Friday, 11 January 2019

If I were an MP ...


I have never harboured any ambitions to be an MP, but if I were one today, this is the speech I would make:

‘Mr Speaker, our country stands at a crossroads – and it falls to us, the members of this House of Commons, to make a decision whose consequences will be felt by generations to come. Are we to take the path that offers us a genuinely better future, at peace with ourselves and our neighbours, or are we to continue to tear ourselves apart, obsessed with petty differences and ignoring what unites us: our common humanity, our love for our families, and our hopes for the futures of our children and grandchildren?

‘Let us look at ourselves in the mirror and be honest with ourselves. We have failed our fellow citizens. A decade ago, they watched – terrified – as the world’s entire financial system teetered on the abyss, due in large part to our unfounded belief that banks and bankers could be trusted to operate responsibly without adequate regulation or supervision.

‘And what did we do in response? Yes, we saved the banks and the bankers, but we squeezed public spending, froze incomes and slashed local council budgets. Our libraries closed, our Sure Start centres were shuttered, and our schools could no longer afford to buy books. Mr Speaker, we did that, and our fellow citizens noticed. They noticed that we were ignoring them – and they remembered.

‘We failed them, Mr Speaker. And unless we are very careful, we are about to fail them again. We will fail our fellow citizens if we approve a Brexit deal that we know will leave them worse off. We will fail our fellow citizens if we allow this government – this pathetic excuse for a government that offers a multi-million pound contract to a ferry company that owns no ferries and then can’t even organise a fake traffic jam – to take our country to a so-called “no deal” Brexit.

‘Mr Speaker, many members of this House will, I am sure, have watched this week’s television drama called Brexit: The Uncivil War. In it, one of the characters described what he called a new, toxic political culture in which no one listens to each other, they just yell. His fear, he said, was that we can’t close the box once it has been opened, and that this is the new politics.

‘We must prove him wrong, Mr Speaker. We must prove him wrong because we remember Jo Cox, the former member for Batley and Spen, who was brutally murdered on the streets of her own constituency. We must prove him wrong because we have seen the disgraceful scenes outside this very House, as Members are harassed, insulted and intimidated by thugs. And we must prove him wrong by changing our own behaviour. “No one listens; they just yell.” What a perfect description that is of what, too often, this House has become.

‘We can be better than this. We must be better. Better than a country in which the 85-year-old mother of a member of this House is sent a letter warning: “We know where you are. Look out for yourself.” Better than a country in which another member of this House was sent two and a half thousand anti-semitic messages in just three days. Better than a country in which yet another member of this House was sent six hundred rape and death threats in a single evening. And yes, all the recipients of those disgusting threats were women.

‘Mr Speaker, I do not say for one moment that everyone who voted Leave is a misogynist, a racist or a bigot. I do say, however, that the Brexit referendum has revealed the ugliest underbelly of our society; that it has encouraged the expression of the foulest prejudices; and that it has empowered those who hate and seek to spread hatred.

‘Two and half years ago, more than 17 million people voted for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. They represented 52 per cent of those who voted, but only 37 per cent of the total electorate. Voters under the age of 25 – the voters who, let us not forget, represent this country’s future – chose overwhelming for the UK to remain in the EU. In Scotland and northern Ireland, there were pro-Remain majorities.

‘We, as elected representatives, must now find a way to reconcile our differences. We must be honest, with ourselves and with our fellow citizens. We must have courage. We must put aside considerations of narrow party advantage and do what we honestly believe is best for those who elected us. Mr Speaker, I do not pretend that it will be easy. But it can be done – and it must be done.

‘First, we must say to this appalling apology for a government that its time is up. We must, at the earliest opportunity, express this House’s lack of confidence in it and force it out of office. It is the duty of Conservative as well as of opposition members to do what they know must be done. And it is the duty of the Leader of the Opposition to face up to his responsibilities by tabling an immediate vote of no confidence. The country has had enough of parliamentary game-playing.

‘Second, the prime minister must acknowledge that she has failed, and stand aside as leader of her party. Her continued refusal to do so brings shame not only on her, but on her party and on her country. Mr Speaker, we are told that she has a deep sense of duty – so I say to her now: Your duty is clear. Your duty is to quit.

‘Third, the Labour party must finally take a clear, unequivocal position on the gravest issue to have faced our nation since the end of the Second World War. It should campaign for what has become known variously as ‘Common Market 2.0’ or ‘Norway Plus’. It should state clearly that it accepts that the UK will leave the EU. That under a Labour government, the referendum result would be honoured. But that the UK would remain in the European Economic Area by joining the European Free Trade Association.

‘Mr Speaker, let me quote Lucy Powell, the Labour member for Manchester Central. “Common Market 2.0 offers real frictionless trade through full single market access and a new customs union. It would guarantee workers’ rights as part of common market membership; provide new controls over free movement in certain, extreme circumstances, when our government deems it necessary; allows more money for public services as our contributions to Common Market 2.0 would be significantly lower than to the EU, in fact about half, and gives us a voice over the regulations that govern the Single Market.”

‘In other words, Mr Speaker, the circle can be squared. The UK will leave the EU, but it will protect its economic future by retaining full single market access and joining a new customs union. It will regain at least partial control over immigration from our European partner states, and workers’ rights will continue to be protected.

‘I acknowledge that there would still be problems to overcome. But I would remind members that the Norwegian prime minister is on record as saying that her government will help to find solutions to those problems if the UK seeks to join the European Free Trade Association.

‘Mr Speaker, this is about so much more than whether we leave the EU, important though that is. This is about who we are, and who we want to be. It is not merely about limiting damage. It is about rebuilding a fractured union. A union in which everyone feels they have a role to play and can make a contribution that will be valued. Whether they live in Stockport or Stockwell; Boston or Brighton, Motherwell or Muswell Hill. Whether their parents were born in Mogadishu or Mumbai, Kandahar or Kinshasa; Nouakchott or N’Djamena.

‘Over the past few days, members of this House have shown that they can – if I may use the phrase – take back control. So let us put this dismal chapter behind us. Let us lift our gaze and work for a better future. A better Britain in a better Europe. Mr Speaker, we can do it. We must do it. It is our duty to do it.’

(Author’s note: if you’d like to hear an MP actually deliver this speech, or something like it, by all means send it to your own MP with my compliments.)




3 comments:

Tinkersdamn said...

Ahh, maybe the conviction politician you've been looking for was nearer than you knew.

Anonymous said...

I agree with much of what you say, Robin, but not the last bit. Sorry. The box certainly was opened but what came out will neither go back in nor be forgotten, either by those who voted to Remain or by the onlookers across the world.

Taking back control is one thing but many of those at the forefront of Brexit have shown themselves quite clearly to be liars, some backstabbers, some who put personal greed in front of everything, and some who put their business interests in front of everything. We are also aware that this government has shown time and again over the past couple of years that they would be incapable of organising the proverbial in a brewery. So how could you - or we - trust them to take this country into anything not clearly laid out?

In September 2018 our PM told the Bloomberg Global Business Forum in the US "Whatever your business, investing in a post-Brexit Britain will give you the lowest rate of Corporation Tax in the G20." In January 2019, the EU brought in its new tax laws intended to at least begin the attack on the tax evasion enjoyed by global businesses in recent years. Fighting these new laws within the EU were MEPs from the Conservatives, UKIP and Ireland. Surprise, surprise. And how much of this was widely circulated by our media? Ha, ha, ha.

Personally, I would rather have listed by the PM herself the agreed terms under which the UK could leave the EU, and then go back to the people and ask them again - Leave under these terms or Remain. If it is indeed the People's Choice then let's base it on knowledge of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Anonymous said...

Excellent speech, Robin, I'd vote for you

However, I'm not convinced we need Norway Plus when we've currently got an arrangement that works well enough (but not perfectly). I appreciate that half the population would disagree, but 2 1/2 years later we still haven't seen a clear proposal for any alternative, just disgraceful posturing & shouting. In fact, having spoken to many people about Brexit, I haven't yet heard a single logical reason for leaving, apart from the tired meaningless & inaccurate phrase "take back control"

But, this is just chewing the fat (no offence to anyone here!)

The reality is that the PM's signed a piece of paper with the "intention" (that's what it says) of leaving the EU. We cannot extend it as it takes 27 countries to agree or abstain if we want to extend. Those countries include Poland, Hungary, Italy & Spain - none of which will want us to Remain, for various political reasons. Just not going to happen.

So, a new plan would require us to withdraw that intention, to buy time. That could happen, but I can't see anyone wanting another 2 years of faffing about trying to come to agreement on the thousands of details, yet again

So, if we go ahead with leaving - both plans have little support amongst our political decision makers, even with the Whips working hard

Pragmatically, I don't think it'll matter whether Corbyn becomes PM. Tuesday's vote will go against the govt. There may or may not be a GE. Corbyn may or may not become PM (until ousted by one of several more intelligent & pragmatic Labour MPs)

The elected representatives will take back control from the extremists (Corbyn is no better than JRM), and the residual problem will be damage limitation

It's not nice, but that's my forecast

JW