Calling All Fellow Brexiteers: Can We Hurry Up and Lose the Never-End-Um?


I’d hate to be a Negative Nancy, or a fun sponge of any description, but there is no way in hell the Leave camp are going to win the EU referendum. Like with Scottish independence and the Alternative Vote, we will opt for the status quo. Fear and small C conservatism will triumph over proper, Thatcherite Conservatism, and we will continue reluctantly plodding towards the United States of Europe, like lost lambs to the slaughterhouse. 

If I’m sick to death of this debate, being a Eurosceptic saddo who resents going out on Saturday nights incase I’m too hungover for Marr, I dread to think how bored the rest of the population must be. The endless stream of statistics, counter statistics, and counter-counter statistics, resonate about as much as Jeremy Corbyn’s rhetoric does in Buckinghamshire. I only hope that the next 36 days pass quickly so we can skip to the next chapter of the Tory civil war, Cameron’s resignation and the inevitable Boris V George cat fight.

If the referendum had been fought on logical arguments and issues such as democracy, accountability and our new best friend ‘sovereignty’, as opposed to faceless statics, I don’t doubt that the passion of the Leave campaigners could have defeated the other sides’ balance sheet approach.

Instead of fighting ‘you will be X hundred pounds worse of per year’ with ‘the EU costs us X million every week’, the Brexiteers’ should have just held there hands up from the beginning and said ‘Yes, growth may be stunted for a few years, and yes, the markets will probably have a massive bitch fit, but in 25 years, will a fat balding man from Luxembourg be determining the price you pay for Tampons?’ Or something to that effect.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. And it is with a very heavy heart that I have succumbed to such a degree of defeatism. The Leave side have thrown the kitchen sink at this campaign, and then some. They’ve had Boris boris-ing around with pasties, bananas and speeches about knickers. They’ve adopted the nauseating ‘save our NHS’ rhetoric of the left in a bid to get socialists on board. They made Michael Gove vaguely likeable again, and up until now, they even succeeded in putting a sock in Nigel Farage. So regardless of the result on June 23rd, the majority of leave campaigners (alright, maybe not George Galloway) can hold their heads high and be proud of the campaign they’ve conducted. I wonder how many ‘remainians’ could wholeheartedly say the same.

If we threw the kitchen sink at this referendum, Cameron and the Remain camp threw the entire bathroom, the plumping system and the B&Q removal van. I can’t be the only person who’s been left exhausted by the relentless onslaught of reports from ‘independent’ economic bodies, with their indistinguishable acronyms and reputations we’re supposed to be impressed by, and by the conveyor belt of establishment figures queuing up to tell us that we’re all going to die of TB if we vote to leave. If it’s not Barrack Obama one day, it’s the governor of the Bank of England, the Pope, or one of the 3 living ex Prime Ministers the next (not that being alive is actually a requirement; judging by the Mirrors’ shameless “Thatcher/Churchill would have voted to stay in the EU – says advisor who made them coffee once” headlines).

The blatant misuse of public money & government resources have stretched the term ‘democracy’ to its breaking point. To be honest, it was always inconceivable that Vote Leave, just one strand of the splintered Brexit cause whose funding depends on some bloke that owns JML (yes, the one from the adverts), could defeat the will of the world’s 5th most powerful Government, all its machinery and its £600 billion a year income. In this David-and-Goliathian battle, the fact that the poll difference has rarely ventured beyond 10% should be celebrated as an achievement in itself. I hope to god I am wrong, but unfortunately, a gold star for effort – or 12 – was never going to take us out of the EU. 

If Cameron was ever remotely serious about settling the European question within the Conservative Party, let alone across the country, as many of his successors have tried and failed to do, he should have played a fair game. Had his government adopted the PURDAH rules, and made at least a token attempt at neutrality (i.e not spending 9 million quid of tax payers money on a single leaflet) the inevitable vote to remain could have been accepted. Eurosceptic Tories would have had no choice but to tuck their tails between their legs & literally ‘put up or shut up’, as the people ‘would have spoken’ (or whatever it is lame duck US presidents say after poor mid-term elections). 

If 2014s ‘once in a generation’ vote on Scottish independence, which abided by PURDAH and was fair in the eyes of all those except the cyber Nats & Nick Robinson, could be spun as illegitimate, then it’ll only be a matter of days before there are serious calls for a second referendum this time around. Far from settling the question mark over our EU membership and the nations post-imperial identity crisis, all this vote has done is inflame the anti-European sentiment at home and abroad, destroy the Tory party, and therefore increase Jeremy Corbyn’s chances of becoming prime minister by default. Yikes. 

So if the pollsters are to be trusted, the EU referendum, once the holy grail of Eurosceptics, has been reduced to little more than an audition for the next Conservative leadership election, and a couples retreat exercise for the Labour Party. 

Therefore the best outcome we can hope for, assuming a British exit is off the table, is for David Cameron to bring forward his date of departure, and for the smoothest possible transition of power to a Eurosceptic candidate, who will insure that our vote to Remain won’t be taken as a ringing endorsement of federalism & ‘ever closer union’ in Brussels. In short; we must continue to do what we do best; be a thorn in the EU’s ever expanding side, lead its 1 man awkward squad, and generally be the John Redwood of the European Council.  

When you consider the fact that it took two referendums to gain enough support for a devolved parliament in Scotland, and a further two for one in Wales, the idea that we would vote for total independence in a single vote does invite us to take a big leap of faith. So though it is a comparison few Eurosceptics will welcome, we Brexiteers may prove be to be this referendums answer to Napoleon. Though we have lost this battle, we may yet win the war.


2 thoughts on “Calling All Fellow Brexiteers: Can We Hurry Up and Lose the Never-End-Um?

  1. Lively stuff and certainly more fun than either campaign in fact but I think this passage highlights why this is largely wrong:

    “Instead of fighting ‘you will be X hundred pounds worse of per year’ with ‘the EU costs us X million every week’, the Brexiteers’ should have just held there hands up from the beginning and said ‘Yes, growth may be stunted for a few years, and yes, the markets will probably have a massive bitch fit, but in 25 years, will a fat balding man from Luxembourg be determining the price you pay for Tampons?’ Or something to that effect.”

    Had this been the Brexit case today there would have been something like a 70:30 split in favour of Remain. Growth being stunted from today’s base and the markets plummeting is no different to saying “hell yeah, I don’t mind another recession” or “OK, we’re going to have to increase welfare spending (which most of you don’t like) to stop increased unemployment laying waste to things but don’t worry, we’ll have even greater austerity than previously to make up for it afterwards”.

    The vast majority of people are broadly content with their lives as they are now and don’t want to do things which will make them worse now. In the real world of people unlike you or I, most couldn’t name their local councillors and barely any will have had any reason to contact their local MP. Westminster is no less distant and unaccountable a place for the determination of tampon prices than Brussels. Having the freedom to set the sales tax rate on tampons won’t make up for being told that they are more likely to lose their job as growth slows or turns to recession.

    I’m not so sure that remain will win, precisely because things like the £350m a week payment to the EU, taken out of context of total levels of spending and any benefits we might get for that amount do have an impact. The message about controlling immigration has an impact, even if in fact nobody is actually proposing addressing the real concern that many of those who are attracted to that have, namely the impact of the immigration which has already occurred has had (not to mention the confusion over whether Brexit means becoming like Norway, Switzerland, Canada or Albania for immigration purposes).

    Unlike Scotland, where there’s a pretty clear single position for independence and a single clear party that argues for it while delivering at least moderately professional and competent government, the Brexit positions are far too varied to sustain a second referendum in the event of a Remain vote. I would expect the likes of Gove and Boris to drop any ideas of a second referendum and instead to focus on a more muscular defence of British interest within the EU. None of the multifarious other supporters of Brexit have the slightest hope of being involved in any future realistically foreseeable government and disagree more violently with one another on what the post-Brexit world should look like than is capable of resolution. Cameron might not last much longer even after a Remain vote. Osborne might not win a leadership election. But the reality I think is that the sovereignty actually existing politicians most crave is one where they are the government. So they’ll all need to go back to ensuring that Corbyn doesn’t become PM. The EU will prove a much less interesting thing to rail against than the clear horror of a Labour government looking anything like the current Opposition.


    1. Thank you for your comment! I accept your first point about the economy, and admit I have downplayed the effect of volatile markets – though they’re hardly a Stable Mable in normal times – and stunted growth on ordinary people’s lives a little (but I don’t ‘want’ a recession I promise!). But I don’t think the economy should be the yardstick by which all a country’s achievements should be measured (which is odd for a right winger, I know). It might sound stranger and slightly ignorant, but in my opinion, the short term potential effects of Brexit (but NOT the exaggerated ones threatened by the In campaign) are worth preserving our democracy and sovereignty in the long term. The whole essence of the campaign should have been based on this argument & on the bigger picture. Short term pain for long term gain and what not.

      About the use of statistics. Your right that the 350 million figure has resonated. But only because of the controversy about its accuracy lol.

      And as for your comparisons with the Indy ref. Your right about the Scottish gov. I guess the pro independence argument did look a lot more credible by default when coming from an incumbent government. Perhaps that’ll mean the margin between leave and remain will be significantly bigger than that for yes and no?

      Thanks again for your comment & for reading – a lot of food for thought!


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