for the people of Scotland, or currently even the UK. If the people of England wish to Brexit that is their choice, which we respect. We don’t, so please can we be respected by the English government.
Robert Mitchell says:
“The best person for the job is to be found in Scotland,….”
I agree with the sentiment, Robert, but I don’t think Nicola would thank you for the poisoned chalice, and I don’t think she’d be able to do much against the wall of blockheads in Westminster.
Andy Crow wrote: “I don’t think Nicola would thank you for the poisoned chalice..” Quite right, Andy, but then nobody in his/her right mind would fancy that poisoned chalice, given the monumental screw-up that has evolved over the last two years of virtual stasis at Westminster. I’m sure armies of despairing civil servants have been working their butts off trying to convert fanciful and often contradictory political aims into comprehensible policy documents fit for the purpose of negotiations. However their political “masters” have created a total bourach, thereby demonstrating their own utter incompetence and unfitness to hold office.
Sturgeon doesn’t hold a seat at Westminster, so she’s ineligible for any role there, and she’s got her own fish to fry. In particular, she’s keeping her powder dry (sorry about all these cliched metaphors!) waiting for the right moment to throw Scottish Independence into the mix. The timing of that will be crucial as will be the tactics employed to set that particular ball rolling (Oh Christ, more metaphors!).
Keep them rolling…..
I’ve been reading a book called ‘Mechanisms of Hope: Maintaining the Dream of the Rational Organisation’ by Nils Brunsson (2006, Copenhagen Business School Press) – I think he is Swedish. It’s one of those dense books that all of sudden presents one with oases of clarity as you read through (he calls change a battle between principle and practice for example).
Anyhow, Brunsson opines that ‘Hope gives rise to stability’. If we look at the rather chaotic place we find ourselves in, one could only come to the conclusion using Brunssons logic that BREXIT arose because a large part of the population had ran out of hope. I think that is true. The prospect of some sort of change to the Leavers probably made them hope that their lives would be better. Those who wanted Remain hoped for no change and stability.
Whatever emerges after BREXIT (or even if it is stopped) the only way this country can be healed in my view Richard is to utilise many of your ideas (and those of significant others) in order to put hope back into our society. I think that you/they have the answers. We/you/they just need the chance to have a fair crack at trying them to see if they are the answers .
Brunsson’s thesis also takes on rationality and how one can be try to be rational in a very irrational and emotionally driven world. Brunsson says that the biggest challenge is to keep Hope ‘afloat in the face of discouraging experience’. Sometimes he says, you have to use irrationality to support rationality.
Anyhow.
For me this means that no matter how much May or Corbyn mess this up, the Hopes we speak of here still exist and there is much to look forward to in seeing them realised despite them.
I agree, we need hope, but the trouble is, do we all hope for the same things? It seems not.
Aspirations and hopes appear to be more eclectic than ever, divisions are greater than ever.
When you hear some people say that they don’t mind being a little poorer after Brexit so long as they get their ‘country back and foreigners out’, what kind of hope is this?
Most people have sensible aspirations, I know, but there’s this significant trend now which was seeded by Farage & Co. with May’s blessing.
It is all the more frightening as it isn’t isolated in Europe. It’s an old recycled seed, but it’ll never die because greed and abuse of power never will.
It lies dormant when democracy works reasonably well, economic conditions are reasonably fair, justice is seen to be done, institutions are mostly trusted.
Right now, all of those need a massive reboot.
These far right forces all over know that despair is their seeding ground, poverty and misery their fertiliser, and a democracy deficit their greenhouse.
They need to keep that despair and misery intact in reality, and promise milk and honey in theory.
They can only manage to do that through emotional discourse and suppressed rational thinking at the same time.
Why are they taking hold so well now?
So much scholarly analysis is being written about it, it should reach ground level, our politicians’ level, soon now surely?
Theories will give ground to practical methods, ideas, to overturn this mess? Any time now? The house is smouldering, time to get the hoses out.
Supporting Labour just now is a bit like booking a Ryanair flight. It says it is going where you want to go. But you have to wonder is it capable of getting you there.
🙂
Richard – you wonder what might come next.
Bear with me – my 97 year old mother in law died a couple of weeks ago. A traditional Tory but tolerant and voted Remain. Amongst her stuff we found a photo from when she went on a school exchange to Germany. A lower middle class girl going to stay with a similar German family. In the photo they are all on the beach and in the foreground is a sandcastle which has a flag on it. A swastika.
We know what came next. Those middle class families accepted an ideology and became complicit in the slaughter of millions in camps and a world war. I’m with Matthew Ancona in the Observer today. We should call out the racism that has been legitimised and exploited by Brexit. That’s not a reason in any way whatsoever to ignore the drivers of poverty, and yes there are parallels with the poverty and policies of the 30s. But that does not make the xenophobia and racism acceptable or justifiable. We know where it leads and the UK, England in particular are sliding steadily downhill.
I am reflecting on that article
His dislike of the Tory government from one who is naturally a Tory is quite significant
I’m in complete agreement with Richard. I wish I could raise objections or see a way out. I’ll vote remain if we get another chance, but this won’t do much to resolve deep and ancient problems.
Agreed
As I read Richard’s post, the issue at hand is not Brexit, it is the dysfunctional nature of the UK – political, constitutional, economic and in other ways. It does not seem likely that the institutions and structures of the past are up to the challenges confronting us – some of them specific to the UK such as still having delusions of grandeur, and some of them shared such as climate chaos and the rise of the regulatory estate with transnational influence (best exemplified by the EU’s Single Market). The fact that the UK can spend several years doing basically nothing but argue about hypotheticals, with so many pressing social and economic problems at hand, tells you the current political setup has run its course. Even if, as seems entirely possible now, Brexit is cancelled, this will not cause the political system to suddenly be running smoothly again, even if it helps the economy somewhat. We need a game-changing reset such as proportional representation, or dissolution of the Union, to jolt the system into a new state.
Nigel Goddard says:
” We need a game-changing reset such as proportional representation, or dissolution of the Union, to jolt the system into a new state.”
Hmmm…. PR would certainly have been a welcome game changer. Perhaps it still will be one day, but when neither the government nor the opposition see it as anything other than a threat to their hegemony it’s not going to happen.
The game changer could prove to be another seismic collapse of the financial sector. I don’t see how that can be avoided from where we are now, particularly given there is no political will on either side of the Atlantic to reign-in the bankers and financiers.
The problem will be that there is not enough financial nous in the political class to do other than ask the financial sector how to fix the problem. We can rest assured they will offer somewhat similar impartial advice to the last time. 🙁
Dissolution of the Union is advancing nicely I think, thanks to the incompetent handling of the entire Brexit issue. England shall have her independence from her tedious ‘provinces’. It is surely only a matter of time (?) Or is that just wishful thinking?
Near inevitable I would say
What’s so evident in the UK at the moment is the lack of joined up thinking on the part of many. Recorded history reveals this is often the reason for for the collapse of empires and nations. I see the advent of Neoliberal ideology as the main culprit for this collapse in reasoning since very few seem to understand its true nature. It’s actually paradoxical or oxymoronic Libertarian Fascism in which there’s a great pretence in theory to unshackle you from the failings and constraints of government but in practice surreptitiously uses government to a very high degree to benefit a super-rich few! In other words it’s a stealth ideology that’s slipped under the radar
Robin
Thanks for that.
I think that what we have been seeing in the Tory party is a number of things.
1) The Lynton Crosby effect. I am damn sure his electioneering methods (which seem to have polarised society in Australia as our relations tell us) are to blame for this. Many Tories have put too much faith in winning rather than questioning the deeper consequences of the methods.
2) That Labour in the UK HAS been effective – even under Miliband and to certain extent Corbyn – because the Tories have had to resort to playing with right wing populism to win. However, it is a pact with the Devil as some in the Tory party now seem to realise.
3) I go back to a theme that we have discussed here before – namely that as of 2008 the neo-liberal orthodoxy that we have clung to well and truly died – the game is up and what the Tories are doing is actually fighting a desperate rear guard reactionary action to keep it going.
Your post suggests that you have at some point considered voting Tory.
Is that really the case?
Can’t see how it can be given what I’ve seen you write over the last 8 years or more since I’ve been following your work
No of course not
I was discussing the issue as most people would see it
I have voted for parties other than Labour
Just following up from above…………………………….
I think that Ancona makes a classic error in an otherwise very good piece.
When he talks of the effects of immigration being ‘marginal’ he is certainly not speaking as one of those at the margins! So how can he talk with any clarity about the issue?
We should be looking at what happens in those margins (lower skilled work forces) because I’m sure that is where the stories about the impact of immigration emerge (and I say ‘stories’ in a neutral sense). We should be concerned.
In customer service we were always told that if someone has a bad experience, they tell up to 10 other people who then each pass it on. If the problem with immigration is at the margins then we need to know more about what is really going there and then (if need be) what can we do about it.
If we don’t, the stories begin anyway and work their way into society where certain parties can make a meal out of them.
Do we really know what is going on concerning this issue? I remain unconvinced partly because the people who tend to write about it are the least likely to be affected.
Maybe Labour should think the unthinkable ,if only to avoid a General Election completely focused on Brexit, which wouldn’t necessarily go well for us ?
1) Agree to support the proposed deal which essentially means that there will be no change in anything until the end of 2020. What happens after 2020 is still subject to ongoing negotiations.
2) In return for supporting the deal Labour shoukd expect a place/ places on the negotiating team and should also insist on an emergency spending programme for the period of negotiations, to prop up public services and to crank up the transition to a no carbon economy ( as outlined in the Green Transition document ).
The above is unlikely to be agreed by the Prime Minister and what is likely to be her diminished team ( but who knows? ) . In the likely event that such an offer is rejected then Labour would participate in voting the deal down,on the basis that it has no confidence in the Tories negotiating a satisfactory long term deal on their own. Labour would be likely to defeat the deal in an uncomfortable alliance with Tory Brexiteers the SNP and angry Ulster Unionists, and attempt to fight the subsequent likely General Election on wider ground than simply ‘in’ or ‘out’ .
“This half-baked Brexit deal fails Labour’s six tests, will be a disaster for our country and puts jobs, right and living standards at risk”
The above is from a Momentum sponsored petition which demands that all Labour MPs vote against The PM’s Deal
How exactly would such a deal be a disaster?
This is The Guardian’s summary of the deal. Only the withdrawal agreement is legally binding . It contains three essential points :
1) The rights of EU nationals living in the UK , and of UK nationals living in the EU, are fully protected, up to the end of the transition period . Surely a good thing and one of the issues that remainers have highlighted as a major concern ?
2) A sum of money has been agreed, to cover outstanding obligations. Inevitable and proper surely ?
3) Northern Ireland will remain in the single market even if the rest of the UK eventually leaves, to protect the Good Friday Peace Agreement and having the consequence that the Northern Ireland border is likely to be open to EU nationals. This will make it extremely difficult for the UK to stop EU nationals entering the rest of the UK – undermining the ‘controlling immigration’ promise being made by Brexiteers. Is this / should this be a problem for Labour ?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/25/may-brexit-deal-explained-eu-withdrawal-agreement-trade-backstop-citizens-rights
The withdrawal agreement is permanent protection for EU nationals and UK expats up until the end of 2020 . What happens to future expats and future EU nationals is still subject to future negotiation. It was never expected that a full agreement for future relations and arrangements would be in place by March 2019. If Labour are pretending this is not the case then I fear we will lose credibility
What else do we need before the end of March, given that there isn’t going to be, and no-one expects, a full agreement to be in place ?The threadbare political statement is fairly irrelevant and doesn’t commit a future Labour government to anything .
Labour arguing for a 2nd ref in the hope of reversing Brexit is a coherent position although it would be politically awkward. What is far from coherent is an argument suggesting we can get a better withdrawal agreement and expecting to achieve this via a general election.
It would be far better if we had Labour leading the negotiation team instead of TM. She is unlikely to agree to a programme of spending on public services and climate change mitigation in return for Labour supporting her withdrawal agreement and she is likely to have to resign if she can’t get her withdrawal agreement through Parliament. If Labour has been seen to have behaved reasonably ( “ we can delay the final terms of the Brexit agreement but we can’t delay emergency spending on public services and climate change mitigation “) then it will be to our advantage and also the right thing to do. It might even resonate among the electorates elsewhere in the EU and open up the required debate about ‘ Another Europe is Possible ‘
As a first step perhaps Labour should be referencing the press release by the EU Commission which expresses the hope ( without providing any strategy ! ) that the EU can be carbon neutral by 2050. Not only might Labour say that it will commit to this target whether in the EU or not but that it is already developing plans to make such a transition, as set out in its Green Transformation document about which I have been so enthusiastic
The EU Press Release is here
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-6543_en.htm
Over 4000 people took part in a Twitter pole 42% of them thought a no deal Brexit meant we would stay in the EU. What hope do we have, should there be a people’s vote, when there’s this level of ignorance in the country.
According to Skwawbox these are Labour’s plans
https://skwawkbox.org/2018/11/29/the-brexit-deal-the-media-arent-telling-the-country-about/?fbclid=IwAR3jUK-jCevmDUEePSLHsQTvwwQTNk6AI5lfysRo1B8buXOlk6Hxqn-QJRo
Over 4000 people took part in a Twitter pole 42% of them thought a no deal Brexit meant we would stay in the EU. What hope do we have, should there be a people’s vote, when there’s this level of ignorance in the country. After two and a half years of negotiations this level of ignorance leaves my filled with despair.
https://skwawkbox.org/2018/11/29/the-brexit-deal-the-media-arent-telling-the-country-about/?fbclid=IwAR3jUK-jCevmDUEePSLHsQTvwwQTNk6AI5lfysRo1B8buXOlk6Hxqn-QJRo
I don’t understand why you list ‘Remain’ as an option.
It was rejected as an option in 2016.
Labour were rejected last yeat
It did not knock them off the ballot paper fotever
You need to learn about what democracy is – principally the right to change your minf
Clive says:
“I don’t understand why you list ‘Remain’ as an option.
It was rejected as an option in 2016.”
Yes, Clive, but this is no longer 2016 and the vacuous dreams of regaining control and sovereignty are clearly now hogwash, to anyone with half an eye. Theresa May’s only remaining ‘red line’ is the xenophobic, misplaced and mis-targeted aim of ending freedom of movement. This doesn’t even address the perceived problem of immigration, even if that was ever seriously a problem that couldn’t have been ameliorated by the UK government whilst in the EU.
Given the choice between an always quite unrealistic option of ‘No Deal’, and what is really so poor a deal as to be a ‘Bad Deal’, Remain becomes a very sensible option.
The only rational interpretation of ‘No Deal’ is that having failed miserably to improve the situation we should revert to where we were and consider what sort of future relationship would be practicable, and seek to negotiate a consensual arrangement across our own union and the EU.
The ‘people have spoken’ is the silliest thing imaginable for politicians to say, since they have clearly no idea what it was the people said.
Clive
If Brexit had had 70% of the vote maybe you’d have a case.
But you do know it was much closer than that – right?
Nothing definitive at all in my view.
And what about the lies that have been told, the internet subterfuge and the dodgy money funding Leave?
Do wake up Clive. There’s a good chap.
Where to start here Richard — I’m wondering if you’ve been taking tips from Margaret Hodge regarding how best to frame your arguments.
We all know Brexit is serious, but the government of this country is not just Brexit. At various points in the last 30 years it’s been the marketisation of the NHS, it’s been PFI, it’s been the sell off of our utilities, it’s been the culture of outsourcing, its been the promotion of Academy schools, its been the ‘hostile environment’ for immigrants, it’s been the light-touch regulation, it’s been the tax-abuse, its been the railway franchise system, its been the closure of Sure Start centres, it’s been the bedroom tax, its been the capping of benefits, it’s been the relentless, punitive (and all-too often fatal) attacks on the disabled…(can you see where I’m going here).
And for the rest of the world? It’s been the ransacking of the Russian economy, it’s been the bombing of Serbian TV stations, it’s been the murder by sanctions of half a million Iraqis, it’s been the subsequent slaughter of hundreds of thousands more in an illegal invasion, it’s been the repetition of that in Libya, it’s been torture and rendition, it’s been the destabilisation and outsourced jihadi assault on Syria, it’s been the arms-sales-above-all-else policies, it’s been the collusion in a genocide in Yemen, and it’s been the failure to act significantly on climate change.
There are very few politicians in the UK who have been consistently (I’d say relentlessly) right on the above (and that list could have gone on and on) — and yet you have trouble choosing between him and someone who has been up-to-her neck in many of the most heinous because of some tactical decisions he may or may not have made in the current crisis? Words fail me.
Words can fail you
Corbyn used me to get elected and he has failed me and many others very badly
You also entity miss the point of what I said
I was saying both major parties have now failed
I did not say that was for the same readon
Words fail me if you really think that from my position, well to the left of Corbym’s timid positioning., Im suggesting he is the same as the Tories
Stop making nonsense up
Adrian
I get your points but there is only one choice in this whole BREXIT mish mash and that is to stop it dead.
If the right-wing thugs want to cause riots then that’s OK. We’ll get the army in and sort them out and prosecute them as insurgents as we would an non-white from the Muslim community if they kicked off. We spent enough time in Northern Ireland learning how to use rubber bullets? Why so squeamish about using such methods in Dear Olde Blighty?
I would like to see Labour stop fannying around now and take position.
A second vote is borderline acceptable except that there seems to be a collective amnesia in Parliament about some very dodgy practices in the first referendum that I’m not sure can be ruled out a second time.
But honestly – anyone calling themselves a democrat can only come to one conclusion about the referendum process that had more holes in it than a colander that had been shot up on a rifle range = STOP. Stop BREXIT now!
So come on then Labour – do the right thing. The whole BREXIT vote was one big rotten borough. It has been invalidated. It is was not a credible enough process upon which to base what we are planning on doing. Sort it out.
Stop BREXIT, sort out the perps and then if you must, vote again after a proper debate. But then again – maybe not eh?
“The time for reform has arrived.”
Well then you vote for Corbyn.
Ignore Brexit, it’s clearly going to be a complete calamity no matter who’s in charge, so it will make little difference on that score. But if you want reform, Corbyn is the only prominent leader who is in favour of it. It may not be reform as fundamental as you’d like, but then he has a Parliamentary Party that is predominantly made up of queasy-conscience-Tories to work with, so he has to give some ground on that.
So you have not noticed the Greens or SNP?
Really?
Why not?