EU - I'm in a quandary

TAKE BACK CONTROL. TAKE BACK CONTROL. TAKE BACK CONTROL. This was the incantation that echoed with Dalek-like monotonous hysteria from the Brexit side, inside Wembley Arena during the big EU Referendum debate. I kept an informal running tally, by scratching lines in the margin of my pad. One hundred and twelve times Boris Johnson, Gisela Stuart and Andrea Leadsom managed between them.

If a politician is asked a question and all he or she can offer back is a slogan, legitimate concerns arise. How will you deal with the fall of pound sterling? TAKE BACK CONTROL. How many jobs will be lost in the short and medium term? TAKE BACK CONTROL. How will you reduce immigration? TAKE BACK CONTROL. Do you plan to be in the Single Market or not? TAKE BACK CONTROL. The crowd cheered enthusiastically.

But how is it "taking back control" to hand a blank cheque to demagogues who have no plan for the country? How is it "taking back control" to feed the ugliest xenophobia of the ultra right who will see a vote for Brexit as moral validation? How is it "taking back control" to purposefully plunge your own country into financial turmoil and break a decades-old peace pact, at the most globally turbulent time? How is it "taking back control" to walk off a bridge, without even looking down?

And why is a vote to Remain in the European Union, to avoid all of this, any less empowering?
The Vote Leave campaign became aware very early on that they had lost the economic argument. Not because of some conspiracy. Because the facts were not on their side. If they argued that they would stay in the Single Market, it was pointed out that this necessitates accepting the paying of fees, the free movement of people, and compliance with regulation. If they argued that they would be outside, it was pointed out the economic effect would be catastrophic. There wasn't even a serious debate on the catastrophy - just the size and length of it.

They devised a strategy of simply creating as much noise as possible. Boris was perfect for this. The master of it. They attacked knowledge and expertise as if they were some sort of elitist pursuit, like polo. They made up facts and plastered them on buses. They heckled. So that, by the end, reasoned argument was drowned out. This suited the Brexit campaign just fine. If they couldn't find credible people to argue their side, they would instead discredit everyone.

Meanwhile, the fires of xenophobia were being stoked. If the carrot was in short supply, the stick was ample. The impression was created that the UK was under some sort of occupation, some tyrranical yoke, and people had to fight for their freedom, for their sovereignty. "I want my country back!" From whom and for whom didn't seem to matter.

But the murder of Jo Cox created a big problem for the leaders of Brexit. Campaigning was called off "as a mark of respect", but really to regroup. Disgusting posters reminiscent of Nazi propaganda, unfurled amidst much fanfare a few hours earlier, were quickly rolled up. The rhetoric of fear and divisiveness had to be doused down - not because it was the right thing to have done right from the start, but because "it wouldn't play well".

Step forward Boris once again. He was so close to Number 10 now, he would not fall at the final hurdle. "Take back control" was zeroed in on - a toned down version of the jingoism and fear sown in the previous few months, but formulated positively. A hollow, tin drum that makes a lot of noise, but means nothing. "Take back control."

The truth is, of course, much more banal. Control is always limited at country level and virtually non-existent at personal political level. And nobody was taking it away.

We entered this pact with our neighbours freely and have done extremely well out of it. "Ever closer union" is not some concept sprung on the UK by stealth. It is contained in the very first paragraph of the very first treaty signed in Rome in 1957, which is preambled as an agreement between nations "determined to lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe". This is what we signed up to from the very start.

The fact that we are having this debate and this referendum, proves beyond any doubt that we are still sovereign, free to walk away from the deal whenever we want. No European army has marched in our streets to stop the vote. Wembley Arena was not bombed by Brussels during the debate. The question is: should we walk away.

There is nothing revolutionary about making the wrong choice, just because you can. There is nothing revolutionary about the logic of "I need to kick something; this is something, therefore I need to kick it".

Unelected officials participate at every level of government in every democracy. They are not only necessary - they are essential. Technocrats make the world go round - not politicians. And that is as it should be. The majority of politicians are dangerous careerists who have only a passing acquaintance with their brief. There, I said it.

There is no argument, that the balance between expertise and accountability is entirely wrong at the moment. But this is not exclusive to the European level and not exclusive to the unelected part of our democracy. It is endemic. What sort of strategy is it to admit we failed at this level of democracy, so we will withdraw to the one below and hope it sorts itself?

We live in a country with a Monarch, a House of Lords, a civil service, judges, Director Generals, Agencies, Quangos, Tsars. Ministers are appointed and on many occasions are not MPs. We have a legislature that, because of the party whipping system, is effectively hostage to our Executive. We have an electoral system which means that, with the exception of a few marginals, you may as well not bother voting.

Take back control from whom and give it to whom? Take back control from the European Court, from the Commission, from the European Parliament, from the Council of Ministers and give it all to a man so cynically ambitious, so unscrupulously jaded, that he changed his allegiance from pro-EU to anti-EU two months ago, just to get the keys to the top office?

Is that what "taking back control" looks like? Not to me.

Taking control is more than putting a cross in a box and expecting to be instantly transported to Shangri La. Taking control is about organising at the local level, volunteering for charities, standing for what you believe in, changing consensus, forcing the EU to democratise, campaigning for House of Lords reform, fighting for Syrian refugees, campaigning for proportional representations, standing up to bullies, effecting change one exhausting battle at a time. Voting for your MEPs, voting for your Police Commissioners, voting for your local council. Jo Cox understood this.

Not clicking your heels together and wishing. Not being in denial. Not believing in Bogeymen. Not blaming anyone who doesn't look like you. Not handing control from one group of crooks, to another, significantly more unhinged group of crooks. All those things are the opposite of "taking back control".

Taking back control is about taking responsibility, individually and collectively, for where we find ourselves today and fighting against what we dislike about it. It is about changing the big picture one bit at a time. To do that, we have to be rational, kind, brave, persistent and active participants in our structures, from local to European level.

Take back control from the demagogues who would burn this country down, if they could be in charge of the ashes. Vote Remain.

www.byline.com/column/11/article/1119

daphnedill. You think the UK is run by the rich and powerful.
Do you think the EU is run by the richer and more powerful?

Actually Daphnedill although from staunch labour roots I personally have tended to vote based on which manifesto most closely aligns with my ideals, so over the years I have voted for them all!
However, with time I have realised that most politicians are a product of the academia machine, I.e. Read politics at uni, go on to be researchers or private secretaries for MPs and eventually get themselves a seat, few now come through any other route so they are a homogenous bunch who toe the party line with little understanding of social impact our heed for paymaster control.

Of course businesses will source their labour for the lowest possible cost - or replace them with robots and computers. That's capitalism. That's what unions fight against every day, so why don't people support them? Ironically, some of the same people who go on about unelected fat cats are the very same people who refer to movements such as UK Uncut as unwashed scum or the unemployed as scroungers.

Oh dear! I hope you've never voted Conservative, Joelsnan, or is the first time that you realised that the UK is run by the rich and powerful?

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/06/22/vote-remain-for-peace-equality-truth-and-simplicity/

At the end of the day, it's all 'For profit. Make as much profit by sourcing the cheapest possible labour. With the vast pool if cheap European labour, why would the ruling gentry want us to leave, these are the ones that fund the 'glove puppet' politicians.

Joelsnan,

That's exactly what will happen! Instead of employing and training Polish and Lithuanian (and quite a few British) workers in the UK, companies will relocate to countries where labour is cheap, especially if they export to the EU. So no manufacturing and unemployed workers - and little chance of emigrating.

Doesn't it depend on what he pays them?
Corbyn is trying to outlaw companies advertising only in foreign countries.

Durhamjen There is no employment law to cover this, depending on how the job is advertised the company can employ who they want without discrimination. We could be held to be descriminating in favour of our own nationals.

Welshwife I can assure you that the two large industrial manufacturing companies in my town ran apprenticeship schemes until they outsourced their manufacturing to Poland and Lithuania, resulting in redundancy of engineers and end of apprenticeships. I said at the time that we will come to rue this as we gave list our skills base.

That builder should be taken to court under employment rules.

Many of the apprenticeship deceased to exist with the decline of British industry and no support from the Govt. nothing to do with the EU.

With regard to employment for our youth. It has been acknowledged even with the industrial sector that many companys currently recruit from the EU rather than employing and training our youth because the can get a quick cheap worker.
Was it on last night's news that a builder in NI was interviewed? He said it was better to employ EU workers for his building firm than bother to train UK apprentices.
Probably it is for him, but surely he does have a responsibility to train young British workers too.
If those EU workers decide to return home for whatever reason then he will be left with no-one to work in his business.

or in English
www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lzQxjGL9S0

JessM. Do you honestly think that the UK, the country that invented employment law, that has probably the most beneficial conditions within the EU will withdraw these, we live in a democratic society not a dictatorship.
The majority of our employment law was enshrined well before we even joined the Common Market and much has been adopted as the worldwide standard. If you view the employment policies of many countries you will note that they are often derived from UK employment law"
With regard to employment for our youth. It has been acknowledged even with the industrial sector that many companys currently recruit from the EU rather than employing and training our youth because the can get a quick cheap worker.
Before the EU we had excellent apprenticeship schemes, these all but dried up as we were drawn further into the EU, the majority of our industrial manufacturing base was outsourced to Eastern Europe, the remaining service industry jobs being mopped up by English speaking EU nationals, and you wonder why there are no jobs?

granjura 'Dinner for One'
This sketch is apparently a smash hit on the Continent, particularly Germany, but most people in the UK have never heard of it.
DN had to send to Germany for an English copy for his parents.

www.openculture.com/2014/01/watch-dinner-for-one-the-short-film-that-has-become-a-strange-new-years-tradition-in-europe.html

That was to jalima

Today 8 year old DGD1 asked me if I would vote remain and was pleased when I said Yes. She has been canvassing everyone she knows to vote remain so that her very best friend (who has German Parents)will be able to stay. I had not realised that her friend was technically German as she talks exactly like my DGD having arrived in Scotland as a baby.

DGD1 also told me that another two girls in her class and their brothers are worried because their parents are Polish. These are all children from fully integrated 'hard-working' families. So, if anyone is still undecided, on their (and my DGD's) behalf I urge you to vote remain.

Ever queued in a French ski resort? (if queuing is what you are talking about
no, I must admit I haven't
It was getting on a bus in the Canary Islands, a queue of British people waiting patiently and chatting, allowing a disabled person with two walking sticks to the front of the queue - who was then elbowed out of the way when the bus arrived, very rudely by a group of Germans who appeared from nowhere. It became quite fraught!

Jalima re the Big 3 and Greece. I'm not sure how much the UK can be responsible for the pressure on Greece. I thought their problems stemmed from being admitted into the Eurozone and as we opted out, perhaps we have not been part of the discussion or decision making process, I don't know. There's a lot of mumblings about Greece not being ready for the Eurozone. Perhaps that says something about the robustness of the entry process.

On the trade percentages though, I think you're right. It's my understanding that the overall percentage of trade with the EU has gone down. Not great for the Remain campaign, although I don't know anything about the reasons for this.

My 16 year old GS had a school vote. Remain won by a huge margin apparently.

I think if older people think a Leave vote will benefit the younger generation they should consider that the employment situation for many young people is difficult at the moment. Many of them work hard to get degrees and then cannot get the first foot on the ladder of a career without doing internships, part time jobs, short-term "self -employed" contracts etc. It would make their lives even more difficult for them if we have another dip in the economy in the next year or two, or ten (which economists predict with confidence - defiantly a dip, don't know how deep or long). This will inevitably make their trouble worse. They will also lose out on the employment rights that they currently have e.g. equal pay for part-timers, fair treatment including holiday pay for temps and maternity benefits. Priti Patel is on record as saying she will cut back on these EU-backed protections for workers. The young, and women would suffer most as those established in professions, or working for ethical companies would probably retain the conditions they were employed on. Please, please think about this before voting. Most younger voters (and 16-17 year olds) want to Remain.

Many young Germans are real fans of the old series like Monty Python, Black Adder, Fawlty Towers, and the like- that many young Brits just don't know.