Theresa May faced reality yesterday.
Reality came in a number of forms.
Immediately there was the certainty of a parliamentary loss.
Thereafter there was the consequent threat to her premiership.
And, unless she really is as robotic as she sometimes appears, there must have also been the realisation that her premiership really will go down in history as an unmitigated disaster, whatever now happens.
And those were only the personal realities. For the country the reality was worse.
We have no functioning government.
We have no Brexit deal.
There is no workable plan, or anything remotely like one, being offered by our official Opposition.
And there is a possibility that a second referendum could be ‘Deal or no deal' and that Remain will never get a look in despite being what most in the Commons desire.
The reality is then that in the midst of utter chaos, created by political inability, there is nothing to make anyone think that at present there is any reason for anything to change.
The EU won't move. I think there almost no chance of them renegotiating.
The Irish back stop is a fixture, as is its permanence until an alternative is found.
And as a matter of fact, Corbyn really should appreciate frictionless trade is a feature of EU membership, not a post-deal agreement.
Whilst ‘no-deal' is a far-right fantasy no -one with any concern for the people of this country should be going near.
These are as near facts as we can get right now. And they have all been predictable for a long time. It did not take yesterday for that reality to emerge, except to Theresa May.
So where next?
Right now a general election would solve nothing. It would probably, in any event, be inconclusive as neither major party looks able to present a manifesto.
So, we could have a second referendum. But the risk is enormous. No deal could still win because people are so fed up with this.
Or parliament could ask for a moratorium: a deferral of Article 50 to allow time for a realistic plan to emerge. The EU might just agree.
Or Article 50 notice could be revoked, knowing it could be given again, if need be. Which is, incidentally, why the EU would grant a moratorium.
Or we could stay in the EU, except no one in leadership of the major parties has the gumption to say this is very obviously the best thing to do. It fell to Caroline Lucas to do so at the weekend.
Which of these will happen in reality? I simply don't know.
Because the reality is that our combined political leadership may let the U.K. crash out of the EU on 29 March, which is the current legal requirement.
And no one does know what might happen as an alternative .
But any sensible person knows that there is a massive amount being lost in all this.
Our national well-being.
Our self-esteem.
Respect for our political processes.
And real economic opportunity that is being foregone.
Whilst massively important policy issues remain unattended to.
The reality is we are a divided, belittled, leaderless nation.
We got here by choice.
And so far there is no leadership able to change that.
Welcome to reality.
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:
How about a referendum with preferential voting on three options:
1. Brexit on the terms of May’s deal.
2. Brexit with no deal (a hard Brexit).
3. Remain.
Voters rank those three options in order of preference.
The option that comes third gets eliminated, and those votes get distributed to the other options based on what voters recorded on their ballot papers.
May’s deal has not been accepted by parliament
In that case can it be on the ballot?
And there is no parliamentary majority for no deal; none at all
So why is it on the ballot?
There should be one simple question on the ballot:
“Do you wish Brexit stopped?”
Those voting “no” will be well aware that they are asking for the present chaos to continue and somehow resolve itself. Those voting “yes” will be the realists: we now know Brexit is unworkable.
I wholly agree with Nicholas’s proposal but I wholly understand Richard’s reservations. I believe the solution is that May’s deal is simply not put to Parliament and is not therefore rejected by Parliament. Instead it should be replaced with a “People’s Vote Bill” following Nicholas’s suggestion and once the votes have been counted, Parliament decides what to enact.
I should add that I hate referenda and passionately hope there will never be another one. They undermine the whole basis of representative democracy. However, in this case, I believe that the only hope of contradicting the idiotic 2016 referendum without risking a violent insurrection is by having this People’s Vote.
PS: Apologies for the grammar. I’m never sure if it should be Nicholas’s or Nicholas’. If anyone can enlighten me as to which and why, I’d be grateful.
Nicholas’
The final s is silent in writing
But I agree, it’s tricky
And I do not always get it right
As far as I am concerned May should not have been allowed to pull the vote. What she did was brazen and contemptuous of democracy and Parliament.
What she and Parliament should do instead is stop BREXIT. Dead. But that would be far too sensible.
I get the feeling though that I (We?) are being manipulated into anger. And last night it worked in our house where two grown ups were reduced to shouting uselessly at the TV and the radio. The BBC thoughtfully interviewed some people in Kent who just wanted it over and done with. Thanks. Where do they find such people? Where they walking down the road barefoot wearing dungarees and straw hats maybe (da da ding dong ding dong ding dong ding)?
They all mentioned immigration. What a surprise!
And then they interviewed that most sagacious of commentators Mathew Parris who blamed it all on Europe!
I wonder what ‘Outraged of Tunbridge Wells’ will be saying when immigrant corpses starting washing up stinking on our Southern shores when the French are no longer patrolling our ‘borders’ for us.
So, no more. We are just going ‘tut tut’ from the sidelines now and try to ensure our kids do as well as they can at school so that they can piss off to a better country somewhere else. And then one day we’ll breath our last and won’t that be a relief?
What a farce. What SHAME. What infamy? What……………well………oh sod it all.
I think that there is manipulation going on
But to what end, I am not sure
Well, my husband, my daughter and I have been noticing a lot more Army personnel carriers and even light tanks on the roads around Thorney Island, our nearest military base.
Almost as though someone’s expecting trouble…
Yesterday we saw the extent of May’s contempt for Parliament. It was just the latest step in a demonstration of Lex Talionis (the law of retribution). Expect more. It was, if not predictable, highly probable. Kant opined “whatever undeserved evil you inflict upon another within the people, that, you inflict upon yourself”. In simplistic terms tit for tat for the contempt motion. Since Thatcher began the neo-lib crusade the political feedback loop has inexorably fed a retributive mindset generating smaller and smaller tribal factions holding evermore hardening attitudes. The concept of competition can only be healthy if it is subservient to a rationale that defines to what universal end the competition is directed. Competition as the sole driver is always destructive. When winning is the only goal it is axiomatic that not only will there be a loser but that the purpose of the exercise is to create a loser. It is also axiomatic that the longer competition continues as the singular driver of economics and politics the greater the number of losers will become. If there is to be a phoenix from this bonfire of common sense it will come from the losers (the majority). Having learned the futility of their erstwhile hardened dogmas they may coalesce around the compromise of a new mantra formed upon the foundation of what is best for US. Who knows I may yet live to see the demise of neoliberalism but the cost will be high.
Hear, Hear Bill!
We got here by choice.
Correct. It was some level of stupidity or arrogance to think getting 37.4% in a referendum was enough backing to take a nation through such a difficult constitutional change. Especially when the politicians didn’t agree before negotions what the desired outcome was!
Oh btw one thing that made me smile yesterday
Peter Kyle MP ask the PM in the commons, “Isn’t it true no prime minister is better than a bad prime minister?”
🙂
Yesterday’s performance in Westminster was the blackest of black pantomimes. I am a Scot, living in Scotland, but I am sure that the desire to escape from this farcical political mess is not confined to my country alone.
The people of the country of Scotland voted heavily in favour of remaining within the European Union in 2016. The people of Scotland returned a large majority of their MPs to Westminster on a mandate to remain in the EU but despite this no account has been taken by the Westminster ‘machine’ of any Scottish perspective.
The Parliament in Edinburgh has shown honorable consistency in its view that remaining within the EU is its desired option but all attempts to have this position brought into the Westminster deliberations have been rudely brushed aside at best, or at worst simply ignored. So may I remind our kindred friends in England etc. that Scotland has had no part in constructing the mess that is Brexit – it was not allowed to have any part in it.
Unlike the rest of the UK, the Country of Scotland (Yes, that is what its status is within the Union) has a means of extracting itself from the present catastrophic situation – that is the restoration of full sovereignty to the people of our country. The seeking of independent nationhood is now a matter of self-preservation as well as a protection of our democracy and should not be seen, or be the subject of media presentation, as some form of ‘back-stabbing’. As an example of another way of doing things, this old country of ours could even be the best friend England, Wales and Ireland could wish.
Phil it seems to me that there is an equal disregard of Northern Ireland. The ‘concern’ about her deal focuses on the border and backstop if it is not resolved in a way that preserves the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement. Neither the majority of the people of the north or of the south, want it. Yet the government feels that it cannot have a separate customs arrangement as it ‘divides the country’ and is ‘unacceptable’.
The paradox is that if English politicians impose a border, it makes it much more likely that N.Ireland will opt for unification with the south. Opinion among the under 40s is heavily biased to that view so the province may go anyway in twenty years. Imposing Brexit could speed up the process. If Northern Ireland goes, will Scotland be far behind?
Polls show that most Tories -for all the posturing by the party-would swop Northern Ireland for Brexit. Other parties are less keen-possibly because they are more in favour of remaining.
If Mrs May was smart, she would say that the ‘will of the people’ of NI is to remain and -although the deal could still be thrown out- it would have more chance. Perhaps she can see that would give more and higher cards to the SNP?
Some people are coming up against reality, not the fantasies of Brexit.
The whole thing is becoming an exercise in humility for some.
Phil,
You’ve no idea how envious so many of us English are of the Scots who have an obvious way out of this disaster. At this rate I’ll be investing in thermals ( 🙂 ) and applying for refugee status at Gretna.
I am afraid that May has a plan. It seemed to me, watching the entire depressing shambles yesterday, that there were non-verbal signs to be picked up in her demeanour. Every time that she was really pressed hard on a date for the vote and she evaded it by reference to it being only when her ‘discussions’ with the EU or what she is ludicrously addicted to call her “friends in Europe”, are concluded – every time, she seemed to nurse a private satisfaction. I very much fear that in her typically inflexible inability to take any account of the opinions of others, she hopes to so delay the vote that she can manufacture as scary a proximity to the ‘cliff-edge’ as she can – close to, or even given her government’s contempt for Parliament’s procedures and rules, beyond 21st January. Then, ‘my vote’ OR ‘no deal’.
Parliament – at least the House of Commons – is sliding into near helplessness and entirely because of the gutless unprincipled nature of the political class of the main Westminster parties. Angus Brendan MacNeil is tweeting that several Labour members are saying that they’ve no intention of going for a no-confidence vote before March. I fear that the main ‘Opposition’ has already sold out on Brexit and will in effect, collude with the gathering Tory disaster. We – the public – have been failed and abandoned.
Scotland’s independent decision cannot be much longer delayed.
I trust Angus
Commonsense is the ability to see further than your nose. This would appear to be absent from Parliament given that May could be mandated by Parliament to come back on a set day before Christmas Break to present her tweaked plan for a vote. If she doesn’t Article 50 will be automatically withdrawn. Instead it looks as though a nation is about to be sacrificed on the altar of ambition!
Currently reading The Left Case Against the EU by Costas Lapavitsas. The EU is a neoliberal outfit. You think that neoliberalism is a bad thing so you should want to be out of the EU. If we all cling to the cosy comfort blanket things will never change. The people who voted to leave the EU may be those who think they haven’t done well out of it. The problems they face may have been created by successive British Governments rather than the EU but the British aren’t the only ones suffering. I think Corbyn might be just about the only politician who sees the problems in the EU so I think he deserves a little more support than he is currently getting. Last week he was reported as having said that austerity has given rise to the surge in right wing populism. Give the guy a break. In or out of the EU there is going to be massive change in the next few years. These changes will be easier with a Labour Government than a Tory one so don’t knock the only bunch of people who are half decent just because they won’t dance to your tune.
This is so boring
Politely, if you want to trash the well being of the UK’s working people for the sake of your dogma then selfish shit is too kind a description of you and your fellow deluded idiots on the Brexit left
Can I be clearer?
I award you a double smiley 🙂 🙂
Rod
Surely you can see that Labour needs more than just the failure of the nasty, perfidious and swivel-eyed loons that is the Tory party in order to get a mandate to govern?
They also need to convince people that they have an alternative vision of not just BREXIT but running this bloody country and have won the electorate over with that offer or way forward.
Labour has to be more than the ‘Default Party’ Rod. Don’t you think?
I’d love them to get in – don’t get me wrong, but I’m not sure that they have had that impact with the electorate which means that (1) if there is a general election it could still be a close call and (2) they may not get the majority that they need to bring any real change to the county if they win. And (3) is that (2) is based on if they have any genuinely radical ideas at all! And I’ve not seen much to be honest to set my heart racing.
People out here are getting cynical about Labour. Corbyn & Co need to be careful.
Currently my belief in Labour is rather like my belief in Father Christmas. I know he doesn’t really exist but I wish he would. Even at 54 years old.
Laura Kuenssberg (33mins. ago) tweeting that Sir Graham Brady has asked to see the PM after pmqs tomorrow. Multiple sources, senior Tories and cabinet minister believe the threshold of 48 letters has been reached. Of course it could be bollox. Find out to tomorrow
I humbly disagree about a general election.
Whenever a government has no functional mandate, the country has to be asked to decide “who governs?”
It allows for a clear manifesto and a limited period of time where fair and equal hearing is allowed in the MSM.
We have a lot of issues to sort for future generations, not just one.
A Labour government that could shelve austerity instantly allowing the lifting of artificial pressures put upon the citizens, that made them pliable to the incessant, and yet to be revealed, illegal brexit manipulation that finally achieved just ONE vote in 33, to bring us to this point.
I am certain that an EU27 winessing such a sea change, would not object to an abbayance of Article 50. A year more or less would make no difference to the ultimate current trajectory.
It is darkest before the dawn.
DunGroanin
Yes – it is indeed the dark before the dawn but what we want surely for Labour is a huge majority otherwise the new dawn you speak of will not only be a damp squib but also not last more than one term and more than one term is needed to put right the wrongs of 2010.
I just do not believe that Labour has that yet. It is still sitting on the fence. And personally I cannot believe that they are willing to let the referendum vote stand as it is given the criminality surrounding it.
Pilgrim, given that Labour came from a 20% deficit in the polls to within 800,000 votes at the cowardly hit and run election last time, I would put money on a super majority if another was held soon. They are not 20% behind at the moment.
Remember also, the last GE was curtailed by vile terrorist murders; it was rushed so that many couldn’t register or get their postal/overseas votes in time; a huge amount of odure was dumped on JC/Abbot/MacD by the MSM and the Blairite rump. There are also indications that the SCL/CA/FB type shenanigans were deployed including the dodgy insurance salesmans call centre.
A lot of that dirty fighting won’t work again. JC has been on perma campaign mode, bypassing the MSM and getting the messages to these areas through vigorous new activists.
Many seats were within few dozen to few hundred votes and the week of cancelled campaigning would have certainly seen the complete loss of the tory majority – heck even May and Rudd would have failed to be returned!
For all these reasons and more, I am convinced that a GE with a high turnout would give Labour the type of majority that could easily deliver all the great policies that the postwar govt did.
Funnily enough I think that the statusquo have realised this and are wondering whether no-brexit or a Corbynite Labour is worse for them. They appear to be looking for a turd way!
My concern is with the extent and ease of public lying. The lapse into sloganeering is 1920’s 1930’s and extremely insulting. An election is useless in Brexit terms unless Labour join the SNP abd Libdems on remain-joint-government. A new referendum is needed. This is barely the start.
And I see no chance of Labour tribalists doing this
Normally a democracy can rely on representative institutions to make decisions on behalf of the people. However, there are certain times when direct democracy is appropriate. The UK’s relationship with the EU has significantly high stakes that arouse significantly high passions that justify a direct vote.
If there is a second referendum, it needs to include genuine options.
Theresa May’s deal with the EU is an option.
Crashing out of the EU with no deal is an option.
Unilaterally revoking Article 50 and remaining in the EU is an option.
The voters deserve the opportunity to choose rank these three options in order of preference. The most preferred option in aggregate should be the one that it implemented.
If the voters choose Theresa May’s deal, this will put a lot of pressure on parliamentarians to enact the voters’ wishes.
I think the Remain option would be likely to be the most preferred option under current circumstances.
Particularly if UK Labour promises that it will ignore the Stability and Growth Pact, use deficits of larger than 3 percent of GDP if this is necessary for full employment with stable prices, and accumulate outstanding treasury securities that are greater than 60 percent of GDP if this is necessary for full employment with stable prices.
For this context, full employment means underemployment of zero, hidden unemployment of zero, and unemployment of no more than 2 percent (frictional unemployment).
UK Labour should commit to stopping debt issuance. Debt issuance is not operationally necessary; it merely confuses the nature of government spending.
The UK has a sweet deal within the EU. It isn’t part of the Eurozone. It isn’t part of the Schengen Area. It can tell the European Commission to pound sand if it isn’t happy with the UK’s performance on the arbitrary and irrelevant Stability and Growth Pact.
The UK can model good participation within the EU. The best way to participate in the EU is to enjoy frictionless trade and relatively frictionless travel, but to ignore the absurd rules about deficits, public debt, competition, public procurement, and state aid.
If the major members unite behind these objectives, the European Commission will be powerless to do anything about it. Spain, Italy, and the UK can form a sensible alliance that forces the EU to become economically literate and reasonable. Germany will just have to adjust.
I have to say. I agree with you
Nicholas
Now this is more like it. Thank you!
I would like to see Labour or any progressive party or grouping stay in the EU and tackle these issues you mention and chip away at them. We should be in the EU as a thorn in the side of EU Neo-liberalism. Because if we want the growth of Fascism to be abated this is the best way to start.
How to get to that position though is simple in theory but hugely controversial (remember in a post truth emotional world, rationality and legality is hugely controversial) : Stop BREXIT. Declare it unsafe as a result.
I’d settle for another referendum but only if really pushed. And I mean if REALLY pushed – gritted teeth, closed eyes – the whole works.
I just hope that May is pushed out and replaced by someone so repugnant to the public that the Tories essentially commit political suicide.
Having said that, any opposition coming to to power after BREXIT will inherent a whirlwind that only really radical progressive policies will have an answer to.
I can see any post BREXIT Government lasting only one term unless money is pumped into the real economy big time. The State-destructive instincts of the Tories will not do this that is for sure.
So much for the state of the nation…which is deplorable. You outlined the position perfectly, Richard.
Now to zoom in (anectotal but replicated in so many families):
We moved to Europe in 1987, using our EU right to freedom of movement.
Ever single day for two and a half years we have lived with worry and insecurity…we are tired.
We have no idea about residency rights, employment rights, pensions, healthcare, travel….
The pound has crashed, we have lost a lot of money. Our UK pension is diminished.
We have two adult children living in the EU (only one qualified automatically for EU citizenship); our daughter is marooned in London, working for an EU-based company.
It is not as easy as most people think to gain another nationality. It is also very expensive.
We are old enough to know how difficult things used to be, pre freedom of movement.
Our MP (Marcus Fysh, no comment) reassures me everything will be fine, but what does he know…?
I feel so angry, worried and frustrated.
Imagine how many other families are being impacted like this.
And disappointingly, a lot of well-meaning people still tell me not to worry! What planet are they on?
I have real sympathy
Then dogmatists on left and right appear to have no clue about such things
And I roundly criticise them all for it
I have no personal experience of this and I’ve no wish to minimise your concerns, and no, I’m not nitpicking but I think it is important to be clear on the issues. I’d be grateful for any clarification you may wish to respond with. As I understand it:
– freedom of movement comes from the 1992 Maastricht Treaty
– the rights of British citizens living in an EU27 country are a matter for that country. many of them, e.g. Germany have rules and regulations about residency which are not very simple as of today. As far as I know there is no such thing as citizenship of the EU, but only individual countries. There’s a lot of information here https://www.gov.uk/guidance/advice-for-british-nationals-travelling-and-living-in-europe regarding healthcare, residency etc.
– I don’t understand how your daughter is ‘marooned’ in London. As a member of the EU your daughter has freedom of movement until the UK leaves the EU. Changing nationality to an EU27 country is a matter for that country.
Hopefully this will get posted and you can respond to my points/questions.
The EU created a handy index of answers to all the myths and lies told by Johnson and others and free movement regulations are part of them. See
https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/getting-the-facts-straight-eu-rights-to-reside-in-another-member-state-eu-benefit-claimants-and-nhs-treatment-entitlement/
The fact that the UK government decided to ignore this further explodes the lie that Teresa May persists in parroting about leaving the EU enabling us to reclaim control of our borders.
I’m no expert on finance or taxation, and am learning a lot from Richard’s columns. And I’m totally discouraged by the developments. I was happy to learn that the UK parliament CAN revoke Article 50, thanks to the efforts of the 6 cross-party politicians who took the matter through the courts, despite so much opposition. That possibility provides a glimmer of light at the end of a long tunnel that just MIGHT not be an oncoming train. However, the madness continues.
I am pretty good on grammar, though. And to answer ‘george,’ yes it is okay to write ‘Nicholas’s.’ The general rule is to include the apostrophe if the second possessive ‘s’ is pronounced in a proper name.
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/informatics/punctuation/apostrophe/possessives
I researched this one
I have sons it impacts
And overall the advice was do not include the second s
I’m no expert on finance or taxation, and am learning a lot from Richard’s columns. And I’m totally discouraged by the developments. I was happy to learn that the UK parliament CAN revoke Article 50, thanks to the efforts of the 6 cross-party politicians who took the matter through the courts, despite so much opposition. That possibility provides a glimmer of light at the end of a long tunnel that just MIGHT not be an oncoming train. However, the madness continues.
I am pretty good on grammar, though. And to answer ‘george,’ yes it is okay to write ‘Nicholas’s.’ The general rule is to include the apostrophe if the second possessive ‘s’ is pronounced in a proper name.


http://www.sussex.ac.uk/informatics/punctuation/apostrophe/possessives
Sorry, my comment got posted twice! Not intended, but I can’t get rid of it. Sorry.
I thought it was …. I will delete one
Hi Richard, at present there is no parliamentary majority for Theresa May’s deal and no parliamentary majority for hard Brexit. But if one of those options were endorsed by voters as their most preferred option in a preferential vote referendum, this would galvanise enough parliamentary support to legislate it.
Any course of action that the parliament takes now with no express consent from voters will be widely seen as illegitimate.
The only way to resolve the issue now is to have another referendum with three options to choose from: Theresa May’s Brexit Deal; a hard Brexit; and Remain.
At this stage it looks like Remain would win.
Especially if Labour and the Tories promise that the main advantage to EU membership is frictionless trade.
Both major parties should declare flatly that the Stability and Growth Pact are dead letter provisions that will not be honoured by the UK and ought not be honoured by any EU member that needs a deficit spend by more than 3 percent of GDP to achieve zero underemployment, zero hidden unemployment, less than 2 percent unemployment, and stable prices.
Both major parties should offer to help Italy, Spain. Portugal, Ireland, and Greece to exit the Eurozone.
The pro-EU establishment needs to become forthright critics of the flawed aspects of the EU.
The UK’s political class will not recover any credibility if it pretends that the state of the EU is strong.
The EU is a horrible vortex where democracy and full employment go to die. That reality should not be obscured or played down.
The UK can stay in the EU with a view to rejuvenating it, making it more relevant. Other nations would thank the UK for performing this role. Only Germany wouldn’t be happy about it. But frankly Germany needs to pull its head it. Germany’s stewardship of the EU has been inept.
“The Irish back stop is a fixture, as is its permanence until an alternative is found.”
Even when an alternative is found there will still be a backstop in case we decide to exit from whatever the alternative is. The EU (and the UK, although you wouldn’t know it) have committed to there not being a hard border in perpetuity. This is why the tantrum about the backstop at this late stage among Conservative backbenchers is so ridiculous – the consequence of the EUs negotiation priorities was plain for anyone with an ounce of sense to see from the start.
What is absurd is that the Tory MPs did not know this
But then Karen Bradley proved this……
Neil, please stop it! An ounce of sense in the ranks of the Conservative (well, the Brexiter ones at any rate) backbenches?
You’ll be suggesting they care about the future of the country next, or that they respect, even if they don’t agree with it, the desire for Scottish independence.
🙂
Ha Ha!
‘Just heard Kenneth Clark on R4’s PM describe Boris Johnson as ‘good company’ but ‘unable to run a whelk store’!
Priceless!
It would be funnier if we weren’t in such a mess.
Another female commentator was ruminating about Corbyn stating that Labour MPs who do not like Corbyn were likely to support May.
There you have the problem – two parties not really using Parliament for the country but for themselves. This is why I have some sympathy for Corbyn and the Left who turn up here trying to defend him.
I don’t want Labour to be in power by default (I want to see courageousness) but the Tories have not earned the right to stay in power. They are shambles. Dearie me…………….!