This is quite long so if you haven't time to read the whole thing here's my summary:
There are many reasons to vote to stop Boris, but as Boris has sought to make this election about Brexit let's take him at his word. His catchphrase is "Get Brexit Done". But as this article explains, this promise is just his latest fraud on the nation.
For Boris is Brexit's charlaton in chief, whose lies misled so many into voting for Brexit in the first place. Perhaps then it's only right that he should be the one to finish the contrick
As I explain here, Boris won't get Brexit anywhere near "done" for years, unless by "getting it done" he means crashing out without a trade deal at the end of 2020 and sending our economy into immediate recession. More likely come 31st January he will be the pied piper to lead us into the twilight zone of the transition period. We'll likely be stuck there for many years, neither truly in nor out of the EU, as he endlessly tries and fails to reach an elusive "have your cake and eat it" trade deal to avoid completely crashing our economy. Meanwhile our nation will continue to stagnate and its public services fall apart.
There is only one way to stop that; voting for a minority Labour government (Labour cannot now win a majority). Working with other parties, they would quickly negotiate an easily achievable soft Brexit deal.
Within 6 months they would put this to the nation to approve or vote remain in a new referendum, which they'd be legally bound to immediately implement. Sadly, despite his buffoonery, Boris is a bloody good liar, so the chances are he'll trick enough people into electing him. But if enough people wake up and come to their senses we can yet avert the disaster he would thrust upon us.
Despite Boris's spin, all his current "deal" would do is agree the basic terms for us to "leave" the EU at the end of January. But it's just a withdrawal deal. We'd then enter the twilight world of the transition period, where we'd be neither properly in nor out of the EU. We’ll have to follow all their rules, pay into their budget, but have no say over anything.
During that transition period Boris and his mates will be desperately trying to agree a brand new trading relationship with the EU before we properly leave. Boris has promised that he'll negotiate a new “Canada plus plus" free trade deal within 11 months and says he'll refuse to ask for extra time. He's still aiming for a "have your cake and eat it" type deal with maximum gain and minimum pain. However, no one experienced in such trade negotiations believes there is any chance of negotiating such a deal anything like so quickly. In fact, it's taken Canada 7 years to negotiate it's own deal with the EU and that's still not even been ratified.
You see agreeing the withdrawal agreement and agreeing a free trade deal are very different things. The withdrawal agreement only covers some pretty basic issues: the divorce bill, basic citizens’ rights and the Northern Irish border arrangements. (And alongside that there's a non binding political declaration of where both sides would like to get to). Yet it took the last Tory government 3 ½ years to even agree that. And Boris can't just claim "not me gov", because for much of those 3 ½ years he was Foreign Secretary. The trade deal will need to cover every aspect of our relationship with the EU: rules governing goods, services, aviation, scientific research, security cooperation, border controls, workers’ rights, environmental protection, health and safety, citizens’ rights, immigration rules, etc., etc. And don’t forget all these complicated rule changes will have to be unanimously agreed with all 27 EU countries. Boris Johnson’s claim that because he agreed a basic withdrawal agreement (after 3.5 years), he can get a comprehensive free trade deal in 11 months is fantastical nonsense.
It would be like England scrapping through to the World Cup through the play-offs and Gareth Southgate claiming this proved England were going to win the World Cup.
And the fact that Boris is bombastically assuring us he will "get Brexit done" should be no assurance at all. His personal and professional track record is as a man almost as divorced from the truth as he is from his various wives he cheated upon. He is a proven liar and fantasist in almost equal measure, sacked from two previous jobs for dishonesty. He started his career as a journalist, making up lies about the EU, such as fake EU laws on bendy bananas and condom sizes. And in his fairly short political career he has become legendary for making bold promises he breaks as soon as those promises hit the hard stone of reality. There are plenty of examples of that from his time as London Mayor. And in his short 4 months as Prime Minister he has already broken his promise to the DUP that he'd never agree to a border in the Irish Sea- the " one nation Conservative" literally dividing the nation!
And, of course, his infamous "die in a ditch" pledge to never ask the EU to extend Brexit beyond 31st October (despite well knowing he was obliged to to request an extension if parliament didnt pass his deal).
So where will Boris take us when, inevitably, he fails to agree a trade deal at the end of next year? There are only two options:
• the economic hell of no deal Brexit
• the purgatory of the transition zone; years of tortuous trade talks, neither properly in nor out of the EU.
If we went "cold turkey" and left with no deal come 2021, all serious economists warn this would be economically disastrous, because it would bring immediate huge tariffs and customs checks that would virtually overnight kill some of our major industries who rely on tariff-free just in time trade access to Europe: including, our car industry, financial services and many of our farmers. Many of our food prices would sky rocket because we would have to charge tariffs on the food imports we ourselves rely on from the EU. And rather than protecting our borders, with no agreement now in place, the French would stop patrolling their own border with us and happily waive 1000s of refugees through the tunnel and across the Channel. Immigration restrictions would also make it impossible to get the doctors, nurses and carers we need to import to rescue our failing NHS and care services (maybe the refugees can help there?)
The government’s own estimates are that after 15 years the economic damage of a no deal Brexit would make the country’s economy 9.3% smaller than if we had remained in the EU; an eventual loss of nearly £1/4 trillion a year.
Boris knows all this, so most predict that once again Boris would break his word, and at the eleventh hour request an extension to the transition period to continue trade talks. (He will, of course, again find others to blame!). We would then very likely be locked into several years of trade talks while Boris tries to negotiate his illusory "have your cake and eat it" deal. All the while we would then we would still be locked into the EU rules and paying into its budget but without any control over any of it.
With Groundhog Day repeats of no deal cliff edges and extensions, it would not plunge us into the immediate crisis of no deal Brexit, but it would continue to slowly strangle the life out of our economy.(Already it's estimated that the fallen pound and disinvestment caused by Brexit have lost our economy over £1/2 billion a week)
Even when we'd finally got our Canada-style new "free" trade deal with the EU, there would still be a big hit to our economy compared to remain. There might be no trade tariffs to pay. However, it’s estimated our diverging standards would create red tape checks with the EU that after 15 years would still see our economy about 6.7% smaller than it would have been; an ultimate loss of about £170 billion a year.
We would then face many more years of wrangling with all those other countries that we currently have trade deals with that we'll lose when we properly leave the EU. But having much less clout than the EU, our new deals would only be worse.
To try to make up for these big economic losses Boris will be desperate to do a deal with the one country the EU has not done a deal (for very good reasons); the USA. We now know that as part of any trade deal with us the USA want "full access" to our public services and for us to sell out our NHS for their big pharma companies, costing our NHS many billions in increased drugs costs. The same leaked documents show the USA would also be looking to us to reduce our "unnecessary red tape", otherwise known as health and safety and environmental protections and workers rights. This is not simply Labour scaremongering. Not only did our government fail to rule these things out in these secret meetings, but these are the very things the USA has insisted on and achieved with every country it's done a trade deal with. There are also plenty in Boris's cabinet who have written in support of these "free market" ideas, such as Priti Patel and Dominic Raab.
But will Labour's "dither and delay" policy of a second referendum get Brexit sorted any sooner or any better? Absolutely. Labour would negotiate a new withdrawal deal within 3 months which would lay the foundation for a Brexit deal that would keep us closely aligned to the Single Market and preserve the big benefits of the EU customs union (including the many free trade deals that the EU has already negotiated with other countries). Labour would also commit to a legally binding new referendum within 6 months of taking office. This would give the public a genuine choice of continuing with Brexit under their proposed "soft" Brexit deal or remaining in the EU. Whatever the public decided Labour would immediately implement; they'd have no choice as they'd be legally bound to do it.
If the country voted for this Brexit, they would keep us in the Customs union andc losely aligned with the Single Market so avoiding the need for any Northern Irish backstop or border in the Irish Sea. We'd keep the UK properly United.Because a Labour government would be keeping most of our current trading terms with the EU (rather ripping up and starting again) it would be much easier and quicker to negotiate a new relationship with the EU. We would be largely copying what other European countries outside the EU have done, like Norway. If this couldn’t quite be achieved by the end of 2020 it should be soon after. It also wouldn’t risk the disaster of a no deal Brexit. We would inevitably have to accept freedom of movement in some form and follow single market common standards. However, we would leave the common agricultural policy and fisheries policies and no longer be under the jurisdiction of the ECJ.
But isn't it undemocratic to vote again? No and this is why. The original referendum (which was advisory not legally binding) was fundamentally flawed because it only asked people if they wanted to leave. It never asked them where they wanted to go. (There should always have been a second referendum to decide that). There’s a massive gulf between the alternative destinations after Brexit; a close soft Brexit, an ultra-hard no deal Brexit and every shade in between. It's like collectively we voted to move from the 3-bed semi that we'd called home for over 40 years, but we hadn't been asked where we were moving to:
a remote old country farmhouse, a luxury flat in the centre of a buzzing city or a rusting caravan by the sea? All very different destinations.
The only Brexit destination consistently sold by the leavers was the fairytale castle Brexit- full control but full free market access. We'd get if because the EU needs us more than we need them.We now know that was a fib and that fairytale castle Brexit exists only in the minds of Boris and Nigel.
It’s like we were buying a second hand car and the salesmen assured us we were buying a vintage classic in pristine condition. They never let us examine the goods, but we trusted them anyway.
We had in our minds that the car we'd been sold would be a fine Inspector Morse red Jaguar Mk II
or a gleaming silver Sean Connery Aston Martin, all in perfect working order.
Instead we find we've been lumbered with a Ford Anglia rust bucket. After being lured into our purchase by such a big misrepresentation shouldn't we have the right to get our money back if we chose? Sure, we might love our Ford Anglia and choose to keep it, but shouldn't we have the right to change our mind now we know the truth about what we've bought?
What sort of message does that send out to our young people who already feel disenfranchised by our political system?
Democracy wasn’t frozen in 2016. If democracy means anything it must be living and relevant to the current views and needs of the country and not tied to the views of the dearly departed (who for all we know might have changed their own minds by now but are not available to ask!).We recognise that democracy is about consulting people for their views. To have more consultation is surely respecting not disrespecting democracy. No one suggests it's disrespecting democracy to have elections at least every 5 years (or 2 years as we're now averaging!) Surely, now we've seen how negotiations have gone and know a lot more about the likely outcome, it is only fair and democratic that the public are consulted for their views again.
Tragically, with the most reliable pollsters showing the Tories currently about 9% ahead of Labour, we are about to hand back our car keys to the most unreliable, untrustworthy guy at the party (as his own colleague Amber Rudd once described him).
Contrary to his claim that he will “get Brexit done” and "get us motoring", he will either drive us over the cliff edge to a disastrous no deal Brexit in just over a year’s time
, or else keep driving us round and round in circles for years of painful trade talks.
If those prospects fill you with dread, there is an alternative: a Labour-led minority government. If that prospect also fills you with dread at policies like nationalisation of our public services, think on. All pollsters agree there is now no chance of Labour getting a majority; they would need to leap from about -9% behind the Tories to about +12% above them. However, if enough people vote tactically, there is every chance of getting Labour to within about - 4% of the Tories, almost certainly enough to prevent a Tory majority (even if the DUP forgave them and about -6% if they didn't). Any Labour minority government will only be able to govern with the consensus of the other parties supporting it, including almost certainly the Liberal Democrats.
Purely out of curiosity you might even want to have a look at a tactical voting site like https://www.peoples-vote.uk/ or https://tacticalvote.getvoting.org/ . If you happen to live in a constituency where another party is best placed to beat Boris then some might say best vote for them. However, as a Labour party member, I couldn’t possibly recommend that!
No comments:
Post a Comment