Brexit is a 'nationalist spasm': Adonis resigns as infrastructure tsar

[LeftishBrit]

Brexit has caused a “nervous breakdown” in Whitehall, the former Labour minister Andrew Adonis has said following his Lord Adonis resigned on Friday in protest at Theresa May’s management of Britain’s departure from the EU, describing the process as “a dangerous populist and nationalist spasm worthy of Donald Trump”.


He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Saturday morning: “Almost the entire government machine is spending its time seeking to wrench us out of the key economic and political institutions of the EU. Everything else is going by the board.”

Adonis said there should be a second referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal and that people like him who are in leadership positions should be “arguing passionately with the British people as to why staying in the EU is the right thing to do”.

He said those who voted to leave were “not stupid” but argued that Brexit was not defined before the referendum and people should be given “a new say” on the choice between May’s deal and staying in the EU

(More at link):

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/29/lord-adonis-quits-as-theresa-may-infrastructure-tsar-over-brexit

[LeftishBrit]

1. I remember not always being Adonis' top fan as Education Minister; but I'm cheering him on now!

Glad someone finally said some of what needs to be said!

[T_i_B]

2. Also worth noting...

Last edited Sat Dec 30, 2017, 09:43 AM - Edit history (1)

...the criticism in his resignation statement of the government's handling of certain railway franchises. Which could be a gift for Labour if the Corbynite faction can put their loathing of Adonis to one side.

[KY_EnviroGuy]

3. Good line, Lord Adonis.

Truth: "dangerous populist and nationalist spasm worthy of Donald Trump". Now, he's getting dressed-down by the Tories as expected.

Not much consolation though, having brothers in arms in right-wing insanity across the pond. Let's wish each other the best of luck for the next several years. We're all going to need it in great measure.

................

[LeftishBrit]

4. Here's to good luck and the return of some sanity!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

5. Absolutely there should be a second referendum. BrExit would be easily defeated.

One without the admitted lies Farage made.

One without Russian interference.

[bucolic_frolic]

6. For me the roots of all these problems

lie in privatization, or the belief that the sum total of the world is the aggregation of private interests.

Legal systems and nations and laws were set up for structure, safety, order, commerce. Simply disregarding
hundreds of years of jurisprudence and lawmaking to focus on commerce as the only legitimate function of
government or the world is what has led us to this mess, in UK, and in USA. Economic, class, and financial
warfare will be the result.

[bucolic_frolic]

7. Phrased more intuitively

We are taking systems conceived for social welfare to value all socioeconomic levels of society and restructuring them to serve as profit centers for those of the most fortunate financial circumstances.

This is not going to work out well, anywhere. Once the masses figure it out, they will resist, cease to serve, look after their own only, or rebel.

[zentrum]

8. Well said.

[Jim Lane]

9. Is there any prospect of a re-vote?

Adonis calls for a second referendum but I had the vague impression that there were legal obstacles to that. In addition, of course, I assume there are significant political obstacles, because May has a tenuous majority in Commons and can't afford to alienate the pro-Brexit bloc among the Tories.

[Ghost Dog]

10. Parliament was required by petition to debate this:

I (virtually) signed the petition, so received this email after the debate:

Dear (Ghost Dog),

Parliament debated the petition you signed – “Hold a referendum on the final Brexit deal”

Watch the debate: http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/3e1dd847-9bcc-48fb-b141-5c8441b50ae9

Read the transcript: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-12-11/debates/E3B1D9A4-5B9B-4337-8486-C4BE9A46F2BB/BrexitDealReferendum

Read the research: https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CDP-2017-0253

The petition: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/200004

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament

It's rather curious that I was able to participate in the (online) petition, simply providing my (real name), email address and postcode of where I live in the Canary Islands. In the original Brexit referendum and in the subsequent general election I was, on the other hand, (imo illegally) disenfranchised, having officially resided in non-UK EU more than fifteen years.

Government responded:

On 23 June 2016 the British people voted to leave the European Union. The UK Government is clear that it is now its duty to implement the will of the people and so there will be no second referendum...

Read the response in full: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/200004

A second referendum would not be illegal, as I understand it. Some of what Ms. May's Government is doing might well be, though. Such as withholding information in contempt of parliament.

[Jim Lane]

11. Thanks for the details!

I suppose there's at least some possibility that, as the specifics of Brexit become clearer, political pressure for a second referendum might build.

The response states in part: "The UK Government is clear that it is now its duty to implement the will of the people and so there will be no second referendum..." I beg leave to point out to Her Majesty's Government that the second clause of that sentence is inconsistent with the first.

[Ghost Dog]

12. Political pressure for a second referendum _is_ building,

that's my impression, observing from out here...

[LeftishBrit]

13. I don't think there are any legal obstacles; but unfortunately there are political ones

Those you mention; and more generally that much of the media is fanatical about Brexit and regards those who oppose or even wish to modify it as 'saboteurs', 'mutineers' and 'enemies of the people'. Not, I am sure, related in any way to the fact that a high proportion of media owners are super-rich tax avoiders, and that the EU rules make this more difficult and are set to toughen in 2019.