Please note that the post below was published more than ten year ago on 21st November 2009 Nick Herbert MP, shadow cabinet member for the Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, was in Cumbria this morning to see the areas affected by the flooding. He writes on Conservative Home about his visit. Here is an extract. I’ve been in Cumbria today to see the areas affected by the floods. I arrived early in Keswick where I met officials from the Environment Agency. Although the river levels had fallen considerably and homes were no longer flooded, the damage to homes had been done. And the water which had got into houses wasn’t just from the river – it was foul water which had risen from the drains. I talked to fire crews who were pumping flood water back into the river, and discovered that they were from Tyne & Wear and Lancashire. They had been called in at an hours’ notice and had been working on the scene ever since, staying at a local hotel. You cannot fail to be impressed by the
Comments
since he said this, nothing about David Camerons pledge on an in out referendum has changed. An in/out referendum was what was promised in april, and an in/out referendum is what is promised today.
Now sure (as i have been trying to point out since cameron made the pledge) there is no way on earth he can secure a re-negotiation (one of any meaning anyway) before the 2017 deadline, I know he is planning it for the end of 2017 due to the UK holding its 6 month council leadership so looking to be "at the heart" of 'Europe'. But this is not really a bad thing. as its now a vote for the status quo or to leave.
if carswell has left to try and steer UKIP to come up with an EU exit plan (at last) well, sorry Douglas you are a little late, you see as UKIP were doing nothing about this Richard North wrote one with input from his blog and the bruges group. Here it is. ready made and good to go.
http://www.eureferendum.com/documents/BrexitPamphlet001.pdf
its taken me a couple of hours thinking about this today, but oh, the sound of pennies dropping.
If anyone is still trying to catch up, ok. Here we go then. You see for the UK there are actually 3 (well there are an infinite number really, but they all fall under 3 basic catagorys. (a bit like all life on earth is either plant, animal or bacteria/virus) kind of thing.
so the 3 options on the EU are 1. Leave the EU, 2. Stay in the EU as we are or 3. Renegotiate a new deal and then stay in the EU with our new deal)
1. needs a referendum, we vote to leave, activate article 50 then negotiate for a post EU UK. The risk with this option is in the event of a "stay in" vote then it may be another generation or 2 before another chance to leave comes along.
2. Does not need anything, though its a time buyer. It leaves the question un asked and unanswered in the event of no referendum (though a "stay in" vote would close the question.
3. This requires a major renegotiation of the EU treaties which requires an IGC, then a new proposal then the agreement of every single member state (some of which require a referendum) then sanctioning. There is not time for this before the 2017 deadline.
so you see whet Douglas Carswell is doing is postponing. He knows that UKIP is the best option to prevent an outright tory win, thus no referendum would be on offer, or at least in the event of a tory led coalition its a get out clause for Cameron. You see Carswell is saying publically he wants option 1. and as he himself said the best way for that is to vote tory and try to keep Cameron as PM. but really he wants option 3, so for that then a get out of the 2017 deadline is a must. now Carswell i think its fair to say does not want option 2, at least not as a permanent option, but (his actions say he thinks) its preferable to keep option 2 with out the question being asked for the short term, increasing the likely hood of an Option 3 in the longer term.
Carswell wants to re-negotiate, that is the only reason he would have defected, If he really wanted to leave he would have re read his own quote, and took his own advise.
But if it was what Douglas C was thinking it seem like a very baroque strategy, though.
:-)
I dont think he is running scared of a lose in a vote, as there is time for the "out" campaign to group (currently its very fragmented. But they can group under a rational exit plan (like Flexit i linked) and put up one heck of a fight.
UKIP wont win an out campaign, there is no exit plan there, there never has been, which is why him joining UKIP is, ironically, not in keeping with the actions of a person who wants to give the best possible shot at leaving the EU.
UKIP is just a way to help prevent an out right tory win, and thus prevent a 2017 referendum.
Well yes, its a very underhanded strategy to say the least - but then which part of politics is not Baroque?