The night before the EU referendum vote, a Major General from the British Army said, “This country desperately needs a clear vision of what it is going to be, and it needs strong leadership to enable it to get there.” How true those words have proven to be!
The referendum divided the nation and ignited passions on both sides. Both sides believed they were correct. Both sides used every technique possible including lying, exaggeration, and bogus statistics to put across their case – something so complex that neither could honestly prove their case. Both sides vowed to support the final decision.
The day after the result, we needed our elected politicians, elected to serve the country as a whole, to come together to face the biggest challenge of most of their careers. Cross-bench collaboration was, and remains, essential.
What did we get? Those who lost and who had so vociferously promoted the value of democracy immediately branded the winners old, uneducated, foolish and misguided. Those who won, gloated, laughed at those who lost, and pretended that this was an easy task.
Just when we needed a clear and inspiring vision for the country, the very Prime Minister who had vowed to implement the decision, resigned. Why? Because he knew that the Civil Service had been advised not to prepare a contingency plan for a “Leave” vote; that there was no clear vision; that there was no plan for execution.
Even prior to the referendum, the UK was in democratic crisis:
- The public at large were frustrated by the failings of the EU.
- Many were frustrated by Westminster. Nearly 13% voted for UKIP to get only 1 parliamentary seat. Yet less than 5% voted SNP and were rewarded with 56 seats.
- Workers across the land had lost their jobs, their children couldn’t get preferred school places, their older children couldn’t get houses, their benefits were cut, they waited weeks for doctor appointments.
What did our politicians produce? 18 months of playground petulance; has-beens scuttling out of the woodwork like cockroaches; and those with massive vested interests fighting a media war with bogus statistics.
The politicians repeatedly state that uncertainty should be avoided. And, yet, they are the very ones who have fuelled the uncertainty. Unfortunately, the Major General was correct, we needed a clear and positive vision and we needed clear leadership to achieve it … and we still do.
A few weeks ago, I would have said, “Those of you who won, stop gloating – get on with creating the Global Britain that you assured us we could have; don’t delay; don’t be pushed around. This really is not about getting us OUT of the EU; it is about building a better Britain. Do it. And for those of you who lost, get over it. This is a democracy and the people voted. If you had won, you would probably be gloating too. Grow up; do your job; work across the aisle and get the best for Britain.” As they all seem incapable of meeting those needs for vision and leadership, I share some suggestions.
First, a vision. I see a vision of a Britain Global Engagement, building on our position as the 5th largest trading nation in the world:
- global because it sees and treats the 190+ other counties in the world all as trading partners;
- global because it has integrated government bodies driving us forward in areas of our specialist expertise such as innovation, engineering, knowledge management, financial services, …
- global because we bring in, welcome, and integrate the very best talent that we need from wherever they are in the world;
- global because we play an appropriate role in global issues such as securing peace via NATO; international intelligence to fight terrorism and cybercrime; CO2 control to fight climate change;
- global because we lead in addressing human rights – not by merely through wasteful aid thrown at reducing symptoms, but by focusing resources and collaboration on solving core problems;
- global because we collaborate with countries who want to work with and trade with us;
- global because we have a parliament with a 21st century mindset that works by collaborating and exploiting the talent it has for the good of the people, rather than using it as stage for individual self-aggrandisement.
That is not about exiting Europe; it is about engaging globally, including within Europe.
Second, leadership. We need someone to lead us now to:
- Take control, calm the nervous and inspire those who want to make this work, and reframe the entire conversation. Forget the negative label, “Brexit.” This is about “British Global Engagement” or BGE;
- Create a new leadership team to manage the negotiations about our cessation of membership. This needs to be a cross-party team with significant representation from politics and British industry. It needs to be diverse, courageous and talented, especially in the fields of international negotiations. It must reflect all voters, not merely those who voted to leave. The action required is to leave but the outcome needs to be the best possible for the country, not merely for the 52%;
- Create a Global British-Trade team to develop a set of principles to underpin and promote future international trade negotiations e.g., if companies or individuals invest in the UK; what are the rules for paying tax; what are the rules for moving money overseas; what are the rules for bringing in talent; what are the rules for outsourcing operations overseas; ….
- and reset the current negotiations!
In part 2, let’s look at some causes of the failings of the current negotiations.
Who does Clinton Wingrove think he is addressing? Given publication in UKIP Daily I presume it is intended for a UKIP readership. In which case he need not bother with Part 2.
I do not recall UKIP lying, exaggeration, and using bogus statistics to put across their case to vote to leave the EU.
I can not recall anyone in UKIP after having won the Referendum gloating, laughed at those who lost, nor pretended that this was an easy task.
As for a vision, while it is not about Europe it is EXACTLY about getting out of the EU, else the vision will be that of the EU. UKIP Campaigned on the slogan “Out of the EU and into the World”: UKIP has had a global vision for years.
As for leadership, we now have a new leader and he is getting on with the job; for instance see the reports of his visits in various parts of the Country. The speed of visible progress it seems to me is primarily to do with the magnitude of the task. UKIP needs another change of leadership like it needs a hole in the head.
Could you please be so kind and wait with your critique for Parts 2 and 3, to be published tomorrow and Wednesday?
Alan, I respect your point of view. We all have a right to one. My points are addressed to all and, yes, many on ALL sides of the argument did those things.
I took a few months off to attend as many meetings representing the various opinions. The simple reality was that the issue was so complex that I doubt anyone knew all the answers and figures were banded around without context or validation, again from those claiming to represent all sides of the argument.
Despite that I strongly supported leaving the EU; I strongly supported UKIP; and, I still do.
However, the fact remains that we have experienced 18 months of squabbling and little real progress – in fact, I fear we are in reverse gear. The “Remainers” are far more active than we are and negative messages merely fuel their case. That is why they use labelling as one of their techniques.
I am unashamedly pro leaving the but I am even more pro a Global Engagement vision; more pro focusing on what needs to be done than on whose fault any of the ills are.
Re the issue of Leadership. Yes, we have a new leader and he needs our support. However, the urgency for clear leadership outside of the confines of meetings with the converted has never been greater.
Please feel free not to read Part 2 and Part 3. But, I hope you do and that we can have a continued intelligent debate about how we ensure what we clearly both want to achieve.
Thinking UKIP.
For a couple of years now I’ve been trying to Promote “an after Brexit policy “. I’ve even sent up proposed leaflets on the subject. They go up the chain and disappear. Will this continue?
I believe that it is only this uncertainty, and the apparent inability of UKIP to even imagine what should happen, and what might happen, that stops ordinary voters from frightening our obviously incompetant pollyyuks of all kinds into a more comprehensive deal.
She doesn’t know, so she puts the decision off.
PS.
Surely someone could put together a project to look at each sector ( Including that of politics and public service which makes up more than 60 % of all sectors )and summarise. eg.
SUMMARY TABLE OF EFFECT OF LEAVING
Sector…+ (or -)…Reason…Action…Notes……..
effect to take
Fishing + £bn6 Left EU Leave CFP ASAP See Hookem
I only know some things, and I’m by no means an expert ( Shudder ). But I’m sure every sector has acknowkedged experts in all. Give the job to David Allen rather than wasting his time on potentially damaging activities only being pursued by the politically ambitious.
A good article Clinton. Someone please forward to UKIP HQ. A vision is the key to leadership, which, when clearly communicated, build trust in the team that they will be successful, which gives them hope. Currently we lack a vision, trust or hope in the UK Govt and this is done by design. There was no Plan B for Brexit as they were never going to lose (big surprise)and if they did it would allow time for delay and prevarication to enable the EU to attack and weaken the process. There was no plan or strategy behind BoJo’s sham Brexit campaign. Now we have a caste of well-paid thousands, alledgedly intelligent and experienced people, agreeing to whatever the EU wants over as many years as the EU wants. This is not an accident, but rather a spectacular betrayal.
Incompetence? No, just more sick devious treachery on the part of the political class and their globalist, financial supporters.
Indeed, perceived incompetence is what they hide behind.
The reason that May took so long in getting started on Brexit was that it took her and the Remainers in the Conservative Party and the whole political class some time to work out how to keep Britain in the EU whilst appearing to be involved in the process of leaving. Hence the ‘thrown’ election, the Irish ‘problem’, the transitional period and Corbyn waiting to take over in 2021.
I have stated on here before that Michael Shrimpton QC writing on veteranstoday stated that Junker ordered May to call the snap election…which she then did her very best to lose…
I fear there may be other reasons why she delayed triggering Brexit. She and Fallon were very busy for months tying us into the EU militarily See
Ukcolumn.org
Did she delay triggering Brexit so Merkel’s troops, now being trained to put down dissent in a specially built European town, complete with bridge and river, could be called in when we do not exit in March 2019?
Fanciful?
Maybe…but read “Germany and NATO: towards martial law and fascist repression in Europe?” And follow the links…
And, if you read the Europrobe listing for “What is Corpus Juris?” She clearly indicated in 2012 she would be happy calling in the Gendarmerie.
Deutsche Bank have issued their predictions for next year…See zerohedge.
The possibility of reversing Brexit is given, as well as a new government in the UK.
My gut feeling has always been the EU will not allow us to leave…our politicians from the major parties work for Brussels not the British electorate
We need to be ready for a more intensive campaign from Blair, Clegg and co to reverse Brexit…is UKIP ready to fight another election?
Time to ditch Northern Ireland (they voted to stay in the EU, anyway) and stop being blackmailed by the ‘border problem’: http://freenations.net/mays-irish-myth-blows-up-brexit/