Solving The Brexit Shambles

Photo Via AnotherAngryVoice.

Thomas Clark was quite angry about Brexit last September and, to be fair, had every right to be. What he wrote that day seems very prescient now. “This total lack of anything even remotely resembling a plan of action that the political class could be held to in the result of a Brexit vote was the main objection of anyone who considered the subject with any degree of seriousness. Had the pro-Brexit camp actually presented their plan we could have considered it on its merits. The fact that they just had a random jumble of slogans, utopian fantasies and false promises instead of an actual strategy for what comes next meant there really was nothing serious to consider”. Yes Thomas is a committed Remainer but I hardly think Brexiteers could argue with much of that. We are nearly one year on and there is still no credible plan that I can see so I wrote Brexit Omnishambles.

The first problem which I touched upon in that piece was the referendum itself, which is described by Phil Hendren (aka @dizzy_thinks) thus, “It seems to me, with hindsight, the EU Referendum Act 2015 was the worst piece of legislation passed by Parliament ever”. It is not the result of the referendum but the wording of it as a binary question when it was anything but. He goes on “This was, without a doubt a massive mistake that has played out in the national debate of the last year. There was nothing about the Single Market or the Customs Union, and as we all know, a state does not need to be a member of the EU in order to be a member of either of these things”. This is precisely why we’re having this debate now instead of when we should have had it.

Another prominent Remainer Frances Copolla having initially accepted the result is now suffering from Buyers Remorse, she wrote, “I saw a completely different political paradigm, though I could not discern its shape. And I saw a possibility that, like Hong Kong in 1997, the fears of economic disaster would prove baseless, and Britain would have a bright future, though one which I could not imagine. I called on everyone to try to make Brexit work”. That has turned into “Since I wrote that, the world has been turned upside down. Britain is in a deep political crisis which started the day after the Brexit vote and shows no sign of ending”. This is a perfectly principled decision, she has looked at the evidence and changed her mind, Brexit never Brexit, it was never defined and to my knowledge still hasn’t been. One thing I can say for sure she hasn’t done so to court popularity.

So who speaks for Brexit? Let’s look at Brexit Central a Twitter account, no sign of remorse there, everything is going swimmingly but for the fact Brexit may not be hard enough. They approvingly quote a junior minister Steve Baker as saying “It would be fatal show of weakness – “like putting blood in the water” – to let Brussels believe Britain is stepping back from the Prime Minister’s hardline proposals, set out in January”. That would be the set of proposals that has already been laughed out of court by the other 27 member nation states then. They are exceedingly cross that the Chancellor is pushing for the retention of the customs union arguing that ” continuing to abide by the rules of the customs union would continue to restrict Britain’s ability to pursue an independent international trade policy. EU rules bar members of the customs union from striking bilateral trade deals”. Whilst damaging to trade relationship with our biggest trading partner, way to go guys.

By a happy coincidence the world seems terribly concerned about North Korea my contempt of this notion being made plain here. My very good friend Scott Adams (Disclaimer: He doesn’t know me) has an idea or three for solving that particular impasse. It goes like this. “The current frame on how all sides are approaching the problem is a win-lose setup. Either North Korea wins – and develops nukes that can reach the mainland USA – or the United States wins, and North Korea abandons its nuclear plans, loses face, loses leverage, and loses security. Our current framing of the situation doesn’t have a path to success“. I don’t see how that’s very different to our current malaise, the UK is hopelessly divided and no matter which side “wins” around half the electorate will end up severely pis… annoyed, miffed even.

Back to Scott for the outline of a solution. ” You need some form of a win-win setup to make any kind of deal. That’s what I’m about to suggest. And by winning, I mean both sides get what they need, even if it isn’t exactly what they said they want. I like the sound of that already, it’s commonly called compromise although that isn’t usually the Btritish way. So Scott’s solution to the NK dilemma?

Proposed North Korean Peace Deal

China, Russia, and U.S. sign a military security agreement to protect


North Korea and South Korea from attack


for 100 years, in return for North Korea suspending its ICBM and nuclear weapons programs and allowing inspectors to confirm they are sticking to the deal.

That is basically where we need to park Brexit in the long grass where it belongs. We find a deal where everyone wins above. Kim Yong Un has no opposition press he can call that the unconditional surrender of the mighty USA grovelling at the feet of the Glorious Leader. America has the dubious  honour of removing NK as a potential source of nuclear attack even though it wasn’t one in the first place, their press will lap that up,

My advice to the hard Brexiteers is take any Brexit you are offered or my prediction will come true, you won’t get any Brexit at all.

Many thanks to Francis Copolla, Scott Adams, Thomas Clark and Phil Hendren, I hope you follow their links.

Don’t forget to click Newsfeed for more stories from around the web.

6 thoughts on “Solving The Brexit Shambles

  1. This total lack of anything even remotely resembling a plan of action that the political class could be held to in the result of a Brexit vote was the main objection of anyone who considered the subject with any degree of seriousness.

    Isn’t the real problem the fact that this is how the British government has done its business for three generations? The real problem here is that one party gets total control for the space of five years.

    Had the pro-Brexit camp actually presented their plan we could have considered it on its merits.

    One might say that “had the Tories/Labour presented their manifesto, we could have considered it on its merits.”

    I happen to live in a country that at present, has no government. The two parties that could form a government are at loggerheads. Naturally, Geert Wilder’s PVV is nowhere to be seen… but that’s how America does politics. In Germany, the socialists and the conservatives manage – somehow – to bury the hatchet and get on with the job.

    Whilst a coalition government may seem weak and unstable on the surface, there’s an important point that underlies the strange happenings in European politics: manifestos are considered on their merits.

    Something that never seems to happen in Britain. A country where “either labour orthe conservatives are in power.” Either Britain’s in the EU or it’s out. When you think like that, it’s rare that anybody thinks any further.

    You simply don’t need to.


    1. The problem with the UK is that it has never been fully in, the feeling is the EU isn’t our club, probably because it isn’t ruled by us!


      1. “probably because it isn’t ruled by us!” That hasn’t stopped Britain from vetoing dozens of useful measures… like the import tariffs on subsidized Chinese steel.


        Hinkley Point.

        That’s why I wanted Britain out!!!

        This kind of selfishness on the part of Britain is why it was never suited to working with European countries. It’s always been better off on its own, the problem is that Britain can’t live without Europe. I guess the British cannot learn what they need to learn.


  2. This article is predicated on ‘because we drove business policy toward trade within Europe through steamrollering through the EU State without democratic mandate, that can never change’.

    Whilst 1000 year Reich Germans want that, I worked years ago with New Zealanders who saw their long term trade ties marginslised by the Europeans. Not surprisingly, they built Asian links to replace thst which had been lost. They did not die…

    Of course, Britain is so weak that what was possible for the economic colossus of New Zealand is impossible for the sexual submissive naughty girl who needs a good spanking, Britain.

    The assumption of all remainers is that every decision has to be economically top dog within five years. Nothing else matters.

    World War II was economically disastrous for Britain. But it was fought.

    Some people put principles like self-determination and sovereignty higher than mafia serfdom.

    They may be right, they may be wrong.

    But personal experience taught me the utter futility of submitting to a narcissistic ignorant idiot who back in the early 1960s was portrayed as a Messiah…..


    1. I agree with a lot of that and for reasons of self determination and sovereignty I’m a brexiteer at heart. There will be a price to pay in the short to medium term because it will take decades to sort outing leaving. The EU was not designed to leave.


  3. Hi Bill, Brexit is a Process and so is the EU. Not only is the British Political Establishment very low information but so is that of the EU. Maastricht is the beginning of the EU´s going off course and Lisbon was the icing on the cake for the Federalists and the straw that broke the camels back for so many of the rest of us.
    In the same way, I would prefer a Social democratic EU I support a Social Democratic Brexit. Both Political organisations are though caught within the Gravitational Pull of the Petro Dollar and its hegemonic Power. As the Petro Dollar is also floundering it is little wonder that a political Establishment who do not understand Banking, Finance and Importantly the money creation process are all at sea with respect to solutions for the various Nation State Polity´s but also the Supr National institutional arrangements tailored to the needs and wants of Globalism and State Monopoly Finance Capitalism. The EU is a microcosm for how to forget the real wealth generated by SME´s in pursuit of Dreams of Global Financial Domination.
    To say that the political Establishment all failed to have a plan for a Brexit is actually False, Richard North Wrote extensively and the IEA ran a Competition the winner of which was a British and Commonwealth Staffer based in Asia, Richard’s Flexit and two Books on the subject were available to all who care to take the trouble and make the effort, available to read and his excellent web Site Flexit is still online for the johnny come lately to the Engagement of Brain and rendering of facts ahead of bursting into tribal rhetoric of the Boris Johnson Kind.

    The Drive of this paper is based upon the more substantial book-length analysis by Dr Richard North, linked to by this web site.

    The 406 page Flexcit report THE LEAVE ALLIANCE Flexcit A plan for leaving the European Union may be found at the link.

    Flexcit Money?

    Mansfield Money?
    in 2014 the Institute for economic Affairs held a competition, The Brexit prize which awarded 100,000 pounds to the winning Brexit strategy.
    The winner was Ian Mansfield a foreign office Staffer based at the time in the Philippines, here’s a link to the winning Paper.

    Here’s a Compilation of all the posts I did on Brexit, the Establishment do not want it, In my view it is in the interests of the people if the Gnomes of Zurich can be kept from Punishing The UK Economy. The forces we will be taking on are the same ones who have been frustrating Mr Trump, that battle will play out this month when the Fiscal Cliff is Reached and the money Charades will ensue.

    My own view of the Establishments abject failure on both sides, which was not in their defence drawn on Party Political Lines, is summed up in this Poem I wrote.

    Upon the Good Ship BREXIT.

    Twas on the good ship Leavus
    My God you should have seen us
    The Figurehead was a porcine head
    Suckling the PM´s Penis.

    The Captain he was Farage
    He was a Proto Kipper
    He wasn´t fit for EU stich
    between Starsbourg and Bruxellis

    Jiggin and Ukippin
    Jigginand Ukippin
    Jiggin and Ukipin
    No time for the EU

    Heave to the ship remain
    Crewed by establishment inane
    The figurehead Elysiums Head
    and the mast the EU gravyTrain

    The Captains of this Mary-Rose,
    Oligarchical in repose
    Headed an eclectic crew who he knew
    The Establishment would brown nose.

    Spinnin for a winnin
    spinnin for a winnin
    spinnin for a winnin
    Brown Nosing the EU.

    Upon Stately Ship Vote Leave
    A controlled crew at first to decieve
    Twin Figureheads a painted Bus &
    a cheque for the NHS , you see.

    Two captains had this vessel
    both demured to blond tressels
    He had the populist touch and touch he must
    with seductive rhetorical mendacity.

    Hoping for a near thing
    hoping for a near thing
    hoping for a near thing
    always meant to lose .

    The 1st Captain name of Farage
    City schooled in Arbitrage
    an Old school type, Pissed up at night
    but other wise a bigot.

    The second Captain Rose
    Schooled in sensible knickers and Clothes
    Of Bourgoise type, Oligarchical awlwight
    neo liberal, safe and Soros chose.

    Gisella Gibbon and Gove
    Drive the Coach and four no more
    guided byEnlightenment , but
    Arguments of straw and entitlement.

    Manipulate the plebs
    manipulate the plebs
    manipulate the plebs
    It makes no fuckin difference.

    With all that said and done, Varafoukis tells us and I think he is right the EU do not negotiate and nor can they afford to, Brexit for them really is the thin end of the wedge, they will not be Reasonable and pragmatic under the current regime. On the EU we need Regime Change, in the UK we are part way through Regime Change, not necessarily to An FPTP Labour under Jeremy Corbyn. I am convinced that a New PR voting system is just around the corner as that and a federated Pound Stirling is the only way to save the Union. paradoxically the federated UK with proper Subsidiarity may well see the EU going back to federation with proper subsidiarity. The ECB and its relationship to the EU Commission is a direct and exclusive competence of the Commission and as such not subject to the requirement for Subsidiarity and by consequence not subject to democratic oversight of any sort.

    Follow the money people, Brexit is as Dereck Wall of the Green Party tweeted at the time, An Imaginary solution to real problems. The UE has many pressing and equally difficult problöems as we do ourselves. Its current leadership are blind to the need of change in the EU institutions and that is the biggest problem. A good start would be to Fire the Whole EU commission starting with Mr Junker.


Comments are closed.