It's written by someone who thinks the idea is ludicrous so before you attack me leavers, instead think how objective that makes me, and how honest I'll be on the issues.
When we've done that we'll look at what we have at the end and decide how we approach it now.
But we can't solve a lie about a brexit bonus funding the NHS. There won't be a bonus so let's be truthful and assume you accept that if you want to leave the EU.
But nonetheless you have to figure out how to leave the EU.
What's the responsible way?
1. Understanding the situation
2. Honouring the reasons for the vote
3. Removing stuff people didn't vote for
4. Uniting the country
5. Salvaging as much of the economy as you can and maybe creating a better future.
If you haven't read my 50 tweets on the contradictions of Brexit, you should read it attached below. It'll help understand some of the complexities we're going to face.
So now you know we have our work cut out for us.
To be successful we have to solve each of those issues.
1. Our trade situation
3. Immigration or the concerns about it
4. Sovereignty or the concerns about it
5. Our Geographic position
6. Our codependence on energy, medicine, flights and other stuff.
It's become fashionable in some leave circles to say it doesn't matter how poor we'll be, brexit NOW.
Which is fine, but let's at least try to limit the damage eh?
Our job as a reasonable Primeminister is to mitigate the damage.
A) multinational promises
B) trade focus
Let's get into those.
A) You can't solve multinational issues easily. Your predecessors promised easy cheap access to Europe.
So you have a choice.
Either you stay in the Customs Union (CU) and Single Market (SM) or you replace those deals. For screw the deals option see screw the country tweet.
You sigh. You already have economic reasons for staying in CUSM at least short term. Now this issue is forcing the same conclusion
Headscratcher. You sit down with your best economic "experts" noone knows how
Now I don't know what this sector is, or even whether it could exist. And maybe the Primeminister wouldn't know either. But what's certain is whatever it is, it'll need time to build and time means we need to stay in the CUSM, at least while we build it.
A third CUSM tick.
C) was infrastructure. And it's the simplest to solve in that until I know what I'm doing with those multinational deals and new foreign trade sector, I don't know what to build.
So for now I have no choice but to maintain what I have with Europe
A 4th tick in the CUSM box
Unfortunately we're not done with this section. But some of the next issues are easier to solve.
No problem anymore.
Well at least for now.
Either way if Ireland does become an issue we're not going to repeat the mistakes of our predecessor
Since I'm in bed with the DUP and they'll never support that, this is a future plan
Which is fine, we need time to build the magic 10% sector anyway and we have to stay in the CUSM while we do that so, we can save this bit of the plan for a time when we're out of bed with the DUP.
So that's Ireland done. Easy.
This is going to be a tough one so you might want to get a cup of coffee and a snack and settle in for a while.
Your first decision is how honest are you going to be about the real situation.
Even if you do try to tell the truth you fear the right wing press will shout terrorist or demonise migrants whatever you do.
Ok we can do that.
1. Migration reality.
2. Economic impact
3. Population concerns
4. Potential solutions.
Good list. Let's get stuck in.
Mostly everything youve read is nonsense.
That doesn't mean that there are not legitimate or illegitimate concerns from the population, but those concerns have very little to do with the reality of the situation so let's be honest. At least with ourselves.
Inbound migrants were
NON EU 264K
Expat British 74K
Non EU 88K
So immediately somethings up.
Freedom of movement works both ways.
You dig into the data more. Turns out half the EU migrants are coming from western Europe. That's your high skilled migrants.
You dig more. Almost all of the EU migrants have jobs. And almost all the British people do too. it's hard to say they're taking out jobs. Maybe they're suppressing wages?
There's a lot of political noise around this topic. But the best realistic data you can find says that while there is a very small impact on wages from immigration, there's definitely no impact on employment.
Here's the problem. impact on wages comes from non EU migrants
You have a dig at the non EU migrant data. Turns out most of that is students and people moving to live with families. That's why they end up taking slightly lower paid jobs but... You also make more money in student income than you lose in any minor salary decrease.
But hold on there do seem to be loads of EU migrants here right. Are people imagining it?
The truth is the population of the UK has changed from across the major ex pat groups. In 2001 this was Irish and Indian. Now the largest groups are Polish and Indian.
Trouble is for those people who object to that, the horse has already bolted. The migration from the EU had happened and we said this wouldn't be a chain that did wouldshouldacoulda. They're here now.
So where did we get to.
Almost all of our current migrants are non EU or highly skilled labour or due to British people leaving.
20% of our migrants are Eastern European but almost all of those are in work.
The large populations of Eastern Europeans already migrated.
To add more to this, even if you object to Eastern Europeans, many of them are doing seriously important jobs in, for example, the NHS. So if you're going to object, please do so carefully or you'll find as we have now that you create a crisis in NHS recruitment.
Let's start trying to tick off problems we don't have.
People are probably OK with students, family members and skilled migrants? Yes?
They might object to the migrants already here but no one is seriously going to try repatriation any more than anyone seriously suggest repatriating indians
That's 6% of EU migrants or 3.5% of the total annual migrants.
You scratch your head. How is leaving the EU going to solve the migrant problem
Clearly lots of people are concerned about migration. You get that.
And many were told and believed the EU was the cause. You get that too.
But leaving the EU will solve just 6% of the problem
Well the people voted. I guess they knew and wanted it anyway.
You shrug your shoulders. Short term there's nothing you can do anyway as you're stuck with CUSM and to keep that you have to keep Freedom of Movement.
But there is one thing you can do.
Though you know it won't have much impact you will do what no British Government has done
You will implement the immigration policies the EU already allows. Any EU migrant must after 3 months prove they are working, or in study or have enough resources to not need benefits.
This is going to cost a lot of money to administer, and won't solve the things some people are concerned about, but it will be what the people voted for.
The best thing.
You can do it immediately to show action even before you leave the EU. No negotiation needed.
And that's all you can do about immigration. In fact even when you leave the EU you can't do any more than you've already done, unless you stop skilled migrants coming.
So that's the new policy. Let's call it the 3 month check policy.
The next topic is sovereignty
What a dilemma this one is. We're going to make our mythical Primeminister a Leaver.
But there are rules.
S/he is a Leaver but both honest and pragmatic.
S/he truly believes the UK is best out of the EU (confounds me why that could be but let's run with it)
Conversely our PM can't lie.
S/he knows we need international agreements.
S/he knows the EU is actually more democratic than the UK
S/he knows that almost all EU Legislation has been approved first by the UK
S/he knows the UK led the expansion into Eastern Europe.
Instead s/he will calmly make the case for how the UK will extract itself from Europe with the minimum of fuss and damage to the country.
The EU is essentially a confederation of nations choosing to work together in the interest of their citizens.
many people hate the commission but the nations and people who are also the EU are friends
Another problem is "bad EU" isn't bad. It's a bunch of people like your civil service back home who are working for the nations and citizens of the "good EU"
Actually more democratic than the civil service.
Another problem is of course that as the civil service of the EU, the "Good EU" is expecting it to negotiate on its behalf. They gave it clear instructions it can't break.
Your predecessor has given your civil servants no instructions at all which is why they're struggling
The previous administration also didn't help by constantly insulting the members of the EU civil service. So they're now not taking anyone in the UK seriously.
You're not going to turn them around now. But you decide immediately to stop the aggressive and language.
Thaf out of the way you now need to decide what sovereignty actually is and what you want to have control of.
The UK is subject to lots of international agreements that it complies with in organisations like NATO or the UN. So it isn't actually law that's the problem.
What you and others object to is the idea that somehow you're being dictated to by Brussels.
You're familiar with this problem. It's exactly how Scots feel being dictated to by Westminster.
Thing is you know that the "good EU" instructs the "bad EU" to make laws.
And you want to keep those things even if the UK leaves the EU because you sponsored them.
So when it comes down to it people are bugged by is the idea that the EU is dictating stuff to the UK whereas the reality is the UK is pushing stuff in the EU.
Oh and sometimes you lose a vote with the "good EU" . But there's far fewer of those than you want to admit to.
Ok. What are your options to solve this mess? Well firstly you're gonna stop talking about the EU as one thing. It's unhelpful and misleads people.
You're gonna talk about EU nations when you mean good EU and EU civil service when you mean the commission
Then you have to deal with the we brief the EU civil service not they force stuff on us problem.
This is the largest decision you're going to make.
This causes the resentment
Instead of forcing their schemes into the EU civil servants and then blaming the "EU" for things, Government ministers will need to get parliamentary approval for any thing proposed or voted on
Ministers need to get parliamentary approval for any qualified majority votes they participate in.
Your civil servants and ministers look at you in absolute horror...
Yes you say, which is why parliament will approve it.
Overnight the UK parliament will be in direct control of UK interactions with the EU
With this change you immediately hand EU law making sovereignty publicly and clearly to parliament.
And we'll deal with those in the next section.
We're in the home stretch now. The penultimate issue to solve. You'll call this the "you can take the EU out of UK but not the UK out of Europe" problem.
Here's the thing. In or out of the EU we have to solve some problems that are not based on arbitrary stuff.
Fishing is an excellent example. The rabble rousing that was throwing fish into the Thames was the height of political irresponsibility. Everyone knows it's more complicated than that.
So while there are lots of Geographic problems to solve we're going to deal with 2 crucial ones and one that's a political boogeyman
Remove goods and look at services we actually have a trade surplus with the EU.
That's btw why the border thing was a problem in Ireland. Services don't care about borders. Goods do. It would hurt us.
Not just that. There's a triple whammy. Prices go up, plus you have to pay more to fly it in, plus that's awful amounts of carbon
A rabid one will say "we can grow our own food we did in the war". Yes we could. That was 70 years ago and everyone was very thin. And had no lemons.
Plus how long will that take to change?
It ain't gonna be ready any time soon.
So energy agreements also definitely need to survive leaving the EU, whatever you do.
Just gonna mention some important things
Fish disputes predate anything in the EU and back then we were the ones stealing from Iceland
The removal of Iceland had nada to do with the EU and is where most of the problems came from.
So let's dig in.
Yes it's true Spanish fishermen are fishing "our" fish in our waters. But there are so many details behind this jingoistic simplification that it makes you think that anyone who talks about fish this way has no interest in solving the problem... Just making it worst.
1. Fish quota that the EU sets are based on quota from before the EU minus ensuring we don't overfish
2. UK "stole" Iceland fish in the 70s. They shut us down, that reduced our quota
3. even in EU we restrict who fishes in "british" waters up to 100 miles
4. we increased our haul in the EU from 2004-14 moving us from 4th to 2nd largest catch in the EU
5. Fish dont respect borders or migration routes, that could hurt us if we can only fish in here
Fishing rights are negotiated in 2022. You don't know if you'll have left by then, but you're pretty sure you're going to need to find a way to stay in the fishing policy...ironically enough it's another thing that needs to survive the EU
You look up from your policy paper. Boy that wasn't what was sold at all...there are a bunch of things you need to negotiate that relate to your geography that have to happen even if you leave.
You quickly give instruction for the "UK in Europe after the EU" policy
So, the final one in just section one of leaving the EU. If you've got this far and you're still reading, I admire your persistence. If you're a leaver I hope you see that you were sold a lot of nonsense and this thing needs thinking about
...we'll just look at one. Euratom.
Prior to the campaign no-one had heard or Euratom. In fact even now it's an obscure thing for anyone but a political hack, but your civil servants tell you it's a good case study so you go learn about it.
Although you can wrap it up in lots of political noise, Euratom basically regulates nuclear stuff, including its transport. Nuclear stuff is obviously kinda good for terrorism so you want to make sure you handle it carefully. The rabid ones don't like Euratom coz of the ECJ
The ECJ is basically the high court of the EU that rules on, amongst other things, disputes between nations. The rabid ones don't like the idea that anyone can rule on the UK apart from its own courts, but on issues like Euratom, some neutral 3rd party has to rule.
Well if you need a medical scan the scanner needs something called technetium to scan you. We do about half a million of these scans a year
You're going to call it the Homeland in Europe policy
Next up 2.0 Honouring the Vote
That's not predjudiced. It's the opposite - making sure you compare fairly
So we return to our imagined new Prime Minister dealing with the complexities and finding a way to leave the EU. Last section was about being responsible and getting clear on what's good for the country
Now we'll try to think about leavers
I ask you humbly to bear with me. Understanding is the route to progress.
Today is gonna be about honuring the vote, why did peole vote?
1. Better trade
2. Sovereignty and laws
3. Immigration and borders
4. Reaction against establishment
7. Take back control in general
8. Anything but this
9. Britain changing
Well there's an obvious one staring at you, you're systematic in everything you do so you apply your standard approach.
Let's work through these one by one to understand before action.