Post Referendum Debrief June 28th

I promised that the Referendum Day debrief would be the last – but I’ve now been asked to keep it going on an occasional basis during this turbulent post-referendum period.

What kind of relationship with the EU?

Now that we’ve voted to leave, the question arises of what sort of new relationship we want – and can get – with the EU, and indeed who is to negotiate it.  On that last point, Lord Heseltine has suggested that Nigel Farage should be involved – one of the very few points on which I can agree with him.

UKIP’s position on the new relationship is simple.  We want to be an independent country.  We want a free trade deal with Brussels – which economic imperatives will force them to accept.  But we don’t want budget contributions or EU laws or free movement.  But there are hints that others on the Brexit side – Johnson and Hannan have been cited – would accept an EEA, Norway-style solution, largely (I believe) because they think it would be easier to make that stick in the face of the massive black propaganda campaign which the Brexit vote has elicited.

It would leave us with “free movement” (though they may seek to tighten it up by restricting it to migrants with jobs), and some level of budget contributions  and EU regulation.  This is not what we voted for, and sits uncomfortably with promises of a £350-a-week Brexit dividend and control of immigration.  It would however be easier to sell to the City, and to any voters who may be getting cold feet.

Jeremy Hunt is the first cabinet minister to come out for the Norway option and a second referendum.  Like Heseltine, he seems to have missed the point that if Brussels negotiates knowing that the result will go to a second referendum, they will have a powerful incentive to offer nothing at all – so that the voters reject what they see as a bad deal.  And if voters reject the deal in a second referendum, have they merely rejected one option – or have they, by default, elected to Remain?

A particular problem with a free trade deal is that it might not include the “passporting” of financial services, which enables London-based banks to offer services across the EU.  This would remain with the EEA solution, but maybe not with a simple free trade agreement. We could seek agreement to keep passporting as a price of access to the UK market (remember we buy much more from them than vice versa).  But many commentators are pointing out that in the future, competition from New York and Hong Kong will matter more than Frankfurt and Paris, and while passporting would help in Europe, EU regulation could be very damaging to the City’s global competitiveness.  Swings and roundabouts.

When do we invoke Article 50?

Cameron had promised to invoke Article 50, to give notice of the UK leaving the EU, immediately following a Brexit vote.  He hasn’t done so.  Now we expect to wait at least until a new Prime Minister is in place. Both Boris, and Matthew Elliott of Vote Leave, seem extraordinarily relaxed about it.  Some in Brussels are insisting we get on with it: Merkel seems less keen.  But the achievement of the referendum will feel much more secure (in the face of the howls of protest) when we have formally announced our intention to Brussels.  We cannot delay indefinitely.  We want to be out by Christmas – even if that’s Christmas 2018.

The race for Tory leader

George Osborne has pulled out of the race, seeing that he faces only humiliation if he puts his hat in the ring.  Boris Johnson is widely regarded as the leading candidateThe Express says Boris has 80% support.  Meantime Theresa May, who has been keeping her powder dry, is expected to enter the race as the “Stop Boris candidate”.  The party has introduced an accelerated time-table for the contest which should see a result as early as September.

Labour challenge to Corbyn is pro-EU

It may be amusing to watch the discomfiture of Jeremy Corbyn (as Jeremy Clarkson Tweeted, “All Jeremys get fired eventually”) but we should not forget that the challenge to Corbyn is primarily a pro-Brussels challenge, by Labour MPs angry that he didn’t do enough for Remain in the referendum campaign.

Cameron to meet EU leaders today

I don’t envy him the job.  Meantime in the European parliament we have an emergency debate on the British Brexit decision this morning.  Expect fireworks.

Civil service team to handle Brexit

At last the government has recognised the reality of Brexit and put together a “crack team” of civil servants, under go-getter Oliver Letwin, to handle the issue.   You’ve done the right thing, Dave.  But you should have done it six months ago.

Surge in hate crimes

The police are reporting a surge in hate crimes against foreigners, following the Brexit vote.This included some totally disgraceful leaflets abusing the Poles.

The great majority of Brexit voters simply have proper and rational concerns about overall levels of immigration and the effect on social infrastructure and social cohesion.  But we have to recognise, however reluctantly, that some individuals with utterly vile and reprehensible views will also have voted for Brexit.  We in UKIP utterly repudiate and condemn such attitudes.  In particular, we recognise the enormous contribution which Polish people have made to our country over the years, from the airmen who fought alongside us in the Second World War to the Polish workers who contribute to our economy today.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to Post Referendum Debrief June 28th

  1. foxbarn says:

    Dear Roger, it is ESSENTIAL that you keep this broadcast going to the BIGGEST audience you can possibly muster. It is a vital antidote to the lies being spewed out by the BBC and others. Many of us use your information for other blogs, letters to newspapers, important websites or just friends and relatives.

    • Anyoldiron says:

      foxbarn is absolutely RIGHT-yes, in big letters. The fight has only just begun-and please take that seriously for it is more important than some know.

    • Roger Turner says:

      Roger I can do more than echo foxbarn`s abjuration that it is ESSENTIAL etc…….
      I would add that winning the referendum must be the concluding battle in the war against the “Evil Empire” – the EU –
      Who have since its inception not been straight with us
      (ask Michael Ancram – 40 years of lies and mendaciousness),
      The duplicitous EU as I seem to remember having been detailed in “The Belly of the Beast” have truly treated this nation as a subject member of an Empire (not the Principal Power, as is the unelected Commission and its many pseudo “Presidents” -ragged, bagged and shagged to perdition Remember Greece and Cyprus – they got robbed!


      May .,Hunt and the remainder mob would ensure we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory
      Incidentally didn`t I hear Grove at various times mentioned that we would introduce an Australian style points based immigration policy -surely this would be impossible if we agreed to a “single market ” deal.

      PS – Watched Nigel`s speech in the EU parliament this morning
      Superb, “Who`s Laughing now” —“Never done a day`s work in their Lives” ——“are in `denial EU economy collapsing around them, EU internal borders shot to pieces”`-

  2. Ex-expat Colin says:

    “Farage’s EU Parliament Victory Speech today”

    Shultz gets a bit shirty half way through…harrroompf!

  3. Sue Stuckey says:

    Article 50: heard the EU emergency debate just now – good for Nigel and vocal minority who warn the EU needs to change direction (anyway). The buzz was the UK has decided and MUST leave the EU. The UK has messed them around for years on given us concessions ex Euro ex Schengen – and now we must go. Hooray – a huge thank you to Nigel and his brilliant team. But can anybody imagine, after the fallout post 23 June – across the world – financial and political upheavals – that we can now tell Brussels ‘Sorry made a mistake we want to stay’? People have lost careers and fortunes on the back Brexit. So surely, no going back? Think what’s missing from the commentaries is that the proposed deals across so many economic, financial and political areas will be struck but – unlike EU membership – they will be flexible, variable and changeable. It will depend on the government of the day – now and in the future – what deals are struck. Surely, that’s democracy?

  4. I saw the debate in the EP today and recognised comment and ranting that goes on there when the business of the UK is considered. Democratic decision of the voters in the UK is not recognised and the EP rant was to be expected. Using personal attacks on Nigel Farage was an attack on all those who voted for LEAVE.

    We also heard today the true aspiration come out for a political, fiscal and EU government. Further integration. These are the representatives who will set the agenda for the policies of the EU. The UK has decided and the EP cannot change that decision and it is that which upsets them.

    Now the question is which member state will follow the UK example

  5. Martin Reed says:

    I’m beginning to wonder whether I had David Cameron all wrong when he vowed there would be no second referendum. I assumed, as many did, that he meant no second referendum would be allowed to reverse the decision of the first. Maybe that wasn’t the case. Perhaps the idea was that the Tories would completely ignore a possible Brexit vote (as Bojo clearly intends) and essentially carry on business as usual with a bit of window dressing for cosmetic purposes. Hence we would never be allowed a referendum rerun where we could reject the betrayal and demand Brexit be genuinely implemented. All in all nothing more than another rotten squalid LibLabCon stitch up.

  6. Alan Wheatley says:

    Re Relationship – Trade

    We make the generous offer of a continuation of the tariff-free trade all 28 countries enjoy at present. Easy, simple and quick. For every tariff the rump EU want to impose we respond in kind. This is a tariff war we would win and the 27would loose.

    ALSO we start right away saying to the rest of the World, particularly the Commonwealth, that soon the UK will be able to finalise its own trade deals and they will not have the difficulty of dealing with the EU customs union tariffs. They can expect to deal with a country that wants to trade, particularly with the Commonwealth where there is an inherent 15% cost advantage.

    • catweazle666 says:

      Exactly, Alan.

      I can’t understand this theory that we are supposed to go cap in hand to the EU, crave their indulgence and beg that they grant us a trade agreement.

      Given the massive discrepancy in the balance of payments between the UK and the EU, as I see it we are in by far the stronger bargaining position and so should be acting from a position of strength.

      In any case, given how low tariffs are these days, why bother with such an agreement when we will benefit far more than the EU from trade tariffs, we will be in a position to subsidise any traders who suffer slightly from the surplus in our favour, and still be well into pocket.

      We hold the whip hand here, we should be negotiating on that basis, not begging for scraps from Junker and Merkel.

      What is going on?

    • John Burnett says:

      I remember Nigel holding up a b lank sheet of paper and saying that’s what a free trade deal looks like

  7. Alan Wheatley says:

    Re Relationship – Passporting

    In amongst all the media people showing how little they know about the subject they have been asked to speak about, I recall one person (a leave MP, I think) saying there is already an agreement that will come into force within the next few months that would make the passporting concern irrelevant. Can anyone shed more light on this?

  8. Alan Wheatley says:

    Leaving aside all the expertise in UKIP, the one person who knows most about what is involved in leaving is Sir Bill Cash, Chairman of Parliament’s EU Scrutiny Committee. During the one, brief interview I know of, he said that his Committee is already working on drafting the necessary legislation that will have to go through Parliament. He is the only person to have mentioned the European Communities Act 1972, which gave the legal basis for the UK to join the EEC, and its repeal will give legal effect to our leaving the EU. This is far more significant (for the UK) than Article 50, which, to my understanding, merely provides for an amicable process.

    • Ex-expat Colin says:

      I suspect John Redwood is involved:
      “A brighter future for the UK” (published today)

      see last para and last sentence

      • John Burnett says:

        The referendum was necessary because the exchange of trading advantages against a loss of sovereignty is a dichotomy which neither reason nor emotion can resolve. It could only be resolved by the Churchillian “Trust the people”, or what is now called “Swarm Intelligence” that displays a perspicacity derived from a deeper form of cognition. It is this that is imploding the Westminster reality. “The voice of the people” too long ignored by Westminster, is the new reality; the one Jeremy Corbyn I suspect is listening to, and I believe Nigel has listened to over the years and is the reason for his political success. This referendum is, as Nigel has observed, the dawn of a new reality.

  9. Ex-expat Colin says:

    oops: (some revelations here)
    “Left leader calls for German referendum on EU deals”

  10. Shieldsman says:

    What is going on in the Conservative Party. Cameron said on returning from Brussels with his phoney new settlement – whatever the British people decide, I will make it work to the best of my abilities. He showed he had no abilities with all his scaremongering, and quite rightly decided to go leaving the Country in limbo.

    The D.T. Editorial today: It was David Cameron’s job to prepare Britain for the possibility of Brexit
    oris Johnson and other leaders of the Leave campaign have been denounced for not having a fully fledged plan for Brexit. But this wilfully misunderstands the purpose of a referendum. David Cameron called the vote, so it is hardly outrageous to suggest he should have made some preparations for what happened if he lost. That, after all, is the Government’s job – not to second-guess the outcome. It was never in the gift of Mr Johnson, Michael Gove et al to instruct Whitehall to make contingency plans, because the official government position was to stay in the EU.
    Preparations have clearly been inadequate: it was wrong and short-sighted not to instruct the Civil Service to prepare for a Brexit vote. By definition an In/Out referendum can have one of two results and to ignore the possibility of a Leave victory was complacent in the extreme.

    Further confusion within the Party and Government by Jeremy Hunt – We can win a better deal for Britain – it’s the only way the EU can save itself
    So before setting the clock ticking, we need to negotiate a deal and put it to the British people, either in a referendum or through the Conservative manifesto at a fresh general election.
    We need to unite the party after a bruising battle on the referendum – but we must remain resolved to unite the country as well.

    From the line up I do not think they have anyone to achieve that. I think Boris is amusing but a buffoon, look at all the silly talk about an airport on the Isle of Grain. Will Cameron make a decision on Heathrow before he leaves, doubt it off on his hols soon.

    Then we have: If Labour embraces Brexit, it just might win. If it doesn’t, it will be annihilated by Tom Harris

  11. Jane Davies says:

    Such a good article by John Pilger……he totally nails it.

  12. Shieldsman says: yesterday:- Diplomats: UK must accept freedom of movement and ECJ to get single market

    If it wants access to the bloc’s single market, post-Brexit Britain must accept EU freedom of movement rules and the supremacy of the European Court of Justice, EU diplomats have warned ahead of a vital summit.
    The idea that Britain could have access under a European Economic Area style deal and impose border controls was a non-starter, diplomats said.
    Diplomats agreed that the UK would only be able to access the market of currently about 500 million people if it accepted the authority of competition regulators, the monitoring of the European Commission and the authority of the European Court of Justice.

    Surely one of the objectives of leaving the EU was to remove the shackles of the ECJ. How could we carry on with the ECJ being superior to our own courts?

    EU Referendum: the Liechtenstein solution – That the state is the principality of Liechtenstein need not worry us. It may be a tiny micro-state with a population of 37,000 spread over an area of 61 square miles – less than half the area of the Isle of Wight – but it is a fully-fledged Contracting Party to the EEA Agreement. It has assumed exactly the same rights and responsibilities as any other Efta state.

    • foxbarn says:

      FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT??? THEN STICK THE SINGLE MARKET WHERE THE SUN DOESN’T SHINE. THE EU ARE GIVING AWAY NEW PASSPORTS AT THE RATE OF 800,000 A YEAR (Eurostat 2014 figure) it’s a security nightmare, bound to end in massive social problems if not bombs and body bags.

    • Martin Reed says:

      We absolutely do not need access to the single market. I believe Nigel may have said so. Tariff levels are so low, generally under 3%, as not to be any significant barrier to trade now. And as the EU sells far more to us than we do to them, they actually work to our advantage on balance. This is all about Tory EUphiles fighting to ensure mass immigration will continue unchecked in the future contrary to the wishes of perhaps the majority who voted for Brexit. Why, I haven’t an earthly but they certainly are a weird lot.

      • foxbarn says:

        I think you’ll find the Tory party is massively funded by house builders who see endless construction across England’s green and pleasant land to house endless numbers of migrants; this is why housebuilders shares have been hard hit on Brexit news. But they’ll use their money and muscle to make weakling Tories (that’s most) buckle and give in. Most Tory donors don’t give a rats arse about Britain, they live in places untouched by grubby poor people.

  13. MIKE MAUNDER says:

    First off. Roger, many Thanks for your constant updates, but please keep it going at least with one a week, because many directions are being pulled on !
    Second. We voted OUT. It’s a small word, but what part of it does the Political establishment not understand ? It is my feeling that a cook-up is about to be made, where we are not in the E.U., so we get to govern ourselves, but we still make payments to the club, and that would be just stupid. If a Brit wants a very good German, French or Italian motor car, then they will be able to buy one, but will also have to pay a tariff. – Likewise, an E.U. customer would face a tariff upon British goods. The car buyer could of course buy British !
    Third. Why, with all the Parties in Parliament being seen as out of step with the people, do we not have a General Election ? This should bring about a new Government, and as I hope for, a sensible move to a negotiating team for the E.U. First of course, since the referendum was so good to use real Democracy, we must have a PR system of voting. – There are better systems, but that would be quicker and easier to pass into law.
    Fourth and final. Brexit was made up of differing ideas for life after OUT, and our relationship with E.U. countries. – ( Keeping in mind that many voted to stay ). – Would it not be sensible to have a General Election to vote for a Government, but also therefore, the negotiating team, as well as the line to be taken in those negotiations ?

  14. Jane Davies says:

    So who would the team be to head up the terms of exit…would they compromise of members of the government? Surely not, because when there is a general election the government will change, we hope, then the team would have to change. Should the team members not be government ministers at all, but then we don’t want all of them to be civil servants either.

    • Ex-expat Colin says:

      Probably a bunch of hard nosed contracts folk from the big procurement ministries backed by a coach load of barristers. Dealing with 27 countries is going to be real silly, but thats what these fools have setup!

  15. Tedgo says:

    While to my mind the Norwegian model is a none starter, many in the press seem to be pushing for it.

    Surely the Norwegian model would require a further referendum under the European Union Act 2011 as there would be a further transfer of sovereignty.

    With the Norwegian model the EU can introduce new or modified diktats, which are binding on us, without the UK having any input or need for our agreement.

    Also an interesting comment from

    Norway’s parliament voted to attach the country to the EU’s financial supervisory body on 14 June 2016; critics called it the “biggest concession of sovereignty since the European Economic Area agreement”. As the UK and the EU embark on the next phase, this may put paid to any hopes of adopting the so-called Norwegian model.

    Further details at

    The comments in that article sound very familiar.

    I wonder what pressure the EU put on the Norwegian Government to get that accepted.

  16. Roger Turner says:

    Would I be wrong in asking this question?
    Our whole education system, as I understand it is predicated on our membership of the EU,
    Our Children undergo what can only be called “Brainwashing” – the “young” we are so worried about have been both seduced and corrupted into the EU “belief”, perhaps a substitute for religion.
    “Groomed” in duty to the benevolent state that hands out the sweeties and privileges they enjoy from the day they start their indoctrination at the day nursery to the day they leave University.
    Will removal of this pernicious system and necessary restructuring of the minds and syllabus of the teaching staff commence in September when clause 50 is triggered, or will it be required to wait until the last nail is hammered into the EU coffin.
    I believe it to be necessary that the redemption of the new “Young Generation” should start immediately.
    DO YOU? and if so how do we ensure it happens.?

  17. sara says:

    Apparently the surge in hatecrime is because the remainers have been told to post anything resembling one onto a specific website/facebook page
    THe police say there is no increase , its the same as usual but that just there’s an increase in posting to this particular site

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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