Why there should not be a Brexit extension

Until the 31st December 2020, the UK must abide by EU laws, laws over which we have no vote or veto. External rule is imposed against our will. This is a clear violation of Article 1 of the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states: “All peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” If that wasn’t bad enough, EU supporters are cynically trying to exploit the tragedy of the Covid-19 pandemic as an excuse to extend this ‘transition period’ even further!

1. There is no democratic mandate for extension. The UK electorate have made it very clear that we want to be an independent democracy again. The government has no right to postpone independence without our permission.

a3a76349-embedded248351683-scaled

2. Extending would break the most emphatic election promise in history. In the 2019 election the Tories endlessly repeated that they would ‘get Brexit done‘ … apparently their scheme was ‘oven ready‘, Johnson also famously declared he ‘would rather die in a ditch‘ than extend membership. If we are not allowed to democratically determine ALL our laws after the 31st December then we can reasonably ask ‘is there no promise the Tories are not prepared to break?

_methode_times_prod_web_bin_1b97e384-1c0a-11ea-84a6-10ccf4ec8de6

3. So what if there isn’t a tariff-free agreement? This is what has been happening to tariffs over the last 90 years:

download

Tariffs have been in a death spiral for decades because they push up prices – a country that imposes high tariffs is making its own people poorer. If the EU want to impose tariffs on our goods that’s up to them, but tariffs are of declining importance and they are only paid by the 6% of UK companies that export goods (not services) to the EU. So why sacrifice our ability to democratically govern ourselves for a couple of measly tariffs?

4. Brexit is good because it will allow us to directly elect representatives who can determine ANY law we must abide by. That will make us more prosperous not less, so why on earth would we want to postpone it? The obvious answer is we wouldn’t – unless of course we wanted to make ourselves poorer for the sake of some irrational ideological belief!

Pretty much all the empirical evidence of the modern world suggests that countries where people can democratically determine their laws (re goods, services, labor and capital) do better that countries that can’t. Indeed the correlation between democratic control and well-being is so consistent that rejecting it is surely an act of denial. Where is the empirical evidence that prolonging external rule is the safe choice? EU supporters are conflating EU membership with prosperity; similarly they conflate danger with us becoming an independent democracy – despite the fact that independent democracies are the most successful societies in human history! Remainers see safety and danger only where it confirms their prejudices.

There are no risks in prolonging external rule?
There are no risks in breaking the most emphatic election promise ever?
There are no risks to failing to implement the most voted-for thing in British history?
The only danger lies in democratic self-determination? … Really?

It doesn’t matter what facts go into their eyes or ears, the thing that always comes out of their mouths is that us governing us democratically is bad, whereas the EU governing us undemocratically is good. This is not normal behavior.

5. Even if the above point were wrong and Brexit was bad, we have voted for it so it must happen. EU supporters have a habit of seeing the implementation of votes as optional.

6. Every week Brexit is delayed it costs us £250,000,000. We didn’t vote to become poorer.

7. There is no deal to be had. We have been arguing the toss with the EU since Cameron’s Bloomberg speech in 2013. The idea that given a few more months we could reach an agreement is fanciful. We voted to have democratic control over laws re goods, services, labor and capital, but EU negotiations are about trading that for market access. So the idea of ‘leaving with a deal’ is oxymoronic. To strike a deal is to NOT leave.

8, As things stand the legal default is that after December 2020 we automatically revert to being an independent democracy. That’s not a problem, that’s a solution. What do the Tories expect the EU to offer us that is more desirable? There’s nothing to discuss. We already have the best deal so long as we DON’T agree anything.

9. EU supporters claim it would be churlish of Brexiteers to argue about this whilst people are dying of Covid 19. It is incomprehensible to them they are doing precisely that.

10. In terms of deaths per million, 11 of the 13 countries worst affected by the pandemic are EU affiliates. If ever there was an argument for being more independent more quickly then Covid-19 is it.

11, Notice how everyone calling for an extension is unelected and receives money from the EU?

12, EU rule prohibits various types of state intervention essential to saving British lives and British companies. Having to ask permission to protect ourselves is as dangerous as it is humiliating.

http___com.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-us.s3.amazonaws

And finally there is the raw political argument: pro-Brexit politicians tend to get more votes than pro-EU politicians. So why should Johnson waste time and money becoming less popular?
Cameron won a majority, a year later he was gone because he wouldn’t implement the referendum result.
May inherited a majority, two years later she was gone because she wouldn’t implement the referendum result.
Johnson has a majority. But prime ministers who don’t implement the referendum result tend to have short shelf lives. Think he couldn’t be gone in a few months? Think again. Thousands are dying every week, people are losing their jobs, the NHS don’t have enough face masks (!?) and the furlough scheme (which we will all have to pay for) seems to be going primarily to the senior managers and big companies who need it least. An extension would have to go through Parliament. These are revolutionary times and the people are pissed off. Does Johnson really think it’s a good time to resurrect the most toxic political issue in living memory?

One thought on “Why there should not be a Brexit extension

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s