It appears increasingly likely that the vote on Theresa May’s proposed plan for 11 December will be turned down. She confirmed that there is no Plan B, only uncertitude. President Donald Tusk has made it clear that should the proposed plan be rejected, there only remains the stark choice between a no-deal (hard BREXIT) or no BREXIT (remain in the EU). This is not negotiable.
Nobody seems to have realised that there is another (better) solution : remain in the EU on improved conditions for both sides.
You think this is a joke ? Let us take a closer look.
Firstly it is vital to realise that the first referendum on 23 June 2016 was gravely botched through poor preparation/presentation. It was seriously marred by multiple gross misrepresentations (i.e. lies), possibly financed by murky investors whose ultimate goals may be questionable.
As a result, the vast majority of those who voted for BREXIT mistakenly thought that they were voting against uncontrolled immigration.
Nothing could have been further from the truth.
So, we really need a second referendum, if only to clarify matters. It is superfluous to claim like Theresa May that the first referendum represents the will of the people. It would be truer to say that the people were fooled.
What is the reasoning in favour of the fourth option, “remain in the EU on improved conditions” ?
The main thrust for these “improved conditions” is to get overall agreement with the EU to control and manage immigration.
Recent events and movements in the Viseograd group, France, Germany and Italy (inter alia) reveal that uncontrolled immigration is a major problem for all countries within the EU.
Therefore, in the proposed negotiation from the UK would probably be warmly welcomed within the EU. Chancellor Angela Merkel has indicated that this could be negotiated. Already variations exist for countries like Austria and Leichenstein.
This would eliminate the main impediment to renegotiating “improved conditions”.
Furthermore, the UK renegotiation stance could be bolstered by other factors, such as (non exhaustive list) :
* reinforced scientific cooperation ;
* enhanced cooperation and sharing intelligence, including Europol and Interpol ;
* increased and more developed military cooperation within NATO ;
* improved economic growth through a growing awareness of the importance of promoting the individual (rather than the state), fighting all forms of monopolistic organisations (including state owned ones) and increasing enforcement and legal rights (speed and costs) whilst decreasing all unnecessary regimentation.
More details will follow.
The first thing is to get agreement on a new referendum with the four options backed up with an explicatory table showing the advantages and disadvantages of each choice.
A substantial majority in favour of this fourth option would almost certainly strengthen the U.K.’s hand in future negotiations with the EU. Thereafter, it would increasingly strengthen the whole of the EU faced with the outside world.