All blogs

Critics will claim that protesting is an outdated habit that people have taken on through centuries to make themselves feel useful and in the right even though it doesn’t achieve change. One may or may not agree. However, on top of making one feel exemplary, marching for a People’s Vote or protesting is a great way for a citizen to exercise his or her democratic right of freedom of expression for a cause they believe in. On the 20th of October 2018, over 700.000 protesters claimed the streets of London, voicing their opposition to Brexit and seeking a People’s vote on the final Brexit deal. It was one of the biggest mass mobilisations of its kind in the UK. The people marched not just to feel virtuous but because so much is at stake for them and because Brexit will have a detrimental effect on their lives. The march increased the legitimacy of the issue, social media visibility was over the roof, the message spread all across the UK and the world and many politicians made statements acknowledging the importance of the event.

Read more

In October 2018 700,000 people like you took part in one of the largest marches ever staged in London to demand a People’s Vote.

Since then it has become clear that more and more people who voted Leave in 2016 are now aware of the true reality of what leaving the Euopean Union will mean to them and future generations.

Parliament is divided and based on what we now know about the consequences for the UK, the chances of a People’s Vote are higher than ever before so we need to march again to reinforce the message that the country should be given the opportunity to decide once and for all whether to leave or remain in the EU.

Please join us as you could be one of those people who played a part in changing the course of our history by demanding a People’s Vote.

See you in London on 23rd March at 12pm. 

To find out more and sign up, click here

John is a supporter of the People's Vote campaign

European Movement member Paula Welch wrote the following account of a recent dinner Eastbourne European Movement held.

Professor Roger Eatwell, University of Bath was the speaker at our January dinner held at the Hydro Hotel and attended by over 70 members and their guests. His talk centred on his latest book about national populism, a movement that in the early years of the 21st Century is increasingly challenging mainstream politics in the West.

He explained that national populism is not simply a passing protest but reflects views deeply held by many in the electorate who feel they have been neglected even held in contempt by distant mainstream elites. He and co-author Prof Matthew Goodwin had decided to write the book amid two moments that had shocked the West and few pundits saw coming: when Donald Trump was elected President and when British voters stunned the world by voting for Brexit.

Read more

This piece was sent in by George Stevenson.

One of the most potent slogans from the 2016 Leave campaign was ‘Take Back Control’. Somehow, it promised a future where free British citizens (or subjects, perhaps), would control their own futures, without any form of external interference

2½ years later, and the reality looks rather different. But sovereignty still exerts a powerful pull; previous London4Europe blogs have highlighted that this may have been a factor in the votes of voters across the generally affluent South East of England, where complaints about ‘left behind’ communities may have been less prevalent

This idea of having control over our own affairs seems to be very deep rooted. At an individual level, most of us will remember resentments as children about being told to do something we didn’t want to do, and this may last into adulthood as well. As the parent of a 4-year old, I’m acutely conscious of the resistance (or stubbornness) of children if they don’t want to do something. Being without someone telling you what to do is seductive goal for many teenagers

At the level of countries or societies, freedom from an overbearing ruler, and having control over your own affairs, is a recurring theme. From ‘no taxation without representation’ prior to the American War of Independence, through the French Revolution, the emergence of new countries from the Austro-Hungarian empire in 1918, the dismantling of the European empires in the years after the Second World War, to the collapse of communism in Central & Eastern Europe in 1989, self-determination for a people or a country has been a powerful, siren image.

So we shouldn’t dismiss this as an argument for Leave voters. Even pointing out that it’s the quality of government that’s important, not whether or not we have ‘full ‘control’ probably won’t cut much ice. Our parents are (mostly) benign, and want what’s best for us, but that doesn’t prevent us from sometimes resenting what they’re telling us to do.

Read more

Theresa May’s opportunity to outfox us?

The emphasis on avoiding No-deal and on extending the Article 50 time-table presents Theresa May with a clear opportunity to outfox us. We have to focus on the referendum, writes London4Europe Committee member Michael Romberg.

What people are trying to do

People have been mesmerised by the threat of No-deal. Sure, it would be really bad. A third of the country wants it to happen. It could happen by accident. It is the default legal position.

But very few MPs want it. For all her faults Theresa May has a sense of responsibility, even if it is selective. So in spite of the rhetoric it is hard to believe that the Government would actually be willing to countenance No-deal.

Theresa May presents her deal as the way to stop No-deal. The main focus of non-Government efforts is delay: an extension of the Article 50 time period to allow more debate. But it’s not as though we have been short of time: 30 months was quite enough for a serious debate of options and the building of a consensus. What we have not done is face up to realities and policy trade-offs – we seem to need deadlines to even begin to do that. Nor is there any point in an extension for a general election – that could not resolve Brexit.

Separately, once we have agreed a course of action with the EU we will need time to implement it.

The EU’s views

The EU is like everyone else. They will agree to something to please someone else if it is in their own interests.

Brexit is a tedious distraction and they wish it to be over. But they also wish to avoid No-deal, and the blame for it. Having the UK stay in the EU is also something the EU would like, although perhaps increasingly said through gritted teeth. Preserving the integrity and coherence of the Single Market and EU institutions will not be sacrificed for the sake of keeping one country in.

An extension to before the date of the European Parliament elections (23/26 May 2019) would be easy. An extension to the end of June 2019 (before the new Parliament session opens on 2 July 2019) would probably also be easy if Brexit had been confirmed so it is clear the UK would not take part in the EP elections.

Any longer extension would be difficult because the UK would need to hold EP elections and send MEPs for a time. So the EU would only agree to that if it was in their interests (like a referendum with a Remain option).

The Withdrawal Agreement as a mechanism

So far the focus has been on an extension of the Article 50 negotiation period. That would require the agreement of both the UK and of all EU27 member states. But there is another way: the Withdrawal Agreement could come into force on whatever day is chosen.

Read more

Active Remainers – like me – are often told that we ‘never accepted the (2016) Referendum result,’ as though this were a defect, a sin, even a crime.

Should we be concerned?

Well, first of all, it depends what’s actually being alleged of us. ‘Never accepted the Referendum result’ … as what, exactly?

As the numerical outcome of the vote? Well in that sense, yes, obviously, we do accept it.

As the outpouring of frustration, anger at being neglected, at feeling marginalised or even silenced? Yes, certainly.

As the seizing by many of an apparently rare opportunity to make known their feelings? Well, apparently, yes.

BUT…

As an informed view of where lay the real causes of that neglect and marginalisation? No, not for a second.

As an informed judgement on the actual impact upon their lives of European Union policy, legislation, regulation and investment?

Read more

It is generally accepted that there is a housing crisis in Britain. A cross party review has concluded that Britain needs three million more social homes. Housing associations are charged with meeting the need for affordable housing by building new homes. These are funded through government grants, loans that are funded from surpluses and cross-subsidy from activities such as selling houses at market value. Housing associations also need to keep their expenditure within what can be afforded given the rents that they collect.

The European Union has never involved itself in housing policy and there are no European regulations affecting housing in Britain or any other member state. The UK government makes housing policy in England and it is a devolved responsibility in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. However, the impact that Brexit will have on housing associations and their ability to provide affordable homes will be negative and significant in all parts of Britain.

The Regulator of Social Housing (a government body that regulates housing associations in England) is giving advice to housing associations about what they should do about Brexit. Speaking to the Social Housing Annual Conference in January, Simon Dow, the Chair of th Regulator, referred to the Bank of England’s forecasts about the effects of a ‘disorderly Brexit’ on the economy. These include a fall in Gross Domestic Product of 8%, an increase in unemployment to 7.5%, an increase in inflation to 6.5%, a reduction in house values of 30% and an increase in interest rates to 5.5%. These would all have an adverse impact on housing associations. He then advised that:

“Providers must be stress testing for Brexit and ensuring that they have the mitigation strategies in place that they can implement.”

Following this, Paul Hackett, Chief Executive of Optivo Housing Association told the ‘Inside Housing’ magazine that they had stress tested a scenario where property values fell by 35% resulting in a 25% reduction in the number of new homes developed. He concluded that government would have to mitigate this by more than doubling what it was prepared to provide in grants:

“We would need to have a conversation with government about using grant in a counter- cyclical way... On rented homes, we would need around 50% of cost on new builds (in grant) ... This would be higher if shared ownership was taken out of the picture.”

However, Jeanne Harrison of Moody’s (an agency that provides credit ratings for housing associations) told ‘Inside Housing’ that

“Government support for associations (through grants) ... could also decline if the public finances are stretched as the government attempts to mitigate the broader impacts of... Brexit.

Another credit rating agency - Standard & Poor’s - has warned that a no-deal Brexit would lead to the downgrading of the credit ratings of about half the housing associations in Britain with associations that provide market sale housing being downgraded the most. They told ‘Inside Housing’ that:

“We can reasonably expect certain negative shocks to the UK social housing sector... Sharp declines in house prices and the higher average inflation in... 2020/21... would shrink operating margins which, in turn, would reduce earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation margins. Moreover, we forecast a reduction in social housing lettings while we consider housing associations will increasingly struggle to increase social housing rents in 2020/21.”

Lower credit ratings would make it more difficult for housing associations to raise loans and would increase the interest rates at which they could borrow. Many housing associations are borrowing extensively in advance of Brexit to mitigate the risk of not being able to borrow afterwards.

The construction industry is dependent on imported components and labour. The UK imports £10billion of construction materials a year and the proportion of construction workers from outside the UK is 20% nationally and 56% in London. A falling pound, tariff and other barriers at ports and the ending of Free Movement is likely to result in increased construction prices and shortages of materials and labour.

Read more

On 23 March the Put It to the People March will take place in Westminster. It will be an opportunity to demonstrate the ever-growing opposition to the Brexit deal offered by the Prime Minister and, in particular, the real risk that the UK will crash out of the EU as soon as 29 March.

The march on Westminster last October gave a huge boost to the People's Vote campaign. Hundreds of thousands of us showed up from all over the UK. We showed the depth of feeling across the land

Now, with just days before our notice to leave the EU expires and still with no arrangements in place to manage the transition, it is essential to show our support for the parties already supporting a People's Vote (including the Lib Dems, the SNP, Plaid Cymru & the Greens), to encourage the Labour Party, which remains open to the idea; and to encourage the Conservative Party MPs who are fighting a no-deal Brexit.

Read more