As we proceed with the Brexit circus, I feel increasingly compelled to write. I have felt stigmatised into silence, unwilling to reveal my views. I feel I am not entitled to express my views as they are apparently so offensive to those who choose to differ. I feel the intimidation and intolerance of those who patronise me with their judgmental generalisations. It may be that those supporting remain do not think they are having this effect or that they wish to, but then again, maybe they do.
Intolerance and intimidation are, of course, the very antithesis of the values that Remainers are espousing. That is a reflection of society as it is, and perhaps historians of the future will reflect on this period with interest.
We are approaching the vote on Tuesday the 11th of December of Mrs May's Brexit deal. As you would expect the respective parties are in overdrive to put their position across. The deal being presented is, apparently, much worse than remaining and supposedly better than no deal, depending upon who you speak to. Refreshingly enough both remain and leave supporting MPs are united in their opposition, this is democracy in action.
I have not read the agreement, but I feel that it is not necessary for two reasons: firstly the MPs are responsible for understanding and challenging this. Secondly, the deal is widely expected to fall and therefore there is no benefit in examining it. It is an expensive waste of time, unfortunately. The only opinion I have on the deal is that it is my view that it has been deliberately engineered to be as unpalatable as possible, perhaps this is too cynical a view to support, but it would not surprise me.
I want to spend some time on the mini-campaign by both sides during this period. Once again, as before the referendum, we are getting full on negative impact assessments from business leaders, the Bank of England, Treasury and other bodies favouring remain, or in this case, the unsatisfactory deal on the table. The first point I would like to make is that the doom laden scenarios lack credibility, this is not because I am an economics, supply chain or legal expert that can present a well informed view. It is because the evidence of growth and resilience of the country, post the referendum, has demonstrated the lack credibility. Remainers will state that we did not experience the significant downturn because of actions taken by various players in mitigating the effects. This point then demonstrates the second flaw in the argument, which is that we will not simply sit back and do nothing, which is what the forecasts and scenarios seem to imply.
In terms of the leave side, they are of the view that somehow they can reject the deal and then go back to the EU to re-negotiate an alternative deal. The EU has unequivocally stated that there is nothing else on the table, it is this deal, no deal or no Brexit. So my opinion on this is that it is also a fruitless exercise, unless you believe that the EU will somehow buckle under the threat of no deal. I don't think they will. The only alternative is no deal. This is not what I would like, but then I have no choice when presented with the alternatives.
So where does that leave us? Well, considering that Parliament is Remain leaning, it is conceivable that the MPs will simply ignore the vote and remain in the EU. Indeed, it would seem that this is both possible and desirable from the EU. One of the possibilities is that the deal is rejected and either before or after Mrs May then resigns or is ousted, a so called peoples vote is held.
A peoples vote or referendum Mk II, would be in keeping with the EU approach in overturning the democratic decisions of voters by simply asking again. The point made by remain supporting MPs and commentators is that people are entitled to change their mind now that they know the true impact of Brexit. I cannot disagree with this, people are entitled to change their minds if they feel better informed. The first issue I would take with this is that the voters were clearly promised, indeed threatened, that the original referendum was a one-off. But then broken promises are not uncommon with politicians. Another issue is that the impact of Brexit, as represented, lacks credibility and impartiality. The deal is not a Brexit by any, even a broad, definition. The last thing on this subject is what happens if the decision is again to leave? If, and one presumes that this is the case, the result is to remain, then what happens when UKIP MK 2 or whatever incarnation comes to replace them starts to gain traction again with the voters?
My view on the outcome is that, as a voter, I do not feel I have any choice. Both of the main parties are split and the smaller parties are a waste of a vote. Tony Blair made the observation, among others, that no one is holding the centre ground. Voters feel disenfranchised. So the rise of an alternative party would seem likely. It is interesting to note that more right-wing leaning parties are on the rise in mainland of Europe, please listen and address the concerns of voters or the slide will most likely continue.
I want to talk about the economics of the situation as I see it. I currently do most of my shopping at Waitrose, it is expensive but convenient. Occasionally I go to ASDA and Tesco if I am passing. Why is this relevant? Imagine if there were laws which said I must use Waitrose and I am only allowed to go to ADSA and Tesco for particular goods but that I have to restrict how much of them I can buy. If Waitrose was in charge of what I was allowed to buy and from whom then clearly they would wish to limit the ability of ASDA and Tesco to threaten their position. So they key factor here is controlling the market to your advantage and by expanding your catchment area you can capture more of this market. Even better, because your expansion is covering less mature economies, you benefit by controlling their economies and making full use of their inexpensive labour. This is basically competitive advantage. As it is now if I want to leave the Waitrose dominated arrangement and choose to shop in Aldi, Tesco, ASDA and Sainsburys whenever I wanted to then I would not expect to have to get the agreement of Waitrose.
So how does this translate? The EU is paid a large amount of money as membership, more than we take out in benefits directly. Our trade balance with the EU is in deficit, ie they sell significantly more to us than we do to them, perhaps some of this is due to restrictive practices, but it doesn't really matter. The main point is we represent a valuable market and a source of direct income. If we choose to leave then we are choosing not to pay the membership fee and to check out the competition to see if we can get a better deal, in a nutshell. No one likes losing control and influence and therefore it is no surprise that the EU is unhappy with this.
The EU started out as a restrictive cartel to control coal and steel production, ostensibly so no single nation could start an arms race without the others being aware. One of the pressing arguments made by remainers is that the EU has been a force for good in introducing changes and tacking the issues of the day. I would not disagree with this, but the implication that the UK would regress is judgmental and not based on any firm grounding. They are trying to foresee the future as though they will not be part of the decision making process that guides the values and beliefs of our society. If we choose to, we can do everything the EU does, but the key point is that we can choose to. We can choose not to if we don't agree with the changes.
So that was a very long way of me saying I have felt stigmatised for having what I think are quite reasonable views. I am becoming less concerned with my friends and family knowing my voting preference because my expectations of being listened to or understood continue to diminish. I have surprised at least two people with my views this last week and that is understandable given my connections with Belgium and my interest in being able to continue unfettered access to my home and family. It is also worthy of note that Belgium has been the unfortunate battlefield site across many wars fought by various nations throughout history. Of more concern, the very institutions of the EU are in Brussels and therefore are the most likely target in the future and even now for civil unrest. I genuinely worry about the safety of my family in the future.
There is not an easy end to the current situation because it is driven by power and politics rather than reason and economic judgement. As a remainer or leaver you can interpret that to fit your narrative and continue to disagree or you can try and understand by reasoning, without threats, why the other side thinks the way they do.
Sunday, 9 December 2018
Sunday, 14 October 2018
Brexit - Finally Moved to Write
Why?
I think this will disappoint a lot of people who know me and most likely they will question my judgement. I will get the main question over with, I voted to leave. Good, now that is said I can finally feel relief that I should not feel burdened with the secret of what should be nobody's business but my own.
Why have I felt the need to be evasive or coy about my views, although, with my commentary on Facebook, it probably became very apparent what my standpoint was on the subject? I'll tell you why. It is the very divisive and disruptive nature of the whole debate, coupled with my strong connections to Belgium. There are all sorts of labels being applied to anyone who discusses the topic that they lose sight of what the real issues are and what they mean to those who cast their vote.
As a generalisation, and this is supported by the analysis of the voting demographics, my friends are split down very similar lines. Better educated and well off are EU fans, those not so well off and supposedly not so well educated are not hot with the EU. In the run up and post referendum, I have discussed the topic with my Belgian friends and An, who has remained remarkably impartial on the subject.
So why did I vote the way I did?
It is probably easier to say and more productive to say what my decision was not based upon. First and foremost my decision is not based on economics, if anyone was attempting to persuade me of the merits of remaining or leaving, economics was not something I was concerned about. Unquestionably there are economic opportunities and threats with leaving or maybe more correctly stated, consequences, but that was not a vote winner with me. The much criticised claim of the NHS benefiting by an additional £350m per week, did not play any role. I, like many reasonable people, saw that for what it was. The same could be said for the dire immediate economic impacts of voting to leave. The media and politicians have long spelt out doom and gloom which fails to materialise in quite the way they claimed.
Secondly, I did not vote because of immigration or some xenophobic fear of people coming over to take my job. I am concerned that we have a large city's worth of people entering the country every year without having the requisite infrastructure to support them. I do also feel that we should have better controls to allow in only the skills that we need in the country. I work in an industry sector which takes the best people in the world, wherever they happen to come from and employs them if they have the right skills and ambition. We also need immigration, let me say that again, we need immigration. The reason is that we are an aging population and we need to have a youthful workforce to keep powering our economy. I do feel that this message was not clearly aired, but perhaps the leavers would have felt they were alienating some of their potential voters. So immigration and the unfortunate labels that go with that debate were not relevant to my decision.
Thirdly and perhaps a little bit on the absurd side, I have no delusions or desire to go back to the days of Empire, even if that were at all possible. In my opinion the US Empire is on the wane, the Chinese are on the rise and the British Empire's heart stopped beating around the end of 1930s. No, I am not some cricket playing, fox hunting, feudal lord seeking slaves to work my land and any other ridiculous and imaginative connotations that you would like to dream up.
What shaped my views?
I grew up in the 1970s and 1980s. Essentially in slum conditions in the labour heartland that is Gateshead. Labour did little for me and Thatcher, the epitome of evil that her policies represented, was oppressive. During the miners strike I was in favour of the police, because I did not understand the politics at that age but thought that violence was clearly not the solution. When John Smith came along, I found that there was someone I could believe in, unfortunately he died before being able to get to the office of Prime Minister. Such a shame. Much though I detested Thatcher, she did possess strength of character and leadership, but lets not get too dreamy about that.
When Tony Blair came along and we had what I would describe of as the golden years of labour, I was a convert. People now say that he is a war criminal for the invasion of Iraq, but they were not saying such things when he took us into Bosnia and Sierra Leone. People have short memories and are far too judgmental.
Before Tony Blair came along I had the blessing of attending higher education, something I think I would have been put off from in this day and age due to the debt being incurred at such a young age. Among other things, I studied European Studies and at this point in time it was all about the Maastricht treaty. A few key headers from those days: in theory the European Union was a great idea, in practice it corrupted behavior. The UK was painted as that bad player, despite domestically introducing and adhering to most EU Directives and initiatives. Other nations appeared to play a rather more loose game. Assurances were given about no desire to have a federal superstate, although clearly that is very much the end state desired. It seemed that we were (in the form of free market economics) destroying our coal, steel and shipbuilding industries, whilst other European nations were subsidising them. This was the first thing to shape my views on the EU Project. But we are talking early 90s here.
The other main driver that has shaped my views has been the violent break up of the former Yugoslavia and USSR. Now the circumstances are somewhat different in both of those cases but they bring relevant and interesting points to the discussion. In the case of the former it was a bloody civil war involving all of the horrors of genocide and destruction on the civilian population. I feel that this is a risk that could apply to an EU superstate, fragmenting along former cultural and national lines.
In the case of the USSR, the EU is ever eager to welcome more countries and I take the view that the reason is twofold: firstly they can get another piece of developing market that they can sell their own goods to and secondly limiting access to competitors and why not. Turkey has a population (market of 77m) If they are ever brought into the fold completely then access to that market can be restricted by barriers to trade etc. So in the case of the USSR the former Eastern Bloc countries have no great desire to be governed by some central, undemocratic and oppressive regime. We have to remember the fun times they had behind the iron curtain. If you are 28 or under there is a good chance you will not know a lot about the USSR and being oppressed, a generalisation but something you should check out.
Why I Voted to Leave
I voted to leave for the simple reason that I believe that the EU in it's current trajectory will result in bloody and destructive conflict. In my view the EU institutions and where the power really resides, (Mainly Germany for economic reasons), means that the EU cannot realistically become a democratically accountable structure. A most pertinent question would be 'who will be in charge?' Should it be a leader from say Greece? How about Latvia? Maybe Germany as they are the economic lead nation? The problem is that anyone from any of the countries will act in their particular interest, it is perfectly natural to do so. We have seen this in action over the Greek crisis.
I genuinely felt that we might have seen mass bloodshed on the streets of Greece, given the oppressive measures being forced on them by the Troika (ECB, IMF and Eurogroup). It is a complex problem and I strongly recommend a couple of books by Yanis Varoufakis, it is eye opening. Yanis is a supporter of the EU and remain but recognises the need to reform. Sadly the EU does not appear to be reforming and instead is bearing down on dissent where it can.
So that really was it. I voted because I fear a conflict in the future and let's be honest the EEC/EU has not prevented conflict, although it has helped. The main security against conflict has been in the collective defence of NATO, which the European nations have been taking full and unjustified advantage of for too long, by that I mean they have not been paying their way.
The last thing I will say, for now at least, is that the EU represents a market of 0.5bn people. That is a lot of BMWs, bottles of wine, bags of sugar etc that you can sell, whilst putting up barriers to prevent others getting in. The EU has and will remain a protectionist block that is lobbied by large corporations so they can enjoy the benefits of their influence. With new EU nations joining, they represent very cheap and mobile labour (as well as a market) that you can take advantage of.
I genuinely hope that the rest of the EU wake up and see what is happening so they can reform. I did not expect to wake up on that June morning in 2016 and find that the decision was to leave. I along with many others will find life a little more complicated when the departure becomes effective.
I think this will disappoint a lot of people who know me and most likely they will question my judgement. I will get the main question over with, I voted to leave. Good, now that is said I can finally feel relief that I should not feel burdened with the secret of what should be nobody's business but my own.
Why have I felt the need to be evasive or coy about my views, although, with my commentary on Facebook, it probably became very apparent what my standpoint was on the subject? I'll tell you why. It is the very divisive and disruptive nature of the whole debate, coupled with my strong connections to Belgium. There are all sorts of labels being applied to anyone who discusses the topic that they lose sight of what the real issues are and what they mean to those who cast their vote.
As a generalisation, and this is supported by the analysis of the voting demographics, my friends are split down very similar lines. Better educated and well off are EU fans, those not so well off and supposedly not so well educated are not hot with the EU. In the run up and post referendum, I have discussed the topic with my Belgian friends and An, who has remained remarkably impartial on the subject.
So why did I vote the way I did?
It is probably easier to say and more productive to say what my decision was not based upon. First and foremost my decision is not based on economics, if anyone was attempting to persuade me of the merits of remaining or leaving, economics was not something I was concerned about. Unquestionably there are economic opportunities and threats with leaving or maybe more correctly stated, consequences, but that was not a vote winner with me. The much criticised claim of the NHS benefiting by an additional £350m per week, did not play any role. I, like many reasonable people, saw that for what it was. The same could be said for the dire immediate economic impacts of voting to leave. The media and politicians have long spelt out doom and gloom which fails to materialise in quite the way they claimed.
Secondly, I did not vote because of immigration or some xenophobic fear of people coming over to take my job. I am concerned that we have a large city's worth of people entering the country every year without having the requisite infrastructure to support them. I do also feel that we should have better controls to allow in only the skills that we need in the country. I work in an industry sector which takes the best people in the world, wherever they happen to come from and employs them if they have the right skills and ambition. We also need immigration, let me say that again, we need immigration. The reason is that we are an aging population and we need to have a youthful workforce to keep powering our economy. I do feel that this message was not clearly aired, but perhaps the leavers would have felt they were alienating some of their potential voters. So immigration and the unfortunate labels that go with that debate were not relevant to my decision.
Thirdly and perhaps a little bit on the absurd side, I have no delusions or desire to go back to the days of Empire, even if that were at all possible. In my opinion the US Empire is on the wane, the Chinese are on the rise and the British Empire's heart stopped beating around the end of 1930s. No, I am not some cricket playing, fox hunting, feudal lord seeking slaves to work my land and any other ridiculous and imaginative connotations that you would like to dream up.
What shaped my views?
I grew up in the 1970s and 1980s. Essentially in slum conditions in the labour heartland that is Gateshead. Labour did little for me and Thatcher, the epitome of evil that her policies represented, was oppressive. During the miners strike I was in favour of the police, because I did not understand the politics at that age but thought that violence was clearly not the solution. When John Smith came along, I found that there was someone I could believe in, unfortunately he died before being able to get to the office of Prime Minister. Such a shame. Much though I detested Thatcher, she did possess strength of character and leadership, but lets not get too dreamy about that.
When Tony Blair came along and we had what I would describe of as the golden years of labour, I was a convert. People now say that he is a war criminal for the invasion of Iraq, but they were not saying such things when he took us into Bosnia and Sierra Leone. People have short memories and are far too judgmental.
Before Tony Blair came along I had the blessing of attending higher education, something I think I would have been put off from in this day and age due to the debt being incurred at such a young age. Among other things, I studied European Studies and at this point in time it was all about the Maastricht treaty. A few key headers from those days: in theory the European Union was a great idea, in practice it corrupted behavior. The UK was painted as that bad player, despite domestically introducing and adhering to most EU Directives and initiatives. Other nations appeared to play a rather more loose game. Assurances were given about no desire to have a federal superstate, although clearly that is very much the end state desired. It seemed that we were (in the form of free market economics) destroying our coal, steel and shipbuilding industries, whilst other European nations were subsidising them. This was the first thing to shape my views on the EU Project. But we are talking early 90s here.
The other main driver that has shaped my views has been the violent break up of the former Yugoslavia and USSR. Now the circumstances are somewhat different in both of those cases but they bring relevant and interesting points to the discussion. In the case of the former it was a bloody civil war involving all of the horrors of genocide and destruction on the civilian population. I feel that this is a risk that could apply to an EU superstate, fragmenting along former cultural and national lines.
In the case of the USSR, the EU is ever eager to welcome more countries and I take the view that the reason is twofold: firstly they can get another piece of developing market that they can sell their own goods to and secondly limiting access to competitors and why not. Turkey has a population (market of 77m) If they are ever brought into the fold completely then access to that market can be restricted by barriers to trade etc. So in the case of the USSR the former Eastern Bloc countries have no great desire to be governed by some central, undemocratic and oppressive regime. We have to remember the fun times they had behind the iron curtain. If you are 28 or under there is a good chance you will not know a lot about the USSR and being oppressed, a generalisation but something you should check out.
Why I Voted to Leave
I voted to leave for the simple reason that I believe that the EU in it's current trajectory will result in bloody and destructive conflict. In my view the EU institutions and where the power really resides, (Mainly Germany for economic reasons), means that the EU cannot realistically become a democratically accountable structure. A most pertinent question would be 'who will be in charge?' Should it be a leader from say Greece? How about Latvia? Maybe Germany as they are the economic lead nation? The problem is that anyone from any of the countries will act in their particular interest, it is perfectly natural to do so. We have seen this in action over the Greek crisis.
I genuinely felt that we might have seen mass bloodshed on the streets of Greece, given the oppressive measures being forced on them by the Troika (ECB, IMF and Eurogroup). It is a complex problem and I strongly recommend a couple of books by Yanis Varoufakis, it is eye opening. Yanis is a supporter of the EU and remain but recognises the need to reform. Sadly the EU does not appear to be reforming and instead is bearing down on dissent where it can.
So that really was it. I voted because I fear a conflict in the future and let's be honest the EEC/EU has not prevented conflict, although it has helped. The main security against conflict has been in the collective defence of NATO, which the European nations have been taking full and unjustified advantage of for too long, by that I mean they have not been paying their way.
The last thing I will say, for now at least, is that the EU represents a market of 0.5bn people. That is a lot of BMWs, bottles of wine, bags of sugar etc that you can sell, whilst putting up barriers to prevent others getting in. The EU has and will remain a protectionist block that is lobbied by large corporations so they can enjoy the benefits of their influence. With new EU nations joining, they represent very cheap and mobile labour (as well as a market) that you can take advantage of.
I genuinely hope that the rest of the EU wake up and see what is happening so they can reform. I did not expect to wake up on that June morning in 2016 and find that the decision was to leave. I along with many others will find life a little more complicated when the departure becomes effective.
Thursday, 12 April 2018
Love
I run, arms stretching out
Through the meadows,
Hands brushing the grass
On into the forests.
Rising up into the mountains,
Until my feet leave the ground,
I begin to fly, fly high.
Over the rivers,
Skimming out towards the sea,
I swoop low, laughing, smiling,
Bursting with boundless ecstasy.
I soar up towards the scudding clouds,
Bursting through to the bright sun beyond.
I fly ever faster, chasing down the sunset,
Into the inky black starry night.
Flying fast, I feel but a gentle,
Warm and comforting breeze.
I am invincible,
No fear,
No worries ,
No danger at all.
I look across,
I realise
I have seen all this,
Seen it in your eyes.
My heart has been pounding,
Now it settles to a peaceful beat,
As I take rest in your arms.
Through the meadows,
Hands brushing the grass
On into the forests.
Rising up into the mountains,
Until my feet leave the ground,
I begin to fly, fly high.
Over the rivers,
Skimming out towards the sea,
I swoop low, laughing, smiling,
Bursting with boundless ecstasy.
I soar up towards the scudding clouds,
Bursting through to the bright sun beyond.
I fly ever faster, chasing down the sunset,
Into the inky black starry night.
Flying fast, I feel but a gentle,
Warm and comforting breeze.
I am invincible,
No fear,
No worries ,
No danger at all.
I look across,
I realise
I have seen all this,
Seen it in your eyes.
My heart has been pounding,
Now it settles to a peaceful beat,
As I take rest in your arms.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)