The big Brexit debate - BBC Newsnight
Summary
TLDRCe débat public rassemble des membres de différents groupes politiques britanniques pour discuter des options de Brexit. Le ministre de l'Éducation, Nadim Zahawi, soutient l'accord du PM May, tandis que Marcus Fish de l'ERG préfère un Brexit sans accord. Nikki Morgan, initialement pour le reste, propose le modèle norvégien si l'accord échoue. Bill Esterson du Labour propose un référendum pour rejeter l'accord et Liila Moran plaide pour un second référendum. Les participants expriment leurs inquiétudes sur l'avenir économique et la souveraineté de l'immigration, soulignant l'importance de prendre des décisions éclairées.
Takeaways
- 🇪🇺 Nadim Zahawi soutient l'accord du Premier ministre car il permet de reprendre le contrôle de la libre circulation, de la pêche et de l'agriculture tout en garantissant des échanges confiables avec l'Europe et le reste du monde.
- 🔄 Marcus Fish, représentant le groupe de recherche européenne, croit que quitter l'UE sans accord est préférable à un accord qui lierait indéfiniment le Royaume-Uni à l'UE.
- 🎓 Nikki Morgan, s'appuyant sur un accord de type norvégien, propose un plan B en cas d'échec de l'accord du Premier ministre, évitant ainsi un Brexit chaotique.
- 👨💼 Bill Esterson, ministre des Affaires du Labour, critique l'accord pour ne pas assurer un commerce sans friction et pour ne pas protéger les services, les droits des travailleurs et la sécurité nationale.
- 🗳️ Leila Moran plaide pour un second référendum, estimant que le public devrait décider si l'accord proposé correspond à leur volonté initiale concernant le Brexit.
- 🤝 L'accord du Premier ministre est présenté comme un compromis difficile mais nécessaire pour respecter le résultat du référendum tout en préservant la relation avec l'UE.
- 🚫 La perspective d'un Brexit désordonné est rejetée par certains orateurs car elle pourrait nuire à l'économie et aux emplois, rendant les gens plus pauvres.
- 🔄 La liberté de mouvement est un point de discorde majeur, certains défendant l'importance de la finir pour récupérer le contrôle de l'immigration, tandis que d'autres soulignent les bénéfices économiques et sociaux de cette liberté.
- 🏛️ Les orateurs abordent la nécessité de prendre en compte les conséquences à long terme de chaque option de Brexit, y compris les implications constitutionnelles et économiques.
- 📉 Des inquiétudes sont exprimées sur les pertes économiques à court et à long terme du Brexit, mais certains soutiennent que c'est un prix à payer pour assurer l'indépendance et le contrôle des politiques nationales.
Q & A
Quel est l'argument principal de Nadim Zahawi pour soutenir le deal du Premier ministre ?
-Nadim Zahawi soutient le deal parce il estime que c'est un compromis qui permet au Royaume-Uni de reprendre le contrôle de la libre circulation, de la pêche et de l'agriculture tout en permettant un commerce confiné avec l'Europe et le reste du monde.
Quelle est la position de Marcus Fish sur le Brexit ?
-Marcus Fish représente la position de l'ERG (European Research Group) qui estime que quitter l'UE sans accord de retrait est préférable à l'accord proposé par le gouvernement, car il considère que l'accord actuel est un mauvais deal qui lie le Royaume-Uni à l'UE de manière permanente.
Pourquoi Nikki Morgan soutient-elle le modèle 'Norway Plus' en tant que plan B ?
-Nikki Morgan soutient le modèle 'Norway Plus' en tant que plan B parce qu'elle pense que cela permettrait au Royaume-Uni d'accéder au marché unique via l'EFTA, de sortir des politiques communes de la pêche et de l'agriculture, tout en résolvant la question de la frontière entre l'Irlande du Nord et la République d'Irlande sans recours à l'arrière-plan.
Quelle est la stratégie de Bill Esterson pour améliorer l'accord sur le Brexit ?
-Bill Esterson, représentant le parti travailliste, propose une nouvelle union douanière complète associée à un accord du marché unique qui assure des régulations communes, des normes et utilise les institutions communes avec l'UE, afin de réunir les votes et de guérir les divisions au Royaume-Uni.
Quels sont les arguments de Leila Moran en faveur d'un second référendum ?
-Leila Moran soutient qu'un second référendum est nécessaire car l'accord proposé par Theresa May ne correspond pas à ce que les gens ont voté en 2016. Elle pense qu'il est important de soumettre l'accord au peuple pour qu'ils décident s'il s'agit vraiment de ce qu'ils souhaitaient.
Quelle est la préoccupation principale de l'auditoire concernant l'immigration ?
-L'auditoire est préoccupé par le manque de contrôle sur l'immigration et la pression sur les emplois à faible rémunération. Ils soulignent également l'importance de la transparence sur qui vient au Royaume-Uni, combien de temps ils restent et les raisons de leur venue.
Pourquoi certains membres de l'auditoire pensent-ils que le Royaume-Uni souffrira économiquement après le Brexit ?
-Certains membres de l'auditoire craignent que le Brexit ne cause des pertes économiques à court et à long terme, mentionnant que la valeur de la livre sterling a déjà chuté et que les coûts de la vie ont augmenté.
Quels sont les arguments des participants qui soutiennent qu'un Brexit ordonné peut être géré sans dommages économiques ?
-Certains participants soutiennent qu'un Brexit ordonné peut être géré sans dommages économiques en établissant des relations constructives avec l'UE, en assurant la gestion des frontières et en évitant les perturbations des chaînes d'approvisionnement en temps réel.
Quelle est la position de l'ERG sur la possibilité d'un accord de libre-échange avec l'UE après un Brexit sans accord ?
-L'ERG, représentée par Marcus Fish, soutient qu'il est possible d'avoir des accords de libre-échange bilatéraux avec l'UE après un Brexit sans accord, avec un accord tarifaire 'zero pour zero' comme accord provisoire.
Quels sont les arguments des participants qui pensent qu'un second référendum pourrait être une solution ?
-Certains participants pensent qu'un second référendum pourrait être une solution pour clarifier les intentions du public après deux ans de négociations et pour permettre au peuple de décider s'ils sont satisfaits de l'accord proposé ou s'ils préfèrent rester dans l'UE.
Outlines
😀 Débat sur le Brexit et les différentes options politiques
Le paragraphe introduit un débat sur la stratégie du Royaume-Uni face au Brexit. Différents membres du public expriment leur préférence pour diverses options, y compris un second référendum, un accord sans accord, un accord de type norvégien, une motion de censure suivie d'une élection générale, ou le soutien à l'accord du Premier ministre. Nadim Zahawi, ministre de l'Éducation, soutient l'accord du PM, arguant que c'est un compromis qui permet de reprendre le contrôle de la libre circulation, de la pêche et de l'agriculture tout en maintenant des liens commerciaux avec l'Europe et le reste du monde.
😐 Arguments pour un Brexit sans accord
Marcus Fish, représentant le groupe de recherche européenne, défend la position qu'aucun accord, ou même un Brexit sans accord, serait préférable à l'accord proposé par le gouvernement. Il croit qu'il est possible d'établir des accords bilatéraux et des accords tarifaires provisoires avec l'UE, tout en évitant de se lier de manière permanente. Il critique l'accord gouvernemental pour être un mauvais deal qui donnerait à l'UE un contrôle excessif sur les politiques futures du Royaume-Uni.
🤔 La possibilité d'un plan B en cas d'échec de l'accord
Nikki Morgan, qui soutient initialement l'accord du gouvernement, reconnaît la nécessité d'un plan B si l'accord actuel échoue. Elle propose le modèle norvégien, qui implique l'adhésion à l'EFTA pour accéder au marché unique, tout en quittant les politiques communes de la pêche et de l'agriculture. Elle souligne que cela permettrait de résoudre la question de la frontière entre l'Irlande du Nord et la République d'Irlande sans recours au mécanisme de sûreté controversé.
😕 L'alternative de la politique de l'opposition
Bill Esterson, ministre des Affaires du gouvernement de la opposition, critique l'accord du gouvernement pour ne pas assurer un commerce sans friction ni soutenir les services, les droits des travailleurs, l'environnement ou la sécurité nationale. Il plaide pour une union douanière complète et une adhésion au marché unique, avec des normes et des institutions communes avec l'UE, comme une voie pour réunir le pays et guérir les divisions.
😠 Le besoin d'un second référendum pour valider l'accord
Laila Moran, plaidant pour un second vote, soutient que le deal actuel ne correspond à rien de ce que les gens ont voté en 2016. Elle croit que le peuple devrait avoir le choix entre l'accord proposé et la possibilité de rester dans l'UE. Elle critique l'accord pour être vague et pour ne pas mettre fin au Brexit, mais plutôt pour ouvrir la voie à des décennies supplémentaires de négociations.
🤔 Les implications économiques et la nécessité de compromis
Le paragraphe aborde les préoccupations économiques liées au Brexit et la perception que le pays subira des pertes économiques à court et à long terme. Certains membres de l'audience sont préoccupés par les conséquences pour les générations futures, tandis que d'autres sont prêts à accepter des pertes économiques pour assurer un Brexit ordonné. Les participants discutent également de la nécessité de compromis sur des questions telles que la libre circulation et la démocratie, et de la manière dont ces compromis affecteront le pays.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡référendum
💡Brexit
💡Parlement
💡Accord de retrait
💡Norvège Plus
💡Confiance
💡Marché unique
💡Libre-échange
💡Immigration
💡Divorce amiable
Highlights
Nadim Zahawi supports the PM's deal, arguing it allows control over free movement, fishing, and farming, and enables confident trade with Europe and the world.
Marcus Fish from the ERG opposes the current deal, advocating for a clean break from the EU to avoid permanent shackles and to reset negotiations.
Nikki Morgan backs the PM's deal but suggests a 'Norway plus' model as a Plan B if the current deal fails, emphasizing leaving the EU while addressing the Irish border issue.
Bill Esterson criticizes the PM's deal for failing on various fronts and proposes a new customs union with a single market deal as an alternative.
Laila Moran calls for a second referendum to let the public decide on the final Brexit deal, arguing that the original vote did not specify the current terms.
Audience members express diverse views, with some favoring a no-deal Brexit for long-term benefits and others concerned about short-term economic pain.
Nadim Zahawi emphasizes the importance of the deal for defining the UK's future and calls for careful consideration by parliamentarians.
Marcus Fish argues against the government's deal, claiming it gives too much control to the EU and suggests alternative arrangements for trade.
Nikki Morgan outlines the 'Norway plus' model, explaining how it would allow the UK to leave the EU while maintaining certain benefits.
Bill Esterson highlights the failures of the current deal and the need for a comprehensive customs union and single market deal to unite the country.
Laila Moran stresses the importance of public consent for the final Brexit terms, advocating for a second vote to validate the deal.
Audience discussions reveal concerns about the economic impact of Brexit, with differing opinions on whether short-term losses are acceptable.
Nadim Zahawi counters arguments against the deal by asserting its benefits for trade and sovereignty, and its alignment with the Brexit referendum's outcome.
Marcus Fish rejects the idea of a managed no-deal Brexit, asserting that side agreements can mitigate potential issues without a formal withdrawal agreement.
Nikki Morgan addresses concerns about the 'Norway plus' model, explaining how it differs from EU membership and provides more control over immigration.
Bill Esterson argues that the current deal does not meet the needs of the UK's economy and services, and that a new approach is necessary for a successful Brexit.
Laila Moran discusses the ambiguity of the Brexit process and the need for clarity, suggesting that a second referendum could provide a clearer direction.
Transcripts
well back here we have members of the
public ready to tell us which option
sounds best to them we'll hear from
leila moran backing a second referendum
from marcus fish from the european
research group he believes any deal or
no deal is better than this nikki morgan
who's behind a norwegian style after
agreement if the pm's deal fails bill
esterson labour's business minister who
believes a vote of no confidence then a
general election would allow them labor
to negotiate a better deal but we start
with the education minister nadim zahawi
who's backing the pm's deal welcome
nadim your minute starts when you reach
the lecture
thank you very much um i before entering
parliament i built a business in the uk
and across europe and the rest of the
world i voted for brexit because i think
europe is heading towards a single
budget um still believes in free
movement and of course let's talk about
a single european army which i don't
think the british people will buy into
why is this deal the right deal because
i think this deal is a compromise it's
uncomfortable but it's uncomfortable for
both sides what does it do for us it
allows us to take back control over free
movement of course but then also fishing
and farming and allows to trade
confidently with europe and trade
confidently with the rest of the world
the two other extremes re-running the
referendum will be divisive and will
tear the country apart and a disorderly
brexit i think will hurt the economy and
hurt jobs and make people poorer and
that's not what they want us to do which
is why i think it's the right thing to
back the prime minister and deliver this
deal which actually did safeguard jobs
but delivers on the promise we made the
instruction we had from the british
people that we must leave the european
union that is why this is the right deal
it will define the country for the next
hundred years
and you have to think very carefully
including all my colleagues in
parliament which i think when they
scrutinize this deal they will back it
nadives are we thank you very much
nadeem they're backing um the
government's deal he is theresa may for
the purposes of tonight um marcus fish
we're going to invite you up next marcus
fish represents the erg position that's
say any deal is better than this deal
possibly even no deal marcus well this
this is a historic moment in our uh
country we we have to not give in to
fear and we have to do the best for the
people who
rely on us in parliament to to get a
good arrangement with the eu but operate
as separate jurisdictions there is
nothing wrong with with leaving without
a withdrawal agreement we actually can
have lots of side agreements we can we
we can do a zero for zero tariff and
quantities deal as a provisional deal
but the the the one thing we mustn't do
though is shackle ourselves to the eu
permanently which is what the government
is proposing
what it's proposing is gives massive
hostages to fortune in the future it's a
a permanent arrangement whereby they
could control what our trading
arrangements are
where whether we have
freedom of movement money it's it's a
really really bad deal and almost
anything is better than this and i
certainly won't be supporting it
and we need to reset these negotiations
and and stand up to the eu when i've
been to the eu and talk to member states
they've said they would love to help the
uk
achieve that but while we've got a
government that is insisting on
capitulating and insisting on this high
alignment model they've got no basis on
which to go to the commission and help
us do it gently catching your eye marcus
fish thank you very much indeed
let's invite nikki morgan now nikki is
going to vote with the government but
recognizes that if it doesn't go through
it maybe
that an amendment is needed just
describe what you are now recommending
nikki well good evening and uh thank you
for
all being here being so interested and i
think this this really matters this vote
that we're going to have i think as
nadim has said that no negotiated
agreement is ever going to be perfect no
side is going to like it it's always
going to involve a compromise i will be
supporting the prime minister in that
agreement when it's presented to the
house of commons i'd like to think that
it's going to go through but if it
doesn't then i think a responsible
government has to have a plan b and that
plan b that i believe can command a
majority in the house of commons is
something like the norway model norway
plus which involves access to the single
market via efta the uk was a founder
member of efta it would mean we leave
the common fisheries policy the common
agricultural policy we would be leaving
the eu as a former remainer that might
pay me to say it but that is what people
voted for 17 million voted for change in
june of
2016. it would also mean we had part of
a customs arrangement which would deal
with the issue of the border between
northern ireland and the republic of
ireland but we wouldn't need the
backstop which is what is causing so
much angst amongst my colleagues and
many mps across the house of commons it
would be a way forward to make sure that
we do leave the eu we don't crash our
economy who respect what people voted
for in june of 2016. and for those
reasons as i say i hope that the deal
does get through the prime minister has
put on the table if it doesn't there has
to be a plan b that avoids a
catastrophic no deal brexit nikki thanks
very much nikki morgan then offering a
plan b to the government's
first attempt at the vote and bill i'm
going to invite you up now um bill
esterson is speaking for labour as their
business minister and you're going to
tell us bill
uh why you need something more radical
than the deal itself
well thank you very much emily and good
evening to everyone
the conservatives have had two years to
sort out a deal and they can't even
negotiate with themselves let alone
with anybody else and the result is a
deal that is neither fish nor foul
it fails to deliver frictionless trade
or
any kind of support for services it
fails on workers rights and on the
environment it fails on national
security and of course it fails to
prevent a hard border in ireland
so labour will be voting against this
deal
and we will be doing everything we can
to stop a hard brexit
no deal
as well that's very very important
we think there's an alternative we think
there's a much better way forward a way
that can unite
lee voters and remainers that can start
to heal the divisions in our country and
that arrangement is a comprehensive new
customs union
with
combined with a single market deal that
delivers common regulations common
standards and uses the common
institutions with the eu that's a way
forward it's a way of healing the
divisions and bringing the country back
together again and the government should
come forward with it and get agreement
on it in the house of commons
bill thanks very much indeed uh laila
moran is going to tell us why we need a
second vote a second referendum
uh well thank you for doing this um and
i think it's quite simple
we were told that this deal is it the
prime minister has told us this is all
that we've got and i don't think that
there is anything better than putting it
to the people to ask is this what you
really wanted because as we've seen from
tonight there isn't a consensus in
parliament for if parliament wants this
deal it pleases nobody it's a deal that
makes us poorer and makes us rule takers
but not rule makers the question then
has to be is this what you voted for and
if it isn't then we need to have the
option to remain in the eu this is the
comparison we need to make this deal
that theresa may has brought back or the
current deal that we've already got and
to those who say oh just get on with it
believe me i am as bored as everyone
else with brexit let's just talk about
something else look at this deal 26
pages at the end
that say a vague political declaration
this canada deal is nearly 1600 pages
long so if you think that this deal
represents the end of brexit and we can
get on with it don't be fooled it's not
the end it's the start of more talk
about brexit for maybe another decade to
come
leila moran thank you very much have a
seat we're going to hear now from uh you
you all held your concentration
incredibly well then i'm sure and
there's a lot of stuff that we packed
into five minutes and we'll invite our
mps or politicians to answer any of your
questions um darren i'm going to start
with you our audience i should say were
with us here on friday to predict
whether the deal um on friday would get
the sign up from the eu this weekend and
many of them are back a balance of three
people who voted remain three who voted
leave one who was a remainer but is now
um weighing up different options and
they're going to tell us who's
convincing us this time round um so
darren
who
made the most sense to you which of
these positions would you urge your mp
to get behind
i i i would put myself behind what
marcus is saying um
i believe that what marcus is saying is
the ultimate backstop for the situation
where we're currently at and um
actually listening to all all five you
know all five of you speaking it was
really interesting that you know nadine
for instance you spoke about we're
talking about something here is going to
affect our country for 100 years but
it's not you know unilateral ability for
us to exit this and
you know there is no article 50 for this
deal and marcus obviously you talk about
this isn't about um
being scared of of a no deal there's you
know 85 percent circle of our trade is
dealt with on you know outside of the eu
some of the great agreements some on wto
wto terms i mean but all three of you
nikki you know you're back in the deal
but then saying actually you've got a
plan b
it's it you know actually there's i've
got a little faith in in a lot of the
positions unfortunately but you have got
a little faith in no sorry i have little
faith okay
so you would say marcus is the most
clear-cut which is just get out and work
it out from there on yeah i think so but
but in in the way that actually it it we
will it will in my opinion cause
short-term pain but i believe this deal
gives us medium or long-term
fundamental constitutional issues in our
nation nazra you were torn weren't you
you were torn
this time round i know you were a
remainer what did you hear yeah i mean i
want to point towards the two
ladies layla and nikki to say that
actually
what you say i i totally agree with we
need more detail we we're in the
situation that we're in because we
rushed through without having the
information that was necessary to enable
us the public to make a informed
decision and we're back in that exact
same position now where we're rushing
through
in is it a a week's time where we've got
to make another decision without little
information but there's very different
perspectives there are so nikki is
basically saying get behind the pm and
then we'll see what happens and leila is
saying you were misinformed let's start
again yeah and i would say in the
majority i'm with layla because you know
as you say where's the detail how
you've put a blindfold on people and
asking them to make a decision can i ask
at this point who would be more behind
layla
and who would be more behind marcus
oh sorry
okay and then go on you were going to
turn that back tell us where you are
then
with that lovely gentleman over there
one hundred percent so you're you would
back you wouldn't want your mp to back
theresa may's deal 100 okay and there
wasn't anything that he said that
worried you about a backstop or about
darren's worries that you'd be caught in
something that you couldn't get out of
the reason i'm sitting here and these
learned gentlemen and ladies are sitting
there because they know far more about
what's going on than we do we know what
we what we know
but they are members of parliament for a
reason
we're not
so
and being a conservative born and bred
all my life i will back prime minister
may
i i i just
it's gonna be hard for everybody yeah
it's gonna be a rocky boat but we've
just got to sit it out and put faith in
the government that we have elected and
put faith in the vote that we voted
before
it's probably quite reassuring uh two
years after referendum to see that there
is still faith somewhere along the lines
in the parliamentary system um i don't
know what
this is such an important decision it's
gonna as everyone has been saying it's
gonna affect our generation and every
generation for the rest of our lives um
and it only seems fair that it goes back
to the same people um who initially
voted for brexit but who didn't vote for
this deal
and we we have the right to decide
whether this deal is the way forward
let me ask you at some point each one of
these five is asking for a compromise on
something if you go with layla you are
compromising on democracy on the purity
of the first vote if you go with nadim
you are compromising on if you like
taking back control right at some point
you're not going to get your full
control
but you can win
right so you think nobody can win the
whole thing is going to be a give and
take anyway what are you prepared uh let
me ask omar what are you prepared to
compromise on what is your compromise is
it freedom of movement is it the economy
even if it's in the short term i think
for me to back up any of the
speeches that we've heard i would say
nikki's deal sounds more
you know promises that were made before
the referendum nothing is being
delivered so
we we need to have a second plan but
when we have a second one why should we
actually
i mean go with the first plan anyway
because that's not working at this
moment
so why would you back up the first plan
if you already have a second plan which
you ought to put forward for let's just
just understand this nikki to get to get
into the after norway this would be a
compromise on freedom of movement we
would have to allow freedom of movement
continue
under the ea agreement is the definition
of free move to workers not freedom of
movement as under the eu agreement so it
is a difference um and there's also an
emergency break uh it that can be uh in
norway if it's the same as norway um
whether it's to live or work people can
come and go throughout the eu that's
what they've signed up they can but of
course we'll also have a new immigration
system whereby we're going to have
people registering so we will know and i
think a lot of people actually the
concern about immigration was not
knowing who's coming here how long
they're coming here for why they're
coming and when they should be going
home so there's lots more that the uk
government proposes to set out
of control of immigration
well
fanned by some of the politico we
haven't helped matters politicians over
over the last few decades in a way that
we have spoken about immigration lots
more that could be done in order to give
people reassurances
the question you were asking sorry sorry
it's been already two years since the
referendum has taken place
if we are to go with any deal could you
assure any days or any num i mean any
timeline when exactly it's going to take
place or is it going to continue for the
next four or five years well the plan
would under you know i think variously
so the uh withdrawal agreement obviously
uh potentially gets ratified next month
uh by the uk parliament that has to be
approved by the eu parliament we will
leave the european union on 29th of
march next year we enter what's called a
transition period that ends at the end
of 2020 and under what i'm obviously if
we were end up with the norway you would
go into the after at that stage i think
if the prime minister's deal uh is
approved and actually hopefully by that
point you've got a new agreement setting
out a new trading relationship between
the eu and the uk if that new
agreement's not in place then you end up
with this irish backstory would freedom
of movement be a red line for any of you
would you say we have to end freedom of
movement that's the most important thing
you lynn
okay angela
yes i think so so you would say i cannot
accept or i would not want to support
any brexit deal that's still allowed for
freedom of movement is that right
exactly darren you were you were a
leader but you were very pro freedom of
movement where do you sit now yeah i
mean i i i still believe in freedom of
movement as a principle but ultimately
we
look the problem is is we're always
debating about where we're at today and
trying to form our opinions on what we
really believe in but the mistakes were
made with immigration like you said over
the previous decades
so it's it's it's a really hard question
to answer really i mean it's shutting
the gate after the horse immigration was
not in any way a top five uh priority of
mine for voting to leave but i
appreciate that isn't the case for a lot
of leavers that's really interesting so
actually which of which of our mps here
would say that whichever party you're
from we made a mistake on on overselling
the negative side of immigration who
thinks who would say to the voters
clearly that's the case you do bill
would you say that would you say that
labour overstated the evils of
immigration i think we definitely made
mistakes in government the point is what
we've now got it's not mistakes in
government but in terms of do you think
broadly there are net ills or net gains
from immigration
our employers need migration in big
numbers for our economy to be successful
for our public services to be successful
the problem now is we have an
immigration system it is all about
artificial caps when it should be about
the needs of employers and that's the
big mistake the current government
it was not just the pm but obviously the
home secretary that introduced those
caps was that wrong those numbers so
first of all um if we go back to
the question you asked earlier so during
the labour years when you had the
accession countries like poland coming
in
germany and italy and france chose a
seven year holiday before they allowed
that movement to happen we didn't we got
the numbers wrong and i think part of
that is not people not anti-immigration
i'm immigrant stocks of this country
they're anti-the rate that it took place
so fast and put pressure on low-paid
jobs so the reason i think prime
minister is so
serious about wanting to
have our own immigration policy so we
have people that we want in this country
who can you know wherever the shortages
are that we want to attract this country
so that actually you increase
productivity you don't put pressure on
the lowest paid people in our country
that's the big driver for this for part
of this deal but people voted to brexit
on all sorts of reasons um
we're just finding out some of those
all i'm saying is it's a compromise at
the end of the day what i'm saying to
you here is look you know we've decided
that we leave because europe is moving
in a direction which i don't think the
british people ever supported so first
of all we could have always had more
checks and balances with freedom of
movement there was always the facility
for us to say who could come they could
not stay for more than three months
without a job that other countries
already do this and we had that facility
we didn't use it but it's not just about
overplaying the negatives what we didn't
also do is probably talk about the
positives of freedom of movement now
think of the number of nhs workers who
are part of our system all those eu
citizens who contribute to our society
they are helping the economy and
politician after government after
government have been complicit in
playing up how bad they were and in fact
they are we are now seeing the great uh
contribution they made to our society
and it's us who's going to suffer the
one thing we all agree on is that
whatever we go down now will take
compromise so we've talked a little bit
about compromise on freedom of movement
what about compromise on the democratic
deficit that a second referendum would
involve who would be willing to see a
second referendum who believes
no you would okay so you don't think
that that would be somehow a betrayal of
you know the way your friends brexiteers
have voted no because things have
changed over the past two years and
we've got a very different
um position now there's a very different
offer of what brexit is we didn't know
what brexit would be when we originally
had the first referendum could any of
you could any of you sell a second
referendum agreed to leave it's like
saying oh we don't like it can we try
again please no what we do what we
agreed was to leave but what we didn't
agree on was that destination and that's
not that's not our job to agree on the
destination our job was to say do we
want to be part of the eu or not and
but the problem with the deal as it
stands now is it looks like no one wants
it right so if you were a remainer you
recognize it's going to hurt the economy
but if you were a leader then you don't
want it it's not going to hurt it's
still going to be rocky
leave it out but if you like it then you
can vote for the deal so again so what
was this but if in the in the referendum
in the referendum what we would say is
that you've got the deal or you stay in
it's like deleting a computer file if
you say no i don't really want this do
you stay with them let's just do a quick
check bill could you sell um a second
referendum to your constituents
well the thing to do is follow the
policy we agreed at our conference which
is a step-by-step approach we've got to
get through these things do you think in
your heart you could sell them a second
reference we've got to get through these
votes i think in time we may get we may
well get to a second referendum that's
why we we left it on the team it
wouldn't be a bad thing well
if that's the right thing for the
country at the time absolutely yeah the
point is to do this thing in the right
order i do support a second referendum
for some of the reasons we've already
discussed i've got lots of people in my
constituency who absolutely want there
to be a second vote but at the end of
the day i think we have a representative
democracy exactly as the lady has said
and actually we 650 are selected in 2017
to take these decisions to scrutinize
the agreement on the table to listen to
what people are saying and to make that
judgment on the 11th of december if we
have enough referendum we cut across our
represented democracy and we will ask
questions about well why do we have a
parliament don't i want to bring you and
go like later i just this
i believe this commentary that comes
around a people's vote second referendum
it's a misnomer when we talk about uh we
didn't know what we was voting for
because we did there's an argument for
that and i would counter that argument
but let's look at the here and now
you're proposing if i understand
correctly that we would have a
referendum with a choice of the
accepting of the withdrawal act as it
currently stands or remaining in the eu
well if you take either of those options
both lead us on a path where we do not
know where it will end because this is a
problem with the
drawer like there's so much ambiguity
look at the discussion the debates will
we get our waters back can we control
this on what time scales will the
transition appear
hang on later one second
so that's one option the second option
to vote to remain
in 20 years will we be in a single
currency will there be a european armed
army what what will the european project
look like this this commentary that we
do not know where we're going to be
applies to every single option applies
to the eu
but we would at least be at the table to
make those decisions
why should we as a public after having
our biggest democratic expression of
will
allow our government to mismanage this
process for two years and to come back
and say this is a terrible deal take it
or remain okay we set a precedent for
this there's one more compromise i want
to talk about which is whether people
feel that economically we will be worse
off can i just ask for a raising of hand
which of you here can say we will be
better off after brexit
absolutely
okay
okay so so
for our audience here
if we have short-term economic losses or
even longer-term economic losses is it a
price price worth paying israel
no absolutely not i mean
moving past our generation onto the next
generations that are coming through um i
think we'll be paying the price for the
decisions that are made in haste blindly
today for many generations angela do you
disagree with that or do you think that
we won't suffer at all economically
what's your sense they will suffer i
think to start off with i think they'll
be sort of like growing pains being out
there on our own but everything is
unknown unless we take the upshot option
of trying how do we know
so can i see a raising of hands from
from our audience here who would say
it's worth whatever economic pain there
is
to get on the right
or on the brexit place
not whatever but no i mean you know it's
worth paying i think we're already
paying off the prices i mean looking at
the current economic status pound value
has dropped so dramatically and
everything has just gone household the
expenses has gone up
by about the level that a lot of
commentators said that the pound was
overvalued by and it's
so so the reason i'm backing the prime
minister's deal is because actually an
orderly exit when you've been married
for 40 odd years you can go for an
acrimonious divorce or you have an order
a friendly divorce say look we can stay
friends we can trade together but we're
leaving we don't want to walk down so we
leave on the 29th of march just let me
finish this sorry i think if we you know
my instinct as
uh sort of someone who was in business
going into politics is if we deliver the
prime minister deal you'll see the
markets react positively
um to that deal including the pound you
saw it immediately when when the markets
thought things were not going well not
just financial services and property
companies but retailers got hit
immediately so i think if we have a
disorderly brexit which is where i think
we will respect where marcus is at no it
isn't that you will hurt the economy
he's shaking his head that is absolutely
not not the case that we can absolutely
have a
managed uh
situation uh when when i've looked at
the actual numbers uh behind this the
government's fear-mongering is a managed
situation do you mean a no deal brexit
no look we we are going to have a
constructive relationship with with our
eu friends we are not going to walk into
the the atlantic and
we don't need a withdrawal agreement to
do that there are lots of side
agreements that we can do
managing our borders is not going to
upset our just-in-time supply chains
it's complete fear-mongering by the
government
they have over-estimated
they've overrated they've overestimated
the non-tariff barrier cost by 15 times
in there
so there's a lot of disagreement with
what we are saying and yet
and you
are going to walk through the same bit
of the lobby in the house of commons
well let's see what happens
you're going to vote against the
government right well
the rgb could yet to back down couldn't
they but uh you know these these things
send happenings do you support the
nikki's
nonsense we saw figures today showing
the economy being 3.9 percent lower as a
result of this deal than if we stayed in
the european union
without a deal it was 1.66
thank you very much indeed
Voir Plus de Vidéos Connexes
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)