A Hollow Crown
Our prime minister returns triumphant from Brussels, his enemies vanquished.
Or perhaps, he returns triumphant from annoying his friends, bringing with him ammunition for his enemies.
Or does he play a double game against all of us? But more on that later.
His brief speech we heard on the radio news this evening actually sounded genuinely interesting in parts. The story told in the media has been consistently different. Doubtless both based on an element of truth and spun from there.
The big story the media concentrate on (though what they say may not be entirely accurate) is about curbing benefits to migrants, on the face of it something entirely reasonable. Or rather, something utterly preposterous: it’s only because our benefits system is monstrously broken that EU rules (accidentally) apply to it in the first place. Germany, for example doesn’t have our “in work benefits” problem. But instead of fixing it, he inflicts gratuitous discrimination on (some) foreign workers, in the hope that one more wrong piled on to the mess might make a right.
It’s supposed to reduce net migration. That seems unlikely to happen. Farage & Co are saying so, and the nutters are much more dangerous when they’re also right about an issue. I expect Cameron will pull a rabbit or two from his hat to wrong-foot them ahead of the referendum, but this fundamental point won’t budge. Two wrongs make an anti-right.
Which brings me to the conspiracy idea: is Cameron in fact saying one thing but working for the opposite (as The Liar did over hunting)? He has gerrymandered the electorate, conveniently setting aside a manifesto pledge to extend the vote to Brits long-term abroad (who may naturally have the strongest reasons to vote stay) and will also exclude EU citizens resident and working in the UK (ditto). He’s promised everything the Europhobes asked for in terms of re-formulating the referendum question and terms of the debate, yet no word on conceding to the (europhile) SNP on the subject of the referendum date not clashing with their election. In short, he seems in his actions to be working for an exit!
Time will tell. But on a personal level, should I get out now, ahead of a time when there might be serious barriers to a move? Ugh.
Oh, and if you pay more child benefit to children in the UK than in their home countries, doesn’t that risk incentivising foreign workers to bring their complete families? So they burden our schools all the more, and become altogether more likely to remain here long-term or permanently. Unintended consequences, or misleading reporting?
Posted on February 19, 2016, in EU, politics, uk. Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.
niq's soapbox 
Someone on the ‘net says the date not only annoys the Scots, but also clashes with the Glastonbury festival. So that’s another little chunk of electorate likely not to vote. The young, who all the polls say tend to favour staying in, perhaps not least because they’re more likely than older people to take advantage of freedom themselves.
Coming on top of the real gerrymandering, it does seem to point to something systematic.
The arrangements strike me as being a typical, monumental government cock-up – bad policy badly executed, something the Brits seem to do rather too often! I’m not sure that ministers or civil servants are capable of being so systematically devious. I note that the Glastonbury organisers did ask if the Electoral Commission would allow a polling station on site, but were told “no”. The Glastonbury folks (who’ve always struck me as decent, engaged people, and would probably do a far better job at running the country) are advising people how to get a postal vote or proxy vote on their website now.
The conspiracy I outlined seems to be gaining traction. It’s now popped up from no less a source than Steve Hilton, Cameron’s former Right Hand Man. One of the more measured reports on the subject is here.
Pingback: The tail that wags a very big dog | niq's soapbox