Brexit: UK Cabinet revolt as ministers resign over Theresa May's new Brexit plan, 9 July 2018

[Astute]

Posted by greybeard (here)
Teresa May has won the vote
200 for 117 against.
Chris

Just to break down these numbers a little bit more.

There are 317 MPs in Theresa May's party in Parliament, all of whom voted.
163 of these MPs are either government ministers, junior ministers or parliamentary private secretaries i.e. they are on the government 'payroll'. You can only be on this 'payroll' (constitutionally) if you support the prime minister. (If an MP doesn't support the prime minister convention has it that they resign from their position).
It could therefore be assumed that Theresa May was expecting at least 163 votes. (She actually got 200)
That leaves 154 MPs that are not on the 'payroll' and called back bench MPs.
Assuming ALL of those MPs that were expected to vote for the prime minister did actually vote for her, she also picked up 37 'extra' votes of support from these 154 back bench MPs. This equates to approx 24% support from MPs not in her government (i.e. 76% of her back bench MPs did not support her.)

So while on paper 200 voted for May and 117 voted against May, giving a majority of 83 MPs, it is actually a lot more damaging for her that she failed to secure significantly more support from her back bench MPs.

In her final appeal to MPs, before the vote, it was widely reported she would not be standing in the next General Election. Her authority has been seriously wounded by this confidence vote.
(In similar no confidence votes in Conservative party history, Margaret Thatcher was in a slightly stronger position but resigned within a few days after initially saying she would fight on. John Major did fight on, but his party was so seriously weakened by his lack of a resounding win in his confidence vote that it was widely considered a lame duck premiership.)

May's government party does not command a majority in parliament. They rely on the votes of 10 MPs from the Northern Ireland DUP party, who are fundamentally against her Brexit withdrawal plan. Her government lost 3 major votes in parliament last week, including (for the first time ever for any government) being found in contempt of parliament. Opposition parties smell blood and may well call a vote of no confidence in the government in the coming days. It doesn't take too many of May's MPs to back this for her government to fall.

I think Theresa May is far from being out of the woods yet.

[greybeard]

As a Scot I would quite like to have home rule.
Thats one thing if England and Scotland are both in the Common Market or both out of it.
BUT if England gets out (Brexit) and Scotland enters, then the there would be a similar problem to the one that is possible with the Northern and Southern Ireland border.
The majority of Scots voted to stay in.
Its a marvellous drama and I suspect the end result was written before all this even began.

Chris

[Frenchy]

Editted :

Posted by greybeard (here)
''' Its a marvellous drama and I suspect the end result was written before all this even began. " Chris

How very true Chris, remember too the quote from Sharon Evans :- "

She told John Nicolson that she soon began to harbour concerns about how the inquiry was being run, and these concerns prompted her to suggest to her fellow panellists that they write to Theresa May.
She continued: "I was taken to one side and it was made clear to me, I was told that Theresa May was going to be the Prime Minister, this inquiry was going to be part of this, and that if I didn't toe the line and do I was told, if I tried to get information out, I would be discredited by her advisors."
She went on to allege that this warning was issued by the inquiry's QC, Ben Emmerson, who served as a go-between between May and the inquiry team.

And this TWO YEARS, prior...

{ And sheeple think there's democracy ? ? ? ? }

[greybeard]

Labour And DUP Hold Talks As Jeremy Corbyn Plots Brexit No Confidence Motion 'Before Christmas'
[HuffPost UK]
Rachel Wearmouth
HuffPost UK13 December 2018

Talks between the DUP and Labour to find “common ground” are taking place “at a senior level” as Jeremy Corbyn’s party mulls triggering a no-confidence motion in the government before Christmas, HuffPost UK understands.

After Theresa May survived a bid to topple her leadership by Tory backbench rebels, it emerged her whole government could be facing a new threat as the opposition plots a confidence challenge as early as next week.

It is understood a meeting between the DUP, which props up her government, and Labour has taken place “at a senior level” in a move which threatens to blow apart the supply and confidence motion the Northern Irish party struck with May in the wake of her disastrous general election.

It comes as the confidence vote in May’s leadership revealed that 117 Tory MPs do not back the Prime Minister.

The DUP has always publicly stated it would not run the risk of a Corbyn-led government - but pulling their backing for May could lead to a snap general election.

HuffPost UK has learned that, should May fail to wrest fundamental changes from EU leaders at this week’s summit in Brussels, Labour is prepared to push for a vote of no confidence in the government after she updates MPs on Monday.
The £2bn confidence and supply deal with the DUP was struck after May lost her majority at the last general election
View photos
The £2bn confidence and supply deal with the DUP was struck after May lost her majority at the last general election

May is due to make a statement to the Commons about Brexit talks on Monday after having been forced into pulling the so-called meaningful vote this week.

It is after her statement Labour could move.

When approached about the talks, DUP chief whip Sir Jeffrey Donaldson said: “I am not aware of any such meetings.”

A senior Labour source, however, told HuffPost UK: “Discussions have taken place between Labour and the DUP to see if there is any common ground there.”

They added a “considerable number of Tory MPs” desperate to oust May could also back the opposition in a last-ditch bid to get the party to switch leader.

“We have seen the hostility focused on May over the last two or three weeks in particular and we believe that, when she returns from Brussels, unless she has agreed major changes to the withdrawal package, that hostility will only increase,” the well-placed Labour source added.

They admitted the DUP were unlikely to throw their weight behind Labour’s plan given Corbyn and his shadow chancellor John McDonnell’s closeness to Sinn Fein.

However, they added: “It should happen before Christmas.

“We might just have this coalition that will vote against her and we want to maximise the vote against her as much as we can. Just a handful of MPs can make a huge difference for us.

“You pick your time for a fight, you don’t pick a fight for the sake of it.”

[greybeard]

Where is the common sense?
Only three real options.
Leave without a deal.
Agree present deal.
Stay as is --dont leave.
All the rest is verbiage--politics.

Dont think Labour party electable.
If they get a General Election they may regret it--the conservatives may get a bigger majority.

Chris

[greybeard]

EU rejects Theresa May’s ‘vague’ appeal for help over Brexit deal
Luke James,Yahoo Finance UK 12 hours ago

Prime minister Theresa May arriving at the European Council summit in Brussels on Thursday (Getty)

Theresa May has been dealt a fresh blow in her bid to get the Brexit deal through parliament after EU leaders rejected her appeal for assurances that would help sell it to MPs.

In a passionate appeal to EU leaders on Thursday, she said the deal could get through the Commons with a new legal clause that proves the Irish border backstop is not a “trap.”

Despite having to call-off the meaningful vote to avoid a humiliating defeat last week, she told them: “There is a majority in my parliament who want to leave with a deal, so with the right assurances this deal can be passed.”

But the European Council ruled out delivering on the legally binding guarantee May has promised her MPs. A crucial part of the meeting’s draft conclusions, promising to “examine whether further assurances can be provided”, was deleted after a three hour debate among EU leaders.

May had said she did not expect an “immediate breakthrough” as she arrived at the summit, but her hopes of securing another special Brexit summit next month also now appear to be fading.

The only assurance May will take back to Britain is a commitment from the EU to “work speedily” on a future trade deal “so that the backstop will not need to be triggered.”

EU leaders appear to have made up their minds during a 53-minute question and answer session with May. She asked for their help in changing the “dynamic” in parliament by tackling the “perception” among MPs that the backstop is a “trap from which the UK could not escape.”

And she concluded by with a call for the EU to “hold nothing in reserve” in the effort to conclude a Brexit deal. “We must get this right,” she implored. “Lets work together intensively to get this deal over the line in the best interests of all our people.”

But her failure to table firm proposals to the meeting left even close European allies exasperated. German chancellor Angela Merkel reportedly interrupted May more than once to ask what she really wanted.

READ MORE: Brexit chaos to continue over Christmas as May warns of no ‘immediate breakthrough’

EU chief Jean-Claude Juncker said the UK was being “nebulous and imprecise” with its demands and called on May to spell out what she wants.

“I do find it uncomfortable that there’s an impression perhaps in the UK that it is for the EU to propose solutions,” he said. It is for the UK leaving the EU and I would have thought that it was rather more for the British government.”

Merkel was among EU leaders who spoke in favour of leaving open the possibility of giving May legal assurances at a further summit in January. Austria, who current hold the European Council presidency, are also sympathetic to May’s situation.

“There’s different opinions on the legal nature of any assurances,” said one senior EU diplomat. “Some are flexible if its more legally binding, some don’t want that. This is something that is just beginning so we need to discuss this internally.”

“It’s natural when you have something on the table for the first time,” he added. “How likely is it that 27 people are of the same opinion?”

But Spain and France are among countries whose tough stance appears to have prevailed. One Spanish diplomat said: “The government refuses any binding solution, even if it doesn’t involve renegotiating the deal. Working on a binding solution means you change the deal through the back door.”

Arriving for the second day of the summit, Luxembourg prime minister Xavier Bettel said leaders held an “honest exchange” with May on Thursday. “We told her that to renegotiate the text will be impossible but if she needs clarification about the backstop [she can give it].”

Belgian prime minister Charle Michel said: “The signs that we were given yesterday were not especially reassuring as to the ability of the parliament to be able to honour the commitment that was given.”

But Austrian chancellor Sebastian Kurz said leaders still want to “make clear what the backstop means”, adding: “The backstop is an idea for a short period of time and not for the next decades.”

Chris says!!!
The bottom line is that EU does not want us to leave and is doing everything possible to stop any deal getting approve by UK Government.
If we had got out with a good deal- then other countries might have done the same leading to an end of EU

Its that simple.
Sigh!!!
Ch

[norman]

Posted by greybeard (here)
If we had got out with a good deal- then other countries might have done the same leading to an end of EU

Its that simple.
Sigh!!!
Ch

If we get out with no deal, and thrive, other countries are watching, they are still screwed.





The folks around my way have not changed their minds about anything. If they throw another referendum dice, they're going to say byebye to EU membership, the hard way..

[greybeard]

You maybe right Norman.
I think Teresa May must be a masochist--to go to Europe again expecting a different result is madness.
Out of it --they still want our products an we still want theirs.
So one way or an other in spite of all the doom stories--UK will probably be just fine.
Scotland might struggle a bit--who knows
Time will tell.
Chris

[greybeard]

Brexit latest: EU leaders scrap plans to help Theresa May pass deal after disastrous meeting in Brussels
The Independent Jon Stone,The Independent 8 hours ago


Theresa May’s Brexit plan was dealt another major blow at a meeting with EU leaders on Thursday night in a disastrous turn of events that resulted in them scrapping written commitments to help her pass her deal through parliament.

After arriving in Brussels with promises to help the prime minister, European leaders were left amazed when she turned up without any developed requests or ideas.

The 27 heads of state and government subsequently decided to delete lines from their council conclusions saying the EU “stands ready to examine whether any further assurance can be provided” and that “the backstop does not represent a desirable outcome for the union”.

The key paragraphs appeared in leaked earlier drafts on the conclusions and their absence leaves a barebones statement that does the bare minimum to help the prime minister. The limited assurances provided in the statement are extremely unlikely to placate Ms May’s MPs, who have said they want major changes to the agreement.

Accounts of the meeting suggest the prime minister’s speech, in which she called for help to get the agreement “over the line”, was repeatedly interrupted by Angela Merkel asking her what she actually wanted from them.

Senior UK government officials admitted that the prime minister did not bring any documented proposals with her to the meeting.

The approach puzzled EU diplomats, who for days before the conference had said they needed to see what proposals Ms May had come up with before they could respond to her request for aid.

Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission president, said at a midnight press conference after the discussion: “I do find it uncomfortable that there’s an impression perhaps in the UK that it is for the EU to propose solutions.

“It is for the UK leaving the EU and I would have thought that it was rather more for the British government.”

In the margins of the summit the meeting is already being called “Salzburg 2.0” – a reference to a previous summit in September where the prime minister’s dinner speech also ended up accidentally hardening the EU position.

The statement issued by leaders warns that the withdrawal agreement “is not open for renegotiation”, but clarifying that the controversial backstop will “apply temporarily, unless and until it is superseded by a subsequent agreement” and that the EU will “use its best endeavours” to get it replaced quickly “so that the backstop would only be in place for as long as strictly necessary”.

They assured the UK it was EU’s “firm determination to work speedily” to replace it with a trade agreement.

The statement will be of little help to the prime minister, who is struggling to get her deal through parliament after a bruising confidence vote on Wednesday where over 100 of her own MPs said she should quit.

The prime minister had told EU leaders: “There is a majority in my parliament who want to leave with a deal, so with the right assurances this deal can be passed.

“Indeed it is the only deal capable of getting through my parliament.”

She called on them to give her something that would “change the dynamic” in Westminster, adding: “We have to change the perception that the backstop could be a trap from which the UK could not escape. Until we do, the deal – our deal – is at risk.”
European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker and European Council president Donald Tusk at a midnight press conference following the meeting (AP)

Ms May is said to have asked for a legally binding 2021 deadline to end the backstop, but it was pointed out by leaders that this would contradict the fundamental principles of the agreement. When asked if the UK could propose a way around this, the prime minister was said to have no answer.

Arriving at the meeting the prime minister had downplayed hopes of an “immediate breakthrough”. But the performance on Thursday evening appears to have derailed the possibility of any further help down the road in the new year, which the EU seemed receptive to before the session got underway. Such plans could have taken the form of protocols or side-declarations to the treaty.

Earlier in the day German chancellor Angela Merkel had said: “I do not see that this withdrawal agreement can be changed.

“We can discuss whether there should be additional assurances, but here the 27 member states will act very much in common and make their interests very clear.”

Austrian chancellor Sebastian Kurz, who is currently chairing the European Council, struck a more conciliatory tone, telling reporters: “We are ready to accommodate Theresa May. It’s not about pushing through maximum positions but to find a provision that is the best possible for both sides.”

Juha Sipila, the Finnish prime minister, told reporters that it would be “a little bit difficult” to give the PM legally binding assurances but that leaders wanted to try and help anyway.

In one positive for the prime minister Mr Juncker, the commission president, said he wanted talks on the future relationship to begin as soon as the House of Commons had approved the agreement – as a sign that the EU was serious about replacing the backstop. But the token gesture alone is unlikely to persuade Brexiteers.

[greybeard]

Cabinet split over Plan B to 'dead' Brexit withdrawal deal

Theresa May is facing rival cabinet calls for a second EU referendum or a no-deal Brexit after returning from Brussels empty-handed.

The prime minister was hoping to extract concessions on the Irish backstop - the mechanism to prevent a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.

But EU leaders made it clear there would be no renegotiation of her withdrawal agreement, making it all but impossible for Mrs May to get it through the House of Commons.

The majority of the cabinet now believe her deal to be "dead", it has been reported.

Five ministers, including Chancellor Philip Hammond and Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd, are "leaning reluctantly" towards supporting a second referendum, The Times said.

But another group, including Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liz Truss, and Leader of the Commons Andrea Leadsom, is said to be willing to leave without a deal.

And a third faction, including Environment Secretary Michael Gove and Home Secretary Sajid Javid, is said to back a soft Brexit, possibly based on the relationship Norway has with the EU.

Ms Rudd, writing in the Daily Mail, said that while Brexit was "in danger of getting stuck", leaving without a deal was something "almost everybody agrees mustn't happen".

Theresa May's agreement had to be put "on hold because it would have been defeated", she added.

Ms Rudd's solution is for politicians of different parties to work together to "forge a consensus".

Mr Hunt said: "The reason I think, in the end, the EU will want to help us as far as they possibly can is because it is not in their interest to provoke a further political crisis in the UK.

"Because although some people in the EU may say that parliament would stop a no-deal scenario, they can't be sure of that."

Other senior Tories - including former chancellor Ken Clarke - have urged Mrs May to reach out to Labour backbenchers in a bid to find common ground to move forward.

Meanwhile, just hours after former prime minister Tony Blair urged EU leaders and Mrs May to extend Article 50 to allow for a public vote to resolve the Brexit deadlock, Nigel Farage said he believed the UK could face a second referendum.

Speaking at a Leave Means Leave rally in London, the former UKIP leader said Brexit campaigners needed to "get ready for every situation".

He said that while he did not want another referendum, it would be wrong of him and fellow Brexiteers "not to be prepared for a worse case scenario".

Mrs May's final day at an EU summit was dominated by a spat with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, who she accused of calling her "nebulous".

Mr Juncker said his use of the word during a midnight news conference related to the "overall state of the debate in Britain", with Mrs May struggling to form enough of a consensus within her own party despite winning a confidence vote in her leadership earlier in the week.

The prime minister will address the House of Commons on Monday to give an update on the Brussels summit, which came after she cancelled a vote on her Brexit deal that had been scheduled for Tuesday.

It is likely that MPs will have to wait until mid-January to have their say, by which time Labour could already have forced a vote of no-confidence in her leadership.

The opposition has said it will only strike when it considers the government to be at its most vulnerable.

One shadow cabinet minister told The Guardian the timing was dependent on whether the party was confident the motion would be backed by the DUP.

[greybeard]

Theresa May condemns Tony Blair's call for second referendum - but allies are secretly preparing for fresh public vote
Sky News Jon Craig, chief political correspondent,Sky News 2 hours 12 minutes ago

Reactions
Reblog on Tumblr
Share
Tweet
Email

Scroll back up to restore default view.

Theresa May has angrily condemned calls for a second Brexit referendum, despite her closest allies secretly preparing for a new poll.

The prime minister hit out at predecessor Tony Blair, who on Friday told Sky News she should "switch course" and back a second referendum because of deadlock in parliament.

Yet behind the scenes, her de-facto deputy David Lidington has discussed a new poll with Labour MPs and her chief of staff, Gavin Barwell, is also said to be backing another referendum.

Over the past fortnight, Mr Lidington has held a series of meetings with Labour MPs, including one on Thursday with leading campaigners for a so-called "people's vote".

This week Mrs May will attempt to salvage her Brexit deal by calling in EU ambassadors to Number 10 and sending a top government lawyer to Brussels for talks on the Irish backstop.

The government's most senior legal officer, Jonathan Jones, aims to secure a legally binding commitment that the backstop can be time-limited, which the PM hopes would deliver the necessary votes in a Commons vote on the deal.

Hitting out at Mr Blair after a bruising week which ended with a disastrous EU summit, the PM said: "I am fighting for a good deal for Britain. I will continue to fight for a good deal for Britain.

"I have never lost sight of my duty and that is to deliver on the referendum result and to do so in a way that protects British jobs, keeps us safe and protects our precious union.

"However, there are too many people who want to subvert the process for their own political interests - rather than acting in the national interest.

"For Tony Blair to go to Brussels and seek to undermine our negotiations by advocating for a second referendum is an insult to the office he once held and the people he once served.

"We cannot, as he would, abdicate responsibility for this decision. Parliament has a democratic duty to deliver what the British people voted for.

"I remain determined to see that happen. I will not let the British people down."

In his Sky News interview, Mr Blair said: "The deal that the PM's finally concluded with the EU is a deal that nobody really wants.

"So I think that the logical thing is to go back to the people and say - you're going to have to give us direction because parliament can't agree on one form of Brexit and it's clear that as a result of this negotiation our knowledge of what Brexit really means has been vastly enlarged."

But the disclosure that Mr Lidington is talking to pro-Remain Labour MPs will incense some members of the cabinet, as well as Brexiteer Tory backbenchers.

He first met a group of around 20 Labour MPs last month and last Thursday he met leading figures from the official People's Vote campaign including Chris Bryant, Ben Bradshaw, Chuka Umunna and Chris Leslie.

Mr Lidington is one of a "gang of five" in cabinet - alongside Amber Rudd, Philip Hammond, David Gauke and Greg Clark - who are said to have concluded that a new referendum may be the only way to resolve the deadlock.

On Friday, Ms Rudd, the work and pensions secretary, stepped forward as the Tories' Brexit peacemaker, calling for a ceasefire among warring Conservative MPs and for a "coalition" with moderate Labour MPs to thrash out a cross-party compromise.

But Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, who believes no deal is better than a referendum, said in a Sunday Telegraph interview the UK would flourish without a Brexit deal and also confirmed he wants to stand for the Tory leadership.

Labour MP Ian Murray said that a People's Vote is now closer than ever.

"Even Theresa May's closest supporters have realised that the only way out of this Brexit shambles is to put our country's future back in the hands of the public," he said.

"There is cross-party support for a People's Vote, and we are now moving towards a parliamentary majority. It's time for Theresa May to trust the British public and for all MPs to work together to achieve a People's Vote.

Liberal Democrat Brexit spokesperson Tom Brake said a People's Vote provides the only escape route from a divisive and damaging Brexit.

"The parties must join forces to defeat the PM's friendless deal and trigger the vote and legislation necessary for a referendum. This decision must be taken back to the people, with the option to remain on the ballot paper offering us a chance to get out of this mess," he said.


Does Teresa May not realize that people change their mind.
They may have voted to leave on the information provided at that time but in the light of whats gone on for the last year or so would they still vote leave?
Is it upper class fog?
Does she truly not get that the deal will not get approval now, no matter what she comes up with?

Chris

[greybeard]

Brexit has made the UK a global joke. How will we rebuild our reputation?
The Guardian John Kampfner,


Theresa May and Philip Hammond
Theresa May and Philip Hammond. ‘Americans and Europeans used to tune in to our parliamentary antics to wonder at the jousting. Now they are baffled that we continue to play banter games at a time like this.’

You know you’ve hit rock bottom when the Germans mock you on primetime TV and the jokes are actually quite funny. Giving Britons this year’s “golden dumbass” prize, Oliver Welke, the German equivalent of Dara Ó Briain, describes how Theresa May “can’t get out of the EU and can’t even get out of her bloody car”, over pictures of Angela Merkel waiting embarrassedly outside her Berlin residency as the door of our prime minister’s limo fails to open. “Just go!” the host yells. “Hard Brexit, soft Brexit, liquid Brexit, just fog off!” Next, he shows a cartoon of a man in a bowler hat repeatedly burning his hand on a hot stove, then stabbing his eye with a fork. The audience is falling about laughing. Welke’s Heute Show on ZDF may not have the cachet of the US equivalent, the Daily Show, but it is good at reflecting the moment.

Britain is now the butt of global mirth and cringe-making sympathy. I spent most of this autumn on trips trying to link our creative industries with those of other countries. From Mexico City to Montreal, Amsterdam to Tallinn, the welcome starts with the avuncular hand on the shoulder, a sigh and a reference to “our British friends”, followed by “I hope you’re all right”.

Consternation over the original referendum decision long ago gave way to bafflement over the chaos. “What on earth is Mrs May doing playing pantomime host in the House of Commons at a time like this?” someone asked me last week. “We used to think that you were serious, reliable people.” Americans and Europeans used to tune in to our parliamentary antics to wonder at the jousting. Now they are baffled that we continue to play games at a time like this. I am constantly asked why we hark on about the second world war, as if we are stuck in time and are not proud of our achievements since.

The gulf between those trying to sell the UK’s skills and modernity and the poor calibre of our political culture is hitting hard. Business groups, which had been surprisingly cowed, are now waking up to the dangers of the brain drain. It is not just young, ambitious Europeans who are moving home, apparently to our prime minister’s delight. The movement of talented Britons to other countries is steady and will grow, as the reality of Brexit sinks in. Why work in a country that regards economic self-harm as just one of those things you have to get through? Why work in a country that permits people to come rather than welcomes them?

The atmospherics are particularly important for those working in, or planning to work in, the knowledge economy – the nexus between science, technology and creativity. These three sectors have, since the financial crash of a decade ago, been the growth engine for the United Kingdom.

People used to flock to us, as world leaders in these fields. Perhaps they will again. But for the moment, the direction of travel is in the opposite direction. The Germans are making a beeline for British talent. The Dutch are marketing themselves as a new centre for the creative industries. Lisbon is hot on tech. At its peak, London had so many French nationals working in the capital, thanks to its entrepreneurial cachet, that it was somewhere between the sixth- and ninth-largest French city (depending on how you count the population). Brain drains become self-fulfilling. France, the old saying went, is where you go to relax. Britain is where you go to work. No more.

Brexit has already deeply damaged the British brand. The idea that we could compensate for the loss of European markets and political influence by growing markets elsewhere was always a folly, driven by ideological extremism. The view from countries outside the European Union about the state of Britain is no different to those inside – apart perhaps from a few rightwing thinktanks in Washington, which is one city that I haven’t frequented.

We have been here before. I remember the 1970s as a young boy. Britain was a laughing stock, the “sick man of Europe”. The UK’s desperately poor productivity, terrible labour relations and propensity to strike earned the tag “the British disease”. Our growth rates consistently lagged behind those of the first members of the European Economic Community. Indeed, their economic success, and our weakness, was a driving force behind us joining the trade bloc. Trips to Europe were expensive – and exotic. Between 1939 and the early 1990s London lost a quarter of its population. Then it became attractive and the reverse happened. These cycles occur for cities and countries. The two peaks of “cool Britannia”, in the late 1990s and around the London Olympics of 2012, feel a long time ago.

This is not zero-sum, not a blind eulogy to “the other”. France is mired in protests as the Macron gloss wears off. Spain has handled its constitutional bind with Catalonia with violence and heavy-handedness. Germany frets about life after Mutti Merkel. Italy has a caricature far-right and far-left government. Vladimir Putin is working his way through Europe, fomenting extremism.

Whatever transpires with Brexit, the British brand is tarnished. The mediocrity tag takes time to shake off. It is likely to take somewhere between a decade and a generation for it to recover. Given that politicians can’t be relied upon to remedy the mess of their own making, it will be the lot of everyone else to rebuild our reputation as a go-getting, open nation – one that is worthy of respect rather than cheap jokes.

• John Kampfner is former CEO of the Creative Industries Federation

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by greybeard (here)
As a Scot I would quite like to have home rule.
Thats one thing if England and Scotland are both in the Common Market or both out of it.

Would you rather have home rule and stay in the EU, or stay in the UK and be out of the EU, if those were the choices?

It's far from any of my business at this point, but in the course of doing genealogical research I couldn't help but notice that most of my most recent ancestors all fled Scotland because of the Anglican Church. Bagpipes still stir something in my blood. But I grapple between my resentment of historical Scottish oppression and the modern oppression of EU bureaucrats, which seems to still get a lot of sympathy up there nonetheless.

[greybeard]

Put it this way.
The status quo has served Scotland well ie no Brexit in any shape or form.
Independence for Scotland would create chaos --particularly if we were in the Common Market and England was out of it
Border control --possibly a new currency.

I dont "mind" what happens.
Life will go on regardless.
My viewpoint really comes from non-duality--The Universe brings everything about.
The evolution of restricted consciousness expanding to know itself.

Its like im two entity
Chris has opinions--Self is in acceptance of what is.

Chris