Tim Farron has written an article in The New European. He starts:
If 2016 felt like a never-ending cycle of shocks and surprises, then 2017 already shows no sign of relenting.
…
I, like all other ‘Remoaners’, get constantly criticised for being too negative about the prospects of Brexit Britain. Yet right now, it is not my confidence in the government’s direction that is significant, it is the markets, displayed so clearly in the pound slumping to a fresh 31-year low on Monday.
The prompt for this had been the impending sense of gloom in anticipation of Theresa May’s Brexit speech on Tuesday, which outlined her plans for the UK to quit the single market, before even entering into negotiations with the EU.
Staggeringly, the PM, increasingly characterised as ‘Theresa Maybe’, has chosen her only act of decisiveness to be on leaving the single market – a British invention that she and her own cabinet have spent their careers recognising as being so fundamental to our public life and economic wellbeing.
He continues:
A Hard Brexit was not on the ballot paper and therefore it is right that the Liberal Democrats, in the complete absence of a coherent Labour Party, stand up and say: this was not the democratic choice of the electorate. This is why it is so important that the public is given a choice at the end of this process.
And concludes:
It has been reported this week that May sent a speech by Winston Churchill to Trump as a Christmas present. In such a defining week for both these figures, they would do well to learn from the great European and liberal values of putting faith in our global institutions and partnerships that Churchill represented.
It will be the challenge, not just for liberal parties around the world, but for all those who believe in the liberal vales – of openness, tolerance and unity – to demand their place in our society throughout 2017.
You can read the full article here.
* Mary Reid is a contributing editor on Lib Dem Voice. She was a councillor in Kingston upon Thames, where she is still very active with the local party, and is the Hon President of Kingston Lib Dems.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
High Fell leaflet watch (2)
No, Leave didn't win the Brexit referendum because of Northern working class voters
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Reform under water
Geoffrey Payne
Richard Whelan
David Raw
Tom Reeve
14 Comments
I agree with Tim!
However, it is important that in the light of the fact that the political argument was only lightly covered in last year’s debates, that we continue to make the case for a political, democratic Europe. This case was made clearly in 1975 (history on this having been rewritten by UKIP and their allies in the press ever since!) Yes, Churchill did argue a political case, and although he was a highly imperfect politician, and he also IMO, wrongly, argued for some reason for British exceptionalism (perhaps because he was half American?) this was one of his ideas we should celebrate.
It seems to me that the antis have argued hard for “a more open international Britain” etc. This seems to be at the moment an argument for excluding the political and the democratic – how could we relate democratically around the world when we find it apparently difficult to impossible with our friends and neighbours in Europe, who have much more culturally and economically in common with us than other disparate nations. I always felt that the concept of a political Europe was always a prototype for something that could in future apply to the world. To give up on the concept now, as our referendum vote implied, seems to be damaging to ourselves, and letting down our partners in this prototype very badly.
I struggle with the argument that leaving the single market (a hard brexit) was not on the ballot paper?
it was implicit in the question asked:
” should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
If a person voted to “leave the European Union”, then it means to leave leave it all, including the internal market?
All leading advocates on both sides stated that a vote to leave meant leaving the internal/single market.
It is a weak argument that is being used as a rallying cal/false hope to those who still wish to reverse the result of the referendum.
Let me add (as I have stated many time previously) I say this, not to try to suppress remain arguments. I would be very happy to have a rerun of the referendum. I am certain the overall result would be the same with an increase in the leave vote.
Mary
You are one of the most reasonable and diligent on this site , and that is something we need. Can you help with some measure of clarity ?
I agree with what Tim writes here, have just linked and read it. The other day it was an article in the Guardian, by Tim on the speech of the prime minister.
Both articles, this one , and the previous, had , in their original headlines, the words betrayal and treachery. In neither article did those words appear !
Do commercial newspapers these days write the headlines. I have written articles once in a while. I always write the headline. I insist on it. I do not write for these newspapers. Is it different ?
I think language very important. As a lover of the word , a practitioner in the arts, it is one of our greatest assets. But I am a graduate in history and politics. It is wrong to use the two words I mention, too often.Throughout our history, in politics, the greatest speech makers and thinkers have made an impact with more to offer than most , knowing however, that sometimes, in attitude, or example, less is more.
I had the great experience of knowing the late great actress, Patricia Hayes, very well, when I was a very young actor trying to get into the profession. She was a tremendous encouragement. She said to me, in a speech , or scene, it is always best to have only one big gesture. More is too much sometimes!
We can learn from that in our use of words and avoid over egging the pudding !
P.S.
Patricia Hayes was a life long Liberal and Liberal Democrat voter !
https://allianceparty.org/article/2017/0010922/naomi-long-sends-best-wishes-to-martin-mcguinness
Was a hard Brexit on the ballot paper, of course not, the question ‘YES’ or ‘NO’ fulfilled what is required regarding any democratic ballot, keep the question straightforward, otherwise the ballot paper would end up a bit tortuous to say the least. Even the following day the consensus by many Brexit Government ministers and MP’s that it was total conjecture what Brexit even meant, so if those in power did not have a clue, how can one say there was a mandate for an outcome that was obtained by a question so ambiguous in its meaning. Legitimacy is not built on the back of concealment, but on openness and transparency.
@ethicsgradient – heard that from perhaps as I remember Michael Howard, on the Daily Politics: “Single Market” = name perhaps literally written in EU treaty as “Internal Market” – or is that incorrect?
And “internal” would appear to indicate a country must be “on the inside”, not an external country?
Looking forward to further constructive comments from Leavers/Remainers.
All the best and peace.
the single market – a British invention that she and her own cabinet have spent their careers recognising as being so fundamental to our public life and economic wellbeing.
I would go further and suggest that May et al are, by their actions, performing an amazing about turn, Magaret Thatcher was for the Single Market, recognising it as being good for business (single system for “conformity assessment”, customs union, common tariffs, labour movement and a set of rules to discourage tendering discrimination). Thus effectively May et al are saying Thatcher got it wrong!
I therefore find it wryly amusing to see some, particularly on the Conservative blogs, hailing May as a new Mrs T…
Lorenzo Cherin: My experience of the print press is that the author of an article does not choose the headline – that task is always given to the sub-editor. That applies whether the author was a junior reporter or a PR person writing a press release. Sometimes they get it spectacularly wrong. I nearly lost my job once because of an inaccurate headline.
I presume the same happens online. Sub-editors are after clickbait so like to insert words like ‘betrayal’, not to mention ‘sex romps’ and ‘kittens’ (though not usually in the same headline).
Perhaps we need to be a bit more careful here on LDV and not make assumptions about the headline.
“A Hard Brexit was not on the ballot paper”
No,and neither could it or should it have been,the possible consequences of a leave vote and what that could entail was explained adequately by various politicians and in the media,surely leave voters had all the information required to make their choice.
An alternative to a binary question is a multichoice question,and the arguments resulting from the result of that would have been endless.
“this was not the democratic choice of the electorate. ”
Well,according to the rules of the electoral commission, it was a legitimate result, although maybe not so overwhelming as some would have liked ,it was just as democratic as when a parliamentary candidate wins a seat ,so is Tim also saying that there should be a much wider winning margin in a parliamentary election also ?
From a remain voter and also an acceptor of the choice of the British electorate
I’ve never really understood the use of the Churchill brand as a political device. He was a decent war time leader. In virtually every other circumstance he was pretty terrible and very prone to self promotion.
alans
And where was my vote ? I am a British citizen.
“All leading advocates on both sides stated that a vote to leave meant leaving the internal/single market.”
False. Repeatedly many advocates on the leave side tried to put forward the argument that leaving the EU and leaving the single market were different questions and one did not necessarily follow the other.
We went into a referendum with one side, the eventual winning side, not clearly defining what they wanted from the 6 months following the result and not clearly what they wanted the next couple of years to look like. There was instead a million different voices about what one issue may be most important, but again not who was prepared to give up their important issue to secure leaving as a whole. While the Lib Dems are speaking about the EU referendum only it doesn’t mean anything for future decisions or how campaigning should take place.
Only 17 million of the 46 million electorate voted for Brexit and most had no idea whether it would really be good or bad for them or the UK. Leaving the biggest free trade area and financial union on the planet, will undoubtedly leave UK weaker financially, politically, and militarily. Brexit is bad; block it!