No Deal Brexit

Last night I voted in the House of Commons to take No Deal off the table. Many people have contacted me to question this, given that Nottingham North voted to leave the EU in 2016.

In 2017, I campaigned to represent this constituency on a manifesto that very straight-forwardly pledged ‘to reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option’. That is what I am now doing.

I respect the outcome of the 2016 referendum, but I do not believe that No Deal is what the majority of the UK voted for when voting to leave the European Union. The Vote Leave campaign themselves explicitly said there would be a deal.

I believe No Deal would be the worst possible outcome to this process, with severe consequences across many areas.

No Deal would mean an end to the frictionless and tariff-free trade with the EU that our manufacturers rely on. Many businesses, such as the car industry, have supply chains and productions processes interwoven throughout Europe. According to Government analysis, customs checks could cost businesses £13 billion a year. The impact of non-tariff barriers under No Deal would be greatest felt by our services sector, which makes up 80% of the UK economy.

Amongst other issues, No Deal also currently means no reciprocal deal on citizens’ rights, including those British citizens living, working and studying in EU countries. No Deal would also mean no agreement on how to avoid a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

I also have serious concerns about the way the Government has handled Brexit. I believe the Prime Minister’s Brexit deal, which has now been overwhelmingly rejected by Parliament twice, is deeply flawed and a bad deal for our country. It does not protect jobs, workplace rights or environmental standards, and it provides no certainty on our future relationship with the EU.

I have never accepted that Parliament’s choice must be between a bad deal or No Deal. Parliament has already rejected No Deal and the Government does not have the right to plunge our country into chaos because of its own failure to get a good deal. I believe all necessary steps must be therefore be taken to avoid such an outcome.

We are now at a point where unfortunately, due to the Prime Minister running down the clock with this unnecessary binary choice between a rock and a hard place, extending Article 50 is the best option. I will be voting tonight to request that European Union is asked for such an extension.

This is not an attempt to thwart Brexit from happening, but the only way that we can continue protecting our economy, our jobs, our workplace rights, our security, our environmental standards, and much more, that we are at risk of losing.

If that vote is successful, I hope that Parliament will finally be given the opportunity to present its own Brexit deal – one that can provide that which the Prime Minister’s deal and No Deal don’t, while also respecting the referendum result. This is what I will continue fighting for.

Alex

7 comments

  • Well said Alex. I wholehearted share the opinions you express here. Thank you for putting them on record.

    Like

  • Totally agree Alex. Although I voted to remain I accept that at the moment Brexit is what we have. If we are not able to have an informed people’s vote now that we know more of what Brexit will actually mean then we must persevere and try to get the best deal we can. No deal is the worse possible scenario.

    Like

  • Jennifer Bradley

    How come our economy is apparently in a better condition than the EU’s at present & that we would continue to thrive post ‘No Deal Brexit’?

    Like

    • No – it does not follow because existing conditions of trade will disrupted, severely if no deal, to our disadvantage. It will be especially so for services, banks have already relocated resources out of the UK, so this will include jobs for people who manage the services.

      Like

  • Using the term chaos along with words like cliff edge are the politicians way of avoiding dealing sensibly with the potential problems to try to gain political advantage. This has become all about emotion and nothing about common sense and logic. Possible queues at Dover ? employ more customs officers and see if we can pre clear goods at Calais. The government has negotiated exceptionally badly however I voted to leave with no qualification or conditions and still hope to do so.

    Like

  • I have signed a petition to leave the EU with no deal, pleaseif you are an honorable man ( as you portray yourself to be ) then respect the referendum that the majority voted for and uphold democracy

    Like

  • As a constituent of your’s, I voted leave, and maintain that as the only viable option for political accountability. I have no issue with a trade partnership with the EU. But, that is it. We agreed to tariff-free-trade in the first referendum, not a political union. It was inconceivable to the British public. Yet, year after year, treaty after treaty, the EU has eroded our national sovereignty, and used massive amounts of British money to run it’s own propaganda campaign against us. It has ham-strung us with imposed legislation that benefits it. It’s destroyed communities, industries, and devastated social mobility. Labour should be “foaming at the mouth” over the corporatist EU policies, or corporate lobbyists to the EU commission, purchasing power and influence, not urging for more.

    You mention the economy, but do so in a manner that is overly concerned with how this will effect the EU’s economy. You neglect to mention that we deal with them at an immense trade deficit(to the tune of some 68 billion pa.) and that imposing tariffs, whilst not wanted, would generate wealth for Britain. You also neglect to mention that the only reason we joined the EU, wasn’t because it would help prevent war in Europe, it was because we were forced into it by the predatory practices of the ECSC. Where are both our steel and coal coming from today? But, this has happened to virtually all of our national industries. Bought out, moved abroad, or dismantled, to assure control of these industries was coalesced under foreign corporations. Are these the actions of a “good faith” partner? Or are they the actions of a parasitic organisation, happily legislating in favour of asset stripping one economy, to curry favour with corporations of another?

    You are right to say 80% of our economy is in the service or financial sectors. but omit that this was due to the Blairite vision for Britain. That saw nothing relevant or useful outside of large cities. The South and city center commercial districts may do well from EU integration. Do you think this is true for the rest of the country. That communities devastated by the colliery closures of the 80s, and other industries, have been somehow revitalized with their shiny new EU community centre and meaningless funded schemes? No. They were given a lick of paint, a cheap press opportunity, and left to rot with unemployment, crime, and drugs. And your concern is taking “No Deal” off the table? No deal means WTO rules apply. That is 2.5% standard tariff where agreement cannot be reached. Yet, why do remain politicians ignore this fact. Why do they also purport to support free trade when the EU itself has many “ring fenced” goods and services that are forced to pay tariffs of 20% plus? That actually impact the British public more than other EU nations. Does that sound like free trade to Labour? Does it sound fair that: under full adoption of the EU legislation, to produce any sale-able item would require full knowledge and compliance of EU laws and legislation. Thus raising the bar to entry to levels only vast multinationals could possibly afford. Demolishing, small businesses, the cottage industry, and the innovation of the entrepreneurs, to a slow bleeding dry of the UK. If you have more money going out, than is coming in, that is only going to accrue debts you have no way of paying. Who do we borrow from? And when we cannot pay, what do they want in return? That we have only been in this position AFTER joining the EU. Blair was borrowing 160 billion plus pa, to try to plug the shortfall, money that we can never pay back. Only maintain the interest on; and the caveat to that is that we keep borrowing, and desperately try to keep the AAA rating, or we can’t even do that.

    Mr Norris, I take you in good faith, and consider that you went into politics(with Labour) to try to help the average person of Nottingham North. But, please understand that the impact that the EU has on those least able to afford it, is shoring up and paying for those able to benefit from it. It is a scam, that transfers wealth from the poor, and workers, and gives it to wealthy corporation and private individuals, via a middle man in Brussels taking a cut, running their own PR campaign, filtering donations into OUR political parties(again to purchase power, and to create their dependence), in order to subvert our laws, constitution, and economy. These are the voices that voted to leave, although many don’t have the words or data to say it, and so voice other easier to vocalize concerns like immigration, that is a big red herring, and little to do with the EU. Yes, immigration is having an impact on Britain, in some cases it’s very negative, but that isn’t down to the immigrants, it is down to the displacement of labour by migrant workers. Who, in most cases, aren’t immigrants at all. We will always need foreign nationals to fill certain skill gaps, and I completely agree that working and paying taxes should ensure their rights to be that of any law abiding citizen(except in instances where UK citizenship is required, like voting). They should also be given preferential treatment when it comes to requesting permanent residency.

    There is a huge difference between skilled migrant workers, economic migrants, and immigrants, and it disturbs me to see people capitalizing of the conflation of the distinct groups, to muster support for ridiculous ideas. The UN migration compact, that I fundamentally disagree with(again because it is a super-national imposition), the substance of which is deeply flawed, not it’s sentiment, has nothing to do with the EU. I don’t like to see dishonest charlatans, on any side, using this issue to undermine political opponents. Yes, there is a problem with immigration, and with migrant communities refusing to integrate, and with those that dislike those communities for their own reasons(some are valid, some not). To me it boils down to someone’s agreement to become a British citizen, adopting the laws of the land, and for any change, engaging with the political process. Not segregation and otherness. Regardless of ancestry – your British. None of this is due to the EU, and must be disregarded when it comes to legitimate criticism. There is a conversation to be had about the EU adopting policies that not only facilitate people trafficking, but in some cases instigate it. Sometimes under the guise of a noble cause, perverted by self-interest and profit(See Mrs Merkel speaking for Europe, and the deaths attributable to her idiocy, and electioneering).

    No. My issue is with the EU. That, if described, even under it’s own laws, would be considered an illegal Ponzi scheme that we have to reject or become subservient to. Where corporate PACs are allowed to write laws that treat the peoples of Europe as a work force to ensure the cheapest labour. This is a gradually encroaching dystopian future that Labour(if it truly valued people over political manipulation), should be wholeheartedly against. But, seem to support. Why? Even from a socialist or Marxist perspective the EU is antithetical to everything they claim to value. Whether we re-join at some later date, democracy must be upheld. Yes, I am aware of the constitutional illegality of parliament ceding the country to a foreign power/entity, requires a public referendum. That it is beyond the scope of any MP to act on behalf of such an entity- and that no MP stood for office on a platform of requesting Britain be governed by an external entity. Not one. Parliament do not have the legal authority to disband parliament. Anyone doing so is betraying their oath and their constituents. MPs serve at the behest and on behalf of, the people. If any MP feels unable to do so, or considers that there is some other body better suited to do the job, then they must recuse themselves from office, and run on that platform. They are not being paid by the British people to work for a foreign entity. Irregardless of personal ideology, the public have cast their vote and expect parliament to implement their wishes. In such a WTO “no deal” Brexit is leverage, and to start from a point of removing it, doesn’t show “good faith”, it show weakness or incompetence. Do politicians, including yourself, not understand the enormity of the task with which you are charged? Do you not understand the anger that is building quietly in this country? Whereby far right voices are now being listened to, because NO ONE else is even acknowledging their frustration. Instead our politicians are peddling lies and self interested ideologies to try to seem nicer, and more inclusive, and attempt to privilege one group over another, in the name of equality. Are we incapable of having a set of laws that applies to everyone? That we must disadvantage one person to favour another is a perversion of social justice. Raising people up and helping them through understanding and acceptance, is vastly different vilifying and dragging others down. Different religions, races, classes, or groups, shouldn’t make people “less than” or sub-human. Neither should differing political points of view, within a liberal framework. Breaking that social contract within a liberal democracy will not only justify the far right, but create a situation of open rebellion in Britain. Just as the far left creates the far right, by categorizing any dissent as such, with no hope of redemption, and sees itself as a small puritanical elite. So too, does hyper-nationalism, creates ultra-nationalism. If a tiny elite, ostracizes the vast majority, yet is reliant on them for every aspect of their life and safety, would it not be more prudent NOT to gift wrap them to the extremists? If you continually tell every dissenting voice they’re a Nazi; what happens, as is happening now, when they say “ok”. That these words no longer holds any social taboo. Initially, you may as well have been calling them a child molester(that is the level of anger you gave to vast swathes of the country by listening to the far left). They fought the real Nazis and hate them with a passion, and would fight and die for that again. But, the far left’s wealthy, college educated, children chose to insult them out of spite and privilege, beyond a point where simple apology just wont do. If college educated means you run around giving hateful insults, and calling for violence against people they disagree with; who don’t even know why they hate them, or want to destroy their country, and culture – I dare say, they’re not as well educated as they think they are.

    I really hope the far left doesn’t force much more of this enmity into British politics, LARPing as modern day socialist revolutionaries. Wealthy, under-developed, privileged, weak minded, traumatized by harsh words, with some drastic parental issues, are not really the type of people that should be calling for a socialist revolution. They might actually get one. Unfortunately, for the lovely Marxists in charge of Labour, they chose to side with, and prop up these bigots, and illiberal elitists: leaving Labour a long walk home. You are our party. Our only voice against the privileged, that exploited us, and bled us dry. Yet, Labour rejected us in favour the exploitative middle and upper classes. Do you not think the country feels a little betrayed by that. What benefit do you think the average council kid in England gets from Europe. What, here in your constituency in Bulwell, of value, do you think we derive from the EU? Where people cannot afford to even go to Europe on holiday. Because, some rich fake socialists decided to flood the labour market with cheap foreign workers. Causing wages to stagnate for the last 20 years, so now both parents have to work to achieve the same standard of living. Doesn’t sound very socialist does it sir? Because it isn’t. By any metric you care to measure, the poorest in Britain are bearing the brunt of Westminster incompetence and self interest. Labour needs to come back to the people, and not develop policy based on a tiny fringe of extremists, and the eternally outraged twitter elite. Stop all this identitarian nonsense, we are all British and we don’t care if the price of avocados and lattes has to go up, to gain our independence and honest social mobility, that someone can advance themselves through hard work and effort, and not because someone has the desired skin colour or gender. That is the very definition of racism and sexism.

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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