Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

I can't see any substantial gain (as in, practical advantage to some people) apart from two:
1. Dirty Europeans can be kept out.

2. No more EU slowing down things with competition laws and such.

I am fairly certain number 2 is what bugged the wealthy people sponsoring the leave side. Sure they will tell you it's because we lost sovereignty due to the EU courts being able to suggest you do something a certain way, but like in any other case that is bullshit. Practical/material interest (real or perceived) gives birth to ideology, not the other way around.

The rich who disagree with me vote in their dastardly material/practical advantages; the poor who disagree with me vote because they're duped by ideology/the rich

[Josquius]

In this case : yes.
It's pretty undeniable that misinformation was a huge part of swaying a lot of poorer people to vote leave.

[Tamas]

I can't see any substantial gain (as in, practical advantage to some people) apart from two:
1. Dirty Europeans can be kept out.

2. No more EU slowing down things with competition laws and such.

I am fairly certain number 2 is what bugged the wealthy people sponsoring the leave side. Sure they will tell you it's because we lost sovereignty due to the EU courts being able to suggest you do something a certain way, but like in any other case that is bullshit. Practical/material interest (real or perceived) gives birth to ideology, not the other way around.

The rich who disagree with me vote in their dastardly material/practical advantages; the poor who disagree with me vote because they're duped by ideology/the rich

EU membership was my own material/practical advantage. if that helps. It was for most everyone.

Do you really, honestly believe the Leave campaign, especially considering the kind of characters behind it, was driven and especially sponsored by and because a genuine political philosophy debate? That the UK was a lesser entity because of the membership, and it is now a more "whole" entity?

[Sheilbh]

EU membership was my own material/practical advantage. if that helps. It was for most everyone.

But how do you square that with believe ideology doesn't matter and it's material circumstances that do? This is the point I always think - as a Remainer - is that we weren't able to convince people in 2016 and despite most people now thinking that Brexit was a mistake and despite many of the problems that we warned about coming true, we've failed to convince enough people to make a change. We failed to make people do what was, in my view, in their best interests and I think we need to go deeper to understand why.

My take away from that is that there should be some introspection in how Remainers campaigned, how they've argued in the last 4 years and why we've failed rather than just saying we were virtuous but overwhelmed by a coalition of the stupid and the corrupt. And a big part of it is that is what happened on the mainstream left in the last decade.

Do you really, honestly believe the Leave campaign, especially considering the kind of characters behind it, was driven and especially sponsored by and because a genuine political philosophy debate? That the UK was a lesser entity because of the membership, and it is now a more "whole" entity?

Yes - with the exception of Boris who I think is just an opportunist who saw a chance and took it. For the rest, the people who drove the Leave campaign have been eccentrics/hobbyists on the fringes of British politics for the best part of 40 years. I think if they were really just interested in their or their "clients" material interests then they'd look more like David Cameron, Tony Blair and George Osborne (and like them, earn a few hundred k a year for attending the odd board meeting at JP Morgan, or Blackrock to offer "strategic" advice).

But I think they were genuinely motivated by generally a libertarian or socialist objection to the EU as an illegitimate and undemocratic body that would fetter their ability to radically reform the UK's economy and that the UK needed to radically reform its economy in one way or the other. For what it's worth I think this time (unlike in the 1975) most the of the leaders were on the libertarian fringe, but the voters were on the socialist side. And on the other hand (despite the JP Morgan and Blackrock jobs ), I think most remainers were genuinely motivated by a view that the UK's economy didn't need such radical reform that the EU would get in the way and that it would be in the UK's best interests (and amplify British influence) to stay in the EU. I don't think either side was making a corrupt bargain.

[Tamas]

But how do you square that with believe ideology doesn't matter and it's material circumstances that do? This is the point I always think - as a Remainer - is that we weren't able to convince people in 2016 and despite most people now thinking that Brexit was a mistake and despite many of the problems that we warned about coming true, we've failed to convince enough people to make a change. We failed to make people do what was, in my view, in their best interests and I think we need to go deeper to understand why.

How? Extremely easily. As I mentioned earlier, I have yet to talk or indirectly hear (as in, a friend of family member of somebody I talked to) of a Leave voter who did not vote so because if immigration - they perceived it as disadvantageous/unnerving for themselves and voted accordingly. That they are likely to see more and not less immigration because of this ultimately, is a comforting schadenfreude I now have.

Obviously the Remain campaign could have done better (especially in hindsight) but it was in a grave disadvantage from the start (again, in hindsight): an actual real thing (the status quo) competed with a promise of everything changing for the better.

I'll accept your take that the leaders of Leave were honest enthusiasts of political philosophy because you for sure know much more about them. I base my impression on Johnson, who is an opportunist prick, Farage who to his credit was consistently and long-term on this bandwagon but still an absolute deplorable dickhead, and Dyson who made a deep impression on me when he was interviewed on TV and when asked about being worried about British exporters potentially becoming hit by strict EU tariffs he said: "80% of my exports are outside of the EU why would I be worried?".

[Sheilbh]

How? Extremely easily. As I mentioned earlier, I have yet to talk or indirectly hear (as in, a friend of family member of somebody I talked to) of a Leave voter who did not vote so because if immigration - they perceived it as disadvantageous/unnerving for themselves and voted accordingly. That they are likely to see more and not less immigration because of this ultimately, is a comforting schadenfreude I now have.

Immigration was key - but there is polling on this that actually the UK is now far more pro-immigration than it was 10 years ago and this has been a long term shift that didn't just start with the referendum - so I think we will actually see more immigration which is good.

Obviously the Remain campaign could have done better (especially in hindsight) but it was in a grave disadvantage from the start (again, in hindsight): an actual real thing (the status quo) competed with a promise of everything changing for the better.

Yes but this is true in every campaign. All political campaigns boil down to "more of the same" v "it's time for a change". I still think there's been not enough understanding on the remain side of why voters rejected more of the same, in particular (and fishing is an example of this) that there is more to being a country than a spreadsheet of economic figures on an aggregate level. There were many mistakes but what I find most disheartening is that there's been no change in four years.

On pro-EU social media it's always "this broken promise" or "this economic stat" is going to change people's minds when the last 100 haven't instead of wondering about what other messages might work - it's all very General Melchett "one more push". It feels like the things pro-EU people like to tell each other ("they're all being lied to", "this is an economic catastrophe") don't carry with the other side. It reminds me of Labour - it's self-indulgent politics about feeling good and reassuring yourself and your friends not winning.

I'll accept your take that the leaders of Leave were honest enthusiasts of political philosophy because you for sure know much more about them. I base my impression on Johnson, who is an opportunist prick, Farage who to his credit was consistently and long-term on this bandwagon but still an absolute deplorable dickhead, and Dyson who made a deep impression on me when he was interviewed on TV and when asked about being worried about British exporters potentially becoming hit by strict EU tariffs he said: "80% of my exports are outside of the EU why would I be worried?".

Being a Brexiteer in the Tory or Labour Party up to 2016 was a seriously career limiting move - not least because chances are you will have to rebel. This was something Cameron got wrong but there were new European treaties to vote on under Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown. If you want to leave there is no room for you in the Cabinet. So either they were playing an extraordinarily long game - in the case of, say, Bill Cash or Peter Bone a 30 year long game - or they really believe it.

[Zanza]

As far as I am aware, there are no concrete examples for regulatory divergence the UK plans. Will be interesting what they actually have in mind. The only divergence so far is that there is no longer mutual recognition, which means more certification effort for business as they have to certify twice, once in the EU, once in the UK.

Or maybe I am just not aware of the planned divergence?

[Zanza]

Like Iormlund, I work in automotive. So far there are two standards for automotive homologation - US and EU.

The East Asians are fairly close to the EU standards, but of course China is the biggest market in the world, so they do diverge. Not necessarily in homologation, but car software is different for example.

Adding a special UK homologation which differs from US or EU homologation will mean two things: cars will be more expensive for British consumers (more red tape) and there will be less choice (might not be worth it for niche models). Hardly beneficial.

Might be different in other areas where I have no expertise.

[Josquius]

Being a Brexiteer in the Tory or Labour Party up to 2016 was a seriously career limiting move - not least because chances are you will have to rebel. This was something Cameron got wrong but there were new European treaties to vote on under Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown. If you want to leave there is no room for you in the Cabinet. So either they were playing an extraordinarily long game - in the case of, say, Bill Cash or Peter Bone a 30 year long game - or they really believe it.

Not so sure there pre Cameron in the tories. It was a pretty small period of history when the brexiters were pushed aside.
A big part of the tories being so out of power during blairs years was their obsession with Europe. Let's not forget the amount of political capital they burned in the 90s trying to stop the working time directive.

[Sheilbh]

As far as I am aware, there are no concrete examples for regulatory divergence the UK plans. Will be interesting what they actually have in mind. The only divergence so far is that there is no longer mutual recognition, which means more certification effort for business as they have to certify twice, once in the EU, once in the UK.

Or maybe I am just not aware of the planned divergence?

I'm not aware of any plans at this stage. There's been suggestions they might look at some parts of data regulation and they have published a National Data Strategy but that's mainly about non-peronal data and largely about moving to open data as much as possible and sharing between government departments more efficiently. From what I've read, though the divergence seems to be more about providing certifications and codes of practice and giving companies confidence that those are presumed to be compliant, rather than material divergence on the actual law.

Like Iormlund, I work in automotive. So far there are two standards for automotive homologation - US and EU.

The East Asians are fairly close to the EU standards, but of course China is the biggest market in the world, so they do diverge. Not necessarily in homologation, but car software is different for example.

Adding a special UK homologation which differs from US or EU homologation will mean two things: cars will be more expensive for British consumers (more red tape) and there will be less choice (might not be worth it for niche models). Hardly beneficial.

Might be different in other areas where I have no expertise.

I'd expect the UK to stay fairly close to EU standards on this and other stuff. I suppose this could be another reason they focused on goods only - align on goods which are a small part of our economy and diverge on services which are larger but also where the single market is less developed?

The areas I know from work are things like IP, payments services, open banking and data. Those are areas where the EU doesn't really have standards - it publishes a law and you then have European guidance and national/member state guidance to help interpret the law and implement it. But there's lots of time (and money) spent trying to understand what is meant by, for example "appropriate security" which is the legal requirement. I can definitely see space for divergence in this area either by making the European regulations a bit more like UK regulations (which tend to be a lot more precise and detailed) or even just by regulating what you can and can't do in new sectors like e-privacy or AI. Because that certainty in itself may be helpful.

[Sheilbh]

Not so sure there pre Cameron in the tories. It was a pretty small period of history when the brexiters were pushed aside.
A big part of the tories being so out of power during blairs years was their obsession with Europe. Let's not forget the amount of political capital they burned in the 90s trying to stop the working time directive.

The Tories were definitely Eurosceptic after Maastricht but out-and-out Brexiters were pretty rare it was a niche opinion that you didn't utter publicly. Even Iain Duncan-Smith when he was leader supported staying in the EU but reforming it (a la Cameron) - and Cameron ran as the more Eurosceptic candidate than David Davis

And they did, to nick Cameron's phrase, "bang on about Europe" but that was to keep the UK out of the Euro (which they hilariously take credit for, as if Gordon Brown and Ed Balls were nothing ) or for a referendum on the Constitution/Lisbon Treaty. Leaving was a very niche taste.

[Sheilbh]

So Politico asked politicians and folks round Westminster a light-hearted question about what got them through 2020 and Priti Patel did not get the memo

DRIVING THE SLEIGH

MERRY CHRISTMAS: There is a frankly unacceptable amount of news for a Christmas morning, but you'll have to scroll down a bit further for that. Since it's been a stinker of a year, Playbook thought he'd ask some of those whose names crop up most in this email how they managed to get through the last 12 months. Here's your Westminster guide to surviving lockdowns, tiers and all the rest from some of Playbook's readers. In the meantime, have a great Christmas Day and let's hope, as someone once almost said, that 2021 really is a fantastic year for Britain.

Boris Johnson, prime minister: "Carrie and I have been getting through lockdown by going on walks with Dilyn and spending weekends reading to Wilf."

Keir Starmer, Labour leader: "It sounds obvious but it is my family who have helped me through this year — and one of the very few upsides of lockdown has been being able to spend more time with the kids. One of the moments that stands out to me was a brilliant care home I visited in Letchworth over the summer. During the first wave, the staff stuck by their residents throughout and even turned down the opportunity to leave and work elsewhere. It's those extraordinary acts of selflessness and determination that have been so inspiring throughout 2020 — and it is what will take us through another challenging year ahead."

Nigella Lawson, Christmas hero: "I'm not sure how I'd have got through this year without having a book to write. It kept me company, and gave me a happy focus. I felt — and feel — extraordinarily lucky to have work, when everything was so dismal on that front for most of my friends, and so, so many other people out there. Perhaps odder was that I took up (online) weight-training: it got me up in the mornings and kept me (relatively) sane!"

Rishi Sunak, chancellor: "A piece of homemade cake every day at 4 p.m. (thank you Lisa!)"

Sophy Ridge, Sky News presenter: "The one thing that has got me through 2020 is parks — I genuinely don't know how I would have coped without them. The return of football also helped — even if watching my team Sheffield Wednesday hasn't exactly done much to cheer me up lately."

Anneliese Dodds, shadow chancellor: "At the start, PE with Joe. No really. Although by the end it was only the adults doing it and the kids laughing at us. Latterly, realising it's possible to run in the dark without breaking any limbs (so far). And as always, Dance Anthems on Saturday afternoons."

Michael Gove, Cabinet Office minister: "Tea, toast, Marmite and Take That on Spotify."

Matt Hancock, health secretary: "The thing that's kept me going is support from members of the public and the ties that some have kept sending in. I like pink!"

Janine Gibson, FT assistant editor: "The equal parts true-and-tragic answer is that one of my oldest friends started a Zoom bridge game. From scraping around to make a four at the beginning, at our peak we played 10 hours a week and last Sunday had nine people on at once. Basically, we're building back bridge. Wait, you're not putting this in Playbook are you Alex?"

Ed Miliband, shadow business and energy secretary: "Outdoor cold water swimming has been a revelation of 2020. I shall hopefully be doing it on my birthday (Christmas Eve) and Christmas Day."

Liz Truss, international trade secretary: "Deliveroo of Bleecker burger, and espresso during long trade negotiation video conferences and phone calls. With red wine to unwind."

Sajid Javid, former chancellor: "Only getting dressed from the waist up."

Kate McCann, Sky News political correspondent: "Kittens! Not being a cat person I was a bit shocked when a stray had her babies in my garden during the first lockdown, but as well as a few sleepless nights and lots of cleaning up she also gave me something to keep me going through 2020 — two new furry buddies who make staying home much more fun."

Jacob Rees-Mogg, leader of the House of Commons: "Lockdown was considerably helped by the Downton Abbey cocktail book which my children gave me for Christmas last year. Helena and I, not the children, dutifully worked our way through it."

Emily Thornberry, shadow international trade secretary: "Gin, cycling and compulsive decluttering most evenings and weekends. And just burying myself in constituency and departmental work during the days. I've been a complete pest to the civil servants in the Department of Trade with PQs, letters and FOI requests, but I did send them Christmas chocolates to apologise."

Tim Shipman, Sunday Times political editor: "Barbera d'Alba and not having to write about Brexit every bloody week. And my daughter, now 22 months, who reminds me every day that there are more important things than politics — like hiding my credit cards or unrolling toilet paper."

Angela Rayner, deputy Labour leader: "A well-stocked spirits cupboard, a worryingly expensive takeaway habit and the knowledge that our NHS is the greatest institution in the world and our NHS and social care staff are the very best people on Earth."

Allegra Stratton, Downing Street press secretary: "Sudoku and the piano. You can't doomscroll while doing either of them. And both turn out to be just about possible with a small child on your lap. The other thing is tapestry: I now sew while watching the 10 p.m. news. Essentially — I've got through 2020 by using my hands differently."

Sadiq Khan, mayor of London: "Walking my dog Luna on Tooting Common, playing five-a-side with my mates (when it was allowed!), the return of the Premier League and Liverpool's promising start to their title defence have all helped me to get through 2020. But above all else, I've drawn strength this year from the kindness, compassion and courage of fellow Londoners who have refused to walk by on the other side and instead gone above and beyond to save lives and care for the most vulnerable in our communities. Their selfless actions are rays of light helping our city and our country through a very dark time, and giving us all hope of a brighter future."

Steve Swinford, soon-to-be Times political editor: "Our three-year-old daughter Cora who was completely and wonderfully oblivious to the pandemic. Memories of lockdown include fielding calls from a Cabinet minister in the park during her toilet training and her shouting at the TV downstairs when she saw me asking questions during press conferences. Being three seems to me about as glorious as it gets and she has proved an amazing tonic in such a difficult year."

Robert Peston, ITV political editor: "My bicycle — and the wonderful people I love."

Priti Patel, home secretary: "Showing the perpetrators of crime that they have nowhere to hide and joining our police on early morning raids — reminding the criminals that we're coming after them. Supporting our front line and watching them keeping us safe has been humbling. They are real heroes."

Harry Cole, Sun political editor: "Learning to drive is the only New Year's resolution I've ever kept and via many lockdowns and canceled tests I finally got there. Third time lucky ... And one day the DVSA might actually send me a licence."

Andrew Neil, chairman of the Spectator: "Ms Molly, Mr Junior and Iris Bailey (aka Scrubber) helped us more than anything through lockdowns. Our two retrievers and our little rescue dog from the streets of Bucharest were our constant companions, made sure our house was always a home and gave us no excuse not to take long walks. To begin with they relished our company too — but I suspect they're now a little bit bored with us. Especially Iris Bailey."

Ben Nunn, Keir Starmer's director of communications: "I've got through 2020 thanks to my dog, beer and Nando's deliveries."

Pippa Crerar, Mirror political editor: "I've become as partial to Zoom drinks, long walks and chatting to the neighbours as the next person. We even got ourselves lockdown pets. But it's work and family that have really kept me going. Journalism has never felt as important as it has this year. And while, like everyone, we've had some bleak days, there's nothing like kids to help you see the brighter side of life. Happy Christmas!"

Lucia Hodgson, Ministry of Defense SpAd (whose last day was yesterday): "The thought of future adventures and a lockdown 2.0 cat."

Jim Pickard, FT chief political correspondent: "I went from the occasional half-arsed run pre-lockdown to regular rapid stress-busting runs along the River Thames, sometimes in the dark, although the joy was sometimes punctured by having to stop to take lengthy phone calls from rigorous news editors."

David Lammy, shadow justice secretary: "My 6-year-old daughter and my new cavachon puppy Silver. Six is just the perfect, cutest, most loving age and a puppy can't help but make you smile. Between them they have made lockdown more joyous and wondrous for my wife and I!"

Alberto Nardelli, Bloomberg's Europe correspondent-at-large: "Guanciale. The king of ingredients. No problem can't be solved by a decent carbonara. No cream. Egg yolk raw."

Marina Hyde, Guardian columnist: "The thing that got me through 2020 was being extremely lucky, and having an extremely enormous amount of things to write about."

Emma Barnett, BBC broadcaster: "My colleagues — thank goodness for their warmth, wit and cleverness as we moved from only talking about Brexit to only talking COVID. Oh and tea. Gallons of it. While reading this indispensable email."

Seb Payne, FT Whitehall correspondent: "Rediscovering photography. I've been using a film camera since the age of six, but fell out of the habit due to smartphones. This snap of Lord Hennessy in his garden is my favourite of the year. That and Australian wine. My wife Soph is something of a connoisseur so we've survived on a stream of home deliveries."

[Richard Hakluyt]

She is comically horrible 

To be fair the Home Office seems to have that effect on people, she is just the worst case in recent years.

[Zanza]

Agreed - I think the big risk for the EU is if this appears to be a success. Either because the expectations of the consequences were extreme and unrealistic (a real project fear) v the reality which is that we are likely to slowly become poorer, or because the UK does better relatively than certain other countries. I think it's a big risk for France and Italy's domestic politics where there is a more souverainiste/anti-European sentiment - plus reasonably successful parties like the Lega or RN who might exploit any perceived "success" of Brexit. If, in 5-10 years time, Brexit is viewed as not that bad or even a success in France or Italy I would keep an eye on their elections (especially v someone like Macron or a flabby party like the PD).

We cannot predict the future, but I would expect that if another country leaves or has a relevant debate about it, it will be less about perceived success of Brexit and more about domestic policies. If Brexit has shown one thing it is that the abstract economic arguments have very little sway about emotional voters. Brexit was supported because of xenophobia and lack of chances in poorer areas of the UK with the EU being the scapegoat. The sovereignty argument also appeals to basic feelings of the voters. That's something that can happen elsewhere, especially the sovereignty argument. A measurable or immeasurable success of Brexit will at best be a minor additional argument.

[Iormlund]

I still think there's been not enough understanding on the remain side of why voters rejected more of the same, in particular (and fishing is an example of this) that there is more to being a country than a spreadsheet of economic figures on an aggregate level. There were many mistakes but what I find most disheartening is that there's been no change in four years.

Not at all. There has been worldwide understanding of what happened both during Brexit and Trump's election. And politicians all over have taken notice. But the lesson is not "we must take care of people or voted out". It is "Holy shit! we can make people believe anything we want".

The only thing that matters is narrative. That's the lesson politicians have learnt. You can see that clearly in Spain, for example.