Brexit - My Take

The Conservative Party was unable to resolve the rift between the two fractions sheltering under its collective banner. There were those looking back wanting to relive the Empire glory days and those looking forward to Europe to grow a new future for Britain. The solution they came up with to re-unite the Conservative Party was a referendum. As this was more to do about patching over the divisions within the single party state than determining Britain's future there was no need for finesse. So a simple  question having a yes/no answer with no minimum threshold was sufficient. As it turned out the country at large reflected the single party state, divided, more or less down the middle. Not a clear cut majority, some parts of the country more or less in favour than other parts. Technically the vote count gave victory to the Brexit, but a victory over a very divided country without a clear ground swell of opinion. The yes/no question was stripped down to its most simplistic, leave or stay. Stripped of any suggestion of complications, consequences or hard choices between conflicting aspirations. Simple, just leave or stay.

Disappointingly the campaigns leading up to the referendum presented either a cake or a pie. The cake option was promoted with fulsome promises of wonderful slices to be enjoyed. The pie option challenged some of the cake slice toppings but did not promote the pie as a better, healthier and more sustainable offering. Worst of all, no one stood up and said hurrah for Europe, with Europe we can be stronger and within Europe we can make change happen to strengthen the pie we want to work with. So the cake with all its tempting deliciousness won. The tragic irony is that this win did not meld the Conservative Party. The referendum turned out to be an empty gesture. The split within the single party state has grown worse if anything, with the PM frantically trying to apply sticking plaster over the increasing rifts. Even the £1B bribe to the NI DUP party has failed to secure her a safe voting base. Britain of course is now stuck with the win/not win referendum outcome. Only now is a degree of clarity emerging about how pitiful the slices out of the cake may well turn out to be. That cake that was held up to be so luxurious and unctuous is turning out to be frugal snack and the pie that was scorned offers to be far more substantial.

One of the more attractive slices of cake offered is for Britain to shake free the EU shackles and sign up free trade deals with the rest of the World. I hear it often quoted that Britain has the fifth largest economy in the world. An economy that can only sustains the illusion of prosperity by building ever more houses for investment. Note, not homes for those unable to get on the housing ladder with their 1.8 children (50% in single parent families), just 4-5 executive houses as investment sinkholes wherever the returns are at their greatest. An economy that, according to a UN report is in breach of its Human Rights requirements for many of its underprivileged classes. An economy that is unable to complete the fitout of the second, let along the third of its new largest aircraft carrier and cannot afford to purchase the planes to fly off them. From this sceptred isle we appear to think the Worlds big trading Nations are queuing up to rush and complete amicable trading agreements with us. USofA cannot wait to dump all their surplus produce on us, produce made without restrictions of all those irksome animal welfare concerns or consequential environmental damage. Or China, the unproclaimed leader of the World that has hoovered up the rights to all the rarer elements in this planet is not going to be bothered about any petty limits, or exchange terms we might waft at them. Is it only me that can get real? Or do you all share a scepticism that the World is not panting to do free trade deals with us. Our importance as a world trading nation are over together with the Empire that first sustained it. 

No, our strength now lies with our close neighbours across the channel. Those neighbours that we share so much history, culture and expectations with. Working together we, the combined nations, can be a world force to reckoned with, a force that can require its terms to be heeded. That can make a stand and demand progress towards worthy aspirations. Together Britain can grow strong and can make its own unique voice heard, not just heard but count for the greater good, of us and this planet we have to care for. The is the pie that is on offer. That is the pie we must seize. That is the pie that must offered to the people again so this time they can make an informed choice. A choice made whilst knowing full well of the consequences that flow out of it. Let the single state party sort out its own mess and leave us to direct Britain's future prosperity.

Small Fry, Big Pond

In this global world we live in there are two power houses who between them control, manipulate and set the agenda for all the other Nations. They are of course China and USofA, except China is just getting into its stride and poor USofA is running out of puff and can now only bluster, pretending it still is in its prime. There are other potentials in the wings watching the drift and looking where the most advantage can be achieved by forming alliances, Russia, Middle East and the rest of Asia. And then there is Europe. Of all the those waiting in the wings Europe has the most potential to step into the vacuum left by USofA's loss of virility, if only it could sort itself out.

Europe needs a dynamic and cohesive core that sets aside trivial national interests and effectively works together for the greater good. That is the promise, a promise yet to materialise. It really doesn't help to have UKplc whingeing on the sidelines for ever moaning about being in, or wanting out, or being in but only partially in with an opt out clause. The powerhouse core with an industrial commercial muscle behind it is clearly France, Germany and England. Not diminishing the contributions of the other allied countries but that is where the EU strength lies, these three nations.

It totally beggars belief that any sane person can seriously contemplate UKplc trading as a sole Nation could stand up to the rest of the World and seek to amend or change trading terms. Even if, with a miracle wand, suddenly all the associated Commonwealth Nations fell into line we still would be a trading irrelevance. With out any power to influence we would be totally subservient to what the other world powers decide are the standards and terms of trade, a total capitulation. That is not my UKplc history. We have a long commercial and industrial history that should be key and influential in setting world agendas. But not if we speak alone, only if we are in step and in tune with our close European partners. A true meld of our strengths.

To work together in harmony, willing to surrender local interests for the common good requires trust. Trust can only be fully founded within societies that have common, similar, parallel cultural and moral codes. Where the word expressed can be confidently taken to mean what it says and not to be confounded by some off the wall interpretation germinated in another different set of cultural values. Unless black is black or white is white or truth is truth only then can trust flourish. I feel that bond with Germany, we share of lot of European history, I share that bond with France we fought against each other or together many times, I feel a bond with the Netherlands. I recognise a lot of common similarities with Italy, Spain, Sweden, reaching out further I begin to get uneasy, too many cultural differences and response at variance with my expectations to feel truly comfortable. By the time we get to Estonia, Croatia, Latvia or even Cyprus I am saying, whoa, I have absolutely no idea where their priorities are, their approach to integrity or commitment, where their deep instinctive loyalties lie. I don't know them and therefore cannot understand them as societies, irrespective of whether they fall under some label called Western Europe. This then is the issue I have with the EU.

The founding aim to re-unite Western Europe all under one umbrella is laudable. Fine as a loose trading partnership, a forum for reaching agreement on unity and support. But tied in to one united monetary and legislative system, no several steps too far. We need a two tiered EU. The core of tightly bonded nations, willing and able to surrender their individual pasts and work cohesively together. When they get their act together only then to expand, cautiously, brining in a new partner at a time. This is the EU vision I can support, a vision where UKplc has to be committed and in. A EU where the referendum is irrelevant, the only alternative to commercial suicide and where xenophobia just does not arise.

sovereignty

We like to think of ourselves as an island community, just nicely nestled off the coast of Europe, contained, masters of our own destiny and far from all the turmoil, strife and the argy-bargy of having to live up close with the neighbours next door on the continent. We are safe and secure in our island. Not anymore.
Though the pipes that link Europe up with the massive servers that feed the internet traffic pass through and across our shores, we are just as dependant on this other server farms for our continued internet access as is the rest of Europe. The USofA holds the world to ransom. Though it may well be not in their interest to terminate service any time soon, let us never lose sight of the fact, our internet, our means of living, is now dependant on the USofA continued goodwill. The best we could do to retaliate is to cut the pipes, damaging Europe but of course cutting ourselves off as well. No, we are well and truly beholdened to the USofA. So much for our sovereign independence.

Worse still, we have entered an age when our GPS location has become a central feature in arranging our lives. It has gone well beyond just SatNav's for car journeys. The GPS fix is becoming an essential element of all the wonderful Apps that let you move, explore and communicate with the world around you. GPS that is of course satellite dependant. How many GPS satellites does UKplc own. Zilch. How many have we contributed to and can rightfully claim part ownership. Zilch., Who do we totally rely on for access to all our GPS fixes, the USofA.  We are probably beyond the point when we can turn back and say we can live without the GPS. It is now integral, yet UKplc is totally dependant on others goodwill for a vital service. No backup plan, no partnership deals just the hope goodwill suffices. A supplicant nation.

I doubt whether we can even claim any degree of independence in the servicing of what is now vital Ecommunications. Though we do have UK front offices that offer Ecommunications I very much suspect that a peek behind the curtain would show that yet again we are totally dependant on the goodwill of USofA for any continuity. Europe would not be able to step in and offer a alternative route for connecting up with the rest of the world. One price we do have to pay for using the USofA as our gateway for all our Etraffic is to allow them to look at all our nations traffic. That is the deal. Come through us but only if you permit us to a look at anything at all we fancy taking a peek at, anything, no courtroom check, just on a whim or a fancy. Oh and inaddition to prove what good buddies we are, you must also show us (USofA) everything that you (UKplc) have been having a peeking at. Fair does, we are friends, we trust each other, right.

With the continuing and inevitable slide of USofA off the top dog spot there are a couple of emergent nations that are arm wrestling to grab this soon to be vacated top dog spot. In the resulting milieu of wheeling and dealing, relationships, even long term relationship are going to have to be renegotiated. Is this the time for a wake up call, we are no longer that independent island goings it own way? We are now totally dependant but also have become lazy about who are our real friends or need to be. Who do we need to cultivate to retain any degree of autonomy is this crazy mixed-up interdependent electronic world we emerging into.

Done in Our Name

Safety, and particularly highway safety, is highly emotive so beware anyone who steps up to rock that cradle. The core issues are clear beyond dispute. The closing speeds of vehicles on opposite direction carriageways are at their most extreme. Accidents can occur where vehicles end up crossing into the opposite carriageway, so these carriageways must to be separated. When these cross-overs happen the resulting carnage is horrific with inevitable loss of life. I do not underestimate the mental and physical distress on all those involved in cutting people out as a result of such an accident, trying to save lives and then having to break the news of a life lost so suddenly. There were three well established carriageway separators, tension cable or moulded sheet steel on posts, dense bush planting and now a new mass concrete continuous section about 900mm high.

We as a society do not choose to protect lives at all costs from the risk of death. The car manufacturer makes commercial judgements as to how much of life safety features are introduced into a car as standard. Not what is possible. Simply what is thought might seen as affordable by the customer, you and I, compared to a competitor. Or at best what we might choose as an extra over option and at what price level. Not a lot on the evidence and well, well short of the possible. How much to spend in saving lives is a pragmatic choice made by you and me. When we condone, as in stand by and watch, our youth going out to get plastered beyond their ability to control their life's consequences we have no right to take a high moral stand point. When we condone, as in standby and allow our politicians, to cut back spending on the frail elderly needy, so there are insufficient resources to ensure the basics of life are provided routinely hour in hour out. The essentials of shelter, food, basic daily care and minimal social contact, just the bare essentials, ignoring higher aspirations of improving their quality of life and giving them a meaningful environment to respond to. Then we have given up any right to claim life matters, claim it is our high priority.

So lets keep highway safety in perspective. Emotive yes, but actually lower down the pecking order I suggest than care for the elderly, care for our new born and care for our youth. Keep it real. Highway safety is yet another pragmatic cost choice. We are very aware of the scenes of road carnage as we pass by. The number of incidents are actually quiet small. 400 hundred cross-over events in a year resulting in 40 deaths. Keep it real. How many teenagers die as a result of excess alcohol? We probably dont know any more than we know how many elderly die of neglect or babies from inadequate natal care. These are not huge numbers considering the number of daily road journeys made. It is called risk management, something we are not used to thinking about but really do need to get a grip on. The level of risk is low and therefore tolerable compared to costs and consequence of trying to significantly improve on these figures when our journey qualities would have to take a huge nose-dive.  Look around and see how much more relaxed our European neighbours can be about their road safety without incurring horrendous road causality figures.

So what has got me all fired up. CSB', concrete safety barrier's. I cannot recall a single political parties manifesto that referred to the need to replace motorway barriers. In these times of extreme austerity when services we hold dear are being cut off, not slashed and reduced, but simply turned off, who was it that got to decide in our name to spend hundreds of millions of pounds replacing these central barriers? Who in our name decided without reference to us, without inviting our opinion, that a replacement scheme was essential and should go ahead without consultation, without advertisement to us the public. Just de-facto. The decision was made and it happened. Who got to weigh up the rival merits of the different options and who made the decision, vetted by what watchdog committees, that concrete was the out and out winner? Such that ripping out the old barriers and replacing them with concrete was a right choice for our nation at this time? The interim advice IAN 60/05 that can be seen here, issued by the Highways Agency gives some insight. It appears to be a classic one-sided rival lobbying argument that has swept the board. All the contra arguments are brushed airily aside as if of little consequence. Only the supporting arguments, in favour of concrete, are given any credence. Note how concrete, one of the worst environmental materials, is given an unquestioning thumbs up, because it is home produced! This is indicative of the level of debate. Very partial and very one sided. So who cares. We all should.

The visual intrusion of these concrete barriers is horrendous. They are scale-less, featureless, will weather appallingly and reduces the drive experience to one of unrelieved visual boredom. Motorway designers had learnt their lesson and put gentle curves back into more economic straight roads just to relieve this visual boredom. At millions of pounds we are now relentlessly undoing that past insight. They cannot be easily replaced, we are now stuck with them for the future. But we should rise up and protest and stop more being laid down. This is not the driving experience any of us will relish, blinkered by the unrelenting featureless barrier that strips away any sense of distance and scale. That destroys any sense of the passing countryside. UKplc will become known as the bad driving experience of Europe. Design and environmental issues do matter and do have to be balanced against other priorities, even that of saving lives.