BREXIT Myths: Can't we just get Brexit done?

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: No. When we leave, we're straight into a decade or so of the real Brexit  negotiations. What we've negotiated so far is just the Irish Border, the divorce bill, and citizens' rights. Everything else (the hard bits) will be negotiated after we leave. We will be trying to replace all our current trade deals with the rest of the world - all the countries and trading blocs - at the same time. It is likely to take at least 5 years.

BREXIT myths: Do we need the threat of "no deal" to strengthen our negotiating position?

Short answer: no.

Longer answer: Right now we're only negotiating the arrangements for the actual trade talks. The real negotiations come after we leave. At that point, we are committed to reaching trade deals, and we'll have no way to walk away. The no deal "threat" won't help with that - we'll have to take what we can get.  If "walking away" now means leaving with no transition deal, then we'll need new agreements even more urgently than if we did have a transition deal. The only real way to "walk away" from the talks is to change our minds, and cancel Brexit...

BREXIT Myths: Can't we just leave and get it over?

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: No, we can't. It's wrong on both counts. We can't "just leave", and even if we do, Brexit won't be over...

No-deal Brexit by Accident?

Jeremy Hunt says we are heading for a no-deal Brexit by accident. He could be right...

If you can believe that...

On anger and what to do with it

When the Referendum result gradually became clear, I was very disappointed. Not by the result so much as by what it said about us as a country. But as I thought about how it had come about, I felt anger. This is what I wrote on FriendFace shortly afterwards...

Our Disenfranchised Young - Let them be heard

The EU Referendum was an outrage. The young - who have most to lose - were denied a voice. And to be quite blunt, the old - who voted to leave in such numbers - will have to live with the consequences for the shortest time. This is wrong!


There must be another referendum, in which our 16 and 17 year old citizens who were denied a voice - denied a vote - can have their say!


Young lives matter - Let them speak!

DUPed again!

I am saddened by last night's referendum result. The vote to leave will cause economic damage, it is true. But more seriously, it threatens the stability of the UK and Europe. And the working people who seem to have voted overwhelmingly for exit are likely to pay the price - how will they not, under a government which has already made them pay the price for the Bankers’ Recession?

Britain (or possibly just England and Wales) can survive outside the EU. The skies will not fall, as the official remain campaign promised, but we will be the worse for it. If the decision had been taken after careful reflection, and an honest campaign, I would not have minded so much. But to be dragged out of an organisation that was founded to help ensure peace in Europe and to prevent a hyper capitalist race to the bottom in working conditions, by a campaign that was so thoroughly dishonest, racist, and misleading, is hard to stomach.

Remain’s project fear was defeated by Vote Leave’s fear and hatred. The country has taken a selfish and inward looking turn. Facts have become optional in our political discourse. Now we will wake up and begin to realise what we have, collectively, done.

The farmers have voted for an end to agricultural subsidies, like turkeys for Christmas. Vote Leave has given comfort to every racist in the country and to far right fascists throughout Europe. And at the end of it we may well concede "uncontrolled migration" from the EU as the price of access to the EU's single market.

And we may now see the end of the UK. That will be the final irony for the dreamers of Empire who begrudged the pooling of sovereignty that kept the peace, encouraged laggards to protect the environment, and ended predatory corporate practises like roaming charges. Little Englanders indeed.

So, Boris, when will the NHS be getting its extra £350 million?

Vote Leave because... Migration?

Migrants are flooding into the UK, claiming benefits, clogging up hospitals and stretching services to breaking point - all thanks to EU rules - or so the Brexit campaign seems to say.

But are they?

Well, some flood in, and some flood out. Lots of elderly Brits, for example, swarm to Spain and clog up their hospitals. Many British people work in Europe. Or study at European Universities - for rather less than £9000 a year! That is not so bad for this country.

Inward migration is mostly young people who are working, and paying taxes. In fact migrants on average pay more towards the NHS and schools than us natives. And being young and healthy, they use the NHS less. Win win! In fact, being in the EU means that if our under resourced NHS cannot provide treatment quickly enough, it is sometimes possible to be referred for treatment in a European country, free of charge.

So if the NHS is under pressure, and it is, it's not because of the disproportionate share of money the migrants are contributing - it's because it's not being funded properly.

Same with schools and housing. Rents are not high because of net migration - that barely compensates for our falling birth rate. Rents are high because there aren't enough houses. We have failed to build enough for the last few parliaments! The solution is building, not Brexit!

When a society starts to blame other ethnic groups or minorities for its problems, it becomes very ugly very quickly. And when the problems are caused by the politicians we choose, the hypocrisy is staggering.

But if the Brexit campaign wins and we leave the EU, with all the economic pressures that will bring, how much more will have to be blamed on migrants and innocent minorities. How much more divided will our society become?

Is that the sort of country we want?

We can choose a better way. Will we?

Farage - the new Trump?

The poisoning of politics continues apace, as Nigel Farage plumbs new depths. Following on his "there will be riots" speech, with its echoes of Enoch Powell, now he seems to be channelling Donald Trump, who earlier called Mexicans criminals and rapists. Farage in his turn seems to be characterising migrants - or maybe just Turks en masse - as molesters of women.

At least we have the English Channel, so Farage won't need to repeat Trump's demand for a wall. Would he have had it built by refugees, and funded by Turkey, I wonder?

Spend spend spend!

I wonder how many people the Brexit campaign have promised the £350 million a week of savings on EU membership to?

Last week it was the NHS. Then it seemed to be the Environment. Neither of them are causes close to the hearts of the right wing conservatives who make most of the running in the Brexit campaign. But if you talk to Brexit-inclined farmers concerned about loss of EU subsidy, they seem to think the savings will be spent on continuing the subsidies.

So the NHS, the Environment, and farmers could receive up to 350m of extra money (or not lose the money, in the farmers' case). It reminds me of the promised speeds in broadband ads. Up to 350 could mean very little indeed to your favoured cause.

But it's worse than that. Mrs Thatcher negotiated a rebate back in the last millennium, so it's only "up to £276m". Or "up to £161m" if you count the money the EU spends on support for the UK - from farming to projects in disadvantaged areas!

And if you want a hint about where the "savings" are actually likely to be spent, look at the government's current priorities - cuts for the disadvantaged, and tax cuts for the rich, and broken promises on pollution and the Environment. What are the real chances of a Damascus Road conversion to non-private health care, saving the planet, or support for the poorest parts of our country?

What next - Rivers of Blood?

The EU debate is becoming toxic. Nigel Farage seems to be channelling Enoch Powell, in his very own "rivers of blood" moment. He claims to foresee violence on the streets if immigration is not controlled. He says it is difficult to contemplate, but nothing is impossible.

Of course, by talking up the difficulties and ignoring the benefits of immigration, by stoking fears - not least by raising the spectre of violence - he can only increase the chances of mistrust, resentment, and inter-communal strife!

Christ said, "Blessed are the Peacemakers."

Or as my spellchecker put it, "needed are the Peacemakers!"

Democracy in action

It seems the EU Commission is in secret negotiations with the US and Canada on rules to harm consumers and governments and benefit US & Multinational corporations. Secret as in they refused for a long time to tell the public what they were doing - even when the EU Parliament demanded to know, earlier in the process. And now that they have been rumbled, they are emitting clouds of spin, managed by specially recruited corporate lobbyists.

Here are some articles from the Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/what-is-ttip-and-six-reasons-why-the-answer-should-scare-you-9779688.html and the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/13/ttip-trade-deal-transatlantic-trade-investment-treaty. And the Guardian has an article here about the similar Trans-Pacific treaty:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/10/trans-pacific-partnership-a-guide-to-the-most-contentious-issues

Some details have leaked. Things like:- give multinationals the right to sue if consumer protection or public health laws cost them money - set up special courts for multinationals, run by corporate lawyers - make it harder for states to regulate things like fracking or genetic modification - weaken financial regulation - (And in the Trans-Pacific treaty, also unknown new rules on tobacco, requested by industry - export subsidies only to be allowed for USA producers - reduced protection for users and consumers from copyright and patent law, and criminalisation of even accidental, non-commercial infringement).

I don't think it is healthy, in a democracy, for laws to come out of secret negotiations with the corporate sector. Negotiations from which anyone who represents civil society, or anyone who advocates the common good, is barred.

Petition on the Stop TTIP site, here:
https://stop-ttip.org/

For UK folk, a link to write to your MP, MEPs, MLAs here:
https://www.writetothem.com/

But hey, I could be wrong. Maybe the finance sector has become suddenly honest and public-spirited. Maybe corporations are now putting other people first. Maybe the US government is trying to help the rest of the world, and its own people, rather than those who fund its re-election campaigns.

Tell me what you think...

Euro NI: UKIP came 7th

So how did GB's main parties do over in the colonies - sorry, Northern Ireland, where the electorate are trusted to vote for people, rather than parties, and where the voters (not party officials) decide who gets elected?

I decided to eliminate those confusing local parties, and produce a short list based on Number 1 preferences:

#7	UKIP	24,584
#8	Green Party	10,598
#10	Conservative Party	4,144
-	Labour Party	did not run
-	Liberal Democrats	did not run

So there you have it. The Tories were beaten into 10th place, behind UKIP and the Greens, with the Lib-Dems and Labour nowhere - literally!

Clearly what we really need is more anthems. And flags.

I missed this story when it came out the other week, but it seems that the EU has now officially recognised its flag, anthem and motto. Apart from the motto, which hardly anyone knows, and fewer people care about, wasn't this supposed to be one of the key differences between the failed EU constitutional treaty, and the new (and temporarily failed) not-quite-so-constitutional treaty? That there was no anthem or flag, so it couldn't possibly be a superstate in the making?

Money money money, must be funny, in the rich man's EU!

In a website with the ironic label "fewer barriers, more opportunities", the EU Commission announce commissioner Charlie McCreevy's cunning plan to protect aging rockstars from having to work or save for their retirement. They propose to extend copyright on music recordings by another 45 years. The barriers are for consumers, it seems, and opportunities are for the music industry.

Apparently it is unfair that 70-year-old musicians won't be paid for work they did at age 20. Shockingly, if they want to get paid in their eighties, they currently need to have worked right into their thirties! This is clearly intolerable.

That's why the EU Commission wants the work they did at age 30 to make them money until they are... lets see... 30 plus 50... plus 45... that's until they are 125.

OK. Time for a reality check. Clearly this is not really about welfare for the over-120s!

A clue to the real reason is buried in the EU Commission's rather self-serving FAQ:

Will record producers also benefit from this copyright extension?
Yes. With the copyright term extended, record producers will receive additional revenue from the sale of records in shops and on the Internet.

So there you have it. Lobbying pays. If only the rest of us could get paid in retirement for work we did in our 20s and 30s.

Maybe that's the solution for the pensions crisis?

Read more over at Ars Technica, and (for the EU party line) on the EU Commission website.

More weaselly than Blair

Gordon Brown is turning out even more weaselly than Tony Blair.

After promising a referendum on the European Constitution, he's decided that the virtually identical European Treaty does not need a referendum after all.

And when it was being signed in Lisbon on Thursday, Gordon Brown arranged to turn up late, so he wouldn't need to be in the group photo. It might alarm the voters, or something. Then he nipped round the back and signed it anyway.

And why is the new treaty supposed to be different from the old proposed constitution?

• The constitution would have scrapped the previous treaties and started again. This treaty doesn't. Except that the provisions we end up with are almost identical in either case.
• The constitution would have included a "charter of fundamental rights" . The treaty doesn't include the text as such, but still makes it binding. Clever, eh?
• The constitution talked about the EU flag and anthem - the treaty doesn't. But since they are already there, it doesn't have to.
• The EU "foreign minister" has been renamed "High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy" - but he'll still have more or less the same power.
• The constitution would have removed many national vetoes. The treaty does as well. See - completely different!
• And there are a few opt outs, that will allow a second class EU to be established, containing the UK, and perhaps Ireland and Denmark, and the "first class" version, with the extra sovereignty the federalists demand. How long do you think it will take for the calls for the UK to be "good Europeans" and remove these "anomalies"?
• The BBC goes into more detail.

But we still don't need a referendum, according to Gordon Brown.

The federalists in the rest of the EU have realised the scepticism that exists in many countries, and are trying to avoid popular votes there.

Ireland has said they'll ask the people - but sure if the people get it wrong, they'll just ask them again, until they give the right answer.

Weasels!

If you were wondering why clear plastic bags make toothpaste safer...

Anyone who is puzzled by the peculiar EU rules on bringing "liquids" onto planes (you can, as long as they are in a resealable clear plastic bag, and they are in containers less than 100ml) will be pleased that sanity is dawning - in the European Parliament of all places.

They have asked the European Commission to repeal the ban, unless new facts emerge. They also, quite sensibly, ask for information about exactly what you can bring (the real rules, not the cartoons that every airport interprets differently), and the reasons why, to be given to passengers.

Of course the Commission have a record of ignoring the Parliament, so don't hold your breath waiting for the sanity to spread.

Credit to Bruce Schneier's October Crypto-Gram for spotting this.

It has not been a good week in Europe

First the EU passes a snoopers' charter, in the form of a directive to create the largest monitoring database in the world. All your phone calls, every email, each connection to the Internet, and more, are to be timed and noted. Details of who you talk to, when, and for how long, will be stored for who knows what organisations to access, on the flimsiest of excuses, and without even the basic safeguard of a warrant. It's not even going to be limited to terrorist crimes, or mafia investigations. There will be no scrutiny of how it's used. And the data may be stored almost indefinitely. The authorities will even be able to track your movements using your mobile phone - even if they just think you've been speeding, or possibly if you're a day late with your tax returns, or maybe if you've criticised their policies a bit too much.

To anyone who remembers how David Blunkett tried to give the Food Standards Agency and your local Council (of all people) the power to seize your phone records the other year, it won't be a surprise that New Labour was in the forefront of the campaign for this directive. But it's the EU, and it sounds technical, so maybe they hope nobody will notice. But these people at the FFII worked out exactly why it's a bad idea. The BBC noticed. Even the European Data Protection Supervisor stated that the directive is not necessary and does not respect human rights.

Then there was a story that even the most inattentive journalist couldn't ignore: Tony Blair hands back a huge chunk of the British EU rebate in exchange for, er, nothing! The French have agreed to take a quick look (in a few years' time) at the billions they waste on the Common Agricultural Policy, before they refuse again to do anything about it. And we pay them an extra 10 billion Euros - every year. Stand by for the spin!

Not a good week in Europe. The worst of it is that when it starts to bite, our politicians will hold up their hands and blame the EU!