I have for a very long time believed that the government's real desire is a no deal Brexit, but they felt unable to say it.
The reasons for that inability should be obvious. They know, as everyone knows, that a no deal Brexit will be a disaster for the real economy and the people of the UK. So of course they could not be seen to be going for it.
I can't forgive them for Brexit. It was won on the basis of electoral fraud and the vote would have been ruled illegal if only it had been binding rather than advisory.
I can't forgive them for conning people.
I can't forgive them for the populism that fuelled all this, and the divisions it has created that will scar real lives for decades.
And right now I can't forgive them for something else. That is their utter incompetence in delivering on their promise.
If they really wanted Brexit they should, at the very least, have planned for it and made sure all the systems were in place well before time. After all, they had well over three years to do so. But instead we still don't know what is happening. No one has the chance to prepare. Because no one knows what to prepare for. And literally nothing appears to have been tested.
And that makes me very angry, because this is really going to matter a very great deal. In the real world change is always hard. Humans simply make mistakes with the unfamiliar. That's normal. To give people no chance to prepare, as has happened, exacerbates that risk of errors arising, through no particular fault of anyone.
Excepting, of course, those who neglected the need to resolve this. And why did they neglect their duty? Precisely because they are disaster capitalists, wanting chaos on behalf of their hedge fund friends who can than exploit the chaos to extract yet more money from the economy at cost to all the rest of us.
I cannot see how chaos can be avoided early next year. Of course, it will eventually get better. I do not pretend otherwise. But chaos on top of COVID, and Covid management that has already told us more than enough about the corrupted ethic at the heart fo this government? That will be disastrous. And they know it.
The only conclusion is that the current incompetence in negotiation is deliberate. I really do hope that those responsible are never forgiven. And at least Gove and Johnson got to be in charge as it is happening. The blame will be unavoidable.
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:
Becoming an independent country seemed so easy when it was done by countries ranging from USA to Ireland and Kenya. And will be easy again when Scotland leaves the union, but they will be negotiating with people who wish them well of course.
I’m wondering if you are ok. You seem to have been infected by the Carole-20 virus.
In what way?
John Toons,
I have bren warning about the triangulation of fire that will be sent towards the Prof.
And here you are! – with the tagged on insinuation – straight out of the Ii/77th playbook. Though i am certainly not accusing you of being so … i’m only nibbling your bait and not biting.
Prof such attempts are best dealt with by a DrDaDe stance, which I’m sure you don’t need telling about.
Good piece.
I have always thoughts Brexit was a way to impose an American style ‘free market’ economy and polity on the UK without having to put it before the electorate in a general election. Brexit was led by the ERG right wing Conservatives and the oligarch owned media which pushed that agenda with lies and misinformation about the EU.
The evidence includes the opaque funding of Cambridge Analytica and the links of Farage with quasi-Fascists like Steve Bannon and other sources of ‘dark money’. The Tory MPs were whipped to vote against Commons’ scrutiny of trade deals, the effective taking back of power from the devolved assemblies and the Manifesto made clear the intention to reduce the power of the Supreme Court.
Any objections or demand that the very different Brexit to what we were told, should be put to a confirmatory vote is denied while they talk about the ‘will of the people.’
I hope that the Labour leadership realise the way things are going and actually lead. My fear is that they feel they have to appease the older Labour voters who voted for Brexit. The irony is that those ‘Red Wall’ areas will be among the worse affected areas.
Agree with all you say Richard, except possibly with your final sentence.
What has been happening in the run up to “No Deal”, is that certain M.S.M publications, along with broadcasters, are advancing the mantra that it’s the nasty Europeans to blame for the shambles that will undoubtedly occur. This is how the Tories will portray themselves. They did their best, but were thwarted at every turn, and their friends in the media will go along with this propaganda, to brainwash the public, once again, in an attempt to shift the blame elsewhere. Will it work? I hope not, but they got away with their lies during the referendum campaign, so who knows.
It’s only now you see this …. it’s all about being able to deregulate banking and the Phenix of tax havens … in addition, this is certainly to the benefit of others particularly europe and france ….. macron has his sights on this too….. why all this agitation about fishing …. a red herring. It’s a unbelievable that the “opposition(s)” have not grasped this
Yes, I agree. Unfortunately, nothing will happen to those responsible. Certainly not imprisonment, which they deserve. They will swan off to the House of Lords with big grins on their faces, while people starve. The writer of Gomorrah said that the UK was the most corrupt country in the world. Spot on.
Agree with all of your points Richard, although one alternative did strike me recently. Johnson is known to be notoriously indecisive, prime example his two Telegraph articles, for Brexit and against’, before deciding which side to back. Also given his narcissism and his calculation of what is his own best interests in every situation couldn’t another explanation be that he is completely paralysed between wanting to avoid the sheer disaster of ‘no deal Brexit’ but also wanting to avoid the leadership challenge that the ERG would no doubt initiate if he doesn’t deliver ‘no deal Brexit’.
So is it clever calculation or sheer incompetence or a mixture of both I wonder.
I accept that may be a factor
Or is that cover?
I called HMRC earlier this week to ask how a particular aspect of import VAT would work from 1 January, for a client who has been importing a product for several years from an EU country. We just wanted them to confirm the process would remain largely the same; but if not how it would change. They did not know. Five weeks to go and HMRC could not confirm who should complete what paperwork. This has fiasco written all over it.
Welcome to your red, white and blue Brexit. The colours translate to anger, fear and despair.
Agreed
A very remainer point of view.
We joined the old common market to trade with them and not to be made subject to their rules and laws and subject to decisions made by the ecj.
Maybe answer why should we provide a living to eu fishing industries from our waters and make nothing ! decimate our own guys while the likes of france thrive from that stupid ted heath free for all many years ago.
Richard ! take a look at the granville bay treaty and how france are decimating jersey waters for their fish.
They are an evil aggressive organisation.
First thing they wanted when we left was £39 bill pay off.
Says it all really.
If that really is the best a Brexiteer can come up with, heaven help us
You’ve had long enough to make a case and it is ….. fish
A comedian could not have made it up
Agreed If fishing was so important why did the English sell nearly 50% of their quota to the Europeans.
Well, to be honest about it, the EEC stuffed us on the fish. They rushed through the Common Fisheries Policy in 1970, just as the UK, Ireland, Denmark and Norway were negotiating to join, so the acceding coastal countries with their Atlantic fisheries would be forced to accept that position as a fait accompli. In the end, Norway decided not to join but the others did because frankly fish were and are a minor issue in the grand scheme of things. When you make an agreement, you win some things and you lose others, and then as now, the benefits of EEC membership vastly exceed either the relatively small financial contribution (much of which comes back to the UK anyway) or the loss of control over fish.
Added to which, the UK directly controls several of our most important fisheries – high value inshore fisheries such scallops, lobster and crabs – but also the UK population does not really want to eat much of the fish taken from UK waters anyway.
To the numbers. In 2019, UK vessels landed 622 thousand tonnes of fish worth … less than £1 billion. And then a huge quantity of that was exported – 452 thousand tonnes (and most to the EU – France, Netherlands, Ireland, Spain) – but then another 721 thousand tonnes was imported – including lots of cod and tuna and shrimps and prawns from outside the EU (China, Ecuador, Mauritius, Vietnam, India, Ghana, Iceland, Norway) and then a fair chunk from the EU too.
Seems to me that EU membership was important to help to our exports but we shall see.
But, really, why are we even spending time to talk about this? It is a tiny tiny dot in the whole economy. Even if we trebled it, given the UK has about a third of the EU fish quotas, and ignoring the important fisheries entirely under our control already, it would still be tiny.
All agreed
The bizarre thing is that lots of our fish is really good and we won’t eat it
I got hooked by fish, so to speak – it is a hook (puns intended) that easily captures the imagination.
The reality of UK fishing is so much more complicated than most of us can cope with. Safe to say that control and the money is in the hands of the few.
Did we get a bum deal when we joined? Possibly. Have we had plenty of time to do something useful about it and other areas? Absolutely.
Will the fishing community be any better off post Brexit? Unlikely. At least not the sort of people we think of as fishing folk.
And will fishing stocks recover? also unlikely.
We’ll be eating a lot of fish next year, that’s if we can get it, as we won’t have anything else. Dibs on the fillets!
I doubt that.
Fish is an expensive product.
It is consumed more by those of “advanced” age, and less by the young (who prefer to eat just the fingers (!) )
Tesco has all but ceased to sell fresh fish (lots of it used to be thrown away as it was unsold). Watchers of the freezer isles will have noticed that the fish section has been slowly shrinking for years, and that much of what is sold is white fish…species not stated.
Brits have been a Cod-based fish consumer for decades.
A very minor player in the English economy, fish will be even smaller if Scotland does a runner.
As usual, I am out of step then
I have always been clear about hard BrexShit being plan A , the only plan, all else was the smoke and mirrors.
Davis turning up to ‘negotiate’ with no papers or plans made it obvious.
The plan was to let the A50 2 year deadline run out and have the EU declare a disorderly exit as per A50!
Thats how to get that cake and eat it.”THEY forced it because of THEIR rules”
The associated plan was to further subvert the EU from the inside with multiple national variations of Ukip type Alt-Right groups – funded by the same peoples and coordinated by the same honchos – like Bannon. The Afd in Germany designed to unseat Merkel, hence displacing her from her senior position in the EU and replace her with Macron (who also was installed by massive manipulation).
That coup at least failed and she hung on and after 3 months formed her government. Which resulted in the sidelining of Macaloon and the paid Atlantists from other EU countries.
It culminated in her masterful huddle in the corridor with the EU representatives, as May sat in the room waiting receive her prize , that rules are rules and A50 has expired and a ‘hard BrexShit’ was all that was left. She could come back and say “its their fault and Labours for not agreeing to ‘her deal’!
Well Theresa got turned over by Angela and had to be tearfully substituted by Bozo under the guidance of Spaffings and the DS/MSM managed fixed GE to not flinch and be bamboozled by the wise old mutti again.
Thats where we are.
The plan is Hard BrexShit. Followed by a hiving off of Singapore on Thames and letting the rest of the country rejoin.
Mutti wont be having it – the EU is progressing towards maturity and will tie in with Russua and the Eurasian trading blocks to form the most sensible new ’empire’ finally free of the old Anglo Aryan Imperial superiority demands, that has left the world polluted and species depleted.
The increasing level of corruption and centralisation that we have seen demonstrates to me at least that Brexit is a silent coup. L Ron Hubbard (he of Scientology and some revoltingly bad SF novels) one famously said that the quickest way to a million was to found a religion. Brexit is based on selling a faith, that of sovereignty, taking back control, and getting rid of nasty foreigners.
Richard,
If we had a Labour government in the UK, would Scottish Independence still be necessary in your view?
Yes
Labour is clueless about Scotland
And Scotland wants to be a country now – that will never go back in the bottle again
OK – I just wanted to check as you only seemed to start talking about Scotland after Labour left power.
If Brexit is such a bad idea for the UK economically, which is what you say, why would Scottish Independence be good for Scotland?
You would have all the same sort of economic effects but far worse, wouldn’t you?
Chance
And simply the way my interests developed
Fine – but on the one hand you are saying that Brexit is a bad thing and will be bad for the UK economy. On the other hand you are saying the Scotland should leave the UK.
We can agree that Brexit is going to cause some amount of economic damage, but then surely Scotland leaving the UK would be worse, as Scotland is more tied to the UK in economic and trade terms than the UK is to the EU?
So how do you square being against something in one case, then for something which would cause more damage in another case?
The EU has never threatened the nation state – and Scotland is a nation state
That’s a totally meaningless answer.
It’s also wrong. The EU has arguably threatened the nation state – one of the reason so many people voted for Brexit. To take control back of laws and borders for example. Scotland as it stands isn’t a nation state. It is part of the UK which is.
But I was asking about the economics though – which you seem keen to avoid the topic of. If Brexit is bad because of the economics, then surely Scottish Independence will be worse, for the very same reasons?
Are you going to answer that question or avoid it with something totally off topic again?
So wrong
Nothing in the EU threatens the national state
If anything it reinforces it, like a good marriage permits a person to be more than they might be
And you will find we have less control if borders – people will be locked in
And as fir Scotland, it is a nation state in union with others – place talk facts
And why would Scotland economically be better off? Because it would be rid of its union partner who has become an oppressive colonial power seeking only to extract value. It’s really rather easy to explain
EU law overriding national law by definition removes national self-determination. The big criticism of the EU is that with the unelected EU council and qualified majority voting it overrules individual countries democratic decisions.
So if being in the EU was like a good marriage, why are you campaigning for Scotland to get a divorce from the UK when being together has been so successful for both?
People locked in? What on earth are you talking about.
Scotland currently isn’t a nation state in it’s own right. No more than England is. The UK on the other hand….
England has been an “oppressive colonial power seeking only to extract value” now has it? Oh come on. If living by the same laws and rules as the rest of the UK is oppression I don’t know what is.
Everything you said in your last reply to me was straight out of some delusional 1984 doublethink style nonsense – literally everything you have said is the opposite of the truth. Your blog, now having read a bit more of it, is mostly your daily 2 minute hate.
Er…the Council us unelected? You know how people get there, don’t you?
This is such nonsense
But tell me this? How will we gain? What will the positive impact of change be so I can look out for it?
And will the mayhem (we are creating it, because we are the ones who have not believed we are leaving and so have done nothing to manage it) be a price worth paying?
I meant EU commission, not council. Lots of power, but no democratic elections for those positions.
I never said there would be a gain from Brexit. I actually said the we could agree that there would be some economic damage. But then I asked you that if this is the case, why then are you arguing for Scottish independence – which will undoubtedly be far more damaging because of the closer economic links between Scotland and the rest of the UK and the fact that Scotland is NOT currently a sovereign nation and would ave to start it’s trade deals etc from scratch.
The point being that you seem to think that leaving an economic bloc is a bad thing in one situation and a good thing in an even wore situation, with no logic behind the difference other than you like the EU but don’t like the UK government.
I’ve asked you this a few times now but it seems you are unable to give a straight answer – a sure sign that you don’t have a good one.
With respect, we have an unelected civil service
And fundamentally that’s the role the Commission plays
There us a Parliament, a Cabinet (the Council) and Commission, the civil service
So?
You really do not have an argument
But you do have a great deal of prejudice
Don’t call again.
Terrible one sided bigoted opinions on brexit so bye !
Enjoy the no deal and conspiracy theories.
Good luck
Delighted to see you go
I give you three months until you are clamouring to go back in
I share the anger, but I disagree. I can imagine some on the fringes wanting a no deal. But I’m sceptical about that actually being policy. Three things suggest a deal. HMG have blinked before and I think they will blink again. I can’t actually see that the two sides are that far apart. If HMG sever all ties they have no one to blame.
I suppose we will know in a month.
If we are lucky
I agree with all of this, the aim is for chaos to prevail, and the government has taken advantage of the pandemic to create more chaos. It seems to me lots of governments have taken advantage of the pandemic for chaos-induced riches. The U.K. certainly isn’t alone in that. And yes, if brexit were to be done, then t’were well it were done with a bit more thought and good intentions.
While we are in the grip of the neoliberal barely-a-democracy electoral system, this is just going to keep repeating isn’t it though? Different kinds of chaos, but with the same aim, and always keeping us off-kilter. Really, the solution is electoral reform, bring in a proportional representation system, give up the hallowed halls of Westminster (and the millions it’ll cost to refurbish! Yes do a wee bit of tarting up and have it fit for tourists, but as a worplace it’s not fit for purpose) – many things can lead on from that. What type of electoral reform is actually needed to prevent this constant cycle of crises and uncertainty (you notice they always roll out the Russians or terrorism when we haven’t been fear-laden enough for a while)? I’m not actually sure – there must be lots of different templates to work out a bespoke solution though!
There are
And you are right on the risk
Richard, you have claimed “ It was won on the basis of electoral fraud”, yet formal investigations have found no such thing.
Do you have additions, evidence that you should be sharing with the electoral commission?
Steve?
The fines?
Steve,
You claim electoral fraud has not been found – that’s not quite true, things are in obscurity – but look at the background investigations into Cambridge Analytica and where the money trail, and ownership, leads there. I think there are plenty investigations still on going – which will no doubt ‘never find anything’ in the end.
The electoral commission is toothless, they have no effect on how the big parties behave – the maximum fine they can give is £700 000 I think, which is pennies compared to donations of millions that the Tories get. I remember Theresa May being questioned about getting the maximum fine (in one of the numerous GEs we’ve had) – and her answer was effectively ‘we paid our dues, and everyone does it anyway’. Not exactly,,, morally upstanding, when you know all the smaller, poorer, parties don’t stand a chance against their riches-laden advantages. The big parties just don’t care.
The things that were revealed about the 2014 independence referendum – well, for a start, the better together group and major political figures, and a newspaper, publicly, and illegally, broke purdah in publishing The Vow (haha, not much of one it turned out, NOT surprisingly) – and the electoral commission said och that’s fine (I paraphrase). What’s the point in having rules if it doesn’t matter if they break them?! But the rules are only for *some* people. Since then – well, there are always questions about who is funding a campaign and why, particularly given the rather relaxed attitude the main political parties, and friends, take towards playing fair – it has been revealed that ‘dark money’ funded a leafleting campaign in the independence referendum: money was channelled through the DUP (in NI different rules apply, and you don’t need to declare the source) that ended up in an obscure group’s coffers to campaign against independence. A Tory was in charge of the obscure group. It’s illegal to have any kind of foreign funding. It took years to find this out – and is anyone punished? Not as far as I can see. There might be a court case somewhere though.
The point of the electoral commission and having fair and transparent funding, is to give democracy a chance, a level playing field. They fail at this, and the rich ride roughshod over it.
The Swiss had a referendum a couple of years back, and the result was declared null and void, because it was deemed the public had been misinformed about the issue being voted on – they’d have to have the entire debate and vote again. That’s what should have happened in both the independence and EU referendums – there was institutional unfairness, illegal funding, and misinformation in both campaigns – for the latter, I would say the EU referendum was worse. For the independence referendum, we just got things like the BBC broadcasting supposed grassroots pro-Union political broadcasts as though they were documentaries – so it didn’t count towards the campaign funding limitations!
I think maybe it’s you that needs to give us evidence of these ‘formal investigations’ that ‘found no such thing’!
I agree with Richard but on Fishing there is more to it:
1. Maritime policy is the new frontier. Its not just about the fish but minerals , oil and gas, wind, wave and tidal power, cables for communications and power supplies, transportation corridors, security, leisure , coastal development etc; and in effect regulation of the maritime commons. This government will sell off as much as possible into private ownership. There are many conferences every year on Maritime policy and its a booming industry.
2. Fishermen just want to fish ; and if left to their own devices they would overfish. But the villains are the industrialised trawlers and factory ships vacuuming up the fish from the worlds oceans to make fish meal as fertiliser or animal food.
If the UK wanted to help the fishermen it would ban sales of fishing rights to anyone other than small scale fishermen. This government will sell to the industrial fishermen for the highest price, or to their mates for a dodgy price.
The reality is that fishing ports are closing because developers want their land to build holiday flats and houses ; and their occupants don’t like the noise, smells and unsocial hours that fishermen keep.
As for knowing what is really going on and the governments motives and real negotiating strategy I recommend again Nancy McLean “Democracy in Chains” and Naomi Klein “Disaster Capitalism”. Its a conspiracy in plain sight and Johnson is a classicist who follows the greek method of deceit , bluff and avoidance of conflict to get his way. Ultimately the greeks lost out to superior force however. I also recommend Christopher Lasch “the Culture of Narcissism” as an insight into Johnsons motives. He is clearly suffering from Narcissistic personality disorder.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder
I know the first two
Recommended!
@ Richard,
How do you reconcile your advocacy of MMT, and opposition to economic austerity, with support of a very pro austerity organisation like the EU?
As far as I can make out all leading MMT economists are hostile to the neoliberalism/ordoliberalism which is hardwired into the EU Treaties and would advise Britain to put as much administrative distance between us and the EU as possible. The so-called Stability and Growth Pact and even worse Fiscal Compact have been responsible for creating the conditions that have led to the widespread disillusionment with the EU both in the UK and elsewhere.
See the blog for an answer
[…] have been asked in a comment on the […]
I am curious now if when the brexit shit hits the fan it will justify another few hundred billion being bunged to some rich Tory mates to run the replacement privatized service that the govt has deliberately let disintegrate