Summary: a strange new cult, the BeLeavers, has been discovered in the UK. Their ambition is to leave the EU as rapidly and wholeheartedly as possible. Their vision of the future is of a strange fantasyland where the opinions of experts count for nothing and were they are happiest believing in alternative facts, formerly known as lies. Their vision of life in the future outside the EU is wonderfully imaginative. It involves living on another planet or in a parallel universe. International happenings are spun for the consumption of their followers in extraordinarily creative ways, defying gravity and certainly common sense. They have taken over the Tory party with their extreme views, and attack energetically any one who questions their vision of the future.

In the last few months there has been a remarkable flowering of a cult thought to be called the BeLeavers. Apparently there was some kind of referendum won with a small majority by those who wanted to leave the European Union. Almost the same number wanted to remain.

The cult is led by politicians who realised that by changing sides following the referendum their prospects of power would be enhanced. Most economists, businessmen, MPs etc believe that leaving the EU will damage the poor and middle-class in British society but the leaders are all wealthy. They do not need to concern themselves with the welfare of those who voted for them.

The BeLeavers are led by ArchWizard Boris and supported by David “The People Have Spoken” Davies. There is also apparently someone called Liam Fox, though few can remember what his purpose is. They are egged on to more and more extreme views on how BeLeavers want the future shape of the UK to be by a quite annoying small person called Nigel Farage. He has a very right-wing views which may or may not be related to his having the same initials as the National Front. Nigel is strangely under the influence of an eccentric American in charge of a worryingly similar cult in the United States. This American shares hair colouring with ArchWizard Boris. Could this be confirmation that Aryan genetics are key? Certainly, it might help explain why both are so negative about foreigners particularly if they are not Christian. Nigel returns from his sycophantic hours with the American to explain to us that everything is going so well in the US. Even in the US Nigel assures us there is little dissent.

Another of the acolytes is called Michael Gove. He also is a politician who changed sides and opinions. He had contrived to stab ArchWizard Boris in the back (possibly in the front) just when poor Boris thought he would become Master of the Universe. Dear Michael has difficulty mastering arguments against anyone who actually has qualifications and experience to backup views on the future of the UK. These people he calls “Experts” and he confidently insists that we must ignore them and rely on what are now called “Alternative Facts” to provide information for the people. It is important that the people have access to these Alternative Facts and so these are propagated by right-wing newspapers in the UK. In the past these Alternative Facts were referred to as “Lies”, a term frowned upon by BeLeavers. However there is no doubt that most of the promises of the BeLeavers turned to dust almost as soon as the results of the referendum was declared. Mind you, most of the dire consequences threatened by their opposition, the so-called Remoaners haven’t turned out to be much more reliable.

Their views about how things will work for the UK once we have left the European Union were helpfully summarised by the always thoughtful Kenneth Clarke. He described recently to the House of Commons that the BeLeavers expect us to tumble down a rabbit hole, and emerge into a wonderland where suddenly world leaders are queueing up to strike trade deals with Britain including such nice men as president Trump and the Turkish President Mr Erdogan. It wouldn’t matter that these countries are very protectionist and are cancelling trade deals right, left and centre. They would really want to work with the UK. Ken Clarke imagined there might be a Mad Hatter somewhere holding a tea party with a dormouse.

The BeLeavers have got an ally who also has had her views transformed by the referendum and the opportunity for great power. She is called Theresa “Brexit means Brexit” May and she managed to become Prime Minister without any national election. Sadly she cannot think of any way of cutting back on the immigration she is now so obsessive about. In fact she could have done this years ago as Home Secretary. See: http://outsidethebubble.net/2016/12/06/massive-negligence-by-theresa-may-when-home-secretary/ . She believes that by the UK no longer having access to the Single Market of the EU then everything will work, immigration can be controlled. This of course ignores the fact that the country can only operate with immigrants because so many of the training places for the jobs immigrants fill have been cut as part of the UK austerity campaign. The worst example is what her government has arranged to discourage young people from training to be a nurse. See: http://outsidethebubble.net/2017/02/02/government-driving-up-non-eu-immigration-intentionally/. The NHS, social care services and education will increasingly suffer but the leaders and strongest enthusiasts amongst the BeLeavers are confident that their private wealth will insulated them and their families from such inconveniences.

Of course Theresa May has sadly forgotten that many of those campaigning to Leave were adamant that there was no suggestion of leaving the single market and indeed that the arrangements that Norway has were ideal. Parliamentarians who on the record as saying clearly we would remain in the single market included Daniel Hannan, Owen Paterson, Matthew Elliott (the Vote Leave Chief Executive), the financier of much of the Leave campaign, Arron Banks and even the very annoying Nigel Farage. But again the Leave case was entirely based on Lies so perhaps these further changes of mind could be understood.

One of the most extraordinary things is that for many years Tory prime ministers have had trouble with a few extremist backbenchers often described as the Tory party’s headbangers. Curiously it is the same extremists who have managed to take over the direction that the Tories will take when negotiating Brexit. We have the slightly worrying sight of Peter Bone in the House sounding as if he has just been appointed the Kumquat of Stoke Poges. More distressing was to listen to John Redwood, also in the House a few days ago, celebrating the end of everything most of us hold dear as he was transported skyward in a miasma of ecstasy. All the ex-headbangers expect everyone to fall in behind them though I have very little confidence that they would have fallen in behind the rest of us had the referendum gone the other way. Sadly the lunatics appear to have taken over the asylum!

It’s all rather sad really. I’m sure life will be delightful down the rabbit hole but I must say I rather liked it up here in the real world. It’s true that we are living in pretty close to a one-party state as Labour have degenerated into a giggling pointless group of directionless Lefties who cannot really work out whether half chocolate biscuits are better with milk or plain chocolate. But at least by staying above ground the poor have a fighting chance of becoming less poor in the future although of course the wealthy might even suffer. But that would require a Labour government, something that a few of us remember we apparently had in the past though that was probably a figment of our fevered imaginations. Perhaps there is another rabbit hole somewhere that we can enter and find a happy land where the leader of the Labour Party has resigned and things can move forward. Too much to hope for, I fear!

Summary: The cost of training nurses that is presently borne by the NHS is being replaced by student loans of £9000 per annum. There has been a 23% drop in applications for nursing places together with a 90% drop in applications from the EU to register for working as a nurse in the UK. This perfect storm guarantees a crisis even more acute than the ones we are used to. It is plainly an inevitable consequence of the hard-nosed accountant driven austerity that is progressively impoverishing us all, and further damaging the NHS already in crisis. It will drive up non-EU immigration numbers even further. So much for regaining control over our borders

The one thing that Britons agree on is the importance of the NHS. We all know that the NHS is under very great pressure. Partly this is due to the scarcity of nurses. At present there are around 24,000 nursing vacancies in the UK. The previous government reduced the number of training places for nurses even though these were oversubscribed. Instead the NHS employs many thousands per annum from overseas. Registration applications from EU nurses to work in the UK has fallen by around 90% since the June referendum.

In the past the most popular route to become a nurse was to start is a trainee working in a hospital and supervised by more experienced staff on the ward. That has been stopped and all nurses are now required to get a degree. A small number (up to 1000) of apprenticeships for nurses have been agreed but these have to be paid for by the NHS trusts. What is also stopping from September 2017 is the way that fees and bursaries to help with living expenses are not only being cancelled but replaced by £9000 fees per annum. This will require student nurses to take out a loan to cover the fees and all their expenses. In reality, most nurses are paid so poorly they will probably never have to pay much of this back. Requiring nurses that we are desperate to have and to train ourselves to get themselves £45,000 in debt before they even get a job is quite preposterous. Together with a work environment that is increasingly pressurised and unrewarding, becoming a nurse is less and less attractive. Many valuable caring and compassionate young people wanting to become nurses now face unacceptable barriers.

Surprise surprise! Student applications for nursing training have dropped by nearly one quarter in 12 months. The Department of Health insists that numbers will recover quickly as they did with university applicants. However the initial drop of university applicants was much smaller and took several years to recover. Undoubtedly these new regulations and fees will lead to a substantial shortfall in the number of nurses being produced within the UK. It will lead to a significant increase in our demand for nurses from overseas, often from less developed countries desperate that their best qualified should stay in their own country.

Theresa May while Home Secretary for six years had no success in bringing down immigration numbers even though she could have done so (see: http://outsidethebubble.net/2016/12/06/massive-negligence-by-theresa-may-when-home-secretary/). Nursing is already on the government’s “shortage occupation list” allowing nurses to be hired freely from anywhere in the world without concern about the U.K.’s tough immigration rules.

The inevitable consequence of these policies that penalises those wishing to train in nursing in the UK will simply lead to a significant increase in immigration from outside the EU. Just another example of how austerity is hurting the country. Something else that Labour might consider expressing an opinion upon?

 

Summary: There is a comprehensive new proposal for the approach which should be taken for the Brexit negotiations for the UK. It has been drawn up by the leaders of the Welsh Labour Party and Plaid Cymru. It provides a valuable template that could be adopted by the English Labour Party should it have a moment to think about this issue which is undoubtedly the most far-reaching and critical matter on the current political agenda in the UK.

Yes, we actually have reasonably detailed outline of what would be an acceptable plan for Labour. Unfortunately it is a plan drawn up by the the leader of the Welsh Labour Party, Carwyn Jones in agreement with the leader of Plaid Cymru, Leanne Wood. Wales voted to Leave the EU, and this plan is designed to respect the Welsh vote to Leave but would give the UK “full and unfettered access” to the single market.

The starting point for their plan is the economic reality that Wales is looking at and it is the same economic reality that is of overwhelming importance for most of the less wealthy areas of the UK. Although Wales voted to Leave (by a very similar majority as the rest of the UK combined) Welsh Labour MPs realise that it is something that is highly likely to damage the Welsh economy so they are prepared to say to their constituents “we really and truly think you made a mistake and we will fight for what we really believe to be in your best interests”. In many ways the plan follows the arrangements agreed by Norway and often touted by the Leave campaigners as being an ideal model. The outline plan has several key components:

• Continued participation in the single market.
• A balanced approach to immigration linking migration to jobs with “properly-enforced” employment practices that protect all workers. This would involve firstly implementing current EU rules that already could be used to limit substantially migration of people who do not have a job in the UK. There is more on this at: http://outsidethebubble.net/2016/12/06/massive-negligence-by-theresa-may-when-home-secretary/ . Legislation would also be introduced to ensure that workers from whatever source cannot be exploited.
• Requires the UK government to make good on promises that Wales would not lose funding as a result of Brexit. Such a promise is essential for the remainder of the UK believe.
• It also calls for a fundamentally different relationship between the devolved governments and the UK government. Essentially this is asking for more autonomy for the regions in the way that Labour has been calling for for some time. The desire for local responsibility and local autonomy is something that is strong particularly with the widespread and growing distrust of big central government.

The English Labour Party have so far been unable to articulate any particularly clear approach to Brexit other than to ask MPs to vote for Article 50. Many, including important Labour shadow cabinet ministers will simply refuse to do so, insisting on safeguards and the right to reject whatever the Brexit negotiators managed to come up with. Labour is continuing to haemorrhage support and we must expect the by-elections on 23 February to be a disaster for the Labour Party, leading to a significant increase in the Tory majority in parliament. Canvassers in the constituencies are finding the electorate much disillusioned with the leadership and in particular the lack of leadership surrounding the whole business of Brexit.

Summary: There is a great deal of naivety about setting up trade deals amongst the Brexiteers. The UK will have to wait in line while other countries establish their trade relationship with the EU. That will largely determine the trading rules and regulations that the UK will experience and we will have little influence upon them. If we look carefully at the claims of Boris Johnson, the UK Foreign Secretary, that countries are queueing up to sign rapid trade deals with the UK it is clear that they are quite nonsensical and do not recognise problems that have already been articulated. Most would work substantially to the disadvantage of the UK and the risk is that the UK would sign up too readily to something ultimately damaging to the UK.   (Updated 30/01/17)

There is a great deal of naivety about setting up trade deals amongst the Brexiteers. They seem to think that a trade deal is simply an agreement between two sovereign nations. In practice it’s much harder than that because each nation will have multiple trade deals with other trading blocs. Chancellor Angela Merkel is keen to pursue trade deals with Pacific Rim nations that have been jilted by the US when TPP was abandoned. The UK in trying to negotiate a trade deal with any nation will find them reluctant until they have agreed the terms with the big trading blocs such as the EU. Each country has its own standards covering safety and technical characteristics. These need to be harmonised. Single nations such as the UK when outside the EU will have to wait until the main deals are agreed.

Boris Johnson has claimed that countries are queueing up to sign trade deals with the UK after we leave the EU. Unfortunately arranging a balanced trade deal is something that is likely to be much harder than he ever imagines. Already many of these mythical trade deals are turning to dust as the British government insists on a very strict approach to such negotiations. It looks increasingly unlikely that any of these that are “queueing up” will lead to anything very serious and certainly not in the short term. Let us look specifically at the obvious candidates:

United States: Donald Trump’s trade chief, Wilbur Ross, has urged Britain’s rivals to exploit the “golden opportunity” of Brexit to take business away from the UK. Donald Trump has indicated he will withdraw from the negotiating process of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP). It was never ratified by Congress so will have little immediate effect but it does indicate a very negative approach to trade deals by the US. He also wants to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), principally to get Mexico put at a trading disadvantage relative to its present position. Ignoring for the moment the fact that Donald Trump is pretty negative about trade deals unless they clearly benefit the US, some of the areas that US negotiators would particularly like an arrangement with the UK (and indeed the EU) include farming.

Unfortunately US regulations on food safety and the environment are much less strict than European (and therefore UK) regulations. About 70% of all processed food sold in US supermarkets contain genetically modified ingredients. The EU allows virtually no GM foods. The US also has much weaker restrictions on the use of pesticides and permits the use of growth hormones in its beef rearing, hormones that are restricted in Europe due to links with cancer.

Jobs would undoubtedly be lost to the US because labour standards and trade union rights are much weaker in the US. There is an interesting and relevant piece here: https://leftfootforward.org/2017/01/theresa-mays-trade-strategy-threatens-british-workers/

The best guide to the motivation of US politicians in respect of trade deals is to look at the fine print of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) recently abandoned by the Europeans as well as being unpopular in the US. This was widely opposed throughout Europe as one of its main aims was to open up Europe’s public health, education and utilities to US companies. It was feared, with good reason, to inevitably lead to the privatisation of the NHS. Under TTIP companies can sue governments if those government policies lead to loss of profits. Any attempt to restrict NHS service provision to the NHS could lead to the British government being sued by US companies with ambitions to run those services.

It is inconceivable that the British public would accept a substantial reduction in the quality of food it would find itself consuming if such a trade deal came into being, or accepting a virtual guarantee that the NHS would be progressively privatised.

India: India has made it clear that they simply are not interested in talking about a trade deal if the British government is not prepared to open the possibility of re-negotiating Visa restrictions on Indian citizens wishing to visit the UK.

Brazil: they have already made it clear they will be negotiating on behalf of Mercosur, a trading block that includes Argentina, Uruguay, Venezuela, Paraguay and Brazil. They are also negotiating with the EU and any agreement with the UK would have to be in the shadow of such an agreement which is, to them, very much more important. The agreement with the UK would have to be entirely consistent with the one with the EU.

Australia: a key item for them is to negotiate a weakening of Visa requirements between the two countries.

New Zealand: Theresa May became very excited at the prospect of negotiating a deal with New Zealand. Our current trade with them runs around £3 billion per annum or just over 1% of our current trade with the European Union. That leaves about 99% still to find!

European Union: there has been a lot of talk about negotiating special access to the single market for specific business areas such as car manufacturing and financial services. Unfortunately the World Trade Organisation rules forbid special treatment in particular areas being given to one country and not others that have the same “most-favoured-nation” status. Simply this kind of arrangement would be ruled illegal by the WTO. You are either in the single market or you are properly out of it.