Yesterday, there was an election in the UK, for those of you who may have been so tied up with the testimony of James Comey and waiting for Trump’s tweet-that-never-came. I have always been confused by UK politics … it doesn’t work quite like ours, though in some ways it does. Blogger and friend Roger, writing as heroicallybadwriter (even though he is actually a very GOOD writer) has written an analysis of the election, it’s outcome, and the likely ramifications of said outcome, that I am actually able to understand! For any of you who are confused by the politics of the UK, this is a must-read! Please take a minute to read … there are some laughs in here, too, so even if you don’t care about the politics, you will definitely get a chuckle from it! Thanks, Roger, for your lucid explanation and implied permission to share!
Tag Archives: Theresa May
Brexit, Anyone? or … Divorcing the EU
It is rather like a divorce between a couple with decades of shared history, not to mention a home, cars, personal belongings, household furnishing, cars … and kids. I am referring, of course, to Brexit, the vote from last June 23rd, whereby the Brits voted to give up their membership in the European Union (EU).
On Tuesday, British Prime Minister Theresa May gave a long-awaited speech (full transcript here) indicating what the country could expect in the negotiations as the UK moves out of the EU. The entire process is expected to take about two years, and I think will cross many hurdles and roadblocks along the way. Many in the EU, as well as those in the UK who were not in support of Brexit last year (Scotland and Northern Ireland voted against), hoped that May would opt for what is known as a ‘soft Brexit’, whereby while not a member of the EU, and with no seat on the European Council, it would nonetheless keep unfettered access to the European single market. This would mean free trade with nations in the EU, and exports not subjected to border controls.
However, P.M. May opted for the ‘hard Brexit’, saying that to do otherwise would go against what the people voted for when they voted to leave the EU. A requirement of remaining in the single market is contribution to the EU budget, and also recognition and acceptance of what is known as the Four Freedoms: freedom of movement of goods, services, capital and people. The last is the one, presumably, that gives P.M. May pause, as the most oft-stated reason for Brexit was to stop the flow of immigration into the UK.
I cannot begin to delve in this single post into all the complexities that are likely to be disputed during the negotiation process, but there are a couple of points that should be understood. First, P.M. May stated during her speech:
“… we will pursue a bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement with the European Union. This agreement should allow for the freest possible trade in goods and services between Britain and the EU’s member states. It should give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate within European markets — and let European businesses do the same in Britain. But I want to be clear. What I am proposing cannot mean membership of the Single Market.
So we do not seek membership of the Single Market. Instead we seek the greatest possible access to it through a new, comprehensive, bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement. That agreement may take in elements of current Single Market arrangements in certain areas — on the export of cars and lorries for example, or the freedom to provide financial services across national borders — as it makes no sense to start again from scratch when Britain and the remaining Member States have adhered to the same rules for so many years.
And because we will no longer be members of the Single Market, we will not be required to contribute huge sums to the E.U. budget. There may be some specific European programs in which we might want to participate. If so, and this will be for us to decide, it is reasonable that we should make an appropriate contribution. But the principle is clear: the days of Britain making vast contributions to the European Union every year will end.”
I don’t presume to be a scholar of international law, however this seems to me to be asking to have the strongest benefits of EU membership without the obligations and responsibilities required by other EU nations. Somehow, I don’t think this is going to work! It is rather like, in my original analogy of the divorcing couple, the wife saying, “And I want to keep the house, but I will not contribute to the mortgage payments, taxes, or insurance … you pay all that!”
Yes, well … then there was this:
“We want to get out into the wider world, to trade and do business all around the globe. Countries including China, Brazil, and the Gulf States have already expressed their interest in striking trade deals with us. We have started discussions on future trade ties with countries like Australia, New Zealand and India. And President-Elect Trump has said Britain is not “at the back of the queue” for a trade deal with the United States, the world’s biggest economy, but front of the line.
I know my emphasis on striking trade agreements with countries outside Europe has led to questions about whether Britain seeks to remain a member of the EU’s Customs Union. And it is true that full Customs Union membership prevents us from negotiating our own comprehensive trade deals.
Now, I want Britain to be able to negotiate its own trade agreements. But I also want tariff-free trade with Europe and cross-border trade there to be as frictionless as possible.”
Again, P.M. May appears to believe that she can, as the saying goes, “have her cake and eat it too”! Again, there are many other issues in her speech that I could address, but I am running out of time and viable space, and I would like to address one final topic: the reactions around the world. EU Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt said: “I think it creates an illusion that you can go out of the single market and the customs union and you can cherry pick and still have a number of advantages. I think this will not happen. We shall never accept a situation in which it is better to be outside the single market than be a member of the European Union.” I suspect he is correct.
Predictably, while Britain’s biggest newspapers cheered Theresa May’s Brexit speech, their continental counterparts rolled their eyes. “Steel of the New Iron Lady,” the Daily Mail (UK) said on its front page, comparing the prime minister with Margaret Thatcher. The Sun, Britain’s biggest-selling paper, likened the prime minister to Moses, with the headline “Brexodus”. The Times led on “May to EU: give us fair deal or you’ll be crushed”.
Germany’s Die Welt says Prime Minister is ‘leading Great Britain into isolation’. Italian daily La Repubblica led with the headline, “Brexit, London gets its wall, ‘away from the EU and the common market”‘. Le Monde (France) splashed on “Trump against Europe”, a bullet point added: “Trump’s support for Brexit is welcomed by Theresa May, who looks to tighten links with her favoured ally”.
Among the best articles I found if you are interested in learning more about Brexit, the complexities, and the process that will ensue, is this user-friendly, easy-to-understand BBC article. For my U.S. readers, some of whom may be wondering what the heck this has to do with you, remember that our economies are linked, for better or for worse, and the predictions are that, once Brexit is a fait accompli, Britain’s economy will take a tumble. Additionally, there are security issues to consider, and a host of other factors that will have a global effect. Brexit is, to some in the UK, what Trump’s election was to the majority of us here in the U.S. It is to be hoped that the negotiations can find common ground that will be the least divisive, most beneficial for all sides, but if P.M. May’s speech was any indication, it is going to be a difficult process for the UK and the EU. Filosofa will continue to write about this on occasion, as I do the situation in Turkey, as I find them both fascinating in their own ways. International Relations is, after all, my first love, and every now and then it beats the heck out of writing endlessly about da trumpeter!
I especially hope to hear some opinions from my EU/UK friends … Jack? David? Choosing? Memoirs of a Husk? C’mon … I need some perspective from those who are closer to the situation!
“The eurosceptic genie is out of the bottle and it will now not be put back,” he said. “EU’s finished, EU’s dead.” – Nigel Farage, UK Idiot Extraordinaire
“The Dutch people deserve a referendum as well. The Party for Freedom consequently demands a referendum on NExit, a Dutch EU exit,” tweeted Dutch anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders.
Cameron Goes, Larry Stays (for now, at least)!
Larry leads a good life. He is currently employed and also resides at 10 Downing Street, where his official job title is Chief Mouser. For you see, Larry is a cat. Not just any cat, but Larry The Cat. Larry, born circa 2007, was adopted by the staff at 10 Downing when mice were detected by television news crews while reporting live. His secondary role was to be a pet for the children of then Prime Minister David Cameron. It quickly became clear that Larry would need to be taught some manners, when he took a swipe at television reporter Lucy Manning during his first week on the job. Larry, a rescue cat, was a bit intimidated by men, but made an exception when President Obama visited 10 Downing, and Larry went willingly to the Prez for some gentle petting.
Larry got off to a bit of a rocky start, and in February 2011 he almost received a “vote of no confidence”, which would have terminated his employment. Some were saying he simply had not “developed a killer instinct”. But Larry was given a second chance, and on 22 April 2011 finally proved fit for the job by killing his first mouse! But then in November 2011, Larry’s future was once again uncertain when accusations were made that Larry was spending more time sleeping, and spending time in the company of a female cat, Maisie, than actually hunting for mice. Sometimes, though, a great personality can overcome a poor work record, and that was apparently the case with Larry. It was said that he brought too much pleasure to staff and family, and thus Larry’s job was secure, though he was banned from the Prime Minister’s quarters, as Mr. Cameron apparently complained about fur on his suits.
Larry & Freya
In 2012, a lady cat named Freya moved into the house next door, 11 Downing Street. I do not know what happened between Larry and his former love, Maisie, but suddenly Larry and Freya became “quite close”. But Freya had a competitive nature, and although Larry had survived a September “Cabinet re-shuffle” and retained his position, Freya began to hone in on his territory and before long, she was reported to be the more dominant cat and more effective mouser. Poor Larry! However, the staff petitioned on Larry’s behalf, and once again, he avoided dismissal by a hair’s … er, fur’s breadth.
There was reportedly tension brewing between the Prime Minister and the Chief Mouser in 2013 over fur on clothing and the odour of cat food. British odds maker Ladbrokes were giving 2-1 odds that Cameron would be the first of the two to go. Cameron issued a public statement saying that he and Larry got on “purr-fectly well”.
Larry proved to excel at playing host to dignitaries and in 2014, his duties expanded to include entertaining guests. Meanwhile, the relationship between Larry and Freya seemed to be on the skids, and one night Freya simply left. She remained homeless for some time, but eventually returned home. Then in August 2014, Freya was hit by a car and injured. Larry was reported “not to seem bothered”.
Prime Ministers, it seems, are more expendable than Chief Mousers, as it was decided during the 2015 General Election that if David Cameron were defeated, Larry would yet retain his position. Not only the staff at 10 Downing Street love him, but so does the public. One lady, Sylvia Barry, hand-crocheted a blanket for Larry, and in appreciation, Larry invited her to visit 10 Downing Street.
Which brings us to the present day. Now that Theresa May has taken over as the new Prime Minister, what will happen to Larry’s job? Well, Cabinet Office staff confirmed that Larry would continue to live at Downing Street and would remain Chief Mouser under the new Prime Minister. However, speculation continues that Larry may have competition in the form of Palmerston, Chief Mouser of the Foreign Office, as suggested by the headline:
Claws are out on Downing Street… and not just in the cabinet! Larry the No10 cat and his Foreign Office rival Palmerston are seen squaring up in the corridors of power – Daily Mail, 15 July 2016
It is rumoured that Larry and Palmerston have been seen in a “bad-tempered stand-off” at least twice in recent days. Somehow, I’m laying odds on Larry to come out on top once again.
A More Civilized Way To Do Things
Why can’t we do things the way the Brits do? Prime Minister David Cameron announced on Friday, 23 June that he would resign as Prime Minister, after the UK voted by a narrow margin to leave the European Union (EU). Monday, 11 July, a mere 18 days later, Cameron announced that he will step down in two days’ time and that Theresa May will become Britain’s next Prime Minister. Think about that. 18 days to decide on the next leader. Here in the U.S., we have been working on it for the better part of two years, and very intensely so for the past 13 months, with another four months to go until the actual election!
“I’m delighted that Theresa May will be the next prime minister. She is strong, she is competent, she is more than able to provide the leadership that our country is going to need in the years ahead, and she will have my full support,” Cameron said. Such politeness, so much dignity. On Wednesday, Cameron will hand the keys to 10 Downing Street to Ms. May. I imagine she will be busy packing for these next two days!
What I find even more amazing, particularly in light of the venomous campaign that has been going on forever here in the U.S., is that Ms. May’s chief opponent, Andrea Leadsom, graciously stepped down from her candidacy, saying the country could not afford a drawn-out political contest and needed to launch quickly into the complicated bargaining with the European Union over the split. Can you picture either Hillary Clinton or Donnie Trump stepping down voluntarily and, again, graciously, for the good of the nation? Just the thought of it makes me laugh.
It is also interesting to note that in the environment of modern-day populism that triggered Brexit, the vote to resign from the EU, Ms. May voted to remain in the EU, while Ms. Leadsom supported leaving. Nonetheless, Ms. May stated in no uncertain terms that she will now do everything in her power to ensure a smooth and timely transition from the EU. Can you picture Donnie Trump saying that he will do everything in his power to help provide a smooth path for immigrants to become citizens? Hardly.
Perhaps Ms. Leadsom would have stood a better chance had she not stated that the reason she is more qualified than Ms. May is because she has children, while Ms. May does not. That is not necessarily the most important qualification for such a high-level position, and it doomed her campaign almost from the start. She later apologized for the remark and then resigned her campaign. Why can’t Americans be that polite?
The other two potential candidates, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, both spoke in support of Ms. May, and Gove said that she should be allowed to take office as soon as possible. Why cannot we have such expedient and peaceful transitions of power here in the U.S. Oh yeah … it’s that “We The People” thing. In Britain, the office of Prime Minister is not established by the Constitution, but rather is appointed by the Queen, based on the candidate considered most likely to gain a vote of confidence from the House of Commons. While I am a great supporter of the U.S. Constitution, in recent years there are some portions that I have come to question. This election year, in particular, has given me doubt that a general election by the population is the most effective method for selecting a president. Britain’s method seems more civilized, more effective, and in the long run leaves the country with far less turmoil.
Of course I am not advocating for a change in the way we elect our president, because as I said, I support and believe in our foundation of government. However, I am advocating for bringing more civility into the process. It is no wonder that most Europeans consider the Brits to be significantly more civilized than us “damn Yankees”! They are! Aside from the whole election process, they do not encourage, nor even allow every man, woman and child to own guns. Guns are tightly regulated, and as a result, they have one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world!
How can we make our election process more civilized? We The People must stand against the violence, the name-calling, the dirty politics that define the process. We must call on our candidates to speak only of ideologies and policies, not personal affronts against other candidates. We The People must act like civilized beings before we can expect our political candidates to do so. We must learn to speak softly and to walk away from those candidates who act more like hyenas than humans. And perhaps most important of all, we must send a message to the media that we do not want to hear playground rhetoric, but are only interested in serious political discourse. We must learn to turn off CNN, Fox, MSNBC, and the “big three”. When they lose viewers, their ratings drop, and when their ratings drop, they lose advertisers, and when they lose advertisers, they go broke. When the media realize that viewers will not tolerate the venom and will turn off their sets, they will stop covering events where candidates cannot act like civilized human beings. And when they do that, the politicians will not be heard and presumably they will eventually get the message.
Is all of that nothing more than a pipe dream, a fairy tale? Sadly, probably so. As a nation, we staunchly defend our rights to be crass, our rights to kill people, our rights to be racist, bigoted and just plain stupid. There are those of us who try to get our point across without violence, without spewing garbage, using instead our intellect. We live in this nation too. We pay taxes, work hard to try to make it a good place to live, to raise children, we vote, and we try to be good citizens. But unfortunately, we appear to be outnumbered. Think about it.
Filosofa's Word 