Negotiating Brexit - the basics

Firstly, some health advice.  Everyone just calm down.  We have had a referendum. We, as the people of the United Kingdom, made a choice and we will live with it.

Also, let's be very clear.  The United Kingdom is still a full and functioning member of the European Union.  We are still subject to all of the rules that membership imposes.  All those people who are accusing the Leave campaign of not fulfilling campaign promises need to understand that no substantive changes can occur while we remain a member of the EU.  Politicians and media commentators already know this and should think very carefully before they, for presumably personal gain, push and publish statements to the contrary.

And think back to last Friday.  Did the sun come up?  Did you go to work and do the same things that you did on Thursday and Wednesday? Was the price to fill-up you car or shopping trolley, the same as the previous time? Has the government suddenly declared we are on a war-footing?  Did Germany stop exporting cars to us and the French, wine?

Wasn't there an old WW2 poster about Keep Calm and Carry On ?

OK, so may as well address the elephant in the room, at the outset.

Nigel Farage should almost certainly take no public part in the negotiation with our (still current) EU partners.  None.  He is far too divisive and incapable of not gloating.

These negotiations are the responsibility of the UK government.  That government is formed by the Conservative Party and currently led by David Cameron.  Cameron has made it clear that he wants someone else to lead his party and the negotiations and so any team-forming must await the outcome of the Tory leadership campaign.  That might frustrate the likes of Jean-Claude Juncker but that's just tough.

I said, at the outset, that Farage should take no part.  Of course that is down to the new Conservative leader but I see no reason for Farage to be a member of the team.  The Conservative Party have a large number of very capable MPs who could participate and anyway, the bulk of the work needs to be carried out by the Civil Service, once they have been given their very clear, marching orders.   The latter point is critical, the Civil Service need to be told, in no uncertain terms that they are to broker a deal that is in the UK's interest and that matches the democratic decision of the people of the UK - a departure (Leave if you will) from all of the institutions of the European Union.

Fundamentally though, it is the Conservative Party that must shoulder the bulk of the work.  They may bring in and take advice from non-Conservative Party advisers but it is the role of the Conservative government to lead and get the job done.

As regular readers would expect, I have a few opinions on the whole process.  Here goes.

Assuming that he isn't chosen as the leader of the Conservative Party, I would propose David Davis, the MP for Haltemprice and Howden, as the leader of these negotiations.  Davis has been a long-time Euro-sceptic but is not so hide-bound that he cannot build bridges across the political spectrum - he was elevated in many people's opinion with his principled opposition to increased detention periods.  He also has a good 'back-story' and has repeatedly shown that he is 'no one's fool' and is not easily brow-beaten.  I would certainly trust him to represent Britain's interests but to do so in a British manner - not rubbing the EU's nose in it.

I believe that the negotiating team would benefit from cross-party participation - Kate Hoey and especially Gisela Stuart were very impressive during the campaign.  Jim Sellars from Scotland and Arlene Foster from Northern Ireland would also be great contributors.  As would Dan Hannan, who could bring his considerable inside knowledge to bear.  Douglas Carswell would also be a sound contributor as would be Suzanne Evans.

As you will note, all are Brexiteers.  It makes little to no sense to have people that passionately believed in Remain, sitting in the team and possibly thwarting the wishes and aims of the people of the UK.

The issues on which we need resolution are clear, and given the febrile atmosphere, now and here isn't the place. to discuss them.

That said, one thing needs to be made crystal clear.  EU migrants, that are now in the UK, should be immediately reassured that there residence is not in jeopardy.  They must be allowed the comfort of knowing we welcomed them before and welcome them now.  This is something that David Cameron can and must state, immediately.

More to follow but for now, let us all remain calm and a British sense of perspective.

Westminster's deficits

Dear reader, please don't be too worried and immediately look elsewhere - this posting won't feature too heavily on the monetary deficit or debt that is affecting the UK.

Rather this is about the other two deficits that are plaguing the UK.

When the so called 'expenses' scandal broke, many people expected the politicians that had their noses so deep into the public purse and were claiming expenses that, if not criminally wrong were at least ethically so, would be severely punished at the ballot box.  Some of them were but maybe not enough.  Some went to prison but again, not enough.

In two recent by-elections - Heywood and Clacton - much has been made of the the results.  In Heywood, Labour clung onto a supposedly safe seat with a much reduced majority of 617 votes, from a concerted challenge by UKIP.   The UKIP leaders crow that if just 20% of the Tory vote had come their way, instead of being 'split' (in their view) then they would have had a remarkable night.

These same UKIP leaders also shout about the victory of their candidate, Douglas Carswell, in Claction, where he actually increased the majority with which he previously won, when he did so as a Conservative candidate at the 2010 General Election.

Look a little closer though and these results seem less spectacular and actually quite worrying.

In Clacton, the winner, Douglas Carswell was a very active local MP for the Conservative party.  His wider activism around European issues, also assured him of media air-time as a prominent Euro-sceptic Tory.  His defection to UKIP was not a complete surprise and neither was his decision to stand down and force a by-election.  That decision speaks to an integrity that is all too lacking among so many of the Westminster elite.

It is a bit rich though for Nigel Farage, the leader of UKIP, to claim that the election of that party's first MP was about a tide of anti-establishment voting which was ready to sweep away the 'out of touch 'Westminster' parties.  The electoral turn-out in Claction was just over 51%.  So when you consider Farage's comments it seems that people were so disgusted with the Westminster elite that barely half of them could be bothered to vote.  The Clacton turn-out at the General Election was 64% so whatever the message was it can't be said to be a ringing endorsement of Farage's policies.

Again,at Heywood we see a much diminished turn-out - down from 57.5% at the General Election to 36.2% in the by election.  So barely one in three voters could be bothered to vote.  Some might say that this apathetic response is the voting equivalent of the old 'a pox on all your houses' epithet.  Labour talk about how the voters of Heywood voted against a 'viciously cruel and austerity driven Tory government' but don't mention the far from ringing mandate that their candidate gained.  UKIP talk about breaking the mould etc., but the reality is that they too couldn't engage with or mobilise the voters.

For the Tories, Heywood does support their contention that a vote for UKIP gets Ed Miliband into Downing Street and power.  The message from Clacton was always going to be hard for the Conservatives - Carswell was a very good and involved local MP and his integrity shone through.  It will be interesting to see how he works alongside Farage in the coming weeks and months.

Clearly Carswell has depth and his views on Europe and the uncontrolled immigration that the EU and the Labour Party unleashed on the UK, resonate with voters and are aligned with Farage.  However, can the same be said for the social and economic policies put forward by UKIP?  I may be wrong but I always thought that Carswell was 'sound' on the economy and understood the critical need for deficit and debt reduction and smaller government - that isn't entirely in accord with UKIP's policies.  Details on these policies are scant but suggest that UKIP follow a much more interventionist, some might say socialist, approach towards the economy - certainly if their 'spend whatever you like' pledge to the NHS is anything to go by.  

I come back though to the turn-out.  In both cases significantly below the General Election levels.

We all know that the European Project has a major democratic deficit.  In the UK, barely 34.7% of those eligible bothered to vote in the 2014 MEP elections.  The UK wasn't alone in recording such poor rates of participation.  As you can see in the below table, barely 13% in Slovakia bothered to vote!

Member States	1979	1984	1989	1994	1999	2004	2009	2014
Belgium	91.36	92.09	90.73	90.66	91.05	90.81	90.39	90
Denmark	47.82	52.38	46.17	52.92	50.46	47.89	59.54	56.4
Germany	65.73	56.76	62.28	60.02	45.19	43	43.27	47.9
Ireland	63.61	47.56	68.28	43.98	50.21	58.58	58.64	51.6
France	60.71	56.72	48.8	52.71	46.76	42.76	40.63	43.5
Italy	85.65	82.47	81.07	73.6	69.76	71.72	65.05	60
Luxembourg	88.91	88.79	87.39	88.55	87.27	91.35	90.76	90
Netherlands	58.12	50.88	47.48	35.69	30.02	39.26	36.75	37
United Kingdom	32.35	32.57	36.37	36.43	24	38.52	34.7	34.19
Greece		80.59	80.03	73.18	70.25	63.22	52.61	58.2
Spain			54.71	59.14	63.05	45.14	44.87	45.90
Portugal			51.1	35.54	39.93	38.6	36.77	34.50
Sweden					38.84	37.85	45.53	48.8
Austria					49.4	42.43	45.97	45.7
Finland					30.14	39.43	38.6	40.9
Czech Republic						28.3	28.2	19.5
Estonia						26.83	43.9	36.44
Cyprus						72.5	59.4	43.97
Lithuania						48.38	20.98	44.91
Latvia						41.34	53.7	30.04
Hungary						38.5	36.31	28.92
Malta						82.39	78.79	74.81
Poland						20.87	24.53	22.7
Slovenia						28.35	28.37	20.96
Slovakia						16.97	19.64	13
Bulgaria							38.99	35.50
Romania							27.67	32.16
Croatia								25.06
Average EU turnout	61.99	58.98	58.41	56.67	49.51	45.47	43	43.09

Now though we see  that just prior to a General Election, voter apathy for the UK parliament remains. The political parties are said to be out of touch - and that includes UKIP!  The same source of the previous table (http://www.ukpolitical.info) also provides the below table on turn-out in UK General Elections, since 1945  We all need to hope that the increases seen in 2010 are built upon and we get back to the turn-out levels seen in the late 1970s through to the 1990s.

Year	UK	England	Wales	Scotland	N.Ireland
2010	65.1	65.5	64.7	63.8	57.6
2005	61.4	61.3	62.6	60.8	62.9
2001	59.4	59.2	61.6	58.2	68
1997	71.4	71.4	73.5	71.3	67.1
1992	77.7	78	79.7	75.5	69.8
1987	75.3	75.4	78.9	75.1	67
1983	72.7	72.5	76.1	72.7	72.9
1979	76	75.9	79.4	76.8	67.7
1974 Oct	72.8	72.6	76.6	74.8	67.7
1974 Feb	78.8	79	80	79	69.9
1970	72	71.4	77.4	74.1	76.6
1966	75.8	75.9	79	76	66.1
1964	77.1	77	80.1	77.6	71.7
1959	78.7	78.9	82.6	78.1	65.9
1955	76.8	76.9	79.6	75.1	74.1
1951	82.6	82.7	84.4	81.2	79.9
1950	83.9	84.4	84.8	80.9	77.4
1945	72.8	73.4	75.7	69	67.4

Perhaps there is a message for David Cameron in the above table?  Maybe it is, that when Margaret Thatcher pursued unpopular but many believe absolutely necessary policies, she brought many voters out to vote.  Indeed, they voted for her and her successor, John Major, in significant numbers and brought large parliamentary success for the Conservatives.  Yes they also voted against her and her policies but the majority voted for the Conservative party.

Strange that!  Give people the hard choice or the soft irresponsible one that Labour pushed and the people chose the tough one on four separate occasions and in large numbers.  Who would have thought it?

While Cameron and his pollsters are thinking about the upcoming General Election, they should also maybe think about these things.

People, other than self-interested public sector union members, haven't taken to the streets in protest about austerity.  I believe that this demonstrates that 'the people' understand the need to rein in public spending.  The need for a welfare cap seems to now be universally accepted.  People can see that those in the public sector have had it too easy and have been cossetted from the realities of life  that 'they' have had to face - redundancy, under-performing and uncertain pensions, real wage cuts and belt-tightening - at home and at work.

'The people' will vote for a party that addresses the first deficit - that of integrity.  A party that does what is right for the UK.  The Conservatives deserve credit for having the courage to push forward with reforms but they have been too timid.  I accept that much of that lack of backbone was because of the compromises that were forced upon them by their coalition partners - the fast-fading Liberal Democrats - but when they come before the electorate again, they must stress their economic competence and emphasize the incompetence and economic mal-administration of the Labour Party.  The electorate know who got us into this mess!

'The people' will also vote for a party that addresses the second deficit - that of democracy.  Again, a party that does what is right for the UK.  One that allows the people of the UK a say on the UK's continued participation in the European Union and one that addresses the democracy needs within the UK.  The so-called 'West Lothian' question has never gone away but the recent Scottish Referendum has brought a much greater focus onto this and to the democratic deficit that is suffered by the English.  I don't advocate an 'English parliament' but English MPs for 'English' votes seems entirely reasonable.

Cameron and Co. need to openly push the message about how they can and will address these two deficits and in the process the other deficit and debt reduction and they now need to do so, unfettered by their Coalition partners.  So it is time to ditch the Lib Dems.  It shan't be too difficult to find an excuse and it allows for a decent period of time - for both parties - to put some clear water between themselves and allow their policy differences to be evident.

I will come back later on what those Conservative policies, should look like.

Carswell and UKIP

I am not sure that the defection, from the Conservative Party to UKIP, is really such a surprise.  Carswell is refreshingly independent and has pursued issues in such a manner.  He has long been an opponent of the continually encroaching nature of the European Union and its repeated erosion of the long held rights of Britons.

What should be worrying for the Conservatives is that Carswell is at the forefront of exploring the new 'e-led' ways of engaging with voters and so his defection represents a real loss.

Equally, it shouldn't be any surprise that Carswell has resigned his seat and so forces a by-election.  This is the action of a man of principle and sets an honourable example for others to follow.

There are rumours that up to eight other Conservative MPs are considering defecting to UKIP.  Some of these will be based on principles, as was Carswell's and some will be based on fear and political calculation - they expect a high threat from UKIP in the next election.

This defection is a problem for Cameron and the Conservatives.

Labour too, are not immune though its adherents are perhaps more in tune with the leftist/statist policies and direction of the EU.  Labour too, has often displayed a country last approach to issues as clearly evidenced by their obsession with the failed multi-culturalist policy.

For Cameron and the Conservatives, this defection is the fruit of a failed policy.  Cameron has offered a referendum on the UK's continued membership of the European Union but there is a very strong sense that his heart really isn't in it and that he will present whatever terms he manages to renegotiate as a significant victory and so justifying the UK remaining in the EU.  "Today, fresh from all-night discussions with our EU partners, I can announce that the UK has retained the right to have round dustbins and on that victory, I will be recommending that the UK stays in the EU" or something like that!

The election of Jean Claude Juncker showed how ineffectual Cameron has been in Europe and how he was out-maneuvered by Angela Merkel and I have no doubt, by his own advisers.  Betrayal would not be too strong a word for how the UK was treated and yet Cameron still thinks he can treat with such people.  Either he is a fool or he takes the British people for fools.  Carswell can see this and so can the rapidly growing band of UKIP supporters.

The EU is a paper tiger.  They led Ukraine to believe that they would support them and now that push has come to shove, they have deserted them in the face of Russian aggression and real-politik.  Cameron and the UK government should abandon EU organisations and withhold funds from the EU beast, forthwith.  Let the EU take us to whatever kind of court that they want.  How many tanks does the European Court have?  Tell them to go to the socialist hell towards which they are daily pulling the UK.

Cameron should make it clear that the negotiations have already started and that we will use bully boy tactics to get what we want.  If there are counter-measures taken, then we will retaliate.  The UK has always prospered in the past, when it has stood by basic principles.  We can be taught nothing from the newly found  'democracies' of Europe - and I include Germany and France and Italy as being new! - about doing the right thing and following our long-held traditions.

All we need and want from the EU is a trade agreement.  We don't want directives on how long we work - the sovereign government of the UK can decide on that.  We don't want orders on what shape is acceptable for a banana or a cucumber or how much of the fish in Britain's waters, we can catch - the sovereign government of the UK can decide on these things.  We certainly don't want to rely on a European Army or Foreign Service to represent our interests - we know that they won't!

The EU has no legitimacy and the UK should have no part of it.  That is the message that will stop the defections and will restore the Conservatives to power.  Oh and by the way, those defections aren't just in Westminster!

October 11, 2014 Update

Douglas Carswell has duly and deservedly won the Clacton by-election.  There is much talk of this being a big problem for the Conservatives  and David Cameron.  No doubt that this is a blow but it can hardly be said that it was unexpected.

Perhaps the biggest issue from the voting on October 9, was what happened in the by-election for the till then always solid Labour seat of Heywood and Middleton.  Here, Labour retained the seat though their winning majority was slashed by 90% and they scraped in with a 617 majority.  This shows four things to me.

• Labour are as much endangered by UKIP as are the Conservatives, indeed since Labour are seen as the pro-immigration party, perhaps more so in traditional working class areas..  
• For Labour to escape the UKIP threat, they need to commit to offering a referendum on European Union membership.  I can't see this happening though, until there is a Labour MP that defects to UKIP.
• The Conservative message of 'Vote UKIP, get Labour'   doesn't work in natural Labour areas.  There, the argument can be made (as was at Heywood) 'Vote Conservative, get Labour'  - The Conservatives polled 3,400 votes and so could have delivered a major blow to Labour had just 20% of these switched to UKIP. 
• The Conservatives need to enter into a pact with UKIP - either formally or informally - and agree that pro-referendum candidates will not face UKIP opposition.  Also, where UKIP is strong, Clacton, Thurrock, Eastleigh, Heywood, for examples the Conservatives will not oppose them.  I know that this goes right against the grain but the reality is, that to do otherwise puts Labour into No. 10 and gives them 5 more years to continue to wreck the UK and the UK economy.

Congratulations to Douglas Carswell and commiserations to John Bickley (UKIP Heywood).  I think that Mark Reckless, the later defector from the Conservatives, will have a tougher time in Rochester and Strood but with how UK politics is today, and generally the people's disillusionment with the out of touch elites, anything is possible.