Category: EU Referendum

Fake News, Brexit And ‘The Prophets Of Doom’

Brexit_cartoon_06.23.2016

Long before Donald Trump coined the phrase ‘Fake News’ (dismissing whatever is inconvenient), British politicians were juggling with ‘spin’ and ‘spin doctors’, as certain individuals or political parties tried to get their own political message across in the most favourable way possible, whilst portraying competing projects, events and points of view negatively. ‘Project Fear’ is perhaps one of the most recent and prominent examples of this where politicians favouring a ‘no deal’ Brexit consider the arguments presented by Remainers as scaremongering, whereas those in favour of remaining portray Leavers as chasing after unicorns and duping the public (arguing therefore that many of those who voted to leave didn’t really understand the implications of what was put before them). Naturally, this is seen as patronising twaddle by those who voted ‘leave’. All of this has been magnified by television, social media and the internet to fever pitch. However, the stakes have been significantly raised by Conservative politicians each vying to be the next Prime Minister with many leaning towards a harder or no-deal Brexit in the light of the recent European elections. But this has caused many on the opposition benches and those wanting to remain in the EU to highlight all the more fervently the perils of a no deal Brexit and falling off the so-called ‘cliff edge’.

The problem is of course that we are not homogeneous human beings – we all come to life with our own particular values and perceptions, but in the game of politics, many of our politicians are deliberately selective, trying to promote their own particular viewpoint or party-line to gain some sort of party or personal advantage. It’s therefore very difficult for members of the general public to ‘see the wood for the trees’ and discern the impartial truth. The BBC may try to give us its own ‘reality check’ but many people are still wary of fake news and ‘media spin’ and therefore find it hard to discern fact from fiction. Surveys repeatedly demonstrate that people want honest politicians but discerning the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is very hard.

With so much at stake it’s becoming increasing important that we should trust the politicians who represent us – and honesty is paramount, because it’s honest and transparent politicians who garner the greatest trust and respect. As someone who the Bible describes as being ‘full of grace and truth’ (John 1.14) it’s not surprising that Jesus encouraged his disciples to be equally open and honest, advising them not to make promises that they can’t keep but urging them to simply, “let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes’ and your ‘No’ be ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one” (Matthew 5.37). Biblically speaking it’s not just cleanliness which is close to godliness but truthfulness, whereas lies and deceit generate confusion and are much more likely to be destructive. So let us do our best to discern the fact from the fiction, the fake news from reality and when it comes to determining our future, let us call for less political spin and more honesty and truth from our politicians and then vote for those who do so.

He whose walk is blameless … speaks the truth from his heart. Psalm 15.2

project fear

Brexit – If At First You Don’t Succeed ….

eu referendum shutterstock_392967421

IF AT FIRST YOU DON’T SUCCEED TRY, TRY AGAIN seems to be the Prime Minister’s mantra as she tries to get her Brexit deal through Parliament – which seems to be a herculian task given the fact that Parliament had already voted against it by 432 votes to 202 – the biggest government defeat ever known. This immediately led to the leader of the opposition tabling a ‘Vote of No Confidence’ which was also roundly defeated. So, the Prime Minister has the ‘confidence of the house’ but not the power to proceed with her proposed deal which had taken her and her government two years to negotiate. Confusion reigns as politicians and the public alike ponder ‘where do we go from here?’

Typically, most people in such a situation would seek a compromise, but unfortunately the problem fundamentally doesn’t really lend itself to one. Like the Brexit referendum of two years ago, we are still left really with the binary choice of ‘do we stay or do we leave?’ Perhaps in reality, the slogan used by Boris Johnson of ‘having one’s cake and eating it’ whilst Foreign Secretary highlights the Achilles heel of our negotiations; one immediately spotted by the EU’s negotiator Michel Barnier who was unequivocally opposed to the UK ‘cherry picking’ what it did and didn’t want. Our politicians should have not only recognised the result of the referendum but embraced wholeheartedly the intrinsic nature and logic of it as spelt out by the simple Leave means Leave campaign slogan. Then our negotiators might have made more positive headway in the discussions, but instead the constant desire to keep ‘as close a tie as possible’ with the EU, and find a middle way, has spectacularly backfired and come back to haunt it. Unfortunately, there is now no potential solution (Norway, Canada, rescinding article 50, or a second referendum) which doesn’t severely undercut somebody’s redline or in my personal opinion fundamentally undermine the democratic process.

The King James Version of the Bible rather poignantly states that ‘where there is no vision the people perish’ (Proverbs 29.18) and we are in danger of seeing this in reality. The sharing of thoughts views and opinions is of course fundamentally important, but without a clear sense of direction, leadership and vision, we will always struggle. Instead of constantly grand-standing on an issue of such national significance, our politicians should humbly come and work together. Those who aren’t in positions of power and authority shouldn’t act as if they were, but positively try to encourage those who do have the power to make the best decision possible – and those with the power and authority should humbly listen to all sides and respect the fact that they are required to act on behalf of the nation. And we who are members of the general public should recognise the referendum result and prayerfully encourage them to do so. That’s democracy!

If my people …. humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven … forgive their sin and will heal their land.    2 Chronicles 7.14

matt cartoon

Politics, Leadership And Authority – What A Responsibility!

Tony Blair

They say ‘a week is a long time in politics’, but it’s taken seven long years for the Chilcot Report to be published. The Inquiry into the Iraq war may have been announced by Prime Minister Gordon Brown on 15th June 2009 but the final report published on the 6th July 2016 with its ‘damming conclusions’ about the ‘decision to go to war’ and upon what basis the nation did so, immediately shone a light, once again, upon his predecessor, Tony Blair. The media were waiting with eager anticipation as to what he would say – and whether he would apologise for the deaths of 179 British Servicemen and many others killed during the conflict.

The pros and cons of such a debate are far too long and complex for me to consider here, but they do raise some interesting questions about power, leadership and authority, and raise the conundrum of what do we do when the people that we vote into government (often with large popular majorities), do things that we rather wish they didn’t? Frequently the cry is for firm leadership – but what happens when our leaders firmly direct us in the wrong direction? Understandably many people will have a view on Tony Blair, and hindsight as they say is a wonderful (and occasionally cruel) thing, but perhaps it should be noted that despite his many failings Chilcot does not say that Tony Blair wilfully deceived Parliament, rather that he honestly believed the flawed intelligence that had been given to him, and despite many people marching in protest against the war, polls showed that at the time, public opinion was overwhelmingly in support of military action. All of which goes to show how easy it is for us a nation to be led up the garden path, unless we ensure that all the appropriate checks and balances are in place. This is all salient, because once again we find ourselves as a nation at a crossroads, and once again ‘firm leadership’ is called for as the Conservative Party elects a new leader and Prime Minister. In homage to Margaret Thatcher, Teresa May and Andrea Leadsom are already being touted as the new ‘iron maidens’ for our generation but they will need to be careful that in their desire to provide firm and positive leadership in the light of the nation’s decision to leave the EU, that they do so collegiately and with the full support of their cabinet, colleagues and party members or else they too in future years could find the swathe of public opinion against them. Firm leadership is not always about getting one’s own way, but taking sound advice and acting in the best interest of others.

It’s interesting that there is a sober lesson to be the learnt from the pages of the Bible, because at one point the people of Israel were so unhappy with their current system of leadership, that instead of the historic train of prophets ruling over them, they demanded a king so that they might be like all the “other nations” having a king to govern them and go out before them and fight their battles (1 Samuel 8). The prophet Samuel saw this as a rejection of God’s voice and authority administered via the prophets and warned them about all the disadvantages of having a king and the possible corruption that came with it, but the people wouldn’t listen. So Samuel prayed to God about it who graciously let the people have their way. The lesson is that sometimes God grants us the very thing that we wish for, but then not only do we have to take responsibility for our actions but we sometimes also have to live with the consequences.

And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and walk humbly with your God. Micah 6.8

EU Referendum – Should I Stay Or Should I Go?

eu referendum shutterstock_392967421

In the light of the EU referendum on the 23rd June, “The Clash’s” 1982 song ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go’ (complete with backing vocals in Spanish) seems to sum up the mood of the moment as people struggle to decide which way they will vote (♫ ‘this indecision’s bugging me’ – esta indecision me molesta ♫). How do we decide? The problem is, of course, that a good case can be made either way. Most people would consider the ‘Common Market’ to be a good thing and initially thought that this was what they were joining, but over the years the EU has changed beyond recognition, becoming a vast bureaucratic machine (some would say empire) that has power and influence over most aspects of common life, from weights and measures, to rights of employees, to the environment. Over time, the size of the EU has also changed from the original six nations in 1957, to nine in 1973 when the United Kingdom joined, to the current twenty-eight, with other nations such as Turkey wanting to join at some point in the future. Many of the benefits have been considerable; cheaper products; greater choice and opportunity; stronger ties with European partners leading to a greater sense of mutual understanding, co-operation, stability, security and peace. The economic, corporate and personal opportunities have also been immense with the free movement of individuals across the continent seeking work and a better way of life.

Equally, as ‘the club’ grows bigger the disadvantages have become more apparent (and some would say irritating). Britain’s influence isn’t what it once was as it tries to negotiate with 27 other partners. The ‘one size fits all’ approach of Brussels doesn’t always seem to make allowance for exceptional or national circumstances, resulting in a perceived lack of sovereignty and a reduced ability to determine one’s own future (or even manage one’s own borders).

So, what IS the answer? Well, in some ways it’s hard to see ‘the wood for the trees’ as nobody really knows what life would be like if Brexit occurred. There are naturally a lot of fear stories and some things said which simply don’t appear to be logical. Why, for instance should our security arrangements be changed, because we decide to make the political and commercial decision to withdraw from EU? Collaborative working in this area seems only natural and no one is seriously suggesting otherwise.

David Cameron and Boris Johnson might be clashing with one another but in reality it seems to me that we have two choices! We either stick with the tried and trusted with all its imperfections and try to reform things for the better from within the EU, recognising the value of international co-operation – or we say that the EU is impossible to reform and has become simply too big for its own good, weighed down with its own bureaucracy hindering the creative talent, and well-being of individual nations such as ours. It’s a big decision and a difficult choice but it’s still our choice, and so I would like to urge you to do your best and think around the issues, be bold, courageous and use your democratic freedom to the best effect and vote. Vote not just for yourself or for what will benefit you in the short term, but vote for your children, grandchildren and their children, vote for future generations – what will give them the best chance of living in peace and prosperity? Vote for the nation!

“For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. Jeremiah 29.11