Just Finished Reading: Divided – Why We’re Living in an Age of Walls by Tim Marshall (FP: 2018) [288pp] 

Walls, be they metaphorical, electronic or physical, seem to be THE topic presently. From the ‘Great Firewall of China’ to the ‘southern Border’ in the US, from the wall separating Israel from the Palestinians to the barriers between India and Pakistan, from the walls being erected on the borders of the European Union and calls for stricter interior controls and the rejection of the free movement of people by the UK in the Brexit vote, talk of walls – the need for more, bigger, wider, deeper – and protests against them has rarely been louder. But why? And why now? 

Walls have a LONG and chequered history. Normally they are built to keep people out, to restrict access to an area or country, to control who comes in. Sometimes they are the opposite – the Berlin Wall being the poster child for this sort of thing – and are designed to keep a population IN. All have failed to one degree or another – although the Berlin Wall was amongst the most successful certainly in modern times. Despite the catalogue of failure, the wall builders rarely give up and instead look for better walls full of gadgets, drones, cameras, and if you’re really serious of keeping people out, men with guns, mines and dogs trained to kill. Yet, people still come, people still get through – or escape. The problem with walls is that there’s often a wall around or through them – be it a ladder, a tunnel, a balloon or simply a bribe at the gate. Most rational wall builders know this. Walls will slow the movement of people, not stop it. Walls are an additional cost – monetary, psychological, emotional – to people looking to relocate. Often the additional cost is worth paying and the cost to be builders to prevent this can be eye-wateringly large. Is it even worth it? 

The issue here, as the author points out, is less practical than emotional. Walls might not make us safe, but they make us feel safer. Or at least that’s the idea. But living inside a wall also makes people feel besieged and under (at least potential) attack. They may feel (at least temporarily) safer but at the cost of increased anxiety. In many ways its completely understandable. We seem to be living in a particularly uncertain time. Ironically, it might have been the falling of one wall – in Berlin – that eventually led to so many of us either cowering behind our new walls or calling for them to be built. The Cold War – however potentially existential it was – provided at least the illusion of stability. Generally speaking, people knew what to expect from their own side and that of the ‘other’. The future, bleak though it might be, was a known quantity. Today we live in a much more complex multi-polar world where the future can be barely imagined (bleak though it is expected to be) much less planned for. The entirely natural instinct is to burrow in, hunker down and protect what you have – in other words, to start building walls or build existing walls all the higher. 

Taking a world tour of wall building – both existing and planned – the author shows (to a surprising extent I thought) the extent to wall building in regional hotspots and along contended and contentious border areas. Most of these walls I’d barely heard of as most talk, at least in the western media is about America’s southern border with Mexico. That is, sadly, not the only one, not the biggest or most expensive or most complex one. With global migration increasing due to conflict, climate pressure and other factors the numbers of people pressing up against walls across the world can only increase. The question for everyone, not just our politicians, is what we can, should, and will do about it. Bigger walls or a more managed and rational process. One way or another we’re going to find out. Definitely recommended, although it might depress you more than a little bit. Much more to come from this author. 

 ... the French (mostly), plus the Tory Government, the "Left-Wing" media - especially the BBC, the Brexiteers, those who have taken 'early' retirement, strikers, the Young.......  Oh, and the French..... 

Just Finished Reading: The Border – The Legacy of a Century of Anglo-Irish Politics by Diarmaid Ferriter (FP: 2019) [146pp] 

The border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is in the news again. When both the UK and the RoI were both in the European Union it was, in effect, invisible. Brexit, of course, changed all that. Naturally with the history of both sides and especially the more recent history of ‘The Troubles’ that particular borders issues are going to be complicated. But these complications go back to the start of its existence with the end of the Irish Civil War and, indeed, in some ways back to the boundaries of the counties created in the 17th and 18th centuries. As I said, complicated. 

Because Ireland was under British rule for centuries prior to the Irish Civil War (28 June 1922 – 24 May 1923) and the subsequent partition the county boundaries were practically meaningless. Borders ran down the center of roads, through parts of villages and between milking sheds and pastures. The Boundary Commision created to settle these issues failed to do so as neither the South nor the North was willing to trade territory for rationality. But being practical people at heart, the Irish either ignored the border or found ways to work (and walk) around it. With so many crossing points and so little surveillance available, smuggling was both rife and highly profitable. Again, this was (mostly) tolerated and largely ignored. There was just no practical way to stop it. Then things turned NASTY with The Troubles and the attempt to stop cross border incidents. Slowly crossing points were reduced, hardened and surveillance increased. The border was still permeable – there wasn’t any way to make it secure without building an Iron Curtain equivalent which no one wanted and would’ve been prohibitively expensive – but at least some control was possible. Then came the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement and the border posts were dismantled, bridges between communities literally re-built and things started moving again. Economic and cross border, cross culture ties increased and people on both sides started to put the bad old days behind them. Then, as we all know, came Brexit. 

Not surprisingly the Northern Irish border was one of THE main sticking points in any negotiations with the EU. But as my friends and I discussed it there was obviously a flaw in the UK’s ‘plan’. Now obviously you can’t have a wide-open border between the UK (in the guise of Northern Ireland) and the EU (in the guise of the Republic of Ireland) once the UK left. At the same time, you couldn’t have a HARD border between the two entities because of the Belfast Agreement and subsequent cross-border processes and organisations. To square that particular circle the UK proposed a ‘frictionless’ border with customs checks taking place automatically with new (as yet to be developed) technology. This magically process was accepted by both sides at the last minute in order to avoid a no-deal Brexit and all of the consequences that would follow from that. Of course, this magical tech has yet to appear (years later) and undoubtedly will never appear because, spoiler alert, it’s MAGIC. 

So, if the Irish border issue has ever caused you to scratch your head and wonder what all the fuss is about, this is definitely the book for you. I learnt a LOT from this short and very well written (and sometimes honestly hilarious) history of a sometimes very contentious line on a map. Definitely more coming on Irish history from this author. 

[Labels Added: 4, Labels Total: 19] 

Just Finished Reading: Democracy and Its Crisis by A C Grayling (FP: 2017) [208pp] 

With the double whammy of the pro-Brexit vote and Trump’s presidential victory the so-called intellectual elite kind of lost their minds for a while and talked about the end of Democracy. Although Trump is mentioned here in passing – for context I’m guessing – most of this short book focuses on the Brexit vote. Naturally I talked to ‘the Guys’ seemingly endlessly about Brexit both before, during and after the decision(s) along the way. The author shadows some of those discussions and I agreed with quite a bit of his reasoning and arguments on the subject. He quite rightly stated that the referendum itself (much trumpeted at the time) was supposedly ‘advisory’ only and then, as if by magic, turned into the ‘Will of the People’ overnight. Or, as I liked to state, the will of 52% of the people who actually voted. That was another problem that the author and I could agree on – the fact that a large chunk of the potential voting population didn’t vote. Does that mean they were happy with the Status Quo or did they consider the question too difficult to answer or where they simply uninterested? It’s hard to tell. What I didn’t agree with was the author’s idea of making the vote – at least in this case – compulsory. That's something I’d never likely agree on. NOT voting is as much a right as voting. CHOOSING not to exercise your right is, indeed, your right. He did make an interesting statement which I’m still musing over – the idea that, in the Brexit Referendum at least, that voting should have been allowed to everyone over 16 instead of the usual 18. I can see the argument for this in this instance – as the future repercussions would be mostly felt by the younger citizens going forward – but I’m not wholly convinced. Dropping the voting age to 16 longer term might be an idea to consider but only, I think, if there was a concerted effort at political education in schools (which should already exist to be honest!). 

But does any of this actually constitute a ‘crisis’? Personally, I’d say not. The election of Trump or the ‘No’ vote in the Brexit Referendum does not, in and of themselves, mean that Democracy is in Crisis. Indeed, I do not believe that Democracy is in crisis at all across the globe. It is certainly under renewed scrutiny – in how to protect it from outside interference - and steps to ensure that it is not interfered with should be enhanced but that’s achievable, I think. Other steps, especially with the influence of social media can, likewise, be tweaked to enhance the robustness of democracy. Things can, and should, certainly be learnt from the last 5-6 years in politics which will make democracy in general stronger. But was the Brexit vote anti-democratic? I’d say no. Was it undemocratic? I’d have to say that parts of it could/should have been more democratic. It was pushed through and had to be pulled back from the edge of illegality more than once. It most definitely ruined the political careers of a number of politicians and tarnished the reputation of Parliament for years to come. It was not, overall, a very edifying process. I also don’t think the Trump election itself to be anti-democratic. Of course, the resulting 4 years in office and the subsequent activities of Trump and his supporters are another story. Was it undemocratic? I’d have to say yes on that one. Afterall Trump failed to win the popular vote which is, in my mind anyway, the whole point of democracy. Trump ‘won’ in 2016 and became President because of the Electoral College and not the actual ‘will of the people’. I’m not the only one to find that whole process as passing strange. 

So, where does that leave us? Is democracy in crisis as the author maintains? On balance I would say no. Western democracies are, generally I think, reasonably healthy. They’re certainly messy but democracy IS messy by nature. Politicians across the world’s democracies are too complacent and too ready to assume that we, the electorate, either don’t know or don’t want to know what they do or what they should do but, as they found out recently here with the loss of a Conservative seat for the first time in 200 years with a swing away of 32% people ARE paying attention. About the only place I know of where democracy seems under particular strain is, rather ironically considering the usual boasting on the subject, is the United States. After the Capitol riot (I hesitate to call it an actual insurrection) and Trump’s refusal to concede that he lost the system is being put under a lot of stress. It’s not at crisis point yet but I do think it’s headed in that direction if nothing changes soon. For the first time since the Civil War it’s actually legitimate to ask the question of whether or not the United States will still be a democracy in the next 10 years. The consequences, both in the US and around the world, of the failure of American democracy are difficult to contemplate. About the only thing that most people would agree upon is that generally they won’t be good. Interesting times...    

Just Finished Reading: WTF? By Robert Preston (FP: 2017) [280pp]

It was the double-whammy of the Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump in the US that made the author (and to be honest many other people) to wonder WTF? In this interesting and often entertaining book the author attempts to answer that question in the form of a long letter written to his departed father.

Although the Trump Presidential victory is mentioned in passing throughout the book the vast majority of it is about the author trying to figure out both why people voted to Leave the EU and, probably more importantly, why the Liberal media elite (in which he recognises himself) singularly missed the signals that said a Leave vote was coming. Part of the reason, he freely admits, was that he lived for the most part in a Remain ‘bubble’ in London among his other Liberal Remain intelligentsia friends and family. For the author the fact of Remain was a no-brainer. In the months before the vote I spoke to a reasonable number of people at work (so a very self-selecting group) plus other friends and family and actually called the 52-48% split to Leave. I actually regretted not putting a bet on as I could have made a few ‘quid’ on that! What the author didn’t realise, as he honestly should have being a political journalist(!), is that a great many people did not see Remaining as a no-brainer at all but quite the opposite. The Remain campaign, as most of my friends agreed, spent far too much time harping on how bad things would get if we left the EU. I actually think that they’re basically right but such statements were quickly dubbed ‘Project Fear’. The problem with this approach is that quite a few people honestly thought (and presumably still think) that they had precious little left to lose so such losses hardly figured in their calculation. What the Remain campaign also failed to realise is that they were essentially trying to sell a ‘Business as Usual’ message to people who had been suffering under such a regime and watching their livelihoods crumble year after year and decade after decade as they were increasingly side-lined and ignored in favour of a Southern (mostly London) Europhile ‘elite’. They were hardly going to vote in droves for more of the same. Leave, meanwhile, gave the ignored a voice all of a sudden in a vote with actual consequences – rather than one which merely rearranged the deckchairs on their political Titanic. So the Leave vote really shouldn’t have come as THAT much of a shock (actually they should have been more surprised that it was THAT close!). Given that they had nothing of consequence to lose (or at least that was the perception) they voted to Leave at least in the hope that the abandonment of ‘Business as Usual’ at least MIGHT make things better – plus it gave them the warm feeling of slapping the elites in the face for ignoring them for so long. Such a response is completely understandable. But, like the author himself, far too many people in the Remain camp (or the South-East/London ‘bubble’) missed just how annoyed – or down right angry – many people were, with a great deal of justification.

Although this was generally an interesting read I did feel a bit disappointed that the situation in America wasn’t covered more that the occasional passing reference. I was pretty much expecting this to be a 50-50 compare and contrast deal – which it definitely wasn’t. I suppose I also found it a little bit boring at times because I’d hashed and rehashed the arguments around Brexit over and over again with my friends and at work (I only touched on it briefly with my family as they all voted to Leave – even my Mother who hadn’t voted for anything since the late 1970’s). Recommended only really for those who didn’t live through it on an hourly basis for the last (seemingly) million years…..        

OK…… Brexit.

So, finally after about 4 months shy of 4 years since The Vote at 23:00 on Friday 31st Jan 2020 we officially left the European Union. Honestly people near me set off fireworks. Yes, honestly. They CELEBRATED Brexit like it was a positive thing.

Of course you’ll hear people saying that “Hey, you Remainers said everything would crash and burn and look…. Nothing has changed”. Which is exactly the point. Nothing HAS changed. What happened on Friday was that we’ve agreed our Leave Agreement. So we’re ‘out’ but at least until 31st December 2020 we still run everything – in relation to the EU anyway – under EU rules. Except that we no longer have any representation on any EU body, committee or anything else. Which essentially means that decisions made by the EU and which might affect us will happen with zero input from us. This will, quite naturally, cause friction in the run up to finalising our future trading relationship with the EU (coincidentally our largest present trading partner by far).

As to a trade deal, the EU have already said that getting one through by Christmas is impossible. Boris is looking to something like the recent Canada deal not harping on the fact that the trade deal with Canada took 7 years and almost failed at the 11th hour. Even if you take the 4 years on the Withdrawal negotiations into account (which we shouldn’t) that’s still another 3 years. We have until October to get a deal ready to put before the EU and if a single country says Non – that’s it. Of course Boris says that WTO rules will be fine and that we’ll prosper no matter what but I can say with equal assurance that next Thursday it’ll be raining champagne between the hours of 4 and 6 in the evening – get those glasses ready, it’ll be great!

For the time being at least everything we keep on keeping on until something somewhere hits a bump. Presumably we now have more ‘control’ over certain things and we’ll start exercising that control to make a point that we have it back. How the EU will react to that if we go too far is anyone’s guess. They’ve already mentioned penalties if we don’t ‘behave’. I imagine also that companies dependent on EU trade will start putting their contingency plans into motion. I’m guessing that over the next few months companies that haven’t already started moving certain of their business elements either onto the Continent or to Southern Ireland will do so. I’m guessing also that countries who use us as a gateway to Europe will start looking elsewhere too – probably again to Southern Ireland.

How exactly things will pan out – I have no real idea. Generally things aren’t as bad or as good as people predict. I certainly hope that they’re not half as bad as some people think they’ll be (including me!). We’ll have to take it one day at a time and see where we end up. Globally we do seem to be going through a particularly turbulent time now and it’s looking like that turbulence will be around for a few more years (probably a decade at least) before things can settle down again. Personally I’m not optimistic. But a train wreck can only really be interesting to watch if you’re not actually sitting in a 2nd Class carriage on the train in question. 

Philip Hammond: Deselecting Tory MPs over Brexit 'hypocritical'

From The BBC

31st August 2019

It would be "staggeringly hypocritical" for the government to sack Conservative MPs who rebel over its Brexit plans, former chancellor Philip Hammond says. It comes after the Sun reported No 10 would stop any Tory MP who votes to block a no-deal Brexit from standing for the party in a general election. Government sources haven't denied this. But Mr Hammond said eight current cabinet members had themselves defied the party whip this year by voting against Theresa May's Brexit deal. Mr Hammond tweeted that he wanted to honour the party's 2017 manifesto promise for a "smooth and orderly" exit and a "deep and special partnership" with the EU and "not an undemocratic No Deal". Another senior Conservative MP, who is likely to back moves to prevent a no-deal Brexit next week, said they would be "disappointed" if it appeared that the government was "threatening" colleagues. They added that Downing Street looked like it was "spoiling for a fight".

Government sources told the BBC that Prime Minister Boris Johnson wanted all MPs to "recognise their duty" and "give him their support" to get the UK out of the EU by 31 October 3. A government spokesperson said: "All options for party management are under consideration, but first and foremost the PM hopes MPs will deliver on the referendum result and back him on Parliament."

Mr Hammond's intervention came after his successor, Sajid Javid, backed Mr Johnson's decision to suspend Parliament. Despite insisting during the Tory leadership campaign that he thought proroguing Parliament was a bad idea, Mr Javid has now defended the plan. He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "It is quite usual this time of year, Parliament goes into what's called a conference recess and it doesn't usually sit for some time in September and early October. It's right because we are focusing on the people's priorities." Thousands of people took to the streets across the UK to protest the suspension on Saturday. Demonstrations were held in central London, near Downing Street, and in Manchester, Leeds, York and Belfast.

[Aaah… Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister that’s putting the “F” back into Fascist….. I guess that the Conservative Party is no longer ‘a broad Church’ and is now more like a personality cult….. I mean, what could POSSIBLY go wrong?] 

Apparently Parliamentary Democracy is DEAD in this country under Boris Johnson's Premiership. Nice while it lasted I guess......  

Migration: UK cannot end freedom of movement on Brexit day, experts say

From The BBC

22 August 2019

Migration experts say the UK cannot end freedom of movement from the EU on Brexit day because it has no system to work out who is legally in the country. The Home Office said on 19 August that EU freedom of movement would end immediately in a no-deal Brexit. But Oxford University's Migration Observatory said employers will have no way to tell whether EU nationals have arrived after 31 October. It comes as official figures show EU immigration at its lowest since 2013. Under the existing system, EU nationals do not have to register their presence in the UK so the Home Office does not have records of when they arrived.

Madeleine Sumption, director of the Migration Observatory, said: "Even if the government knew exactly what it wanted the post-Brexit immigration system to look like, it wouldn't be possible to implement it immediately after a no-deal Brexit. That's because any new restrictions on EU migration can't be enforced unless UK employers know which EU citizens have been here for years and which ones arrived post-Brexit and have to comply with the new immigration regime." The government's only way to assess which EU citizens had a right to be in the UK would be through the settlement scheme, which closes in December 2020, the Migration Observatory team said. The settlement scheme aims to register EU nationals in the country, but there is no obligation for all of them to take part. As of July, only a third of the estimated 3.3 million UK-based EU citizens had applied, leaving more than two million unregistered. The announcement that freedom of movement would end the day after Brexit "added to the growing uncertainty and unease" for businesses, the Recruitment and Employment Confederation said. Tom Hadley, the confederation's policy and campaigns director, said: "It is hard to believe that government continues to leave businesses and EU citizens in the dark, with such little clarity on the biggest questions with just 10 weeks to go." A Home Office spokesman said it would set out details of changes to EU migration after Brexit "shortly" but encouraged EU citizens to apply to the settlement scheme. "Free movement as it currently stands will end on 31 October when we leave the EU," he said. The warning on freedom of movement comes after the Office for National Statistics conceded that its key migration figures were no longer reliable and should now only be regarded as "experimental".

The ONS revealed on Wednesday that it had been underestimating EU arrivals and overestimating those from the rest of the world. It now believes EU net migration - the difference between people arriving and leaving - was 16% higher (29,000) in 2015-16 than previously thought. Net migration from outside the EU was 13% (25,000) lower, because more foreign students left than previously estimated. The ONS has used additional data from the Home Office and the Department for Work and Pensions in an attempt to make the adjusted figures more reliable. But statisticians have not yet adjusted the figures for EU immigration after 2016. That is partly because EU citizens interviewed for the survey may not be sure if they are staying in Britain for at least 12 months - the cut-off point for inclusion in the data.

The ONS estimates that EU migration is now at its lowest level since 2013, with 200,000 EU citizens arriving in the year up to March 2019 - the original date for Brexit. It says the main reason for the decline is that fewer people are arriving from the EU to work, with the numbers more than halving to 92,000 from their peak in 2016. Ms Sumption at the Migration Observatory said: "The drop in the value of sterling has made working in the UK less lucrative than it once was, and continued uncertainty about the Brexit may also have played a role." More Central and Eastern Europeans are leaving than are arriving - causing a net fall in the numbers from eight countries, including Poland, of 7,000. That confirms a trend that began a year ago.

[What a farce. Until we leave the EU – presumably on 31st October (delightfully Halloween of course!) – any EU citizen didn’t have the register their presence here. Therefore the UK government has absolutely no idea how many EU citizens are here, where they are and how long they’ve been here. So how exactly is that going to be regulated and the rules changed without causing massive issues for all concerned by the end of October? Well, it can’t, it’s IMPOSSIBLE. A total FARCE.]

Divided, pessimistic, angry: survey reveals bleak mood of pre-Brexit UK

By Nosheen Iqbal for The Observer

Sat 15 Jun 2019

Britain is a more polarised and pessimistic nation than it has been for decades, according to a survey that reveals a country torn apart by social class, geography and Brexit. The survey by BritainThinks reveals an astonishing lack of faith in the political system among the British people, with less than 6% believing their politicians understand them. Some 75% say that UK politics is not fit for purpose. As the Conservative party focuses on who its new leader should be, and the Brexit impasse continues with no solution in sight, 86% think the UK needs a strong leader more than ever – but only 21% think the next prime minister, whoever it may be, will be up to the job. Some 52% believe the country is heading for a Boris Johnson premiership. Pollster Deborah Mattinson said she was shocked by the findings. “I have been listening to people in focus groups since the late 1980s and I cannot recall a time when the national mood was more despairing. ‘Broken’, ‘sad’, ‘worried’, ‘angry’– the negatives tumble out, as does the long list of grievances. I’m hearing anxieties voiced in a way that I haven’t heard since the 1990s: a rundown NHS, job insecurity, teacher shortages.”

BritainThinks polled more than 2,000 people and hosted several focus groups in London and Leicester to gauge the national mood. Almost three-quarters of the British public believe the divisions on Brexit between Leavers and Remainers will deepen and get worse within the next year. Two-thirds feel depressed by rising poverty and homelessness. While people say Brexit has made them more politically engaged – 40% are paying more attention since the 2016 referendum, rising to 50% in those aged between 18 and 24 – the polling suggests the bitter political debate over leaving the EU has shattered public trust in the way the nation is governed. Some 83% feel let down by the political establishment and almost three-quarters (73%) believe the country has become an international laughing stock and that British values are in decline. In focus groups, “worried” and “uncertain” were the most repeated keywords used by respondents to describe how they felt about the future. Job insecurity and a perceived breakdown of local communities concerned both older and younger generations. Some blamed immigration, others pointed to cuts in public funding following a decade of austerity.

The poll found an extraordinary gulf in levels of optimism between the generations: while 52% of those aged over 65 said they felt optimistic about the country’s future, this dropped to just 24% of under-34s. Mattinson said: “Younger people feel a strong sense of injustice. Home ownership seems a pipe dream even for the relatively well off. Secure employment can be elusive for them too, despite being far better qualified than their parents and grandparents.” Those who self-identify as “haves” stand at 52%, while 48% see themselves as “have-not”, but anxiety about crime is widespread. In 2016 the Office for National Statistics revealed that 15% of the public expected to be a victim of crime within the next year. Today that stands at 19%, rising to 29% for those living in London. Conducted between 7 and 9 June and weighted to be representative of all UK adults by age, gender, region and socioeconomic grade, the BritainThinks poll found only 58% believe the UK will still leave the EU. Uncertainty over the country’s future is deep rooted, but green shoots of optimism could be found in an underlying stoicism: two-thirds of those polled felt positive about their homes, relationships and mental health and that “British people will just get on with things regardless of the impact of Brexit”.

Class was a clear dividing line; 72% of those from AB social grades felt positive about their personal lives compared with 57% of those from DE households. Similarly, only 54% of those in social grade DE are optimistic about their physical health, compared with 71% of ABs. “The people we elected think we’re too stupid to understand what’s going on, there’s condescension and no respect for us,” said one Remain voter from Leicester, who now believed that the only way to uphold any sense of national pride would be to leave Europe. “The British took democracy to other countries, but we can’t even abide by it or believe in it ourselves,” he said.

[It’s weird. Ever since the referendum YEARS ago now the political map of the country has essentially morphed from Left-Right to Leave-Remain. Class doesn’t seem to matter anymore, nor does age, gender or ethnicity. The leading question, the most important thing to ask is: Leave or Remain? Or where do you stand on Brexit? Once you know the answer to that question everything else falls into place – even the fact that you’re going to continue the conversation or not. As the article quite rightly points out – this divide will not go away once we leave (or crash out in October as I’m predicting) but will get worse. If things turn out badly (as I believe they will) there will be endless recriminations. Politics will get increasingly messy and increasingly divided. It’s already almost impossible – as the world has seen – to get politicians to agree on anything. Political parties of the Left, the Right and even the Centre are fracturing along Brexit lines and tearing themselves apart. It’s little wonder that the voting public has lost what little faith it had in its elected officials. The predicted arrival of Bris Johnson as PM will help none of this. He will only divide his party and the country more. The next ten years (and beyond?) are going to be turbulent. Time to tighten our seatbelts I think!]

UK economy rebounds in first quarter

From the BBC

10th May 2019

The UK economy picked up in the first three months of the year after manufacturers' stockpiling ahead of Brexit helped to boost growth. Growth was 0.5% in the quarter, up from 0.2% in the previous three months, the Office for National Statistics said. The manufacturing sector grew at its fastest rate since 1988 in the period. The ONS said this was driven by manufacturers rushing to deliver orders before the original Brexit deadline of 29 March. Pharmaceuticals was one of the sectors most affected, expanding 9.4% between January and March. Previous business surveys had shown manufacturers stockpiling goods for Brexit in case the UK left the EU without a transition deal, which they feared could lead to delays at UK borders.

As well as manufacturers rushing to deliver orders before the UK was due to leave the EU, firms also stockpiled parts. This drove a surge in imports, with the total trade deficit - the gap between what the UK imports and exports - doubling in the first quarter to a record high, separate data from the ONS showed. The total trade deficit widened from £8.9bn to £18.3bn, driven partly by a sharp increase in imports of cars and gold [£6Bn worth!]. However, the UK's deadline to exit the EU has since been extended until the end of October after Prime Minister Theresa May asked the EU for more time to negotiate a deal.

Chancellor Philip Hammond said the figures showed the economy remained "robust". "These GDP figures this morning show again that the UK economy is performing robustly, despite the evidence of slowing global growth and the continued Brexit uncertainty at home - so it's good news," he told the BBC. But analysts have warned the impact of Brexit could mean the pick-up in growth is short-lived.  Tej Parikh, senior economist at business lobby group the Institute of Directors, said it could well be just "a flash in the pan". "Some businesses brought activity forward early this year in preparation for leaving the EU, so higher stocks and earlier orders have artificially bumped up the growth numbers. In the second quarter, many firms will be keen to run down their Brexit caches, which will drag on economic growth," he said. But Ruth Gregory, senior UK Economist at Capital Economics, said the figures offered some "encouraging signs that underlying growth gained some pace". She said household consumption growth was "solid" and pointed out that business investment grew "for the first time in four quarters".

[Stories like this are one reason why I don’t trust the pronouncements of Economists or Chancellors. It’s clear that the so-called ‘boost’ in the economy is from companies stockpiling like crazy because of their fears regarding a no-deal Brexit and getting out as many orders as possible to both avoid any increased tariffs and to get a war chest ready to tide them over any expected issues post-Brexit. This is not simply companies ‘doing well’ despite all of the doom and gloom from Project Fear. Likewise household consumption – hardly something to rely on – is probably people stockpiling (again) plus making purchases now in the expectation that prices will inevitably rise once we leave the single market. The sudden import in gold to the tune of SIX BILLION POUNDS in THREE MONTHS says it all really. People are hunkering down in anticipation of the hard times ahead. This is hardly the sign of an economy ‘doing well’.] 

Happy (Not) Brexit Day! Two Weeks until the Next Cliff Face to Fall off!!!

Crisis? What Crisis?

It’s hard to believe that another week has flown by. Only a week ago the country and the government elected to run it were in crisis. Now, here we are, in probably a worse place than before.

The original date for Brexit is a mere 4 days away: this Friday. However, Teresa May’s awesome negotiating skills (AKA begging to the EU) has managed to push this out by, at the very least, a whole two weeks further to April 12th. But that’s only if Parliament can’t come up with an agreement on the PMs Plan. I mean they’ve only been arguing about it for weeks now so another 2 weeks probably won’t change very much. Of course this will, essentially, be the third time ‘The Plan’ is due to come before the House of Commons. The last defeat of 149 was bad enough but pails into insignificance to the previous truly historic vote against. As of a few hours ago it’s been decided not to bring the Plan back just yet for another go. Even the Prime Minister realises that another defeat by any significant numbers would be catastrophic to her premiership.

So, what on earth do they do now? After arguably the biggest public demonstration in a hundred years on the streets of London for a second referendum this weekend and with a petition to repeal Article 50 moving towards 6 million signatures (5,616,825 @ 21.21 on 25th March) it’s difficult to argue that the country is either ‘coming together’ or is moving towards the idea of an acceptable no-deal Brexit. Yet Parliament has still yet to come to a consensus on the issue. Tomorrow is looking like we’ll see a series of ‘indicative votes’ that will aim to show exactly where MPs want to hang their hats. I’m not sure if any of the ideas floating around will get a majority. Even if one does the government has already said that they don’t approve of the votes, will not do anything to enable the process nor say if they will even take the outcome into consideration. In other words they don’t like the game anymore, the rest of the House of Commons are just being mean and they’re taking their half of the game home to sulk.

To not put too fine a point on it it’s a mess, a big, useless, pointless mess. There’s only really one deal on the table – take it or leave it. The view being to leave it. So, clearly that only leaves a few options: No deal – which parliament has already rejected, Revoking Article 50 – which would probably cause riots, a 2nd referendum – which would probably cause riots or…… Or what? That’s a VERY good question. There are a number of alternatives – all of them bad to one degree or another and all of them rejected by significant numbers of people both inside and outside parliament. It’s an impasse that I can’t see around. But what I think is going to happen whether people want it or not is what I was predicting originally for this Friday. Because no one can agree on a deal or any other way forward there is only one alternative: a No-Deal Scenario by default. Europe say they are prepared. They may well be – or at least as much as they can be. We, however, are not prepared (in my estimation). So, in just under 3 weeks we crash out of Europe. What happens after that is anyone’s guess. But I will try to report for as long as I can. For as long as the power lasts. For as long as my food holds out. For as long as I can hold off the biker gangs looking for the last can of tuna fish. I just hope that they believe me when I say I’m a vegetarian…..       

Déjà vu in Parliament

Next week Parliament are going to be allowed to have a ‘meaningful vote’ on Brexit. Of course we’ve been here before and it didn’t go so well for Teresa May but at least it made the history books with the worst defeat of a standing government since the 18th century.

There are, if it goes ahead (remembering the time that a promised meaningful vote was pulled at the last minute because the Tories *knew* that they were going to lose it), three votes on the 12th, 13th and 14th March – yes, that TWO weeks before the scripted departure from the EU. The first vote on the 12th is on Teresa’s ‘new’ deal which is essentially the same as the old deal (that of the historic defeat) which everyone is expecting the government to lose despite the threats and poorly executed bribery they’ve been spraying around the place. So, no deal is expected on the 12th. The second vote is on the no-deal scenario. Smart money (and I agree with them) suggests that no deal will be rejected by Parliament as a viable option. It’s just by how many votes that’s up for debate. The last vote on the 14th will be about extending Article 50 past the 29th March date. My guess is that this will fail for a number of reasons although I’m guessing that it might be close (less than 50 votes maybe?). One of the problems is that European Elections are coming up in June so it’d be kind of embarrassing (and pointless) to have the opportunity to elect people to an organisation you’re trying very hard to leave.

Inevitably the voting would be another referendum in all but name. However the kicker is that any extension (with just two weeks to go remember) would have to be agreed by the EU 27 nations and they’ve already said that they would extend the Article 50 deadline ONLY if there was a good reason to do so – like us having time to pass laws and such. Giving us more time to argue and squabble is not, according to the EU a ‘good reason’. So, as long predicted by myself on March 29th we will crash out of the EU without any deal.

So, what happens then? I think that after the Tuesday vote is lost the present slow undercurrent of prepping for a no-deal scenario will break out into an increased level of panic buying. I’m expecting there to be an increase in empty shelves at supermarkets and even talk of unofficial rationing. There will also be (undoubtedly) a sudden increase in heated rhetoric in the blame game – most of it aimed at the EU for not giving us what we wanted and at the Labour Party for not being Teresa’s backing group at all times. That will go on with increasing volume right up to the moment the country drives itself off a cliff. Then what? Well, here’s what won’t happen: It won’t be the End of the World. There won’t be riots and the Army will not be on the streets. Contingency plans (mostly admittedly half-baked and ill-prepared) will go into effect. It will not be like The Blitz or just after Dunkirk when we expected (wrongly) to be invaded at any minute. But what will happen?

Inevitably there will be a breakdown in the supply chain as customs services on both sides of the English Channel get fully up to speed. That’ll take somewhere around 2-4 weeks. For that time there will be shortages of something exacerbated by panic buying. After the initial chaos things will start settling down. Supplies will be getting through and the initial panic will subside. But some things – like cut flowers for example – will take much longer to recover. Inevitably prices on probably all goods will increase from a few percent to over twenty percent depending on the product. It wouldn’t surprise me at all (sadly) if hate-crime against anyone with a foreign accent increases at this time. That too will settle down but I’m guessing that the level it returns to will be higher than before.

Longer term we will lose jobs and manufacturing capacity. This is already starting to happen with companies either moving or actively talking about moving jobs and factories out of the UK. It’s always been obvious that this will happen despite the lies (it’s difficult calling them anything less) from Brexiteers. It’s simple economics. If there’s an EU tariff on a product that is hurting sales and it can be eliminated by moving a factory inside the EU that’s exactly what will happen. It won’t happen overnight but any new investment simply won’t be happening here. In 10 years I imagine that most of the foreign car manufacturers will only have the runts of their global empires based here for purely domestic consumption. Naturally we’ll get back on our feet whatever happens. But Britain’s economic future won’t exactly be bright for the next 10-25 years, not unless something very unexpected happens. I’m not exactly holding my breath on that one. But you never can tell. Teresa might win her vote on Tuesday against all of the odds and negative predictions – which will mean two years in that half-way house of being outside the EU but still inside the Customs Union and Single Market. How THAT works out is, as with so many other things, ANYONE’S guess.   

Crash & Burn?

As of tomorrow we will be 39 days from crashing out of the EU unless something unexpected happens – the miracle of the two wings of the Conservative Party agreeing with each other (even temporarily). Although I think there is a scant possibility that the hard-line Brexiteers might hold their noses and sign up to Teresa May’s deal I think that’s actually pretty unlikely giving the push from some quarters for a no-deal Brexit as the preferred way to go. Naturally there are a few problems with leaving on a no-deal basis but essentially it boils down to one thing – the absence of any kind of deal. This has all kinds of implications on both sides of the Channel some of which we are aware of, most of which we might appreciate and some of which will bite us – HARD.

I think a big part of the problem is that, because we’ve been an EU member since the mid-1970’s very few people appreciate what it was like before we joined. Now, with a decent transition period we could probably have a reasonably effective system in place before we actually left. Without that transition we change over from one set of rules to another set (of generic rules) when the clock ticks over past midnight. One minute we have a whole set of regulations everyone follows and are fully aware of. One minute later no one is quite sure what to do any more. This is not the recipe for any kind of economic activity – never mind anything approaching normality.

As the probability of a no-deal increased both sides started making detailed contingency plans. As far as I can tell the EU plans appear to be further along and much more competent than our own. Some have even been arguing that trying to reduce the effects of no-deal on the British economy actually reduces both our bargaining power in Europe and reduces the threat hanging over MP’s from both sides from being forced into a compromise with Teresa May (AKA being forced to agree with everything she says). So I’m guessing that any plans will do make – nothing like leaving things to the last minute - will be half-hearted, half-assed and only partially thought through and implemented. So it’s pretty certain that the first couple of weeks – and maybe a month or so – will be a combination of chaos, panic and the military being drafted in to sort the mess out.

One thing that’s pretty much guaranteed is that there will be shortages in the shops. This will be a combination of supply chain breakdown (which everyone pretty much agrees on will happen even if things run reasonably efficiently at the ports of entry - which they won’t) because of the prevailing just-in-time systems used by most businesses. A lot of companies are spending a great deal of time and money stockpiling supplies but at best that will only relieve some of the stresses for a few weeks. But I think what will really cause a problem will be panic buying. I’m predicting that, by about 15th March (if nothing else changes), people will start to realise that a problem is barrelling towards them – fuelled by the media no doubt – and they’ll start emergency stocking up on things. What that will cause is temporary and local shortages of things and once people see empty shelves in supermarkets they’ll go full panic mode and shops will have to start rationing things. We’ve seen it before when heavy snow is predicted or strikes happened in one industry or another but this will be worse. Much worse. 

Sensible people, it seems, are already pre-panic buying and are steadily, slowly, increasing holdings of coffee, baby wipes and cat food. A little extra on the weekly shop stored away under stairs or in the garage. Freezers are filling up (as are petrol tanks), cupboard space is becoming a premium and best before dates are being checked. The sensible people are digging in….. Personally I’m stocking up on books and body fat – just in case the worst happens….

The Tuesday Vote

Well, it looks like Parliament will actually get their vote this time. I think the whole place would go into meltdown if they didn’t. However, it looks like very little has changed before the last vote was cancelled and most political pundits agree that the vote on Tuesday will not go Teresa May’s way. The only real question is by how many votes she will lose by. If it’s by a handful it might just about be recoverable from. If it is, as some expect, by 100 or more it’s pretty much game over for the whole deal. If that number transpires (which honestly I doubt) she’ll need to go ASAP even if Labour don’t table a motion of no confidence which, if the results are that bad, they undoubtedly will. Of course who can replace her and if the Tories really want a leadership contest inside the ensuing chaos is anyone’s guess. My guess for the vote is that she’ll lose by about 40 votes – probably no more than 45. Of course this will be bad but not bad enough for Labour to go nuclear – probably. It all depends who much blood is in the water – to mix my metaphors somewhat!

So, what happens then? I’m assuming that May loses the vote (it’s possible that her fear tactics might persuade enough people for her to just squeeze by but I doubt it) and that either Labour doesn’t table the no confidence motion or they do and she wins in (which she most probably would). Well, without an agreed deal there aren’t many options left considering we’re due to leave the EU, almost no matter what, in about 11 weeks. We could of course simply carry on and crash out on that date with a no-deal Brexit. Most people think this is a bad idea but there are some that view this as a real Brexit and something to be aimed for. We could ‘pause’ Article 50 until we get our act together and then leave in a more orderly manner – though this would require EU approval. The government/parliament could cancel Article 50 and we’d go on as before. With both sides of the debate already throwing toxic missiles at each other I doubt if that would end well either within the Tory party or the general population. As they say – I predict a riot (or three). Likewise if there’s a second referendum to let the people decide – because Parliament can’t – it would get very nasty very quickly and all hell would break lose if Remain won this time. Another possibility is a General Election to decide but with less than 3 months to go this is a very risky option and results, as they say, are far from certain. I would not be surprised by yet another hung parliament with no one in overall control and weeks to go before we crash out. So it’s hardly any kind of solution.

Essentially the Government have made a dog’s breakfast of the whole thing. Because of their poor handling of the vote and the resultant negotiations (if they warrant the word) we are presented with no good options here. Even in the unlikely event that May wins the vote on Tuesday the agreement placed before parliament pleases no one. It is simply the worse of all worlds and the political fallout from the agreement if signed into law will not be pretty. Either way I can see the Tory party ripping itself apart. Their only saving grace is that support for Labour is, seemingly, far from universal. Whatever happens on Tuesday, no vote, lost vote or won vote, the next 3 months are going to be very interesting over here – and that’s before people start panic buying and stocking up on bottled water and baked beans….     

Tourist pound now down at close to just one dollar

By Brian Milligan, BBC Personal Finance reporter

14 December 2018

Travellers at some UK airports are barely being offered one US dollar for each of their pounds, following a month of Brexit uncertainty. Those exchanging pounds at the UK's biggest airport, Heathrow, are finding as little as $1.05 coming back across the counter. Since 16 April the pound has fallen by 11.77% against the US dollar. In places, sterling buys less than a euro, with tourists being offered just 92 cents for every pound. Against the dollar, the pound is now at its weakest since April 2017, although it has recovered slightly since Theresa May won her vote of confidence. In March 2008 the pound was briefly worth more than $2.00.

While there are some other factors behind the drop in the pound's value, such as the receding chances of an interest rate rise, most experts accept that the politics of Brexit are chiefly to blame. "Over the last couple of months... we've seen several developments in Brexit negotiations, MP resignations and more recently a leadership challenge which have all sparked significant turbulence for the pound," said Ian Strafford-Taylor, the chief executive of currency traders FairFx. Changing money at a port or airport is the most expensive way of doing so, and there are usually much cheaper deals online. The best deal on offer on Friday was $1.23 for one pound.

Tourist rates are also more expensive than official exchange rates, as they take into account the costs of providing bureaux de change. But the weakness of the pound leaves anyone thinking of going abroad next year with a dilemma: Should they buy their currency now, or wait, in the hope that the pound will recover? "It's impossible to predict how foreign exchange rates will change in future, especially with volatility around Brexit and other economic events," said Nathan Best, UK commercial director at Travelex. "The best customers can do is keep an eye on rates and convert at a rate they feel comfortable with. One option for customers who are wary of foreign currency volatility is to split their currency purchases to reduce risk. Customers can choose to buy some of their currency before their trip with a preferred rate, and then buy the remaining currency closer to, or during, the trip."

[One thing some people tend to forget is that the value of the pound against the dollar – and presumably other currencies – has NEVER recovered from the drop it experienced when the Brexit Referendum results came out. That alone, not counting everything else Brexit has and will do to the economy, has cost the country and its taxpayers billions of pounds and, as we’re constantly reminded, we haven’t even left yet. Of course some shrug this off as a price they’re willing to pay. We’ll see what else they’ll put up with from next March. Unfortunately the rest of us will have to put up with it too….]

Vote? What Vote?

Well, there I was planning to write about my thoughts on tomorrows Brexit vote in Parliament when Teresa May goes and cancels it – or postpones it until next year (probably) hoping that *something* will turn up to either save it or save her. Some luck! But thinking about it this was probably the only thing she could have done to save her Premiership.

She was, in all honesty, in an impossible position. No one really liked her proposal for a deal with the EU. Despite everything she’s been saying it doesn’t really satisfy anyone – Brexiteer or Remainer. Rather than being the best of both worlds compromise it turned out to be the worst of both worlds which pleased exactly no one. Of course, as everyone has known from the beginning, at the heart of things is the border between Ireland/Eire and Northern Ireland. When we were one big happy European family the border did not matter one jot. But now, or at least next March, it matters a great deal. It’s out only physical border with the EU so can’t be open but both Eire and Northern Ireland insist it can’t be closed. Now I know Logic isn’t my strong suit but things usually have an either/or state called open/closed. You can’t have both. You just can’t – no matter what legal or political slant you put on it. You either have an open border which means that Northern Ireland stays in the EU – with the infamous border in the Irish Sea – or you have a closed border with all the usual checks. The compromise failed to please the Northern Irish/DUP or the hard-line Brexiteers on the mainland. Despite much pressure and, no doubt, much backroom dealing tomorrows vote looked like a loser for the PM. The only real question was by how many votes. Of course if the number was as high as some thought her whole political future would be in question – which is pretty much why she pulled out. But kicking the vote down the road or ‘into the long grass’ will, I think, solve exactly nothing. Few, if any, of the hardliners on all sides will change their minds over Christmas but at least it’ll give people around the festive turkey something else to argue about.

When, or if, the vote is finally taken in the New Year the result I suspect will be exactly the same – the PM will lose. But what then? Well, she’s off later in the week to speak to European leaders in the hope that they can save her – despite repeated messages that the deal we have is IT and cannot be renegotiated. Which doesn’t leave very many options especially with around 8-10 weeks after a January vote. If the deal is dead and more negotiations are off the table there seems only two options left: Crash out without a deal or decide to stay. Parliament has said that a no deal option is unacceptable but then so is going against ‘the will of the people’ and staying in the EU. If Parliament can’t decide (or won’t decide) they may consider letting us have another pop at it – either in the 2nd referendum or a General Election fought mainly around the European issue. But can such a thing be arranged and settled in less than 8-10 weeks? I seriously doubt it. Maybe that’s the final plan. Give Parliament the choice between a deal no one wants or chaos that people want even less? That, I think, is a very, very dangerous strategy based on the assumption that people in those circumstances will act rationally – they won’t. They’ll panic, they’ll revolt and they’ll attack. It could all get VERY messy indeed.

Many would agree that the whole Brexit process has been very badly handled from Day One. Politicians have consistently been less than honest with the public keeping the sobering truth from us all – that Brexit was never going to be easy and, no matter what the Brexiteers say, there are downsides to leaving (even if there are upsides too). The possibility that something might have been decided tomorrow is now gone and we’ll need to wait until early next year for some kind of resolution. What that will end up being is, presently, anyone’s guess.