• Brexit: Taken to the cleaners.

      1 comment

    Yesterday’s failed palace coup revealed that the internecine conflict within the Tory party has gone beyond the point where rivals can embark on a common strategy to achieve divergent aims.

    The present dire state of affairs has been correctly described by some politicians and media commentators as a failure of British politics.

    Since before the 1832 Reform Act, British politics has been dominated by a class based tribalism. Traditionally we had the landed class represented by the Tories and the merchants or bourgeoisie represented by the Whigs which transformed between 1859 and 1868 into the Liberals in the “two party system”. The industrial revolution and the growth of organised labour lead to the formation of the Labour Party which between the end of the Great War and the slump 1930s took the place of the Liberal Party as the main opposition.

    British politics differs from continental politics largely because of the two party system. The coalitions are to be found inside the two main parties themselves and not in divers separate parties as on the continent. That does not of course mean that the UK does not have minor parties, but it does mean the two party system means that they struggle to achieve seats in Parliament and with it the level of media coverage that their popular vote should afford.

    The trouble with this system is that it establishes political actors within a system which cannot cope with severe challenges and new situations. The British politicians and importantly the ordinary members of those parties are not used to coalition politics. With them it is all about party loyalty. So when the TV reporters went to the Tory clubs to do a “vox pop” of the members there was a general criticism of the challengers. Tory leaders always have this because the ordinary Tory is generally respectful of authority.

    What is clear since the UK joined what was then the European Community on New Year’s Day 1973 – which was fraudulently described as “the Common market” by the arch traitor Heath and his fellow traitors – was that British politicians have been consistently out manoeuvred by European politicians.

    IF Brexit is achieved on or after Friday 29th March 2019 then it will have been demonstrated across the world that the UK’s politicians will have been comprehensively taken to the cleaners. In short Madame Mayhem’s tactics has been disastrous. She pursued an agenda which was never going to be delivered (a “cake and eat it” Brexit) in a manner (attempting to divide and rule and not realise that the EU Commission was the one party to deal with) that was never going to succeed.

    Throughout the EU has had the following aims:

    #1: If possible, welcome the UK back into the EU’s fold like the prodigal son at anytime before 11PM on Friday 29th March 2019.

    #2: If #1 above cannot be achieved, then ensure the UK “Brexits” with a deal that is so obviously and demonstrably inferior to what it had it will be an object lesson to the Eurosceptic politicians in any other EU member state that leaving the EU is not a good idea!

    #3: If possible, avoid a No Deal Brexit.

    If Madame Mayhem is not stopped and manages to put her Brexit Deal – aka “Purgatory” – through then the UK will indeed leave the EU but any long term relationship established during “Purgatory” will be noticeably “sub-optimal” and will come with a heavy and humiliating price. This will almost certainly include the following:

    #1: – Complete betrayal of Britain’s fisher-folk. The CFP will continue probably under a different name.

    #2: Spain will have a Veto of the future changes in Gibraltar’s status.

    It MIGHT also include the UK giving up it’s PM status on the UN Security Council. This is because Germany is demanding that France give her PM status to the EU. The new leader of the CDU, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer wants the EU to press ahead with the EU’s own army.

    It is likely that the EU will once Brexit has been achieved will form common cause with Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India to establish a change on the permanent members of the Security Council with France and the UK giving up their seats in favour of the EU (France) and India (UK).

    This will of course lead to a loss of the Falkland Islands as Argentina will immediately propose that the Security Council sets up an international panel to arbitrate on the status of the islands. The panel will inevitability rule that the islands belong to Argentina but the islanders are British and are entitled to compensation. Argentina will borrow the money to pay off the islanders from the IMF who will have little likelihood of getting it back any time soon!

    Doubtless the UK’s Prime Minster at the time will beg Mr Modi to use India’s veto but he won’t!

    The other options are no more appealing. They are:

    - A No Deal Brexit with all the chaos that such would bring!

    - Remaining in the EU on the UK’s present terms.

    Reform of the UN’s SC would of course lead to demands for reform of the WEOG (Western European and Others Group) and the EEG (Eastern European Group). Currently, two of the ten non-permanent seats of the Security Council are reserved for states from the WEOG and of the two seats the EEG has Russia holds a permanent seat with one other elected seat.

    It would doubtless be suggested that the WEOG and EEG merge into a new group, the European and others group (EOG).

    The members of the WEOG are:

    Andorra
    Austria [EU member]
    Belgium [EU member]
    Denmark [EU member]
    Finland [EU member]
    France [EU member]
    Germany [EU member]
    Greece [EU member]
    Iceland
    Ireland [EU member]
    Italy [EU member]
    Liechtenstein
    Luxembourg [EU member]
    Malta [EU member]
    Monaco
    Netherlands [EU member]
    Norway
    Portugal [EU member]
    San Marino
    Spain [EU member]
    Sweden [EU member]
    Switzerland
    Turkey
    United Kingdom [EU member before April 2019]

    non-European members are:

    EEG members are:

    Albania
    Armenia
    Azerbaijan
    Belarus
    Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Bulgaria [EU member]
    Croatia [EU member]
    Czech Republic [EU member]
    Estonia [EU member]
    Georgia
    Hungary [EU member]
    Latvia [EU member]
    Lithuania [EU member]
    Macedonia (Republic of)
    Moldova
    Montenegro
    Poland [EU member]
    Romania [EU member]
    Russian Federation
    Serbia
    Slovakia [EU member]
    Slovenia [EU member]
    Ukraine

    Were, after April 2019, the groups merged and those members of the EU were to be ineligible for election onto the SC due to their membership of the EU those countries of the new group eligible for election to the three seats the group would have on the SC would be:

    #1: Albania
    #2: Andorra
    #3: Armenia
    #4: Azerbaijan
    #5: Belarus
    #6: Bosnia and Herzegovina
    #7: Georgia
    #8: Iceland
    #9: Liechtenstein
    #10: Monaco
    #11: Norway
    #12: San Marino
    #13: Switzerland
    #14: Turkey
    #15: United Kingdom
    #16: Macedonia (Republic of)
    #17: Moldova
    #18: Montenegro
    #19: Serbia
    #20: Ukraine

    non-European members:

    #21: Australia
    #22: Canada
    #23: Israel
    #24: New Zealand

    Twenty four eligible members, three seats to fill, means a one in eight rotation.

    Of course, it may be that enough MPs from both sides of the house may vote for Madame’s deal but only after forcing an amendment stating that it should be subject to the approval of the voters in a referendum.

    This of course is why madame is running the vote to the wire to frustrate those who want a second referendum. However desperate times call for desperate measures and since the referendum if it was to take place would have to suspend the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 c. 41 the referendum could practically be held over a short time-scale.

    Ratification is required by the EU Parliament. It is possible that in this most Europhile of institutions the MEPs may ratify on the basis that it is approved by a plebiscite of UK voters as well.

    Theoretically then polling day for such a referendum could be as late as Thursday 28th March 2019!
    This would mean that should the people decide to remain a minister would lay a Statutory Instrument before Parliament formally revoking the Article 50 process and the UK’s ambassador to the EU would hand a note to the same effect to Donald Tusk!

    • Why so gloomy always of leaving on WTO terms that deals with the majority of world trade very well.
      That is what we should go for and prepare for before it is too late.

    Write a comment