One has to take good news where you can find it these days. This seemed like a rare glimmer of hope to me, from Byline Times:
Brexit has been the defining feature of Westminster politics since 2014, thwarting progressive parties and helping to sustain a long period of reactionary Conservative rule.
The intricacies of Brexit have been rehearsed and rehashed for more than half a decade, and the common narratives are difficult to dislodge.
However, evidence increasingly suggests that attitudes to Brexit are changing; that it's no longer the binding force that propelled Boris Johnson's Conservative Party to an 80-seat majority in December 2019.
This is confirmed by new Byline Times polling, conducted by Omnisis, showing that previously pro-Brexit cohorts of voters are now increasingly apathetic towards the policy – all while anti-Brexit voters are still firmly opposed to our separation from the EU.
The analysis in the article is confusingly presented, but a good summary is this:
In short: Brexit is no longer the binding force that it was in 2019 among Leave voters, whereas it is still a unifying issue among those who voted Remain.
The polling also shows that Mr Brexit, Boris Johnson, no longer draws political strength from his association with the project.
The Brexiteers are losing faith in the light of the evidence of Brexit's failure, in other words. Those of us who always said it was going to be a disaster have in the face of that same evidence unsurprisingly stuck to our convictions.
So, why is Keir Starmer getting everything wrong on this? I wish I knew.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Sounds like as the country decides to change its mind, so does Sir Keir Starmer, just in the other direction. Which he’s entitled to do of course, politicians, promises and principles rarely travel in the same row of the plane.
The fact that Starmer has broken silence on brexit after three years maybe is some kind of progress? Some acknowledgement of the dawning realisation in the country at large that brexit is a disaster?
Surely he could have kept the SM and CU in play without making them the headline aim of his policy?. He could have said he would negotiate the dreadful effects of the withdrawal agreement to re-enable exporters , remove bureaucractic barriers, sort out the operation of the NI protocol etc etc.
He could have said he would do whatever it takes.with nothing ruled in and nothing ruled out..if in the end it means the SM and/or CU which it probably eventually will, so be it.
Strategically it was dire
I said before that Starmer could say that we should rejoin the SM and CU to enable frictionless trade that was promised by Leavers in 2016, also eliminating the problems in Northern Ireland. He should remind the public, media and other politicians that Leavers said we should be like Norway and only a madman would leave the singke market
There is of course the malign influence of the UK press
For the life of me I cannot understand Starmer’s vision of a ‘Brexit that works’ for the UK. It sounds like a slightly less messy version of what Johnson has created eg ‘we will sort out the NI protocol’. In the absence of a return to the levels of trade with EU we had, where else does this trade gap get filled? Even the Tories can’t find enough substantial deals. Desperately dropping clauses about human rights to get a Saudi deal over the line. Does Starmer share Johnson’s end vision of membership of the trans pacific trade group? Does he realise that’s the logical outcome of his direction? Is he hoping someone else will lead the party? Autarky with a few trade agreements with global minnows beckons.
It is as if the last 6 years had not happened, and we are back in July 2016, with “Brexit means Brexit, and we are going to make a success of it.” How did that work out, then?
Do you remember Sir Starmers 10 pledges he made to the Labour members to secure his election? What makes you think anything he says now will last as long as they did? He’s an attrocious charlatan.
As for the EU & Brexit – I think all predictions right now are premature – we need to see how the consequences of the circular firing-squad of Ursula’s Russian sanctions play out first. German Union bosses are warning of the complete collapse of numerous industries there (there were emergency talks with the President yesterday) – it anything like that transpires, then all bets are off. Britain rejoining or altering terms will be the least of anyones concerns out there.
Here they are: https://keirstarmer.com/plans/10-pledges/
1. Economic justice – eg increase income tax for the top 5% of earners
2. Social justice – eg abolish Universal Credit, end benefits sanctions, abolish tuition fees
3. Climate justice – eg Green New Deal
4. Promote peace and human rights – eg no more illegal wars
5. Common ownership – eg public ownership of rail, mail, energy and water
6. Defend migrants’ rights
7. Strengthen workers’ rights and trade unions
8. Radical devolution of power, wealth and opportunity – eg regional investment banks, abolish the House of Lords
9. Equality
10. Effective opposition to the Tories
I doubt he meant to engrave them on a stone slab, but I think they stand up rather well. Which ones would you say have been reneged on already?
Let’s see how much of that survives into the next election manifesto.
He is not an effective opposition
He has banned Labour support for Unions,
I hear nothing of the Green New Deal that I recognise
Common ownership has been forgotten
When did Labour oast talk tax increases – except some minor issues around capital gains tax?
And is there a student loan deal in the offing? Or any of the rest?
And the House of Lords is not feeling the threat
It’s all feeling very hollow
Far be it from me to feed lines to the Conservative supporting press, but someone ought to be asking Starmer whether he still stands behind all of his 10 pledges or not. If so, what is he planning to do about them. And if not, why not.
I go back to my view from yesterday that Starmer is not wanting to rock the boat for the Establishment – especially those who have supported BREXIT – he is seeking to win over the back seat drivers by being seen as a safe pair of hands. John Warren said much the same too (I think) and it’s plausible. The Establishment are trying to contain the situation to the point of denial. To have one’s failures pointed out anyway is so vulgar old boy!
OTOH, we must remember that these days a ‘leader’ does not necessarily have to believe in anything. Starmer’s ‘political advisors’ tell him what to think and he does as he is told. What we really need to be doing is confronting these back seat driver ‘worm tongues’ whoever they are, and putting them straight. I wonder how many of his advisors are in cahoots with the very people Starmer is trying to get rid of? I’d love to see their email traffic.
Moving on – lets look at the complete Horlicks that is post BREXIT Britain.
I think that BREXIT was a high risk game and even those promoting it knew that to be the case knowing that the downsides would have to be managed skilfully afterwards. But I think they underestimated the effects of the previous years of austerity probably because those promoting BREXIT had not actually been touched too much by the austerity in the first place. They were rich of course.
The crucial point seems to have been when Boris decided to use BREXIT during the last election to boost Tory chances of winning. This was of course short term thinking – it got the Tories in but the skills shortage and ideological vacuity in the Tory party has been revealed over time. What was needed after BREXIT was more Government help to get over the changes. Alas not – the Tories anti-Statist tendencies gave us less. And then Covid came along and just how risky BREXIT had been was made very clear again.
Everyone involved in promoting BREXIT has made a complete mess of BREXIT through a mixture of ignorance, idealism and incompetence. We all know it could have been done much better even if it did not have to be done at all.
Don’t underestimate the effect it is having behind the scenes though – I imagine matters are quite rancorous – the BREXIT mob did not get the skilled politician and party they needed to get it done. They mistook bluster, bullshit and FPTP for skill and talent. In a way, they deserve each other but we’re paying the price.
The other issue is that the Labour leader is a Knight of the Realm who needs to know which side his bread is buttered – maybe he feels compromised? In my view Starmer should renounce his knighthood and become a man of the people once again freeing him to embarrass his former brethren in a way that they deserve. That’s what Starmer should do first – sever his link with the Establishment, then the gloves are off – or should I say the cap that he is doffing is off too.
Having said all that, we still do not know just how much resources the Tories and the BREXIT mob could draw down to destroy a Starmer led Labour party if it went against BREXIT. We still have not had a full pubic enquiry . Would the current embargoes on Russian money movements have an impact or are those embargoes just more lies? Would the BREXIT millionaires put their hands in their pockets again to outspend real democracy once again with their lies?
The whole thing seems like a Gordian Knot. And it needs someone being Alexandrian to undo it. Where is he or she when we need them the most?
Absolutely, Richard.
The Brexit voters are divided into three groups;
the Breximaniacs – it’s about control,’British’ exceptionalism/jingo ‘patriotism, xenophobia (and worse) and they will never change;
the hopeful/disgruntled ‘let’s show ’em’-it’s-only-a-vote brigade, who are now somehwat stunned that things have only got worse – split between resentful and still looking for someone to blame on the one hand – and those yelling ‘Help! – Anything but this’ – who are ripe for persuading;
and the genuinely mis-sold who thought there was a real case – and these are already changing their minds and would, given a chance, change their vote – referendum and/or electoral
So… what does Starmer do? Tells them all – and one minister actually used these words to an MP in parliament the other day – ‘ “to suck it up”, but let me sling you a slogan or two, instead of the other chap’.
We are back to the ancient question, which has SO fitted Johnson – “When does the fool become the knave?”
Is Sir Keir (and his court) really this stupid – or is he so far down the same road as Johnson to knavery – (a la Peter Oborne’s pungently argued case) – as to regard the voters as this gullible. I have news for him. They are not and will not prove to be so either come a new ‘election’.
If Starmer’s version of Labour – let’s call it Brexi-Labour, or BeLabour for short – is all that is on offer it will never do more than stagger into a powerless minority government in which it will have the odium of administering the disaster of a collapsing society. I am beginning to dream of that fine Durham constabulary!
With every passing day and utterance from Starmer I become more than ever confined that he was and is a plant to destroy the Labour Party.
Labour is beyond redemption in the short – medium term after Starmer – get out and start campaigning and shouting out for the Green Party.
Can I just pose that voters are potentially apathetic to Brexit because it has already happened, they won, therefore why would they still need to be so passionately pro Brexit?
Because the decision was wrong
And in a democracy everything is open for reconsideration
If you made a business decision that turned out to be a disaster for your business would you stick to it and let your business collapse or reconsider your decision to rescue your business? Democracy did not stop on 23 June 2016 and the electorates have the right to reconsider their decision if things go very badly. That’s democracy.