brexit news
http://davelevy.info/brexitmingle
brexit news - http://davelevy.info/brexitmingleOutside Views: Even the most stubborn supporters now see catastrophic mistake in the Brexit fiasco | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGAW7NleHWU
2023-09-27T04:00:24+00:00Outside Views: 10-Point Plan for Lampedusa and millions for Tunisia | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFgEnBqU8lE
2023-09-26T16:00:22+00:00a different bias: Johnson's Allies Aim to Ambush Sunak at Conference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UoFPATyDF0
2023-09-26T16:00:05+00:00a different bias: Brexiteers Unhappy That Brexit Deal is Being Honoured
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PG_1B_m4V9k
2023-09-26T11:01:10+00:00a different bias: Lib Dem Row At Party Conference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAHD5lZ0kD4
2023-09-26T11:00:13+00:00a different bias: Sunak Spinning the Wheel of Policies in Complete Meltdown of Strategy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZpJMrJBAWQ
2023-09-26T09:54:01+00:00Outside Views: Johnson attacks Sunak over newest damaging Tory U-Turn | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTWpQ2nuNOg
2023-09-26T09:46:06+00:00a different bias: Is Sunak's Inheritance Tax Plans a Pre-Election Trick?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hB6CFqwJ0E
2023-09-26T08:09:45+00:00a different bias: Reasons Why an Autumn Election Makes Sense
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQqRXSaLl54
2023-09-26T08:02:25+00:00a different bias: Rejoin March Concerning the Brexiteers Now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQEUPapp56Q
2023-09-26T07:37:53+00:00a different bias: Sunak Giving Labour an Easy Win
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlDGAtoPUD0
2023-09-26T07:24:14+00:00a different bias: HS2 Becomes an Expensive Tory Joke
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhPFzlX-mCU
2023-09-26T06:50:31+00:00a different bias: Brexiteers in Panic Over New EU Proposal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u793r8qywv0
2023-09-26T06:48:23+00:00Outside Views: Business insolvency in England and Wales jumps in August | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2-nuPxho9w
2023-09-25T16:00:32+00:00Outside Views: Declining inflation and robust labour market | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gclSpxRFS00
2023-09-25T10:00:33+00:00a different bias: Exposing More Brexit Nonsense from Farage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUEVUOgSOWg
2023-09-25T07:26:11+00:00a different bias: BREXIT: Extension to Tariff Free Export of EVs Looking Unlikely
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDt3JFx-PLg
2023-09-25T07:02:36+00:00a different bias: Latest Polling Bad News for Sunak
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwxXAmsSsXQ
2023-09-25T06:21:17+00:00a different bias: Braverman Interferes in a Live Murder Case
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHLvGVMtl6A
2023-09-25T06:10:36+00:00Outside Views: Boris Johnson is not gone | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUpYce-X7BY
2023-09-25T04:00:08+00:00Outside Views: Brexit Britan - Toxic poster child of Europe | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpRaq20_W2Q
2023-09-24T16:00:45+00:00Outside Views: Late Payment Regulation | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZx2fmQnGyk
2023-09-24T10:00:52+00:00Outside Views: Starmer behaves as if he was already Prime Minister | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT0Z95ZQlq8
2023-09-24T04:00:18+00:00Outside Views: 7.7 million people in England are waiting for routine treatment | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niPS_fQR5-Y
2023-09-23T16:00:42+00:00Outside Views: Head Office Tax System for SMEs | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq56nCnlQGQ
2023-09-23T10:00:42+00:00a different bias: Farage Banking Report to be Published This Week
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjkytCDeXq8
2023-09-23T07:11:23+00:00a different bias: Why Sunak Is Getting His Net Zero U-Turn Strategically Wrong
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZSfMM3NtPU
2023-09-23T06:57:31+00:00Outside Views: Brexit deal will be majorly rewritten if Labour is elected - says Starmer | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnbjvtqtHhQ
2023-09-23T04:00:18+00:00Outside Views: Fail for Sunak: No relaxed environmental regulations for house building | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aN_dLpMPxIk
2023-09-22T16:00:03+00:00Outside Views: Rule of Law: Commission formally closes the CVM for Bulgaria and Romania | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uFU5ZYecHs
2023-09-22T10:00:06+00:00Chris Grey's Blog: It’s limited, but Labour’s post-Brexit policy does offer voters a choice
https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/its-limited-but-labours-post-brexit.html
This has been quite an important week for post-Brexit politics, in that there has been the clearest indication yet of the approach of the anticipated future Labour government, and certainly the most extensive media coverage of it, perhaps because that prospect is becoming closer. At the same time, there’s been the clearest indication yet of how Labour’s policy will differ, to an extent, from the present Tory government and differ, considerably, from the probable position of a post-election-loss Tory Party.<br /><br /><strong>Labour’s ‘new’ post-Brexit stance</strong><br /><br />It is the latest stage in what has already been a long, slow process, which I’ve discussed many times in the past on this blog, most recently <a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2023/06/as-brexit-fails-attention-turns-to.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">in June of this year</a>. This means that, in some respects, there is little that is new. Keir Starmer has been talking <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/04/starmer-ends-labour-silence-on-brexit-as-he-rules-out-rejoining-single-market" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">since July 2022</a> – although it seemed to have to be dragged out of him – about seeking to improve the terms of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), including a security pact and a veterinary agreement. And in January of this year Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy made <a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2023/01/untying-brexits-toxic-knots.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">what I argued was a significant speech</a>, which included plans for closer and more harmonious relations with the EU.<br /><br />However, Labour are now making relations with the EU a more central part of their electoral offer, and doing so more loudly and slightly more confidently, perhaps emboldened by the clear polling evidence that so many voters regard Brexit as having been a failure. Indeed the pollster <a href="https://inews.co.uk/opinion/keir-starmer-brexit-promise-isnt-bold-catch-up-2624731" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Professor Sir John Curtice argues</a> that Labour aren’t so much being bolder as “playing catch-up” with public opinion.<br /><br />This began to be signaled by Starmer’s visit to meet Europol officials in The Hague last week to discuss enhanced cross-border intelligence cooperation, during which <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/13/starmer-on-tour-solutions-migration-crisis" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">he announced Labour’s plans</a> to strike a deal with the EU over irregular migration. Then, last weekend, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/16/labour-wants-new-eu-links-in-a-reset-of-british-foreign-policy" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">he and David Lammy</a> used a conference in Montreal to re-iterate that in government Labour would seek to re-set relations with the EU as their “number one” foreign policy goal. This isn’t just about the TCA, and would include participation in structured, formal strategic dialogue, presumably along the lines already <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/1147fc63-59f9-45c3-aee2-a15ee570bb84" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">offered by the EU but rebuffed by Rishi Sunak (£)</a>.<br /><br />During the Montreal visit, <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/6bdc4e88-c2ed-44ad-aa7d-c70bc358e027" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Starmer also gave a major interview to the <em>Financial Times</em></a>, which, tellingly, was widely reported by other media outlets, including the BBC main news bulletins, pledging “to seek a major rewrite of Britain’s Brexit deal” as part of the TCA review in 2026. Subsequently, <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-we-dont-want-to-diverge-from-eu-says-sir-keir-starmer-12966338" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">footage emerged</a>, though it was hardly surprising, of him emphasising that, under Labour, there would be no desire to diverge from EU environmental, food and employment standards. Then, also <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66852753" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">widely reported</a>, including <a href="https://www.lemonde.fr/en/european-union/article/2023/09/19/keir-starmer-leader-of-british-labour-party-outlines-european-policy_6137723_156.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">in the French media</a>, was Starmer’s trip, along with Lammy and Rachel Reeves, to Paris, where he held what <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/paris-appears-to-be-very-open-to-the-prospect-of-a-starmer-government-12965239" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">seems to have been a positive meeting</a> with Emmanuel Macron.<br /><br />In <a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-seventh-summer-of-brexit-pragmatism.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">last week’s post</a> I suggested that a Labour government might be able to fashion “a more coherent strategy, to the extent that it might pursue closer ties with the EU across all policy areas” and, even in the short period since then, it now seems clear that this is what they will offer. As such, again as I pointed out last week, it offers a contrast to the <em>ad hoc</em> and inconsistent Brexit ‘pragmatism’ of Rishi Sunak, constantly hamstrung by his own lack of vision as well as the leaden, lumpen, dead weight of his Brexit Ultra MPs, and the ever-present Conservative terror of a Farageist revival.<br /><br />It’s worth adding that, for all that Starmer has repeatedly endorsed the hard Brexit red lines of not re-joining the EU or the single market, he has at least implicitly rejected the Tories’ doctrinaire opposition to (almost) any role for the ECJ. That in itself opens up some space for creating closer relationships with the EU, as it is often what precludes them (for example in relation to security and commercial database sharing). That is a contrast both with one of Theresa May’s original Lancaster House ‘red lines’ and with Boris Johnson’s adolescent ‘sovereignty first’ approach to the TCA negotiations.<br /><br />Moreover, it is clear from his <em>FT</em> interview that Starmer has set his own red line against the ‘Brexit 2.0’ of derogating from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-tories-rishi-sunak-european-convention-on-human-rights/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">so many Brexit Ultras are agitating for</a> and which, possibly, and I would think probably, will be adopted as Conservative policy after the next election. For that matter, given Sunak’s embrace this week of the anti-Net Zero agenda of the Tory right, it’s not inconceivable that, alongside promises of a fresh push to post-Brexit regulatory divergence, it will be their policy before the election. Some may regard Starmer’s stance as a small mercy, but I think it is rather more than that: Brexit itself is bad enough, but Brexit 2.0 on top of it would be even worse.<br /><br /><strong>The Brexiters’ reactions</strong><br /><br />As this new, or newly communicated, approach from Labour began to emerge, the Brexiters’ knives were sharpened, if sharpness is a quality that can be applied to what, in both senses of the word, are such dull blades. Some of their reaction had a slightly surprising tinge. We’re well-used to them predicting the imminent collapse of the EU, but, in the <em>Telegraph</em>, both <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/15/the-eu-is-in-chaos-and-keir-starmer-cant-be-trusted/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Associate Editor Camilla Tominey (£)</a> and <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/14/the-eu-is-not-the-cuddly-place-remainers-think-it-is/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">columnist Nigel Farage (£)</a> were making the slightly different argument that, according to Tominey, only “poor deluded souls ‘remain’ under the illusion that the EU is some sort of friendly and progressive family of nations” whilst, according to Farage, “it is not the cuddly place Remainers think it is”. As evidence, both of them referred to the rise of the AfD in Germany, the illiberal regimes in Poland and Hungary, and the possibility of a Le Pen presidency in France. Why would “idiot remainers”, as Farage charmingly put it, want closer ties?<br /><br />It was a strange line to take. There may be some remainers who are starry-eyed about the EU, but there are at least as many Brexiters who are constantly astonished that the EU is ‘mean’ and ‘unfriendly’ for reserving the rights and benefits of membership to its own members, something which most remainers see as self-evident. And even those with the mildest of liberal sensibilities hardly need instruction from Farage, of all people, about the dangers of neo-fascist and populist regimes. Beyond that, the very fact that individual members of the EU follow their own political paths gives the lie to the Brexiter claim that membership precludes national sovereignty.<br /><br />But there is an even more fundamental issue, and it lies at the heart of the fallacy of Brexit. Brexiters used to say ‘we’re leaving the EU, not leaving Europe’, a slogan which, unusually, is simultaneously a truism, nonsense, and an important insight. The important insight is that, whether or not the UK is a member of the EU, the EU and its member states are there, right next door to us. Indeed, even if the EU didn’t exist at all, the nations of Europe would be there, right next door to us. Those irreducible geo-political facts mean that, whether in terms of trade, defence, irregular migration or anything else, the UK necessarily has a significant relationship with those countries.<br /><br />So the issue is how, and how best, to relate to them. Brexiters have never even tried to give a reason why being absent from the institutions that link them is a better way of relating (as opposed to their claims about the supposed benefits domestically, or in terms of relating to non-EU countries and bodies). And they most certainly haven’t given any reason why, having decided to leave those institutions, a relationship of distance and antagonism is better than one of close cooperation.<br /><br />Otherwise, most of the reactions from Tories, and Brexiters generally, to Labour’s approach have been fairly predictable. Early out of the trap, like an unusually well-conditioned Pavlovian dog hearing the distant ringing of a bell, <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/14/britain-is-now-in-serious-danger-of-losing-brexit/#:~:text=The%20country%20may%20feel%20in,run%20Britain%20would%20be%20like." rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">David Frost dribbled (£)</a> that “Britain is now in serious danger of losing Brexit” because “Labour wants to take us back closer to the EU”. It didn’t make much sense as a critique, though. Frost, like many Brexiters, gives as his central ‘philosophical’ argument that democratically elected UK governments should be free to pursue whatever policies they judge to be in the UK’s best interests. So if such a government decides being closer to the EU is in the national interest, then, even in Frost’s own terms, it doesn’t mean ‘losing’ Brexit but enacting it.<br /><br />A few days later, <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/18/the-government-is-paving-the-way-for-labours-brexit-betraya/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Frost came up with the even more predictable line (£)</a> of “Brexit betrayal”. If possible, this made even less sense than his previous effort, if only because, in insisting that the EU would not countenance an improvement to the TCA he negotiated, he not only negated his claim that it was already a wonderful deal – since he implicitly conceded that, <em>were</em> the EU minded to agree, a better deal is possible – he also negated the very claim that a ‘betrayal’ was in prospect.<br /><br />In fact, this was a recurring contradiction in the Brexiters’ reaction, such as <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12534613/Keir-Starmer-humiliated-Brussels-betrayal-plan-renegotiate-Brexit-deal-EU-warns-Labour-leader-ahead-meeting-Frances-Macron-wont-budge-unless-Britain-rejoins-customs-union.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the <em>Mail</em>’s report on Starmer’s meeting with Macron</a>. On the one hand, the prospects of the EU agreeing any re-negotiation were dismissed – strangely, the Brexiters have now abandoned all their claims about Britain ‘holding all the cards’ or ‘them needing us more than we need them’ – whilst, on the other hand, the non-outcome of this non-negotiation was presented as something to fear.<br /><br />That aside, Frost’s second article was revealing in being laced with disparagement of the present Tory government for “paving the way” to Labour’s supposed betrayal, a good indicator of how the Tories will conduct their election defeat post-mortem. Frost will undoubtedly be a leading player in the autopsy, which seems almost certain to conclude that Sunak failed to be a ‘true’ Conservative and Brexiter. This will, again almost certainly, presage a lurch to the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/who-are-national-conservatives-and-what-do-they-want" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">‘National Conservative’ right</a>. Liz Truss’s attempt this week to exhume the corpse of her disastrous <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/09/21/six-wasted-years-liz-truss-deliver-brexit-actually-works/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">‘true Brexit’ premiership (£)</a> can also be seen as the beginning of the same dismal process, <a href="https://www.politics.co.uk/news-feature/2023/09/19/what-liz-truss-speech-tells-us-about-the-future-of-the-conservative-party/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">as discussed by Josh Self</a>, the increasingly excellent political commentator who succeeded Ian Dunt as Editor of politics.co.uk.<br /><br /><strong>Political dad dancing</strong><br /><br />The meta-issue in all this, shown by the reaction of Frost and <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12533171/Keir-Starmer-accused-Brexit-betrayal-vows-write-deal-EU-ahead-meeting-Emmanuel-Macron.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">numerous other Brexiters</a>, is the endless betrayalist narrative that permeates Brexit. But its very endlessness shows its absurdity. Just how many times can Brexit be betrayed? And if it has already been betrayed then what does it matter what Labour now do? Similarly, having warned us <a href="https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/uk/nigel-farage-johnson-new-deal-brexit-name-onlty/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">in October 2019</a>, and in <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ITVPeston/videos/i-fear-its-going-to-be-brexit-in-name-onlynigel-farage-tells-anushka-asthana-no-/2803353379948052/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">December 2020</a>, and in <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1699580/brexit-eu-swiss-style-deal-tories-rishi-sunak-comment" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">November 2022</a> that we were getting ‘Brexit in Name Only’, it is hard to imagine why anyone would feel greatly stirred by <a href="https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1703673462013780288" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Nigel Farage’s latest hand-wringing</a> about how “two years into a Labour government it will [be] Brexit in Name Only”.<br /><br />In fact, generally, although the Brexiters’ attack on Labour’s plans will undoubtedly continue to resonate with hardcore Leave voters, it’s hard to see it having wider cut-through. Things have moved on from the ‘will of the people’ days, especially given how many voters, including leave voters, have become disillusioned with Brexit, and the way that Sunak’s government has already, in a limited way, accepted the deficiencies of the Johnson Brexit. In this sense, if Labour are still 'playing catch-up' with public opinion, the Tories are simply ignoring it.<br /><br />For that matter, not only has there been little regulatory divergence from the EU under the Tories – because for the most part it is totally impractical, either politically or economically – but, also, there is <a href="https://twitter.com/AntonSpisak/status/1704900617284505704" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">considerable public support for things staying that way</a>, including amongst leave voters, in line with Labour’s policy. Similarly, whilst Starmer’s mention of not diverging on environmental, food and employment standards got the predictable ‘betrayal’ treatment on <a href="https://twitter.com/jacksurfleet/status/1704967185154634182" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">this morning’s <em>Mail</em> front page</a>, a commitment to at least non-regression of environmental and labour standards is <a href="https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9190/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">part of the TCA that Johnson agreed</a>.<br /><br />However, the only songs the Brexiters have are the old ones. For example, in his moonlighting role as a GB News presenter, <a href="https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1703852890744381902" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Jacob Rees-Mogg’s squeaky diatribe</a> against Labour focused primarily on the possibility of re-negotiating the Brexit deal leading to the UK “shadowing” the EU through “alignment”. But it seemed embarrassingly dated, the political equivalent of dad dancing, given <a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-seventh-summer-of-brexit-pragmatism.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the numerous ways</a> that this is happening under the Tories, for reasons <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jacob-rees-mogg-do-so-many-civil-servants-make-british-lives-better-probably-not-dw57mk2k5" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">very well-understood by Rees-Mogg himself (£)</a>, as illustrated by <a href="https://iea.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/IEA-_Briefing_Changing-the-rules_web-1.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">his support for the idea</a> of the UK unilaterally adopting EU regulations and conformity assessment marking, so as to avoid the ‘red tape’ of divergence or duplication.<br /><br />Rees-Mogg also deployed an altogether more cynical, and probably more electorally potent, criticism in suggesting that the public had thought that all the arguments about Brexit were over. This was the standard response from the Conservatives, with <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66839501" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">a government spokesperson telling the BBC</a> that Starmer "wants to take Britain back to square one on Brexit, reopening the arguments of the past all over again". It is a response that eschews any discussion about the merits of a closer relationship with the EU but instead plays upon the perhaps widespread desire amongst the electorate to simply not hear anything more about Brexit. Yet, apart from being cynical, it is also dishonest, since it is the Brexiters who constantly try to drag the debate back to the toxicity of 2016, not least with the accusation that any steps to a closer the relationship are 'betraying Brexit'.<br /><br />By contrast, Labour’s policy is plainly an attempt to avoid ‘reopening the old arguments’ at all costs, hence Starmer’s insistence that there is no case to re-join the EU or the single market. That attempt attracts the hostility of Brexiters, who argue that his<em> real</em> agenda is rejoining, and that seeking a closer relationship is a route to this. But, ironically, it attracts as much hostility from re-joiners, who argue that his real agenda <em>ought</em> to be rejoining, and that seeking a closer relationship doesn’t offer any route to this.<br /><br /><strong>Towards ‘de-Brexitification’?</strong><br /><br />My reading is slightly different. I think what Labour are doing, sensibly, is to try to ‘de-Brexitify’ the entire question of UK-EU relations, and to approach them as a policy issue that may be very different in detail, but no different in kind, from the way the UK conducts its relations with other friendly powers. Contrary to the Brexiters’ criticisms, that doesn’t entail reversing Brexit, but contrary to the re-joiners’ criticisms it does not preclude doing so, and is a necessary step to doing so.<br /><br />If successful, normalizing relations, and not framing them constantly in terms of the now dead question of whether to leave the EU, would be a good thing in itself, undoing some of the damage of Brexit, as well as providing at least one of the preconditions for a viable case for joining the EU to be made (another being an active campaign movement for doing so). To put that another way, whilst Brexiters are wrong to think that Starmer’s insistence that ‘there is no case to re-join’ conceals a current intention to do just that, it really shouldn’t be difficult for re-joiners to envisage that, at some time down the line, he will say that circumstances have changed and that there is now such a case.<br /><br />It may well be that Labour, at least in public statements, are pinning far too much on the TCA review, which is designed as a technical stock-taking exercise rather than a vehicle for re-negotiation. This week, the UK in a Changing Europe (UKICE) research centre <a href="https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/UKICE-Reviewing-the-TCA.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">produced an excellent report</a> on this, explaining that, as things stand, the EU is likely to approach the review from just such a ‘minimalist’ perspective, and that if a Labour government wants to make the scope more ‘maximalist’, then the onus will be on it to persuade the EU that this is worthwhile, which won’t be easy. Moreover, even if that persuasion is successful in setting a maximalist agenda, then pursuing it to a successful conclusion will take a long time to negotiate. Peter Foster and Andy Bounds of the <em>Financial Times</em> provided <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/e7c1699d-f060-470a-9944-ed6f736bcf11" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">a similarly cautious analysis (£)</a>.<br /><br />However, an interesting Twitter (or X, or perhaps ex-Twitter) <a href="https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1704018628113309757" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">thread by Mujtaba Rahman</a>, the well-connected and insightful Europe MD of the Eurasia Group, offered a perhaps more subtle, and rather more optimistic, perspective. Amongst other things, he argues that the importance of changing the tone of the UK-EU relationship shouldn’t be underestimated. That’s not, as is sometimes dismissively suggested, for the naïve reason of thinking that a more ‘friendly’ atmosphere will make much concrete difference, but because Labour look set to bring what Rahman characterizes as a “more consistent, more serious and more forward-leaning engagement” than the UK government has shown since 2016. That, along with greater realism than the Tories have shown, could create new incentives for the EU to engage with the UK.<br /><br />Domestically, Rahman suggests that Labour ruling out all forms of re-joining gives them “political cover” to make non-trivial improvements. It’s true, as the UKICE report points out, that even the maximalist version of the TCA review would not greatly shift the economic dial, but the report also provides a list of the substantive improvements that could result. Of course, they aren’t going to ‘make Brexit work’, but it simply isn’t true, despite what most re-joiner critics of Labour insist, that Starmer’s red lines preclude any progress of any value at all. Indeed, that’s demonstrated by the UKICE point that the maximalist version of the TCA review would require protracted negotiation. That would hardly be so if the possible changes were as trivial as those critics claim.<br /><br />Rahman also points out that the positions of both Labour and the EU are in flux, with many possible outcomes. One indication of this was the publication this week of a Franco-German plan, <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/french-german-plan-for-eu-inner-circle-with-membership-for-uk-pkhn5vsmm" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">reported by <em>The Times</em> (£)</a> as being “designed with Labour in mind”, although better understood as <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66872827" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">part of a far broader EU discussion about enlargement</a>, for new forms of tiered ‘associate membership’ of the EU, within which the UK might find a place. It’s <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255217/Brussels-plot-make-Britain-second-class-member-EU-denying-country-veto-MEP-seats.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">not an altogether new idea</a>, although the context is, and a shadow minister was <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/labour-not-interested-in-associate-eu-membership-12965317" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">quick to disown any interest in it</a>, which is unsurprising as it goes much further than Labour are willing to go this side of the election. But it does point to the way that, <a href="https://inews.co.uk/opinion/brexit-britain-new-european-future-keir-starmer-knows-2629518" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">as Ian Dunt of the <em>i</em> put it</a>, “a new kind of European future” could emerge for Britain.<br /><br /><strong>The domestic choice</strong><br /><br />Whether or not that is so, the domestic politics of Brexit are becoming clearer, at least in terms of what the alternative to the Tories’ approach consists of. It is a Labour, or perhaps Labour-led, government which won’t offer (and, arguably, couldn’t deliver, at least in its first term) a reversal of hard Brexit, but will develop as close and as harmonious a relationship as the EU will agree to short of that. That isn’t just about the TCA review, but the entirety of the ongoing relationship.<br /><br />That opens some clear water between the parties, though it is of slender breadth. As <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/sep/20/brexit-deal-britain-europe-boris-johnson-eurosceptic" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Rafael Behr eloquently put it in the <em>Guardian</em></a>, “the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition are both shopping for European policy in the narrow aisle between economic grasp of the problem and political fear of the remedy”. The difference, though, is slightly greater than it seems, and greater than Behr perhaps allows, not so much in itself as in the direction and speed of travel it points to. Just as it is now widely understood, even by most Brexiters, that Brexit is a process, not an event, the same holds for ‘de-Brexitificaton’ and even ‘de-Brexiting’, if they are to happen.<br /><br />The problem, of course, as Behr concludes, is that “time is already running out”. More accurately, the problem is the tension between two different timescales. The more time that passes since the 2016 referendum, the more the toxicity of Brexit recedes, the more its sensitivity as a political issue reduces, the more the generation of politicians which was obsessed with getting it passes, and the more the electoral demographic that most supported it is replaced by that which was most opposed to it. On the other hand, the more time that goes by without being a member of at least the single market, the more the economic damage racks up as, without also being a member of the EU, does the geo-political damage.<br /><br />Within that framing, the first timescale isn’t much affected by who is in power, but would be slightly accelerated by a Labour government if only because that would marginalize Tory Brexiter politicians. The second timescale could be slightly shortened by a Labour government, and the interim damage slightly reduced, or possibly considerably reduced compared with what a Tory government might decide to do if elected.<br /><br />It may not seem like much of a choice, but it is a choice, and this week made it clearer than ever that it will be the one facing us at the next election. The outcome will make some difference to post-Brexit policy in the following years, but could make a huge difference to the choices available in the election after that.<br /><br /> <br /><br /><em>Note: I have re-enabled comments on this blog, for an experimental period, under a strict </em><a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/p/comments-policy-and-related-matters.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow"><em>comments policy</em></a><em>.</em><br /><br />2023-09-22T06:49:00+00:00a different bias: Truss Re-igniting Tory Civil War Again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayWvRO4JBLs
2023-09-22T06:37:12+00:00Outside Views: Bad crisis handling makes Sunak now as unpopular as Johnson was when he resigned | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUqpI1NBg8M
2023-09-22T04:03:47+00:00Outside Views: Russia - Butterflies - Traffickers - Labour and more with Dishy Rishi | Outside Views live
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrBGjMDKUnk
2023-09-22T02:43:00+00:00a different bias: Tory Backlash as Sunak Abandons Net Zero
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlhQeBc6_eg
2023-09-22T00:25:04+00:00Outside Views: Growth and competitiveness in the EU | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO1kcG-DO2I
2023-09-21T23:46:00+00:00a different bias: Johnson Evades Consequences for Rule Breaking ... Again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab46x2vA9Qo
2023-09-21T23:44:36+00:00a different bias: Tories Don't Seem to Understand How Strikes Work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gw8w-veyZrM
2023-09-21T23:41:45+00:00Outside Views: Simplifying EU rules for citizens and business | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dh-DySdzVNI
2023-09-21T22:24:09+00:00Outside Views: Foreign diplomats owe London millions in tolls | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PMSv_WZtw8
2023-09-21T16:00:04+00:00a different bias: BREXIT: Apple News Shows We Will Always be in the EU Rules Orbit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LonFBtWtgrE
2023-09-21T13:58:24+00:00Outside Views: Germany, France and Great Britain extend sanctions on Iran | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEqAJ2_GJt0
2023-09-21T12:10:25+00:00a different bias: Tory Hypocrisy Raging Again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97RbKDaYX24
2023-09-21T10:32:57+00:00Outside Views: Brexit: Weakening of the EU plan to clear euro derivatives? | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_HzD7vEpmE
2023-09-21T10:27:27+00:00a different bias: Starmer Talks Brexit Deals
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQO0cmMe9Qc
2023-09-21T10:09:27+00:00Outside Views: Britain cannot arbitrarily monitor foreigners | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGBsUjzFA9Y
2023-09-21T09:45:16+00:00a different bias: Tory Waste: HS2 Rail Project a Failure on All Measures
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aDlLtWeBCE
2023-09-21T09:19:01+00:00Outside Views: Brexit is hurting touring artists | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTL1CUv426k
2023-09-21T08:23:46+00:00a different bias: Why Sunak Should Stand Up to His Rebels
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TxWNAbcplY
2023-09-21T06:46:12+00:00Outside Views: Digital Markets Act´s six gatekeepers | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxYxBbpQhkk
2023-09-19T12:27:59+00:00Outside Views: The British economy is not moving | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0So0B-TJ24
2023-09-19T12:18:01+00:00a different bias: What Happened to Sunak's Plan?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzCtW1_1MZc
2023-09-19T12:16:03+00:00Outside Views: Great Britain launches fight against smoking | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0SmNLdDPOc
2023-09-19T12:14:34+00:00Outside Views: Tory infighting claims next victim | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb8gYd48b_U
2023-09-19T12:08:23+00:00Outside Views: Championing Europe's SMEs | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtiwXrW7VSw
2023-09-19T10:00:12+00:00my blog, tagged brexit: Three steps back from Brexit
https://davelevy.info/three-steps-back-from-brexit/
<p>I have been away and missed and thus not commented on three small steps made to improve the co-operation and relationship between the UK and the European Union. The areas of policy are science and research, settlement rights for EU citizens in the UK and relationship with Frontex. </p>
<p>The first is that the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-joins-horizon-europe-under-a-new-bespoke-deal">government finally signed up</a> to Horizon Europe, the European Union’s R&D programme; this will be of <a href="https://sciencebusiness.net/news/brexit/its-official-uk-associate-horizon-europe">advantage to scientists</a> and private sector researchers but also everyone as the research has a multiplier effect and for some, investment in human capital is the most effective investment for stimulating GDP growth.</p>
<p>The government have also <a href="https://the3million.org.uk/node/1100851753">announced the automatic extension of pre-settled status</a> to allow those that have not applied for conversion to settled status, the time to do so. It seems that the judicial arguments between the Independent Monitoring Authority and the government seem <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64663795">to have been settled</a>, but there may have been more in the pipeline. Any failure to treat those entitled to remain in the UK often having been born here, and or, lived here for decades would be an illegal act. This would include applying the hostile environment to them and charging them the NHS surcharge. No doubt, whatever the motives, this is a good thing.</p>
<p>The government is in negotiation with the EU to improve its relationship with Frontex, the troubled EU border agency. Even if only about intelligence sharing, this is a step in the right direction away from the hard Brexit that the Tories negotiated which led to the UK being excluded from Frontex and interpol because the member states don;t want to share information with nations that don;t accept the Charter of Fundamental Rights. And as the Guardian <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/12/uk-sunak-agreement-cooperate-eu-border-force-frontex">comments</a>, it is Sunak’s third agreement with the EU. It’ll be interesting to see how far this one goes as the critical issues are not on intelligence sharing, although I am sure the UK will find it useful, but in order to get agreement from the EU to take illegal entrants back, we’ll have to agree to accept those that have the right to enter. It would be an act of solidarity with the government and people of Greece and Italy to accept some of their migrants. Kier Starmer <a href="https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/labour-would-seek-much-better-brexit-deal-from-brussels-starmer-357363/">seems to be struggling</a> at where to draw the line. The FT (pay or id walled) covers this well and better than most, <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/af628073-93e7-4b58-82a4-67b0307eb02f">reporting on Starmer’s position</a>, adding <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/a18edde2-6403-4b57-ac25-b305cf26b127">a longer piece</a> by George Parker in London, William Wallis in Lewes, Andy Bounds in Brussels and Laura Dubois in Strasbourg on the dangers of a Tory counter attack; Starmer’s words are also <a href="https://www.timesandstar.co.uk/news/national/23794300.starmer-meets-justin-trudeau-montreal-trip/">reported</a> in the Times and Star. Labour’s language has not moved on from pandering to the view that immigration is bad. I repeat my posed dilemma, we need workers, skilled and unskilled, we should want students, and we have a duty to accept refugees; who do we seek to stop. While if even the Tories are looking to work with the EU and Frontex, solving the problem with decency and justice will take a lot more.</p>2023-09-19T08:30:25+00:00Outside Views: Great Britain wants to use controversial bone tests on migrants in the future | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxVHDBKXghA
2023-09-18T16:00:13+00:00Outside Views: Make it easier for Europeans to live - work - travel abroad | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zP109_ZfWR4
2023-09-18T06:29:38+00:00a different bias: Are Labour Ready for the Tory War on Brexit?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5ddX4CZ124
2023-09-18T06:21:27+00:00a different bias: Damning Report Into Stolen Votes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJQb_DMvvdY
2023-09-18T05:33:16+00:00Outside Views: Cross-border associations in the EU | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fx_BMtKONDQ
2023-09-18T05:09:03+00:00Outside Views: Great Britain - the country of too much government power | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56tGyiJZP6E
2023-09-18T05:07:27+00:00a different bias: General Election Campaign Now Unofficially Underway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dyu20HqtEKU
2023-09-18T04:55:39+00:00Outside Views: Brexit rules for Northern Ireland have huge potential | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcS-D2wrpC4
2023-09-16T14:14:20+00:00Outside Views: Success for Britain: BMW is investing heavily in its Mini factory in Great Britain | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5-1_QaFcHE
2023-09-16T13:39:31+00:00Outside Views: Brits angry about reunification statements from Ireland | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5X6LC4YEJQ
2023-09-16T12:30:59+00:00a different bias: Is Sunak Driving the Tories to Complete Ruin?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRU826Gxqfk
2023-09-16T12:23:12+00:00a different bias: BREXIT: Unique British Company Forced to Expand in the EU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CxB02Utx3Y
2023-09-16T11:00:00+00:00Outside Views: Defending EU industry and protecting jobs | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ6H6SaIJpA
2023-09-16T10:00:11+00:00Outside Views: Criticism of China policy in Great Britain | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3VsHBjYP58
2023-09-16T08:21:27+00:00a different bias: Has Starmer Just Taken Sunak Out?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqd2Kazb97c
2023-09-16T06:06:06+00:00a different bias: Tory Media Seem Upset at Starmer's Asylum Plans
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UX1tOpqPb9A
2023-09-16T04:36:15+00:00Outside Views: Take back control: Great Britain wants to return to the EU's Frontex | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8i-UUuLn_q8
2023-09-16T04:00:07+00:00a different bias: Global Britain Exposed Three Times In Three Days
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU1874a0smc
2023-09-15T22:44:55+00:00my blog, tagged brexit: Brexit/Brejoin is on #lab23 agenda
https://davelevy.info/brexit-brejoin-is-on-lab23-agenda/
<p>As a member of the AEIP National Committee, I have been campaigning to reverse Brexit. The personal politics that led me to stand for their NC is based on both an abstract commitment to what the EU could be and a detailed observation of the economic and social advantages of common citizenship, together with the economic advantages to the nation of belong to the European Union. The absence of the EU’s freedom of movement to work and the common citizenship rights do not affect the rich.</p>
<p>Opinion polls are steadily showing a majority to rejoin the European Union but the two major parties in the House of Commons are both triangulating with a dying electorate and rejecting the aspirations of its replacement. The younger voters that replace them see the reciprocal freedom of movement as a benefit.</p>
<p>At my Labour Party’s general committee, I successfully moved a motion for Labour’s Conference calling on the UK to rejoin the single marker and customs union, together with Erasmus and Horizon. Horizon has just been agreed by the government in another series of small steps back towards the Union. The motion will be submitted to the Labour Conference but will need to survive the priorities ballot and then the composite process. </p>
<p>I believe that <a href="https://momentuminternationalists.org/2023/04/17/template-motion-for-labour-party-conference-brexit/">Momentum’s model motion</a>, Breaking from the Brexit Disaster, has also been submitted by at least one CLP. I have also posted the words of their motion below. It is probably too late get more CLPs to submit these motion as the deadline is 21st September and notice of a meeting and of business. to be conducted needs to be given. A more effective way of supporting the motion and policy is to argue to include these motions in the priority ballot which takes place at conference.</p>
<p>The following is the speech I made, or something very similar to the speech I made. I was very constrained by time; if I’d had more I’d have made more of the human arguments around the racism of the hostile environment and in favour of freedom of movement.</p>
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote">
<p>This motion is quite clear, and maybe public opinion has moved on, and we could ask for more but,</p>
<p>Brexit was a con, perpetrated by liars and will go down in history as an act of national self-harm and folly.</p>
<p>Economically, the Tory ‘Hard Brexit’ has led to reduced foreign inward investment, a worsening balance of trade, reduced employment, a labour shortage in many industries, particularly social care, agriculture, hospitality and the NHS, and sterling has lost value against the dollar and the euro.</p>
<p>The Labour front-bench’s response is not good enough.</p>
<p>It remains a mercantilist, shop keepers’ approach, it focuses exclusively what membership buys and calculates it value in red and black ink. They propose to amend the future trade and co-operation agreement with five changes all of which are of benefit the UK. It’s a version of cakeism. Why would the EU agree to those if there is no commitment by the UK to make their citizens’ lives better too. Why would they make it easier for our musicians and consultants to work in Europe, while we continue to refuse entry to Eastern European construction workers and Western European health workers, all of whom we need!</p>
<p>In order to fix Brexit, we need to rejoin the single market and customs union, and re-engage in Erasmus+; this motion is so much common sense that even the Tories have agreed to rejoin Horizon, although we don’t have it as good as we did.</p>
<p>Much of the reasons for Brexit were based on the xenophobia and racism, as part of fixing Brexit and re-establishing a rule of law we must welcome migrants and repeal the hostile environment.</p>
<p>This is right and decent; arguments opposing this because of electoralism are neither, we are better than that; triangulating on this issue is preferring those that don’t and won’t vote for us to those that do.</p>
<p>Send this motion to conference so Labour can go into the next election with its head held high offering to work as partners with out European allies and welcoming migrants as equals and citizens.</p>
<cite>Dave Levy @ Lewisham Deptford General Committee</cite></blockquote>
<p>The text of the Lewisham Deptford motion and the Momentum model is overleaf, use the “read more” button …</p>
<span id="more-12519"></span>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Trade, Jobs and the European Union (Lewisham Deptford).</h3>
<p> Conference notes,</p>
<ol>
<li>that Horizon Europe funded €5.1bn to UK research.</li>
<li>that UK University sector’s pre-eminence is jeopardised by exclusion from Erasmus+ & Horizon Europe</li>
<li>thousands of financial services jobs have moved from the UK to the EU</li>
<li>that the Tory ‘Hard Brexit’ has led to reduced foreign inward investment, a worsening balance of trade, reduced employment, a labour shortage in many industries, particularly social care, agriculture, hospitality and the NHS, and sterling has lost value against the dollar and the euro.</li>
<li>That opinion polls are reporting that the Tory Brexit is no longer supported by a majority of people.</li>
<li>that the labour shortages are compounded by xenophobia and the Tories’ morally disgraceful “hostile environment”.</li>
<li>that there are over 3m EU citizen’s living in the UK, many of whom will have come to be restricted by the measures of the hostile environment and the discrimination introduced by the withdrawal agreement</li>
</ol>
<p>Conference believes,</p>
<ol>
<li>That in order to reverse the damage done by Brexit, we must advocate re-joining the European Single Market and Customs Union.</li>
<li>That restoring free movement between the UK and EU would be a benefit, socially and economically, not a cost.</li>
</ol>
<p>Conference resolves,</p>
<ol>
<li>to call for a new relationship with the EU involving the adoption of the single market and customs union</li>
<li>to campaign in opposition and in Government to rejoin Horizon Europe and Erasmus+</li>
<li>to call for the repeal the cruel hostile environment.</li>
</ol>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Break with the Brexit Disaster</h3>
<p>Conference notes:</p>
<ol>
<li>That far more people want to rejoin the EU than stay out, and the gap is growing. The ten polls to 17 April favoured rejoin average 49% to 34.3%. Specific polling shows a big anti-Brexit shift in the “Red Wall”.</li>
<li>The vast chaos and damage Brexit is causing on many fronts – reinforcing the Tories’ attacks on rights, living standards and services.</li>
<li>That a March 2023 Omnisis poll found 72% supporting “mutual free movement” between the UK and Europe, 14% against. Leaver voters supported 66-20.</li>
</ol>
<p>Conference believes:</p>
<ol>
<li>That accepting even the Tories’ ultra-hard Brexit as beyond criticism means failing to show the leadership required of any kind of internationalist and working-class party.</li>
<li>That hard Brexit and withdrawal from the Single Market have brought economic damage for working people.</li>
<li>That greater free movement would not be an unfortunate overhead of mitigating Brexit damage, but a positive benefit.</li>
<li>That Labour must stand up for migrants and for working-class unity and solidarity against Tory politics of scapegoating and bigotry.</li>
</ol>
<p>Conference resolves:</p>
<ol>
<li>That Labour will
<ul>
<li>– indict the Tories’ Brexit policy</li>
<li>– pledge to rejoin the Single Market and Customs Union and restore UK-EU free movement.</li>
<li>– campaign for the pro-migrants’ rights policies we passed in 2019, counterposing repealing all anti-union laws, better pay and workers’ rights and restored public services to Tory scapegoating.</li>
<li>– aim to rejoin the EU.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ol>2023-09-15T10:09:56+00:00Chris Grey's Blog: The eighth summer of Brexit: pragmatism without honesty
https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-seventh-summer-of-brexit-pragmatism.html
The recurring word in most commentary on this summer’s Brexit events is ‘pragmatism’. It refers to the range of ways, some quieter than others, in which the government is trying to soften or avoid some aspects of the damage of Brexit. It’s a fair description, so far as it goes, and there is something to welcome in the damage limitation measures it is applied to, so far as they go. It may be further evidence that, as <a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2023/03/has-britains-brexit-fever-finally-broken.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">I suggested last March</a>, Britain’s ‘Brexit fever’ is finally breaking. However, it is very far from showing anything like honesty about Brexit, and it consists of <em>ad hoc</em> measures rather than a coherent post-Brexit strategy.<br /><br />Nevertheless, there is an emerging pattern. For, although this summer’s Brexit news stories are quite disparate in nature and detail, they are all variations on the same theme in being attempts to deal with the consequences of the delusion that Brexit meant ‘taking back control’ without admitting that it was a delusion. It is this which means that such pragmatism as there is still lacks honesty about what Brexit actually means.<br /><br /><strong>How independence brought dependence</strong><br /><br />This is evident in the only event that prompted me to post during this summer break, namely the decision to <a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2023/08/ukca-symbol-of-folly-of-brexit.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">indefinitely postpone the introduction of the UKCA mark</a>. I won’t write about it in detail again now, but it was always one of the most hubristic examples of the supposed ‘independence’ that Brexit would bring, and although it has long been on the cards that it would be dropped, much cost has been incurred in indulging that hubris. And whilst dropping it is, indeed, ‘pragmatic’ the government, and Brexiters generally, are reluctant to spell out that it means that Britain is now dependent upon CE marking, dependent upon EU approved bodies to test and certify conformity to the standards necessary for this marking, and effectively accepting the same product standards as the EU.<br /><br />The UKCA announcement was swiftly followed by reports of yet another <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66394235" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">delay in the introduction of import controls</a> although, incredibly, it was not until the end of August that <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-border-controls-to-protect-the-uk-against-security-and-biosecurity-threats-and-ensure-smooth-flow-of-goods" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the government formally confirmed this</a>. This also creates a dependency in that, in effect, the UK is now dependent upon the EU to ensure that the goods it exports are safe and meet all requisite standards. But the EU has no responsibility and no system to do this for third countries. As <a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2022/04/peek-boo-brexit.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">I discussed at some length</a> last time import controls were postponed, this creates increased risks because the UK is no longer part of the eco-system of single market institutions that reduce those risks. Hence <a href="https://www.politicshome.com/members/article/british-veterinary-association-responds-delays-implementation-governments-postbrexit-border-controls" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the British Veterinary Association has warned</a> that this latest postponement “is putting the UK’s biosecurity at serious risk of imported diseases”.<br /><br />Those and <a href="https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/the-uks-border-with-the-eu/?mc_cid=3674228b74&mc_eid=ca9415a695" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">other risks</a> are real, but they are trumped by the fact that Britain simply can’t afford to implement Brexit import controls. This latest postponement was perhaps the first time the government overtly admitted that doing so would cause inflation, especially of food prices, although it wasn’t the first time that it had been admitted it would cause costs. Jacob <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-approach-to-import-controls-to-help-ease-cost-of-living" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Rees-Mogg had already conceded that</a> at the time of the previous postponement. Such admissions also at least implicitly acknowledge the costs in the other direction of trade, in other words the EU controls on UK imports which have been in place since the end of the transition period.<br /><br />There is perhaps some honesty in this, but even that is concealed by <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-border-controls-to-protect-the-uk-against-security-and-biosecurity-threats-and-ensure-smooth-flow-of-goods" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the government’s pretence</a> that its border strategy involves “using Brexit freedoms” and the usual tedious, and again hubristic, rhetoric that when import controls are introduced they will be part of a high-tech “world-class border”. Mere competence, of course, is as disdained as it is elusive. It’s a boast which seems all the more vain given that this summer also saw <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/phased-approach-to-cds-export-migration-announced" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the very quiet announcement</a> of “a new phased approach” (meaning, again, delayed) to introducing the Customs Declaration Service (CDS), the system meant to replace the Customs Handling of Import and Export Freight (CHIEF) service. CDS is supposed to provide a much more streamlined service so as to mitigate some of the Brexit frictions but, as I noted in <a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2021/01/get-ready-for-long-brexit.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">a post in January 2021</a>, it has been subject to persistent delays, going <a href="https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252472362/HMRC-fails-to-get-new-customs-system-ready-for-Brexit" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">back to at least February 2019</a>.<br /><br /><strong>Freedom to do … not much</strong><br /><br />The decisions about UKCA and import controls are similar in responding to the impracticality and costs of ‘taking back control’ by acting as if Brexit hadn’t happened. It turns out that the best way to use the wonderful freedoms of Brexit is not to make use of them at all. That is unsayable for the government, and on the same day as the UKCA decision was announced, with the timing perhaps designed to sweeten the pill for Brexiters, the UK’s new post-Brexit alcohol duties regime came into force, complete with the populist tag of the ‘<a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1797366/jeremy-hunt-brexit-pubs-guarantee-cheaper-pints" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Brexit Pubs Guarantee’</a>.<br /><br />Here, at least, is something that can be said to have been made possible by Brexit, although whether the specific issue of cheaper beer in pubs required Brexit is <a href="https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2023/05/breweries-respond-to-sunaks-claims-cheaper-beer-is-due-to-brexit/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">disputed by breweries</a>, as are its benefits to the pub trade. More generally, <a href="https://www.foodingredientsfirst.com/news/uk-wine-and-spirits-makers-brace-for-post-brexit-duties-as-government-tries-to-incentivize-low-alcohol-drinks.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">most parts of the alcoholic beverages industry are unhappy about the new regime</a>, and, far from cutting red tape, it introduces a far more complex structure of duties and looks set to create strange anomalies in, for example, the pricing of different strengths of wine.<br /><br />But even if it is to be counted as a result of Brexit, there are only a very small number of these “micro-divergences” in tax policy, and it is unlikely that there will be many more to come, <a href="https://www.cityam.com/we-were-never-going-to-have-a-great-british-bonfire-of-the-tax-system-after-brexit/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">according to KPMG UK’s Head of Tax Policy</a>. Indeed, in most respects Brexit ‘freedoms’ are unused, not just in relation to tax policy divergence but regulatory divergence, as the latest edition of the <a href="https://ukandeu.ac.uk/research-papers/uk-eu-regulatory-divergence-tracker-eighth-edition-2/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">UK in a Changing Europe’s regulatory divergence tracker</a>, released in July, shows.<br /><br />This isn’t, as the Brexit Ultras moan, through lack of political will, but again because doing so is too impractical and costly. However, that doesn’t mean that continuing the pre-Brexit <em>status quo</em> of regulatory alignment in most areas is cost-free. Once outside the single market, it isn’t enough simply to be aligned, it has to be formally demonstrated by individual firms selling into the EU, just as it does by those of any third country. That entails both direct costs, and indirect costs in terms of delays – precisely the kinds of costs that single market membership gets rid of. In short, leaving the single market makes regulatory alignment expensive, but regulatory divergence is even more expensive. So we pay for the price of a freedom we cannot afford to exercise, and Brexiters call this sovereignty.<br /><br /><strong>Freedom to … follow</strong><br /><br />But it’s actually worse than that. Not only can we not afford to diverge, we cannot afford not to follow. Even without the UK making any active choices to diverge from EU regulations, ‘passive’ divergence occurs whenever the EU itself changes regulations. Each time this happens it puts pressure on the UK to shadow the EU, partly because of the costs to British businesses and organizations of not doing so, and partly because in many cases a failure to do so increases divergence between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, thus ‘thickening’ the Irish Sea border. As time goes by <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/4455784d-37aa-465e-b72b-10a54c548616" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the significance of this “ratchet effect” becomes ever-clearer (£)</a>.<br /><br />The imminent introduction of the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is a significant case in point, and we will hear much more about it when transitional implementation arrangements begin this October. As with most things Brexit, the <a href="https://www.clydeco.com/en/insights/2023/05/the-eu-carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism-an-updat" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">technical details are ferociously complex</a>, but in essence it means a tax on embedded carbon in EU imports of goods in many sectors, with an associated system of trading in carbon certificates, as well as systems of reporting and monitoring. British firms exporting to the EU <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/5f75a690-dab6-46e9-8960-eb0d544d7bd3" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">will be immediately and directly affected</a> (if they are to continue to export), imposing considerable new costs, although reports suggest that most of them are <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/0472b02a-089c-4a19-b735-3271c254a7ea" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">unaware of what is about to happen (£)</a> with CBAM (and with several other major upcoming EU regulatory changes).<br /><br />At the same time, the UK is <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/addressing-carbon-leakage-risk-to-support-decarbonisation" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">planning to have its own CBAM system</a>, although it is unlikely to be ready until at least 2026, and it is possible that in outline it will be very similar to the EU’s. However, unless there is an <a href="https://ukandeu.ac.uk/uk-and-eu-emissions-trading-schemes-drifting-in-different-directions/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">agreement linking the two systems</a> then British firms will have to show compliance with both. This sounds rather like the ill-fated plan to have ‘our own’ UKCA mark, but UK CBAM is perhaps more akin to the <a href="https://www.natlawreview.com/article/uk-reach-amended-to-extend-registration-deadlines" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">still postponed UK REACH system for the chemicals industry</a> in that both could only link to the EU’s equivalents by agreement with the EU. It is a subtle difference, but an important one. Whereas things like delaying UKCA and import controls, or passive regulatory alignment, can be done by the UK without any agreement from the EU, things like creating linkage or mutual recognition with EU systems overtly make the UK a supplicant to the EU.<br /><br /><strong>Brexit Britain’s supplication</strong><br /><br />This is evident in a much more politically visible policy area, which has permeated this summer’s news, namely the frenzy over ‘stopping the boats’. Entirely unsurprisingly, the government has discovered that, here too, ‘taking back control’ does not actually have any substantive meaning, and that its policy requires agreements with others – not just the EU, but some of its members, such as <a href="https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/france-not-intercepting-channel-small-boats-tory-mps-ministers-threaten-funding-2545859" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">France</a> and <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/09/rishi-sunak-giorgia-meloni-italy-migrants-channel-crossings/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Italy (£)</a>, and other countries, such as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/aug/09/uk-government-announces-deal-with-turkey-to-disrupt-people-smuggling-gangs" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Turkey</a>.<br /><br />Of course, irregular migration is very much an issue across the EU, and were the UK still a member it would have a significant role in shaping EU policy, as well as benefitting from its shared arrangements, <a href="https://www.durham.ac.uk/departments/academic/law/news-and-events/news/2023/february/new-report-on-small-boat-crossings-launched-by-professor-thom-brooks/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">such as the Dublin 3 Regulations</a>. That can include the right to return asylum seekers for claims processing in the first safe participating country they reached, and <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/08/15/rishi-sunak-migrant-returns-agreement-eu-small-boats/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">it is reported that Rishi Sunak (£)</a> would like to replicate that right in a UK-EU agreement. Indeed, a returns agreement is something that was sought during the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) negotiations, but the EU turned it down. Reportedly, <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12406567/EXCLUSIVE-EU-blocks-deal-allowing-Channel-migrants-sent-France.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">it has done so again</a>.<br /><br />It is not difficult to see why. The UK, because of its geographical position, is very unlikely to be the first safe country arrived at (unless arrival was by air) and, if it is, unlikely to then be used as a point of departure to an EU country. So a ‘returns policy’, in itself, would be almost entirely one-way, which is hardly in the interests of the EU or its members. Inevitably, Brexiters are incapable of understanding this, with bone-headed former MEP <a href="https://twitter.com/DCBMEP/status/1691401584435965953" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">David Bannerman tweeting</a> rancorously about “our so called friends in the EU showing their true colours again”, and <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1804013/Small-boats-crisis-EU-revenge-Brexit" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">an <em>Express</em> article</a> trotting out the usual paranoid and self-pitying line about “Brexit punishment”.<br /><br />By contrast, the Labour Party’s plan, which <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66804798" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">hit the headlines this week</a>, is rather more honest and realistic in recognizing that any deal with the EU needs to offer something for both sides (though it can’t be assumed the EU will agree to it). It seems to include offering agreement to take some asylum seekers from the EU, via managed routes, in exchange for EU agreement to accept returns of those arriving in the UK by irregular routes. But the government reaction to this more, well, <em>pragmatic</em> proposal was <a href="https://twitter.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1702238837164867690" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">to denounce it</a> as surrendering control to Brussels and making Britain a “dumping ground” for “illegal migrants” (sic), whilst the Brexit Blob went into predictable hysteria.<br /><br />This serves to illustrate the continuing dishonesty – as well as the stupidity – that surrounds Brexit, which precludes a realistic post-Brexit strategy. Rather than accept the reality of being a supplicant to the EU, the Brexiters either expect to be gifted what they want, and denounce the EU as malevolent for not doing so, or, if some deal is made or even proposed, they denounce it as ‘surrender’ and betrayal of Brexit. They certainly haven’t grasped that being outside the EU means less, not more, control, something which will be shown again in this policy area if, as <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-12/uk-nears-post-brexit-deal-for-access-to-eu-border-agency?srnd=undefined&sref=3eAg5tE1&leadSource=uverify%20wall" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">a report this week suggests</a>, the UK is about to sign a deal to access the EU Border Agency, Frontex. Such ‘opt-ins’, for all that they may be desirable to both the UK and the EU, are invariably different in character from full membership, and invariably shaped by the fact that it is the UK ‘joining in with’ an EU programme or initiative rather than vice versa.<br /><br />Something similar applies to the last of this summer’s main Brexit stories, with the UK finally, and belatedly, agreeing terms <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-joins-horizon-europe-under-a-new-bespoke-deal" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">to re-join the Horizon Europe programme</a>. Again this is widely seen by sensible commentators as <a href="https://conservativehome.com/2023/09/11/david-gauke-rejoining-horizon-the-right-decision-and-the-shape-of-things-to-come/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">a sign of an emerging pragmatism</a>. Yet, as with the other examples, there is little honesty from the government about what that pragmatism means. In particular, not only has the UK’s absence from the scheme in itself <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/sep/09/britain-eu-horizon-programme-scientists-research-scheme-flagship" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">done significant damage to British science</a>, but the new associate membership, which operates without freedom of movement of people which does so much to promote easy and flexible cooperation, is inferior to what we had before.<br /><br />So this is a recurring theme. When particular instances of the damage of Brexit become undeniable, the government sometimes seeks to patch them with some kind of solution, be it a delay, quiet alignment, or cooperation, but there is no honesty about the fact that the ‘solution’ is rarely as good as what has been lost, or, even if it is, that the very need for ‘solutions’ demonstrates that Brexit is the cause of so many problems, and that all the effort used to create such solutions is itself a cost of Brexit.<br /><br />At the same time, even these sub-optimal solutions come in the teeth of Brexiter opposition with, in the case of Horizon, <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/09/09/europe-economy-stagnated-remainers-havent-noticed-brexit/#:~:text=The%20vice%2Dchancellors%20must%20have,would%20have%20been%20similarly%20overjoyed." rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the <em>Telegraph</em>’s Matthew Lynn (£)</a> sneering at all the scientists and industrialists relieved that there has been at least a fix of sorts, on the grounds that they apparently don’t recognize that “Europe is finished” and is a “failing bloc”. But whatever Brexiters may want to think, the UK wanted and badly needed Horizon, and for all that they continue <a href="https://www.briefingsforbritain.co.uk/windsor-framework-revealed-asunworkable-con-trick/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">to rail against the implementation of the Windsor Framework</a> they refuse to see that it was only that agreement that unlocked the possibility of being in the Horizon scheme. In this sense, the EU’s refusal to agree Horizon terms until the Northern Ireland Protocol row was settled was an effective negotiating lever.<br /><br />Yet a quite <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2023/09/07/britain-is-not-a-mere-supplicant-of-the-eu/#:~:text=The%20saga%20of%20Britain's%20involvement,on%20issues%20of%20mutual%20advantage." rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">astonishingly ignorant <em>Telegraph</em> editorial (£)</a> insisted that the delay over Horizon showed the EU to be irrational and self-harming and that, far from being a supplicant, the UK’s participation was needed to prevent the EU becoming a “scientific backwater”. Indeed, the article suggests, it was a clear case of ‘them needing us more than we need them’ whilst <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1810075/uk-rejoins-eu-horizon-programme" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the <em>Express</em> reported it as the EU “backing down”</a>. But even here there is no consistent logic, with still other Brexiters, <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1810478/Brexit-warning-Horizon-Frost-Sunak" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">such as David Frost</a>, warning that the UK will be ‘held hostage’ by Horizon membership.<br /><br />And this, too, is a recurring theme. Endless claims that the EU is failing, that it ‘needs us more than we need them’, but that, paradoxically, it is able to punish and hold hostage the UK are amongst many examples of how the Brexiters have learned literally nothing from the last seven years. Indeed, now they are making ever more strident calls for a ‘Brexit 2.0’ of leaving the ECHR. That may come to nothing, but the vociferousness of the demand, and its reach <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tory-splits-erupt-over-calls-for-uk-to-quit-european-court-of-human-rights_uk_64d4bd9ae4b03c1d7392dccf" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">well into the higher ranks of the cabinet</a>, is an important sign that the madness of Brexitism is alive and kicking, despite the failure of Brexit. This enduring madness sustains the tension, which has existed in various forms throughout the entire Brexit process, between the practical realities of what Brexit means and the implacable demands and fantasies of Brexiters within and outside government.<br /><br /><strong>Brexiters’ continued denial</strong><br /><br />One sign of this is the way that, even now, the Brexit Ultras continue to claim that <a href="https://www.briefingsforbritain.co.uk/trade-with-eu-doing-fine/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Brexit has had no adverse effects on trade</a> and the economy generally, or even that its effects have been positive. This summer seems to have seen an upsurge in <a href="https://twitter.com/BrugesGroup/status/1692263002777477494" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">such attempts</a>, in ways which are as <a href="https://nicktyrone.substack.com/p/this-week-in-brexitland-september-787" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">brazenly dishonest as they are desperate</a>. These attempts have shown all the now familiar tricks, including cherry-picking particular data points (especially relating to the pandemic), citing trade figures without adjustment for inflation, or making <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1809567/brexit-britain-economy-boom-ons-forecast" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">comparisons between the UK and the EU</a> (or individual members) rather than between the UK when an EU member and when not.<br /><br />The latter of these, something to which anti-Brexit commentators are also sometimes prone, is especially misleading because, of course, whether or not a member of the EU, the UK economy is often, if not always, better or worse performing than the EU average, or the Eurozone, or individual EU members (Germany being a <a href="https://twitter.com/BrugesGroup/status/1695083938971111692" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">currently popular comparator</a>). To see how asinine such comparisons are, consider whether, when the UK was a member of the EU, Brexiters would have argued that the relative performance of the UK and the EU had any implications for the case for belonging to or leaving the EU. Undoubtedly, they would (and probably did) say that if the UK was performing better than the EU it ‘proved’ we did not need to be a member, and were held back by being ‘shackled’ to the EU; but if the EU was performing better than the UK it ‘proved’ we should not be a member as the EU was ‘rigged’ to our disadvantage.<br /><br />But even comparing the UK during and after membership is not really sufficient. What is necessary is to estimate the ‘counterfactual’ of how the UK would have performed had it remained a member of the EU compared with how it has in fact performed since leaving, <a href="https://obr.uk/box/how-are-our-brexit-forecasting-assumptions-performing/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the OBR’s being the best-known and most authoritative example</a>. Such estimates are difficult to make, and bound to be imperfect, but although <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/11/remainer-myths-are-crumbling-gdp-better-than-expected/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the Brexiters are happy to dismiss all such estimates (£)</a> they fail to provide a convincing one of their own. Instead, they frequently simply assert that Brexit has had a beneficial effect, effectively positing an implicit and indefensible counterfactual, especially by pointing to increases in the nominal value of trade (ignoring inflation, as well as things like unusual energy trade fluctuations, changes in statistical methodology etc.).<br /><br />The endless and varied kinds of chicanery used to make these assertions has the effect, no doubt intended, of making it exhausting to debunk each individual example. But, even without doing so, it is easy to demonstrate their hollowness. For, crucially, no Brexiter is able to explain <em>how</em> Brexit could conceivably be responsible for increasing trade or economic growth, or how even sustaining their levels could be <em>because</em> of, rather than despite, Brexit. It has increased trade barriers with the EU, and, even if the much-vaunted new trade deals are going to have much value (they won’t), it is far too early for them to have had any impact, as those with Australia and New Zealand only came into force at the end of May, whilst CPTPP membership has yet to begin. Nor can any supposed Brexit boost have come from deregulation since, as noted above, and as Brexiters themselves constantly and vociferously complain, there has been almost no regulatory divergence.<br /><br />So there is no reason in principle why Brexit could have a positive, or even neutral, effect on trade or the economy generally. Moreover, the claim that it does so flies in the face of <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-poll-trade-uk-eu-b2393287.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">what businesses themselves say</a>. Even in the fanatical pages of the <em>Express</em>, an <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1803621/small-business-backs-brexit-remoaners" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">article headlining business backing for Brexit</a> and hostility to any idea of re-joining was replete with examples of businesses saying the exact opposite, primarily because of the ‘red tape’ barriers to trade that Brexit has created. By contrast, there are no examples of businesses for whom trade with the EU has become <em>easier</em> as a result of Brexit. The latter is important, because Brexit was supposed to have a positive effect, not just ‘to not to be (too) negative’. This point is also relevant to the wholly bogus way that Brexiters treat any post-Brexit good news - such as this week’s <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/britain-says-bmw-make-multimillion-pound-investment-electric-mini-output-2023-09-11/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">announcement of BMW’s investment in the Mini plant</a> – as if it were somehow <em>attributable</em> to Brexit. Again, the question is: what investments, if any, have been made that would not have happened without Brexit, and how do they compare with those investments which would have been made, but for Brexit?<br /><br /><strong>So what happens now?</strong><br /><br />The consequence of the continuing power of this invincible stupidity is a kind of political drift. Where the economic or political costs are high enough, and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/sep/10/forcing-uturn-on-horizon-scientists-showing-flaws-of-brexit-can-be-overcome" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">those affected lobby strongly enough</a>, we see the government seeking accommodations of various sorts to mitigate or minimise some of them, but in cases where the immediate costs are not too high, such as <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/1147fc63-59f9-45c3-aee2-a15ee570bb84" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">its dismissal this summer of the EU’s offer of formal ‘strategic dialogue’ (£)</a>, we see the government pandering to the Brexit Ultras.<br /><br />This is why the government’s supposed ‘pragmatism’ over this summer only consists of <em>ad hoc</em>, sub-optimal fixes, which may slightly reduce the damage of Brexit in a few policy areas but are constrained by the <a href="https://nickcohen.substack.com/p/brexit-why-cant-we-break-the-conspiracy" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">ongoing ‘conspiracy of silence’</a> which prevents honesty about the reality even of those fixes, let alone about the abject failure of Brexit across every single policy area. That silence is shared by the Tory and Labour Parties, and it comes from the fear both have of the unquenchable and unreasoning fury of the Brexit Ultras, a fury so hair-triggered that it is provoked even by <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1811566/richard-tice-eu-flag-last-night-proms-ban" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the waving of EU flags at the Last Night of the Proms</a>. I don’t think we will see an end to the power of the Ultras at least until a few of the high-profile ones publicly admit that Brexit, in principle and not just in delivery, was a catastrophic error.<br /><br />Even so, it is possible that a Labour government might be able to fashion ‘pragmatism’ into a more coherent strategy, to the extent that it might pursue closer ties with the EU across all policy areas (it will in any case inherit, perhaps by Tory design, some of the present government’s delayed or deferred implementations, such as import controls). At least such a government would not have the dead-weight of Brexit Ultra MPs that makes this impossible for the Tories, and although it would still face the massed ranks of the pro-Brexit media – a taste of which we saw with this week’s furore over its asylum plans - it might, when in power, <a href="https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2023/08/labour-government-work-government" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">be more able to resist or ignore their attacks</a>. However, there is little sign that Labour will be any more honest about the costs and limitations of such an approach, since to do so would open up the obvious question of why that approach was not bolder.<br /><br />Yesterday saw the publication of <a href="https://www.bitebackpublishing.com/books/brexit-unfolded" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the revised edition of my book</a> <em>Brexit Unfolded. How No One Got What They Wanted (and why they were never going to)</em>. When the first edition was published, in 2021, the sub-title was perhaps provocative. Now, it is almost a truism, whilst also being a taboo for the main parties. The new edition tells the story of what happened from the end of the transition period up to last June, and concludes that the situation is that “now they can’t agree what to do about it”, creating, at least for now, a political – and national – impasse.<br /><br />So what happens now? Seven years ago, I returned from holiday and wrote <a href="https://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/where-we-are-now.html" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">the first post on this blog</a>. It finished with the words “it is this strange new landscape that I will comment on in the months and years to come”, but I did not really anticipate that I would do so for so many years as I have, and certainly didn’t anticipate that the blog would receive the attention it has (for which, as always, I am grateful). The landscape now is just as strange, if not even stranger, although in some ways depressingly unchanged. Entering the eighth year of blogging, I will continue to try to record and analyse it.<br /><br />2023-09-15T06:38:00+00:00a different bias: Discussing My Recent Illness And Upcoming Plans
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eYYUsYpdV8
2023-09-14T14:10:32+00:00Outside Views: Critical Infrastructure and disruptive cross-border incidents | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOoTqTxrFcA
2023-09-14T11:41:42+00:00Outside Views: A Brexit benefit for Australia and continued risk of inflation in Great Britain | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQBlhpQFaZA
2023-09-14T10:58:19+00:00a different bias: More Extreme Tory Brexit Reversal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6Lxr-6xZEs
2023-09-14T10:36:14+00:00Outside Views: British Prime Minister Sunak complains to China about espionage | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlWt0vFwIvM
2023-09-14T10:16:36+00:00Outside Views: Union of equality: European Disability and Parking Card valid in all Member States | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHxnQnR8u4Y
2023-09-14T10:00:11+00:00Outside Views: Brexit danger: Britain is dependent on EU food that will soon not be exported there | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNq0N5miGSI
2023-09-12T18:31:15+00:00Outside Views: Important answers on the UK's association to Horizon Europe and Copernicus | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8qW4zNPRAg
2023-09-12T18:02:32+00:00Outside Views: Boris Johnson´s Downfall announces resignation after harassment allegations | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZV2736NFI5Y
2023-09-12T16:00:32+00:00a different bias: Tory Spygate is This Week's Rishi Sunak Scandal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPb4dNqqsvo
2023-09-12T14:47:00+00:00a different bias: Brexiteers Losing Their Minds Over Proms Publicity Triumph
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUqSg_ZIcME
2023-09-12T13:43:24+00:00a different bias: Education Secretary Folds Under Pressure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVppGKGuYLs
2023-09-12T09:07:47+00:00a different bias: BREXIT: Business Secretary Gets It All Wrong
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpiLOTJJZCg
2023-09-12T08:25:19+00:00Outside Views: Chaos on the way: The first Tory zombies are coming back | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WGIAdzgSi4
2023-09-11T16:00:02+00:00Outside Views: If only hot Brexit air could generate energy | Outside Views live
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JUEamiw83g
2023-09-11T11:02:20+00:00Outside Views: Brexit: UK nationals are being wrongfully detained whilst transiting | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NI7aTnWyMzc
2023-09-11T04:00:08+00:00a different bias: Braverman on Resignation Watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inSM2zucl8I
2023-09-10T21:38:08+00:00Outside Views: City of London calls for 'big moves' to boost post-Brexit finance | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJloyyxcGXo
2023-09-10T04:00:33+00:00Outside Views: Great Britain is now also introducing its ESTA | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVyevvacsjc
2023-09-09T16:00:24+00:00Outside Views: British culture war over the home office | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5ZAOkEwsAo
2023-09-09T09:28:56+00:00a different bias: Tory Chickens Came Home to Roost This Week
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfilGIFOnYM
2023-09-09T09:03:04+00:00a different bias: Breakdown of the Three Autumn By-elections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVOjYBq5hMI
2023-09-09T07:48:19+00:00Outside Views: More trouble in Northern Ireland | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRYal4-Gpo8
2023-09-08T16:00:48+00:00Outside Views: Scandal reaches Sunak: Brits unhappy with PM | Outside Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA2BG8cp62w
2023-09-08T09:24:04+00:00