By Chris Patten*
The decision to leave the EU will dominate British national life for the next decade, if not longer. One can argue about the precise scale of the economic shock – short- and long-term – but it is difficult to imagine any circumstances in which the United Kingdom does not become poorer and less significant in the world. Many of those who were encouraged to vote allegedly for their “independence” will find that, far from gaining freedom, they have lost their job.
So, why did it happen?
First, a referendum reduces complexity to absurd simplicity. The tangle of international cooperation and shared sovereignty represented by Britain’s membership of the EU was traduced into a series of mendacious claims and promises. The British people were told there would be no economic price to pay for leaving, and no losses for all those sectors of its society that have benefited from Europe. Voters were promised an advantageous trade deal with Europe (Britain’s biggest market), lower immigration, and more money for the National Health Service and other cherished pubic goods and services. Above all, Britain, it was said, would regain its “mojo,” the creative vitality needed to take the world by storm.
One of the horrors that lie ahead will be the growing disappointment of “Leave” supporters as all of these lies are exposed. The voters were told that they would “get their country back.” I do not believe they will like what it turns out to be.
A second reason for the disaster is the fragmentation of Britain’s two main political parties. For years, anti-European sentiment has corroded the authority of Conservative leaders. Moreover, any notion of party discipline and loyalty collapsed years ago, as the number of committed Conservative supporters dwindled. Worse is what has happened in the Labour Party, whose traditional supporters provided the impetus behind the big “Leave” votes in many working-class areas.
With Brexit, we have now seen Donald Trump-style populism come to Britain. Obviously, there is widespread hostility, submerged in a tsunami of populist bile, to anyone deemed a member of the “establishment.” Every expert was rejected as part of a self-serving conspiracy of the haves against the have-nots. So, whether it was the governor of the Bank of England, the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the President of the United States, their advice counted for nothing. All were portrayed as representatives of another world, with no relationship to the lives of ordinary British people.
That points to a third reason for the pro-Brexit vote: growing social inequity has contributed to a revolt against a perceived metropolitan elite. Old industrial England, in cities like Sunderland and Manchester, voted against better-off London. Globalization, these voters were told, benefits only those at the top – comfortable working with the rest of the world – at the expense of everyone else.
Beyond these reasons, it doesn’t help that for years hardly anyone has vigorously defended British membership in the EU. This created a vacuum, allowing delusion and deception to blot out the benefits of European cooperation, and encouraging the view that the British had become the slaves of Brussels. Pro-Brexit voters were fed a ludicrous conception of sovereignty, leading them to choose pantomime independence over the national interest.
But moaning and rending one’s garments won’t do any good now. In grim circumstances, concerned parties must honorably try to secure what is best for the UK. One hopes the Brexiteers were at least half right, as difficult as that is to imagine. At any rate, one must make the best of the hand that has been dealt.
Still, three immediate challenges come to mind.
First, now that David Cameron has made clear that he will resign, the Conservative Party’s right wing and some of its sourer members will dominate the new government. Cameron had no choice. He could not possibly have gone to Brussels on behalf of his backstabbing colleagues to negotiate something he didn’t support. If his successor is a Brexit leader, Britain can look forward to being led by someone who has spent the last ten weeks spreading lies.
Second, the bonds that hold the UK together – particularly Scotland and Northern Ireland, which both voted to stay in Europe – will come under great strain. I hope the Brexit revolt will not lead inevitably to a vote for the breakup of the UK, but that outcome is certainly a possibility.
Third, Britain will need to begin negotiating its exit very soon. It is difficult to see how it can possibly end up with a better relationship with the EU than it has now. All Britons will have their work cut out for them to convince their friends around the world that they have not taken leave of their moderate senses.
The referendum campaign revived nationalist politics, which in the end is always about race, immigration, and conspiracies. A task we all have in the pro-Europe camp is to try to contain the forces that Brexit has unleashed, and to assert the sort of values that have in the past earned us so many friends and admirers around the world.
In a sense, the Brexit referendum was the result of Winston Churchill’s hands-off approach to European unification (which he favored, but not for Britain). And it recalls one of Churchill’s more famous aphorisms: “The trouble with committing political suicide is that you live to regret it.”
In fact, many “Leave” voters may not live to regret it. But the young Britons who voted overwhelmingly to remain a part of Europe almost certainly will.
Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong and a former EU commissioner for external affairs, is Chancellor of the University of Oxford. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2016, published here with permission.
105 Comments
Mr Patten doesn't actually make any sound arguments why Brexit is a bad thing. His best effort is that it is difficult to imagine Britain negotiating a better deal with Europe than it has now. That may be true. It is easy to imagine the UK negotiating better terms than it has now with China, Japan, India, the old Commonwealth, and despite what Obama says, with the USA. Europe including Germany and France moves like a supertanker (and not a very nimble or rational one even then), and is a competitor in many ways to many other economies. The UK is not really. As many commentators have noted, mass immigration to the UK doesn't really affect wealthy people so much- and not the Chancellor of Oxford University. In very many ways it does affect everyone else quite substantially, if sometimes positively and sometimes negatively.
Maybe I'm wrong, and financial services (London's prime industry) will need to move to mainland Europe. But I can't actually understand why that would be.
I believe this gives GB more negotiating power not less, Germany has already commissioned a report beforehand where they allow GB to leave but take on favoured nation(same as Norway) so they still trade, cross borders but are not bound by brussels.
if Germany decide to play nice the rest that leech(propped up by) off her will do what they are told
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/683054/EU-referendum-Brexit-Leave-G…
You're right about the lack of sound arguments about why Brexit is a bad thing, but the whole tone of the article is that of a "stay" voter - stunned disbelief that anyone would accept the arguments for leaving which he does detail. The people need to understand that just like the swing to Trump in the US, this is a message to the politicians from the common man on the street. Globalisation has not worked for the ordinary man as they have seen their jobs exported to Asia, their living standards eroded and their rights eroded while the big corporations and global businesses have got richer, and more powerful and politicians openly act in their own interests before those of their constituents.
Leavers may well have been driven by amongst other things immigration particularly non EU migrants remember that Cameron called the referendum before Merkel had a rush of blood to the head and announced effectively open borders for refugees and promptly lost control of numbers. Also before Isis started to more regularly appear as an attacker in European cities. On the point re the elderly voting and leaving the problem for the next gen - the next gen, as usual couldn't drag themselves away from their social media, get their feet wet or otherwise make the effort to vote. Actually nothing unique about that - has been the case Adam was a voter -I.e. the current old probably did exactly the same thing. Only major diff now is that media and info access means the young should be an even better informed gen and really have no excuse not to participate.
Sorry Caleb, looks to me like the wealthy may be the ones losing here...which perhaps is why there is so much bile flowing!
The ordinary people ended up being more than 50% of the population. More than those actually gaining from EU membership. And they knew they were having more trouble making ends meet with huge competition for jobs, and increasing immigration providing even MORE competition, which inevitably drives wage rates down.
When you have more than 50% of the population losing, and less than 50% of the population winning, then if you're a winner you'd better watch your back!
I see this as a win for democracy - the ability for self-determination. Those politicians had better take note.
It is also a loss for the One/New World Order or globalisation, those who would have a "slave" class attending to the needs of an "upper" class, and the "slaves" will all live in high rise apartments in cities while only the privileged few would live in the country.
I'm pretty sure a similar situation has developed in NZ, where more than 50% feel they are not making progress while Key trumpets the wins for his supporters...
There's quite a good BBC article that outlines what happened:-
Eight reasons Leave won the UK's referendum on the EU
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36574526
Churchill's quote is more apt when considering joining the EU.
The British did indeed commit political suicide and they did indeed regret it.
Now they are making things right.
"whether it was the governor of the Bank of England, the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the President of the United States, their advice counted for nothing. All were portrayed as representatives of another world, with no relationship to the lives of ordinary British people". Exactly, they don't and that was why their pontifications a
were ignored
Exactly. It is pretty obvious that when so many leaders of other countries are recommending the stay argument, one has to question why. Their loyalties are not to the average Briton, so remaining must benefit the interests of people other that the average Briton and it is fairly obvious at the expense of the average Briton. I.e. the more these "concerned" (self interested) external leaders advised staying it is probable that this was perceived as a very good reason to leave. For a long time the public have been on the losing end of spin from slick talking politicians and their sycophantic media, who can blame them for taking the opposite view of anything they say
Sky TV NZ and Vodafone team up.
http://www.vodafone.co.nz/tv/sky-with-broadband/
What is left?
The privileged will always try to protect it. So in assessing the merit of the rhetoric in this article, the pertinent question is whether Chris Patten so privileged.
Brexit can been viewed in a wider context IMO. Centralisation of power takes resources, as resources decline you will see a desperate grab for the scraps that a left. Nationalism and protectionism are intevitable results.
I see the people have rearranged the deck chairs again and this time in Europe.
Do we really care? Is it even important?
Countries are like fleas fighting over who owns the dog; whilst the dog is dying from a serious illness.
Do we really care about this crap when Super Storms, Super Fires, Droughts and Floods of epic proportions are here and winds that can flatten cities are round the corner.
Add to this that in the near future millions of people will be dying (horribly and painfully) from bacteria that we can cure with a simple tablet today. A simple re-arrangement of the global pharma to make it worth while creating new antibiotics would be a far better talking point...
Where is the GLOBAL tax for these problems?
I find the whole Brexit thing repulsive as it simply takes the focus away from the real problem; saving the planet from humanity.
@Tony, don't you think that now there is a possibility to do something about all those things? With the Chris Pattens of this world running the show there was not a chance in hell but with the people taking back their sovereignty and their democracy there is now a chance. Only a chance but that is so much better than before. There will be more Brexits and, thank god, it is the start of the end of globalisation.
Tony: Not sure whether you regard the Global Pharmacy as the naturally occurring plants and elements -clean air, clean, potable water, and climate conditions undisturbed by human pollutants?
Sadly, much of the worldwide mayhem could have been easily avoided if imperialistic countries, ably driven by international and politically/corporate driven human resource(wealth) "scoopers" such as IMF and the like had been halted in their tracks.
Maybe it does sound idealistic, but how much more peaceful and contented could the world have been if we hadn't allowed everything to represent "The Market," and be economically calibrated in value solely by financial wealth and gains?
There would be no need for vast numbers of immigrants and refugees to feel pressured to leave their own homes and countries through food shortages and imperialist wars over resources and world power.
Food shortages due to natural climate fluctuations could have been mitigated with the world working together to assist countries/people severely affected.
Gifting New technological methods for sourcing adequate water for crops, along with up to the minute technology in crop selection would have been a far smarter solution for many African countries, than burdening subsistence farmers with IMF debt., leaving families hungry, leading to depressed immunity.
The Indian farmers who have become reliant on Monsanto are another example of Corporate greed.
Just imagine a giant, international 'honestly - administered' "Give- A -Little" fund in place of the IMF and various other international " Grafters?"
Sounds like Fantasy Land, too good to be true, I have to agree. It's the complete opposite of the methods we have used to respond to human need to date.
How indeed can we stop the rampant Imperialism of USA?
How can we stop the Military Industrial Comanies and their political shareholders from their continuous massive push for power through war and international mayhem?
How, indeed, do we clean up the food chain to make agriculture free of killer chemicals and nutritionally fit for human consumption ?
This won't happen while the same Big-Pharma that pollute the soils and waterways get a second payout through massive profits from chemical drugs to "heal" the illnesses caused largely by toxic food.
You are correct, Tony. Instead of human compassion and generous no-financial-strings-attached, we ( international governments and political/financial leaders,) have responded only with For-Profit solutions.
And these same world leaders were taken by surprise by Brexit. They sure live down dark rabbit holes, or other equally dark places.
To be surprised that so many people no longer trust their propaganda or saw this coming is really a joke.
So, using the same analogy, a GLOBAL TAX to try and protect the people and the planet from Climate change, has to equal my own realm of fantasies, but it's amazing to read that many of us still dream of a better world.
We cannot fix such destruction using the same attitudes and methods that caused the catastrophe.
(A twist on Einstein's wise words!)
Chris Patton - long time EU supporter crying over spilt milk - it was his party when he was a force alongside ken Clark who were split on EU membership even though the rest of the country was pro EU - they had a chance to nip this in the bud and go to the people 20 years ago but they knew it would split their party and cost them privileged power for the next ten years - so they did nothing till it was too late - Cameron only promised the referendum when it looked like he would be beat last election -
it has never been about the ordinary person - after 40+ years the 95+ % are not any better off - and finally they had a chance to speak out and they did!
on Monday - everyone will go back to work - the markets will recover ( FTSE closed 200+ points higher than it did last Tuesday!!) the pound will gain a little back week by week - and Europe , desperate to avoid the notion of exit spreading will seek to negotiate a quick and easy exit - probably with free trade at the heart of it in return for a little bit of EU legislation remaining -
Scotland will finally get its independence - and England can start rediscovering what it is to be English and surprisingly enough - they will actually do pretty well as they have done for the last few hundred years!
It will be Europe who end up the biggest losers - something they could have avoided by allowing the UK to set an immigration limit that was fair and reasonable
- how does it go -- all we can ask for is to live in interesting times!
Cameron only promised the referendum when it looked like he would be beat last election
Is that right? So, the promised referendum was an election bribe? Was he bribing the general public or those to the right in his own party? Or both?
Fascinating that an election bribe could backfire so spectacularly for him.
Nah, Cameron promised it to try and balance of factions within the Tory party. Then people voted on a complex mix of who they blame for their problems/ how they feel about the establishment/ how they feel about England in general.
But if I can fact check one bit from the article "Worse is what has happened in the Labour Party, whose traditional supporters provided the impetus behind the big “Leave” votes in many working-class areas."- Rubbish. Labour voters voted 2 to 1 to remain, suggested however they felt about immigration they liked the EU rules on things like worker protection more. Conservative voters voted 3 to 2 to leave. UKIP, which Chris Patten ignores, voted 95% to leave, and it is these people, which have established the party strongly in the north of England over the past couple of decades that formed the big "Leave" votes in many working class areas. The ground is a bit different to 30 year old models of Conversatives vs Labour. For an Brexit voting exit poll see http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-w…
The ground is a bit different to 30 year old models of Conversatives vs Labour.
Indeed it is - as was pointed out in the article on globalisation as a political ideology that I often refer to;
http://socialsciences.people.hawaii.edu/publications_lib/JPI%20Ideologi…
The incumbent Right/Left establishment (i.e., globalist) parties across the West are in trouble as the challengers rise in profile:
Challengers of globalism on the Right might include national populism, new localisms, and various religious fundamentalisms with strong political inclinations. Oppositional ideologies on the Left might include global feminism, international-populism, and various ideational clusters associated with 'global social justice’ movements.
The real question for me is, how will the establishment respond given their globalist brand is in tatters.
Very interesting to see Simon Moutter, Spark CEO on Q+A this morning - weighing in on the Google, Facebook, Apple should pay taxes in NZ debate - and urging the Government NOT to wait for OECD initiatives/recommendations - because they will proceed at a "glacial pace". A really worthwhile interview to watch. All a part of a changing political landscape.
Kate, speaking about dealing with ideas in peoples heads.
Paxman still showing good value.
Talking of the right mess to untangle, possibly by some that don't want to unpick the knott. As their career and personal dreams had been based upon standing on that knott.
It went far deeper than that, of course. The European Union had entered the bloodstream of the British public service and there was not a department in Whitehall which did not have an eye on Brussels.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/25/brexit-has-exposed-the-chasm…
Well if you're a British citizen who feels they made the wrong decision about leaving the EU, here's your chance to fight back!
EU Referendum Rules triggering a 2nd EU Referendum
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215
May be David Cameron wished he was here in NZ so he could have ignored the result of the referendum ?
http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/nz-govts-have-proud-history-ignoring-refer…
They will get what they deserve
http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/bravo-brexit/
Running the numbers....
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/06/brexit-eu/4885…
But here’s a domestic question for American leaders and thinkers.
The force that turned Britain away from the European Union was the greatest mass migration since perhaps the Anglo-Saxon invasion. 630,000 foreign nationals settled in Britain in the single year 2015. Britain’s population has grown from 57 million in 1990 to 65 million in 2015, despite a native birth rate that’s now below replacement. On Britain’s present course, the population would top 70 million within another decade, half of that growth immigration-driven.
British population growth is not generally perceived to benefit British-born people. Migration stresses schools, hospitals, and above all, housing. The median house price in London already amounts to 12 times the median local salary. Rich migrants outbid British buyers for the best properties; poor migrants are willing to crowd more densely into a dwelling than British-born people are accustomed to tolerating.
On the telly lots of locals were talking about how they couldn't get their children into school or have a family GP.
Low ages and competition from immigrants.
Talking about competition.
https://secure.attenbabler.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Chi…
There is a window where opinion is made raw before the polished finish of spin.
There is one labeled Teflon Cockiness.
All this from a man who sauntered into the job of prime minister “because I thought I’d be good at it”. He rarely showed any reason for such self-confidence. His plans to modernise the Conservative party crumbled upon first touch with the banking crisis, which forced him and Osborne to reheat the Thatcherite economics they’d imbibed as students. The “big society” turned almost immediately back into the “small state”. At No 10, he launched an austerity drive that was meant to be over within five years, but is now scheduled to go on for double that. Other prime ministers handed power for a long stretch come up with ideas, policies, a style of governing that defines them: Thatcherism, Blairism. What was Cameronism, apart from a hectoring manner at PMQs (parliament question time) and an inability to keep on top of detail?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/24/david-cameron-res…
This highlights the issue. If one pulls the levers of persuasion you'd better have the credible vision (the higher brighter place), otherwise there is danger of one coming up short and exposed as a smooth talking spiv that plays a bit rough.
This whole referendum has split people within the UK and the UK from Europe, bugger the financial impact. It's all about people.
Currently various commentators are gloating, commenting and commiserating on losing or winning.
This event is about people and what they wanted, on a massive scale.
My question is: Do you think those in power will allow another event of this type in any situation, given the outcome?
I wonder how it would work out for NZ First if they organised a petition demanding a referendum to reduce immigration to say 7000 per year excluding returning kiwis. Would the government -
- delay the referendum till after the next election and suffer the flack in the election,
- have the referendum coincidental with the election and make it an election issue or
- hold the referendum before the election then ignore the result?
People are taking their democracy back.
How many EU officials in Brussels earn more than David Cameron?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10847979/10000-Euro…
IF There is a follow on, of Sctland going independently and Northern Ireland rejoining to Ireland, the GDP per capita for England increases substantially. Put in the net benefits of leaving EU, control the immigration inwards to England, reducing competition on their own existing housing stock, NHS , education, council services strip out the free loader immigrants taking up welfare entitlements, then the average English, working class family can only see an upside.The citizens can do the maths, and voted accordingly.
What percentage of voters do you suppose truly understood the implication of their vote? Voting on sound bites and the longing for "the good old days" (which never actually existed) sounds like what is happening in the US at the moment.
The #1 thing that worries me: Winston Peters is a strong Leave supporter.
The UK is a fairly small place in the scheme of things - about the size of a small US state. Why all the fuss about leaving an economic union? With all the anguish and tears you would think some great catastrophe had happened. It makes me think even more that the UK is doing the right thing.
It is as if this represents something far more than just an exit from an economic union. It's like the global elites realize that this is an opening shot in the resistance war against globalism and it has hit a bulls eye.
Some are claiming that Brexit and Trump are White people fighting back. I reckon that's what the fuss is about. Their little dream of a global utopia is burning down. Next comes Frexit. Then the US:
sen-jeff-sessions-brexit-now-americas-turn
The writer of this piece thinks the common people should have listened to the stooges, Bank of England, the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the President of the United States and the like- all globalists - what a laugh.
It's almost like the UK has sent a missile into the exhaust duct of the EU Deathstar. Good times.
It's about the debt. Look at the Uk's
The UK National Debt is estimated to be £1.64 trillion.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15748696
What's about the debt? The people wanting to leave or the tears about leaving?
People want to leave because of Europe's inability to defend itself and its bullying of member states.
Europe does the opposite of defending itself. It bullies members who want to build defences. It destroys countries and turns them into post apocalyptic nightmares that serve as migrant transit camps. It waits off the coast of Libya and picks up people only a few yards off the coast and brings them back to Europe.
As a sovereign nation Britain can just create sufficient money as required, the national debt is just a scary monster to cow the masses with, but in reality it is a paper tiger. The Bank of England was set up to deal with just these problems, shortly after the Glorious Revolution.
If I had come on to this stage four years ago and told you, my friends, that we were going to have 40% of the world’s governmental debt at negative interest rates, $10 trillion on central bank balance sheets, and $10 trillion worth of dollar-denominated emerging-market debt, and that global GDP growth would average only 2%, unemployment would be below 5%, and interest rates would be negative in much of the world and less than 50 basis points in the US, you would have laughed me out of the room. You would have all hit the unsubscribe button. Today’s world was unthinkable a mere four to five years ago.
http://ggc-mauldin-images.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/pdf/160625_TFTF.pdf
John Mauldin seems to have lost the plot over the years. The Japanese have led the way, instead of having 30%+ unemployment when their mega bubble burst they have managed to have very low unemployment for 25 years. Stagnation? Yes. Disaster? Certainly not. The Japanese Central Bank have hoovered up 30% of government debt and will hoover up lots more over the next few years without creating much inflation. Very clever of them.
I don't really believe this remorse thing is that big. It was a secret vote. Many who say they regret it may have actually voted remain.
People should have it explained to them that it is really just like a worker opting out of a union. Money is not everything. The hyper concern should make them more resolute. They are showing themselves to be slaves if their greatest concern is not being able to buy so much Chinese made rubbish.
More than 2.5 million people have signed a petition calling for a second EU referendum, after the vote to leave.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36629324
It has more signatures than any other on the parliamentary website and as it has passed 100,000, Parliament will consider it for a debate.
The UK voted to leave the EU by 52% to 48% in Thursday's referendum but the majority of voters in London, Scotland and Northern Ireland backed Remain.
The petition is nothing more than sour grapes and will not succeed. Democracy has spoken, but unfortunately such outcomes are very hard to accept when on the losing side.
Change is hard to accept. There will be positives and negatives with this move, just like if it went the other way. And if it had gone the otherway, would such a petition be listened too? no, ofcourse not.
Move on.
It may be false:
https://i.sli.mg/HOmzOW.png
he picked them to stay in, but shorted European stocks and brought gold as he saw problems in Europe with migration, now he is picking more to leave the EU
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/08/george-soros-has-made-big-bearish-invest…
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/25/brexit-makes-eus-dissolution-practically…
I thought I was in a minority, as I read this, but most correspondents here see though the self seving tripe that is regularly thrown at the long suffering British public by the Uk political elite. It's called politics in the post-truth era. It works for me so I'll say it. Churchill had a deep seated belief in democracy, and genuine political and personal courage. Cameron has little vision , and his reasons for resignation demonstrate his gutlessness. To quote, "Why should I do the hard shit?", not, perhaps someone might do this better than me.
'Keep calm,carry on Britain"
Patten's one of the Elite. So naturally questions of sovereignty and Constitution are, shall we say, malleable.
The best-reasoned view for Leave I've ever seen is AEP's: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/12/brexit-vote-is-about-the…
And after the event, this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/24/the-sky-has-not-fallen-a…
I just refuse to raise this as a topic of conversations with my friends/acquaintances because whilst I see merit and the rationale in Brexit almost all of them don't. When I have raised it, they've looked at me like some sort of low IQ xenophobe, when I'm far from either of those!
I had a robust discussion with my father last night, I told him to put himself in the shoes of all the Brits (or kiwis) for that matter) who are just getting more downtrodden under the status quo.
The status quo is great for the elite.
What really annoys me are so called 'progressives' or 'liberals' who backed 'Bremain' but can't see the contradiction in that position....
Majority? Not by a long shot...unless you are counting non voters as leave votes..
"Rather, it was the absurdly low bar for exit, requiring only a simple majority. Given voter turnout of 70%, this meant that the leave campaign won with only 36% of eligible voters backing it"
Well worth a read and shows the lack of foresight with the structure of this reforendum.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/brexit-democratic-failure-…
“Some financial firms, banks and perhaps even governments will now default,” Hudson predicted.
An interesting read. Probably too pessimistic, but some of it may come to pass. http://www.truthdig.com/report/page2/2008_all_over_again_20160624
Sunderland is now the most productive car plant on the Continent, with vehicle output dwarfing that of the whole of Italy. Every Sunderland worker makes an average of 118 cars a year and the factory has been at its 500,000- unit annual capacity since 2011. In Italy, 401,317 cars were built last year.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/engineering/12…
The Brexit vote was essentially a vote for productive industry and against its mortal enemy, City finance. Productive jobs in the regions, not jobs in money laundering London. When jobs are lost in the City, the rest of the country think it is a good thing as they are seen as a bunch of overpaid white collar criminals who make a living by stealing from others.
Just as money pouring into Auckland stuffs up productive business here. Finance is primarily about wealth transfer, not about productivity. The 5% of financial activity that does increase productivity is used to legitimise the 95% that is parasitic.
I don't think it is that easy. The solution may be for the West to regain some martial spirit and actually see these challenges as kind of fun. Unfortunately the West has turned itself into a large shopping mall where nothing is worth fighting for anymore so it is rather disadvantaged. This also means that the West cannot replace the ideology of the enemy with something better so winning hearts and minds fails. Islam in general rejects the degeneracy of the West.
It's hard to imagine the EU any weaker than it is already. The leadership are deliberately allowing ISIS in. Practically going over there and picking them up and bringing them back. In Europe they are housed in refugee centres and ghettos where their sense of oppression and injustice can be further fermented while the more concessions that are made just makes the situation worse. They are also assisting terror organizations in Libya and Syria. They have agitated rebel movements in the ME to cause civil war which has resulted in massive refugee flows. They are deliberately blinding themselves to the fact that most refugees are military age young men. Young German men will soon be a minority in their own country. On top of that the extreme right wing grows in power as each day passes. It is very poor management.
Well that productive Sunderland factory will be effected. Nissan wrote to each employee stating their preference for a remain win. 32000 jobs throughout the uk depends on Nissans Sunderland plant. This vote is not a vote for uk independence. It is a vote for uk isolationism and a vote for the breakup of the uk itself. Well done england. And moodys has already downgraded uk credit rating. 7% govt deficit just got more expensive. Price of petrol just jumped 10% purely on the currency fall alone. Recession in uk is a certainty as are job losses. The country is without leadership too. Boris needs to be questioned for all the lies he told.
Indeed, an immediate balance of trade,manufacturing and exporting boost, plus inbound tourism, and a likelihood of eliminating loss leading dependants,locally and in Scotland,perhaps Northern Ireland, as well as the already calculated benefits of cutting out subsidising Basket case minor European economies, control over borders and immigration. I see no long term downside in it.
Hang about a bit. Maybe now a more reasonable set of rules with be worked out, that actually work better for all parties. Like, reasonably free movement of people within Europe, reasonably free trade and reasonably free flow of capital. Sounds good to me.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/25/we-have-the-chance-to-fo…
It is incredible that people actually believe leaving is destroying young people's futures. That would only possibly happen if Europe becomes vindictive. If they did that it would actually confirm that leaving was the right thing to do. The US is not in the EU, NZ and Australia and Canada are not in the EU....
It's like there is no other way, no possible way of improving things, the status quo must remain.
How this will play out: (Simpelton's version )
A) Lots of huffing n puffing.
B) Other (EU) discontent from within
C) EU disbandment back to a common market with dropping of the political governance.
Footnote : I love how all the 18-35's are blaming the older generation(s) for this outcome....Hopefully their apathy from NOT voting will be a lesson to them to pay more attention in class,or wherever, instead of being so absorbed in modern day media demi-gods.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.