The forgotten arguments since Boris's hollow Brexit bus.

To make a decision on Brexit MPs have the unenviable task of weighing two incompatible realities:

• Leaving the EU gives back to the UK electorate the right to hire and fire those that govern them.

• Leaving the EU will cause years and years of economic disruption on a scale that we have not seen since the 1920s.

Below: Tony Benn puts the democratic case for leaving the EU

More on the EU:

• Brexit could take 10 years and might not happen at all
• Will the UK ever leave the EU? 
• The European Union IN or OUT

European Union Referendum. In or Out?

In or Out EU Referendum 23rd June 2016 

Despite living in Cornwall, where there are more benefits to membership of the European Union (EU) than there are for some, I am still making up my mind whether to vote to remain part of the EU on June 23rd. 
Here's a few key issues from the EU debate which I've been considering before deciding which way to vote in what is probably the most important political question of our lifetime.
A peaceful and social Europe?
The EU certainly isn't all bad. We haven't had a war with Germany and Italy for a while and many of the social policies coming out of Europe have tempered an otherwise unthinking and rapacious free market. I have in mind improved employment rights, things like paternal leave and safety at work, but, on the other hand, surely these changes to workers rights could have been made here in the UK, if our elected MPs cared enough that is...
Is it right that EU Commissioners, that you probably have never seen, or even heard of, make many of the laws used to govern the UK?
The democratic argument for leaving the EU is that it's law making procedures and institutions are not democratic. Decisions are made in secret by EU Commissioners that are appointed and not elected.  Ultimately, the only way to stop these directives becoming enshrined in UK law is for a majority of the Council of Ministers to vote against them, but since the UK is only one voice in twenty eight our ability to influence decision making in Europe is minimal. On top of this mathematical reality, as other EU member states become increasingly aware that the UK is, at the very best, ideologically semi-detached from Europe, the hard core and more powerful members of the EU, i.e. Germany and France, are likely to dig their heals in and make it even more difficult for the UK's Ministers to have a meaningful say in Europe.
Here's the late Tony Benn speaking in 1975 on the undemocratic nature of the European Economic Community which later became known as the European Union:

What economic power has the UK got outside the EU?
If we decide to properly leave the EU, that is without a free trade agreement, the EU will be more expensive for UK to do business with and this will reduce EU trade. It is also by no means certain that the international trade lost from the EU will automatically be replaced by trade with the rest of the world, or on such favourable terms. 
The reality of the situation is that the UK is no longer the superpower it was before the second world war and today ranks as the sixth largest economy in the world. Outside the EU free trade area it will be be more difficult for UK businesses to negotiate as good trading agreements, which will inevitably drag down economic growth. Add to this to this the rise of State Capitalism in Asia and it's not hard to imagine a lose-lose scenario emerging in the years ahead. In short, the decision to leave the EU has to consider the impact of Britain's reduced international stature.
If we end our marriage with the EU will it be a messy divorce?
In view of the power-shift away from the West towards the East, the long term economic benefit to the UK remaining of part of the EU is, I believe, marginal. Business need not fret too much. Businessmen the world over are sufficiently greedy to do deals irrespective of political systems. Further, the UK consistently runs a trade imbalance with the EU meaning that we buy more from them than they buy from us. If the UK pulls out of Europe, it is unlikely that France and Germany will refuse to sell us their Renaults and BMWs? In practice, the EU will realise that their economies are suffering enough without their politicians not playing ball. It's arguable, therefore, that coming out of the EU wouldn't alter the balance of trade with Europe too much, not once it all settles down.
Should we have faith in UK democracy and cut ourselves loose of the European Union?
Overall, because of the undemocratic nature of the EU and the feeling I have of being disconnected from the EU political process, I am considering  voting to come out of the European Union in the June 23rd and look forward with interest to the Remainer's headed by David Cameron, George Osborne and Theresa May to make the democratic and economic case for staying in...
In - Out Referendum
The case for Europe: The UK government's opinion on EU membership
More arguments for and against UK membership of the EU

UK Independence Party view on EU membership
Latest You Gov polls on which way the EU membership referendum
EUReferendum.com
What the UK public think about EU membership
More Politics

Tony Benn on arms sales to Iraq

The problems in Middle East go back a long way. This is the sadly missed Tony Benn speaking in the House of Commons (1992) on the arms sales to Iraq in 1992. 

The ability to look back and then  ahead is an essential mark of an effective Prime Minister...

Read more about the 2015 Middle East Arms Race

More from Tony Benn

More Politics

Tony Benn | WILL AND TESTAMENT

Tony Benn dies aged 88 | Read full details...

SHOUT-OUT | "If you want justice go to the people. Don't go the the guys at the top" #TonyBenn http://t.co/1Lv5K89uVZ pic.twitter.com/fdye4hhKri
— Quotilucious (@Quotilucious) October 10, 2014

More Politics

As the Second Great Depression Looms Cameron and Osborne Find Thatcher's Invisible Hand

Not since the end of the Second World War has the UK economy been in greater need of central planning as it is today. As in 1945 the problems the people now face are the result of too much power being left in the hands of too few.

The Labour Party under Blair with Brown towing the “Tony” line as Chancellor of the Exchequer are not blameless. The financial meltdown happened on their watch, and could have been avoided, if the government hadn’t taken away the Bank of England’s regulatory function and given it to the Financial Services Authority (FSA).

Ill equipped to cope with an overly complicated set of financial instruments, carefully designed in the square mile, the FSA didn’t really stand a chance of keeping the big banks in check. As a result of this colossal mistake the seeds of Britain’s economic disaster were sown.

We are told that the FSA has since been revamped and some academic heavies thrown in, but it’s too late now, the damage is done. We can only hope that the young bankers who collapsed the system for their six figure bonus and their cottages in Cornwall are now safely back in their play pens leaving the serious business of banking to the grownups.

I can’t help thinking that the eggheads following big money to the City could have served their country better by applying their expensive education to something more useful in the fields science, engineering, or medicine. Instead Britain’s best minds have been used to manufacture the mathematical tools that have produced the most magnificent financial fiasco in living memory.

After pouring in billions of tax payers’ money to save the banks from capitalism and certain bankruptcy Chancellor Darling has now turned his hand to mitigating the mess they made of the economy. The measures can be summarised in a word, a word politicians have been afraid to use for a very long time - Socialism.

All this talk of fiscal measures, increased government spending and taxing the rich sounds like a something Chancellor Denis Healy and Tony Benn argued for the 1970’s and it palpably grates against Cameron’s every fibre.

The Tories are simply not used to having to argue against socialist policies, they thought that had ended with Kinnock and are now left on the horns of a dilemma. Will Cameron and Osborne support the government’s neo-socialism, or will they simply revert to Thatcherite type, scratching their collective heads in search for another nasty market solution?

Cameron is in a political and ideological jam, he knows it and its starting to show up in the polls. The fact is that no one in power outside a South American junta, or a sense of social and economic history believes in free market economics anymore. The IMF, EU, OECD, G20 and even George W. Bush tell us, loud and clear, that the world should spend its way out of this particular economic crisis.

The basic problem the Tory Party faces is it was their unfettered market economics that landed us in this financial mess in the first place and worse still for the Tories, the people know it. The Labour government has decided that they cannot wait ad infinitum for the hidden hand of the market to put the economy back on track and have gone back to their roots and intervened.

The depression caused by the banks and the government’s failure to control them, has resulted in millions people living in fear of losing their jobs and their homes being repossessed. To abandon the people now and the economy upon which they depend for their survival, would create social hardship and unemployment not seen in this country since the Second World War.

Associated Material

Reproduced with the kind permission of Frank Thomas "Pennyland - Echoes of the Great Depression"

"I created "Pennyland - Echoes of the Great Depression, from an original song written by my brother. Here's the link to the video" - Frank Thomas.

Cameron and Osborne Find Thatcher's Invisible Hand

Not since the end of the Second World War has the UK economy been in greater need of central planning as it is today. As in 1945 the problems the people now face are the result of too much power being left in the hands of too few.

The Labour Party under Blair with Brown towing the “Tony” line as Chancellor of the Exchequer are not blameless. The financial meltdown happened on their watch, and could have been avoided, if the government hadn’t taken away the Bank of England’s regulatory function and given it to the Financial Services Authority (FSA).

Ill equipped to cope with an overly complicated set of financial instruments, carefully designed in the square mile, the FSA didn’t really stand a chance of keeping the big banks in check. As a result of this colossal mistake the seeds of Britain’s economic disaster were sown.

We are told that the FSA has since been revamped and some academic heavies thrown in, but it’s too late now, the damage is done. We can only hope that the young bankers who collapsed the system for their six figure bonus and their cottages in Cornwall are now safely back in their play pens leaving the serious business of banking to the grownups.

I can’t help thinking that the eggheads following big money to the City could have served their country better by applying their expensive education to something more useful in the fields science, engineering, or medicine. Instead Britain’s best minds have been used to manufacture the mathematical tools that have produced the most magnificent financial fiasco in living memory.

After pouring in billions of tax payers’ money to save the banks from capitalism and certain bankruptcy Chancellor Darling has now turned his hand to mitigating the mess they made of the economy. The measures can be summarised in a word, a word politicians have been afraid to use for a very long time - Socialism.

All this talk of fiscal measures, increased government spending and taxing the rich sounds like a something Chancellor Denis Healy and Tony Benn argued for the 1970’s and it palpably grates against Cameron’s every fibre.

The Tories are simply not used to having to argue against socialist policies, they thought that had ended with Kinnock and are now left on the horns of a dilemma. Will Cameron and Osborne support the government’s neo-socialism, or will they simply revert to Thatcherite type, scratching their collective heads in search for another nasty market solution?

Cameron is in a political and ideological jam, he knows it and its starting to show up in the polls. The fact is that no one in power outside a South American junta, or a sense of social and economic history believes in free market economics anymore. The IMF, EU, OECD, G20 and even George W. Bush tell us, loud and clear, that the world should spend its way out of this particular economic crisis.

The basic problem the Tory Party faces is it was their unfettered market economics that landed us in this financial mess in the first place and worse still for the Tories, the people know it. The Labour government has decided that they cannot wait ad infinitum for the hidden hand of the market to put the economy back on track and have gone back to their roots and intervened.

The depression caused by the banks and the government’s failure to control them, has resulted in millions people living in fear of losing their jobs and their homes being repossessed. To abandon the people now and the economy upon which they depend for their survival, would create social hardship and unemployment not seen in this country since the Second World War. No responsible leader should want that on their conscience, not at any price.