She won't listen. She never does. The only answer we get is a clip form Central Officer saying how wonderful everything is.
Her latest hobby horse is that 'there is real anger in the country and therefore we have to deliver Brexit'. Maybe intelligent people should get angrier instead of marching peacefully.
Dear MP,
I am returning to the familiar subject of Brexit.
It will not have escaped your attention that over 700,000 people took the trouble to march, or rather shuffle, through Central London last week in support of a People’s Vote. I was very sorry not to be able to join them.
The arguments for a further public vote are surely now inescapable.
It is now abundantly clear there was never a single plan for leaving the EU. Instead, the leading Brexiters made a series of wildly extravagant and conflicting promises. There is evidence that they both lied and over-spent their permitted budgets. They promised vast additional sums for the NHS and that we would ‘take back control’ by leaving the EU. They clearly had no plan but were motivated entirely by emotion.
Having changed sides herself, the Prime Minister brought some of these individuals into the Cabinet and challenged them to implement their proposals. Gradually, as reality has bitten and they have been faced with the contradictions of their positions, some of the ‘big beasts’ and many of their acolytes have left the stage, unable to support the Prime Minister or the way the negotiations have progressed.
What is now emerging as being on offer bears almost no relation to the proposals made by the Brexiters during the campaign. The nearest we have had is ‘Chequers’ which was summarily dismissed by the EU and which, anyway, would have left the country as a rule-taker – hardly taking back control – with no say in the making of those rules. It had the merit of keeping us economically linked to Europe but the disadvantage of offering no realistic solution to the problems of Northern Ireland or the possible domino effects of any NI solution on other parts of the UK.
Survey after survey confirms that the public believes that, for whatever reason, the government is making a mess of the negotiations. What we were told was going to be ‘easy’, ‘the simplest negotiation ever’, ‘we hold all the cards’ has turned out to be anything but.
To add to the difficulties, the government’s own studies have confirmed that any alternative to staying in the EU is going to impact the economy of the country negatively. It may sound like a revival of ‘Project Fear’ but the reality is now becoming clear. Stockpiles of food and drugs, lorry queues, visas, staff shortages, aeroplanes unable to land, ‘adequate’ food, companies exporting their head offices, manufacturing and investment to other countries, investment stagnant and the UK dropping down the world rankings: the list goes on. And these are not campaigning slogans, they have come from the government.
The country was, and remains, split. Remainers like me have refused to lie down and be silenced, convinced that the best future for this country is as part of a wider partnership of countries: not giving up sovereignty but sharing in certain areas in the common interest. ‘Subsidiarity’ is and will remain, enshrined in EU law.
No doubt many of those marchers last weekend were Remainers but many more were people who originally voted Leave as there is no confidence in the government or Parliament to deliver anything remotely like what was promised by the Brexiters. Even if we knew what that was.
Parliament has been promised a ‘meaningful vote’ on any deal but the government seems intent on gerrymandering anything but. If the Tory party calls on the dark arts of the whips, strong-arms a few Labour MPs, buys off a few more DUP MPs to push through a vote in favour of the Prime Minister’s deal then it will, yet again, have shown the narrow politics and party interests are of more importance than the good of the country. I have argued before that In or Out of the EU is not a party political issue despite the cynical attempt of many in your party to make it one.
And let us remind ourselves that the deal we are being asked to consider is only the deal on the terms of exit and a political statement about our, as yet un-negotiated, future which will no doubt be suitably vague. That we have got to this situation with five months to go, is irresponsible in the extreme. No wonder companies are holding back investment, the housing market is stagnant and people are moving investment offshore.
Ah, you will say, there is genuine anger across the country at the way things have been in the past and we must listen to the people. I agree. People are cross with elites: and I include both you and me in this. They are cross with austerity when those in power appeared not to suffer from pay and investment cuts. They are cross with the London-centeredness of investment and the media. They are cross because the trains don't work, the prisons are overflowing, because crime that affects people is not being tackled. They are cross because individual people suffering hardship or disability are being 'examined' by people with no brain, sensitivity or specialist training, tick boxes in hand. They are cross at the lack of investment in the regions – and here we can include Cornwall.
It is the populists who have harnessed this anger, offering up the EU as the whipping boy to suit their own ends. You know the EU was not responsible for this list of failures. Can you honestly face your Cornish constituents and say that investment is going to be greater in Cornwall after we leave the EU than we have received during our time in it?
If you do push ahead and leave the EU then, the government will be hated by well over half the country (all those who would wish to remain plus either the deal or the no dealers). As the impact of leaving begins to bite, businesses will fail and more and more people will fall into poverty, gearing up the hate to levels not seen in generations.
The country will look round for someone to blame and it will not be the EU. It will be the Tory party. The whole parliamentary system will have been tainted leading to even less confidence in our system of governance. That may suit a right-wing dictatorial regime but it is not the liberal democracy in which you and I grew up.
The only credible way out of this bind, and the statesmanlike approach, is to allow a proper three option People’s Vote. This would allow the government to breathe a sigh of relief, put it back to the people and agree to implement that result in full and final settlement.
‘In 2016 you voted to leave the EU. Key elements behind that were large sums of money for the NHS, the ability to ‘take back control’ and the promise of a much richer economic future. I have to say to you that these are not deliverable. We have done what we can to talk to the EU but find ourselves in a bind.
'If we continue to be linked closely to them economically then we will have to accept their rules without having any say in the content of those rules. If we break away completely then we will incur a massive bureaucratic burden which will take years to establish and pay-off, for a questionable economic future. We were already the 5th largest economy in the world and are now the 6th. It is hard to see how we can do any better than we have in the past.
‘Having come to the end of our negotiations on the withdrawal agreement, and before we start work on the really difficult negotiations about our future trading relationship, we are going to ask the British people once again whether they want to go ahead and leave the EU. If we leave without a deal then we estimate the economy will suffer a 7.7% hit. If we leave with a deal then the economic hit is estimated to be between 2-5%, depending on the deal but we will have to accept others’ rules. Or we can simply stay in the EU as we are at present and take our chances.
‘Yes, there are real challenges in our country. The ‘Have-nots’ and the ‘Just about managing’ are struggling. We have been through a period of austerity but we can genuinely see the end of this and we are determined to ensure that in future the benefits are shared more widely.’
'But first, we need to decide whether we tackle these problems from within the EU when there just might be enough money to make a difference, or from outside when we will have to weather a difficult storm as we settle down to t anew reality.
‘The decision is to be yours’
I accept that any further vote is going to be divisive but it is a bit late to be worrying about that now. The country is already divided. It is also not a denial of democracy as some would have us believe; on the contrary, it is the best sort of democracy. I need hardly echo the words of last weekend’s campaigners about being allowed to read the small print before signing the contract.
And this time can we make sure that the vote includes all those who are affected by the result.
My sister is a UK passport holder who exercised her right to work in a European country travelling smoothly between EU countries and working without problem. When the referendum came she and her adult children were denied a vote. Now she faces being deprived of her right to hold a UK passport and to travel smoothly between different EU countries.
If we leave the EU then you will have deprived her of her rights without her having any say in the matter. This feels positively C19. Because she owns no property and has not lived in the UK recently – which there was no requirement to do – she has been deprived of a vote. Americans threw tea into a harbour for such things.
And then there are the young people, many of whom could not vote in 2016 but who may well be of voting age when we finally leave the Transition period in 2021. A 23 year old voter could wake up in December 2012 outside the Eu and yet never having had an opportunity to vote in the decision which will have the greatest affect on their career and life. They have to have a chance to vote now.
It was all very well to have an 'advisory' referendum to test the feeling of the country but now that the lies and deceptions have been exposed, now that the government had finally issued some advice on what the various futures might look like - none very rosy - then the people must have another option to review the detail and decide whether they still want to go ahead. And it must be a three way vote. Transferable voting is possible, you know; it is just hated by dictators and bullies.
If Brexit is such a good idea, what have the Brexiters to fear?
I look forward to your reply and please do not make it one of those photocopied Central Office replies such as you sent me last time which was so shot full of self-serving illogicality that it did more harm than good.
Yours sincerely
She was probably better off with the short version.
