I work in Brussels alongside the EU Brexit negotiators and I find it incredible how little the UK government understands

Appeared in the Independent 26/06/2018

Being an MEP is a bit like being a DHL package: no sooner have I arrived in Brussels for meetings with businesses, NGOs and sometimes bigwigs like Guy Verhofstadt (the European parliament Brexit coordinator), than I’m being shipped off again to London for marches, rallies and occasionally some rest in my garden in Oxford (very occasionally). Being shipped back and forth across the English Channel isn’t always easy – but it does give you some great perspective on Brexit.

Everyone I meet, wherever I am these days, asks me the same thing: “What are the Brits doing?” Even Brits ask me what we’re doing. And I wish I knew what we were doing, I really do. The trouble is that all we’ve received from the British government in the last year and a half has been overused slogans, half-baked threats and undercooked plans. Just one thing has been resoundingly clear from the government: Brexit means Brexit.

According to the government, Brexit means we are leaving the EU’s institutions, the single market and the customs union. That makes the UK a “third country”, just like Canada or South Korea. Being a third country means you don’t have the same privileges as EU members.

As a third country, it has been confirmed by EU negotiator Michel Barnier that the UK will not be in the EU’s crime-fighting intelligence agency Europol or the EU’s satellite project Galileo. It’s not a matter of money – no amount of cash is going to allow Britain to continue being in Europol or Galileo. It’s about trust.

Nick Gutteridge, a journalist in Brussels, recently tweeted a comment from an unnamed EU official who summarised the third country conundrum perfectly. I will quote the entire thing because it is really quite brilliant: “There is not an issue of general distrust towards the UK. That’s not the issue, but the EU is a rules-based system. Why is that? It’s because 28 member states do not trust each other spontaneously; they trust each other because they work on the basis of agreed common rules with common enforcement, common supervision and under a European court that will make sure they all apply the same rules in the same manner. They trust each other because there are remedies available. If you don’t have these remedies, you’re a third country.”

Since the UK has self-imposed red lines preventing it from signing up to the “common rules and common enforcement” we are out the door – with no special treatment.

But this concept of a third country being different from an EU member has fallen on deaf ears – not just amongst many Conservative MPs, but also some Labour MPs who are making gallant attempts at keeping the UK in the “nice bits” of the EU like Europol, the European Arrest Warrant and Galileo.

This was clear for the eye to see when Verhofstadt appeared in front of the Exiting the European Union Committee in Westminster recently. You could hear the same question, repeatedly from the MPs: “So we can’t stay in Galileo?” “So we can’t stay in Europol?” The answer from Verhofstadt was always the same: “No, because you will be a third country.”

Andrea Jenkyns even asked: “Why is the EU not just giving the Brits what we want?” Verhofstadt explained this is not a simple two-way negotiation: the single market is a legal entity and you cannot just break those rules to appease a member state who wants to leave.

Are we really being serious when we ask the EU to give the UK, as a third country, the same level of access as a member to sensitive information like satellite development and criminal databases?

I’m sure I’m not the only one who finds it incredible that a lot of Westminster still doesn’t get this. But they should get it – the UK signed off on a joint report with the European Commission in December 2017, which makes it abundantly clear that you cannot cherrypick the bits of the EU you do like and pretend the other things don’t exist.

We are Britain! We are a grand, important country – that’s what they say. And maybe some people still believe that. But it doesn’t change the fact that we will soon be a third country.

Catherine Bearder is the UK’s only Liberal Democrat MEP

Nicola Sturgeon Tweet’s pay rise for NHS Staff of 9% over 3 years

Nichola Sturgeon announces a 9% pay rise for NHS Staff. For those earning under £80,000 however, all is not as rosy as it seems. When playing the percentage game. Those workers at the lower pay grade scale get very little. Whilst those at the top of their pay grade £80,000 will gain significantly.

 

Therefore, a senior health professional earning £80,000 pa will be £7,200 better off after 3 years, a nurse earning £26,000 pa will be £2,340.00. However, this is subject to, tax and national insurance and increased pension rate. We feel that the upper level should be reduced to £40,000 and the rate increased to 11%. this we would be a fairer system. that re-dresses the balance and distributes the wealth where it’s needed

One has to ask is this a Blairite ploy to buy votes for independence…?

Where is the money coming from to pay for this….?

Independence….! Should the SNP call for another referendum on Independence…?

On September 18th, 2014, Scotland voted against Independence in favour of remaining in the UK.

The vote was quite conclusive with 55.3% voting to remain in the UK and 47.4% of Scots voting for independence.

on 23 June 2016 the  UK and Gibraltar voted to  for leaving the EU

The vote this time, however, was not so conclusive. With 51.9% of voters voting to leave the EU and 48.9% voting to remain.

What is really interesting, is that very few people in Scotland, voted to leave the EU. The majority of Scots voted to remain in Europe. (see map below & key)

 

This has left many of the Scots now asking for another referendum on Independence.

A background to devolution

On the 11th September 1997 a referendum was held to establish the level of support for a Scottish Parliament, and for such a Parliament to have powers to vary the rate of income tax.

The vote was counted as 74% voting in favour of a Scottish Parliament and 63% voting for Parliament to have powers to vary the basic rate of income tax.

This led to to the introduction by the UK Government of the “Scotland Bill” which received Royal Assent on the 19th November 1998 and became the Scotland Act 1998. Elections were held on the 6th May 1999 and the powers previously exercised by the Secretary of State for Scotland and other UK ministers were transferred to Scottish ministers on July 1st, 1999. The same day that the Scottish Parliament was officially convened

 

 

The Scotland Act 1998 in brief  

The Scotland Act 1998 made provision for a Scottish Parliament and a Scottish Government, who would be accountable to the Scottish Parliament. It is important to note that the Act does not specify, which matters are devolved to the Scottish Parliament. Rather it specifies those matters that are reserved to the UK Parliament

In other words, matters which are reserved. Are matters that the Scottish Parliament cannot debate or amend. i.e have “No Control Over”

The list is as follows:

Reserved Matters

  • The Constitution
  • Foreign Affaires
  • Defence
  • International Development
  • The Civil Service
  • Financial and Economic matters
  • Immigration and Nationality
  • Misuse of drugs
  • Trade and Industry
  • Aspects of energy regulation (e.g electricity, coal, oil and gas and also nuclear energy)
  • Employment
  • Social Security
  • Abortion, Genetics, Surrogacy, Medicines
  • Broadcasting
  • Equal Opportunities

Devolved Matters:

(matters that the Scottish Parliament have jurisdiction on)

  • Health & Social Work
  • Education & Training
  • Local Government & Housing
  • Justice & Policing
  • Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries
  • The Environment
  • Tourism, Sport, & Heritage
  • Economic development & Internal Transport

Nicola Sturgeon urged to back EUref2

Nicola Sturgeon is being pressed, to back the call for a second Brexit referendum. Noel Dolan who was the First Ministers enforcer in Government, raised concerns as to why no SNP politicians, had backed the policy. Which the Liberal Democrat’s, Labour and some Tory figures have long been advocating.

Dolan’s call came, as thousands of people marched through the streets of Glasgow yesterday in support of Independence. Nicola Sturgeon, must now consider her next constitutional move. Given the growing confusion and frustration, over details of the Brexit deal, to be struck between the the UK and Europe.

Many feel that Theresa May is standing in the way of Scotland’s progress. Whilst others fear the UK Parliament will look to derail a second referendum on independence with a change to the Scotland Act 1999.

Is Nicola Sturgeon right to push for independence and respect the democratic process of Brexit or push for the so called EUref2 and over-ride the democratic process…..?

 

William Wallace…! Hero & Keeper of Scotland or Barbaric Warlord…?

 Was William Wallace personified for the silver screen….?  

 Just how much was fact and how much was fiction. We all know about the big mistake of Wallace wearing a Kilt in the film. when in actual fact kilts were not worn till 300 years later in the 17th Century. It should also be noted that the name Braveheart was in fact the nick name given to Robert The Bruce and not William Wallace 

More importantly was William Wallace really a commoner…? 

Would the title “Keeper of Scotland actually be given to some who had no noble standing…?