|
Jan 2020
11:15am, 10 Jan 2020
2,513 posts
|
J2R
I do not agree with larkim here that this is exactly the same 'fake news' as we Remainers complain about from Brexiters. It is, I would say, rather a misrepresentation of what the vote actually represented (and I wish it had been more judiciously worded). Yes, it wasn't a vote to leave Erasmus, but voting the amendment down is a pretty clear indication of intended direction.
To be honest, 2020 is working out much worse so far in Brexit terms than I had feared it would, because I held on to the vain hope that a government with a comfortable majority would be able to behave a little more rationally. But we are seeing where this is going. Johnson, like Trump, is in perpetual campaigning rather than governing mode (perhaps because he doesn't know how to govern and it takes hard work), where what happens is determined simply by what will get the biggest roars from the believers. And that means pretty well breaking all bonds with the EU.
And for reasons that Canute and others have explained, this will be devastating for science in the UK (and numerous other areas as well). Within a very short space of time we will lose any chance we have of continuing to be a world leader in a range of knowledge-related fields and our 'soft power' will dissipate massively.
Is this deliberate policy, designed to reshape the UK as an offshore tax-haven, or just casually ignorant vandalism? I'm still not sure, but ultimately it doesn't matter, the result is the same.
|
|
Jan 2020
11:16am, 10 Jan 2020
9,952 posts
|
larkim
LOL @ niggling over terminology. As I say, I've no disagreement that the changes which are now all but unavoidable as a consequence of Brexit are appalling, and many of them will be unexpected by those who voted for it, and has the potential to damage us all massively. That's why I remain a remainer.
This is happening. With the way our fellow voters voted, there is little practically that can be done in the short term which mitigate these things. And yes, of course we should draw attention to where Brexit has negative consequences which can be verified.
What I'm fearful of is a debate which continues over the next 24-36 months which continues in the same tone that has been place over the last couple of years. There is simply no point now having the main argument as being "we'd be better off in the EU" because that simply isn't a realistic, practical policy. We'd be better off with the discovery of a gold mine under our houses, but we can't make that happen, and nor can we now restore the UK to full EU membership. That might seem defeatist, but it is the current reality.
So instead the debate needs to be about policy specifics, about shifting the debate away from the polarised Brexit one (because those views are so entrenched) and shifting it to arguing about policies that are fit and proper for a UK which is not part of the EU *today*.
And I do think it behoves any political movement that is going to earn my vote and my respect to tell the truth, and not play games of distortion which play into the hands of the cynics on the right and create easy opportunities for the Tories to respond to accusations made against them of "fake news". If we're all at it it won't be possible to get across to the public a clear view of the damage that Brexit is doing.
|
|
Jan 2020
11:33am, 10 Jan 2020
32,613 posts
|
LindsD
Nice post, larkim. I was a bit worried about where our debate was headed. Not worried now.
|
|
Jan 2020
11:35am, 10 Jan 2020
1,989 posts
|
Canute
Jda, I used the words: ‘The Horizon program is already drifting beyond our horizon’. You said: ‘UK access to this funding has in reality fallen off a cliff’. Sadly I fear that your words are probably more accurate than mine. But as you imply, it is not the time for debating the precise choice of words when we really need to be mobilising forces for action. I have not yet lost all faith in our parliamentary system. We need to ensure that the issues are debated vociferously in the hope that some reasonable Tories might be pursuaded to join with the opposition parties in minimising damage.
The argument that the UK undermines its bargaining position by declaring a commitment to collaboration serves to perpetuate the myth that the EU is our enemy and feeds the notion that negotiation is a ‘zero sum’ game.
|
|
Jan 2020
11:44am, 10 Jan 2020
2,514 posts
|
J2R
I'm not really in disagreement with you, larkim, maybe just rather more pessimistic about what is possible. What frightens me is that we now have a populace which is seemingly perfectly happy with the idea that it is being lied to by its Prime Minister and other members of Government, and we see that lying big gets you the best results.
Tell me how I can be less confrontational and yet hold on to my rigid adherence to the importance of facts, objective truth, and I'm all ears. Because this is how I see it - it's not a battle between two different sets of ideas, it's a battle between fact-based policy-making on one side and ideological fingers-in-the-ears delusion on the other side.
|
|
Jan 2020
12:52pm, 10 Jan 2020
6,092 posts
|
jda
larkim, the argument about erasmus and horizon funding is precisely one of policy and not wishing away brexit! We can stay in these schemes, there are other non-EU countries in these schemes, but it won't happen by wishful thinking.
What proposal do you have for how to oppose leaving erasmus, other than the opposition proposing amendments that would try to keep us in?
|
|
Jan 2020
1:26pm, 10 Jan 2020
27,200 posts
|
macca 53
As I see it the next phase is our government deciding which EU Schemes/legislation we want to retain membership off (which costs money of course). Euratom seems to have gone, Erasmus looks as though it’s on the way out, not signing up to ECHA would destroy much of the chemical industry (that nice Mr Ratcliffe will no doubt blame the EU for making UK plants uncompetitive - not true, we would be doing this to ourselves). The “press” somehow seems to think fisheries discussions should be at the top of the list of priorities! Really?? 24000 employees and 0.1% of the economy????? The chemical industry employs 185000 and is 7% - let’s get things in perspective..... Sadly I don’t see any sense of strategic planning from our government so I suspect a lot of things will be going out with the bathwater. I have yet to see a single piece of information or news that makes me think that a) I was wrong to vote remain or b) The government is willing/capable of negotiating in the best interests of all the people of Britain.
|
|
Jan 2020
1:35pm, 10 Jan 2020
8,341 posts
|
simbil
Fish is one area where we have something that the EU wants and will be an important bargaining chip, we don’t have that many.
The negotiations are neither zero sum game or win win. The EU has concerns over U.K. direct competition in some sectors.
The initial engagement is rumoured to come down to agreement on just a few sectors such as fish, traded goods and security. There isn’t time to do it all with our self imposed deadline.
|
|
Jan 2020
1:47pm, 10 Jan 2020
2,426 posts
|
Fellrunning
The vast majority of the UK population both leave and remain care little for science and technology. To them it's a black box that produces the odd useful widget. If they were disinterested enough in the NHS to vote in a government hell bent on dismantling it they certainly won't care about things that mean little to them beyond allowing them to say "Alexa eat my shorts".
Now if Brexit meant that Sky sports would no longer be available you can bet your boots there'd be riots on the streets.....
|
|
Jan 2020
1:49pm, 10 Jan 2020
1,990 posts
|
Canute
Simbil
Some things, including Horizon and Erasmus and indeed many others, cannot wait until we have sorted out fish, traded goods and security, important as these things are. Once destroyed, collaborations that took years to construct cannot simply be re-created overnight. We have already lost scientific expertise and will almost certainly lose more in the next 12 months.
|
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
