Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - General Election： Brexit - Hard vs Soft

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 7, 2017 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

07:50

General Election： Brexit - Hard vs Soft

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello Britain.
	In 2016, as you know, we held a referendum on whether or not to remain a member of the European Union, to which we as a nation voted to leave.
	Fast forward a year and we're debating whether we leave or remain a member of the single market.
	The decision before us appears to be between a soft Brexit or a hard and ultra extreme, likely Russian-backed and probably racist Brexit, with cliffs.
	The professional liars have planted their flags, but with so many adjectives and metaphors being flung about, it's sometimes hard to know what to make of it.
	So being myself a rather simple fellow, I've had to break the relevant issues into digestible sections and now beg a moment to present to my fellow Brits what all this bother is about.
	The single market originated in 1957 as the EEC.
	It grew and it grew both in size and power until it contained almost the entire continent.
	This ever-growing economic union was originally designed by the principal architects of the EU as a first step towards creating a single giant European superstate.
	Over the decades, the legal frameworks, treaties, conventions and institutions required to set up this new state were gradually assembled behind the scenes until, in 2009, the pieces were formally combined into a single legal entity.
	The single market is now at the core of this new quasi-federal country.
	It consists of 500 million people, 26 million businesses, and comprises 15% of the global economy.
	We, being a part of this new country, have free access to this huge market, which accounts for 45% of our trade.
	However, membership of this ambitious club isn't actually free.
	Let's look at the costs.
	1.
	As a member of the EU, we gave up control of our fishing grounds, which are now governed by the EU's common fisheries policy.
	This is possibly the worst policy that Brussels has ever come up with.
	Boats are given strict quotas on what they're allowed to catch, and so when they inevitably catch the wrong fish, they have to throw them back dead.
	Billions of good fish are tossed back into the sea dead each year due to these quotas, which have made our oceans some of the most overfished in the world.
	Taking back control of our waters, we can replace quotas with flexible days at sea as required to protect our valuable stocks and crucial marine environment.
	2.
	As a member of the EU, we gave up control of our immigration policy, which is now in part governed by the EU's free movement of people.
	This is possibly the worst policy that Brussels has ever come up with.
	Every year, enough people migrate to Britain to create a new city the size of Nottingham, half of which come from the EU, despite it only containing 6% of the world's population.
	This is very unusual.
	Nowhere else in the world does trade impart citizenship.
	Free movement was only implemented here as the single market was designed to become a single country.
	But regardless of the reasons, this mass migration is simply unsustainable.
	Taking back control of immigration means we can do something better.
	We can set up the system to allow many tens of thousands of the world's most talented and law-abiding people to join us on our island each year.
	For example, if we need 7,000 nurses, we can welcome in 7,000 nurses.
	We can also lavishly issue temporary visas for any people who just want to study or work here for a while.
	We'll remain open to tourists and of course we can provide refuge to asylum seekers, providing they actually are.
	An equal borders policy is one that works to treat the world's people equally based on their merits, rather than simply discriminate on the basis of where they're from.
	3.
	As a member of the EU, we gave up control of our trade policy, which is now governed by the EU's common external tariff.
	This is possibly the worst policy that Brussels has ever come up with.
	The external tariff was designed to protect large and inefficient businesses in Europe from competition by raising the costs of goods imported from the rest of the world.
	As a result, everything is more expensive, our economies stagnate and our global exports suffer.
	Taking back control of our trade policy, we can remove these economic barriers and join the global market, which is thriving outside of the EU.
	4.
	As a member of the EU, we gave up ultimate control of our law and are now subservient to the European Union's dictates and the judgments of its court.
	This is possibly the worst idea that anybody has ever come up with.
	New Zealand isn't having Australia govern its laws.
	Japan isn't subservient to China and even tiny Hong Kong is fighting to keep its independence because sovereignty is synonymous with freedom and freedom is valuable.
	Although we trade with America, for example, no one is suggesting that Mr Trump need govern our laws, whereas according to the EU, our buying wine from a chap in France apparently requires we submit to the rule of a fellow in Brussels.
	Taking back control quite literally means just that.
	We will be responsible for our own lives and our own laws, not some far-off Eurocrats, foreign courts, or especially that little chap in Brussels.
	5.
	As a member of the EU, on top of our fisheries, immigration policy, trade policy and sovereignty, we also pay a net fee of almost £10 billion each year for the privilege of trading with the single market.
	Some say this is a rather expensive bill for supposedly free trade, especially with a market that appears to be collapsing.
	40 years ago, the single market's current members comprised 30% of the global economy.
	Today they're down to 15% and falling.
	Just 10 years ago, the single market accounted for 55% of our trade.
	Today it's 45% and also falling.
	If we were to leave the single market with no deal, the worst possible case for Britain is that the EU erects trade tariffs, charging us a fixed percentage on what we sell into their market, up to the maximums allowed by the World Trade Organization.
	They might also erect the protectionist barriers that isolate members of the single market from the wider world.
	That said, and despite their bravado, the EU is actually in no position to put up trade barriers with the UK.
	Our trade earns them a net £60 billion in profit each year, any reduction of which would cost their already crumbling markets millions of jobs.
	At the same time, by leaving the single market, our global trade is set to increase by tens of billions, which will make the EU's large but shrinking market increasingly less relevant.
	So back to the options.
	A so-called soft Brexit would see us remain a member of the single market.
	Membership would continue to cost us our trade and immigration policies, and we continue paying a significant sum.
	Also, as a member, we would remain subject to EU laws and jurisdiction, and the federalisation of Europe would be near complete.
	A so-called hard Brexit would have us leave the single market and trade with the EU either under a custom trade deal or under WTO terms, depending on which they prefer.
	We'd regain control of our fisheries, trade and immigration policies.
	We would save around £10 billion a year in fees and likely earn upwards of £40 billion in new trade and our laws would be our own.
	So this, dear Britain, is the decision before us.
	It's not about hard and soft, floppy or wet.
	It's about the 2016 referendum and an attempt to overturn the result.
	As an aside, I fully believe that our next Prime Minister, Chairman May, is an out-and-out liar who fully intends to backslide on Brexit.
	I hope I'm wrong, but I foresee, as with Cameron before her, there will be months of waffle about tough negotiations before she declares victory without any meaningful change to our relationship with the European Union.
	The establishment have almost 100 years of planning and implementation invested in creating the United States of Europe, and they're not going to give it up easily.
	The worst bit is, if she does backslide, once she has a large majority, we the people have absolutely no democratic way to stop her.
	It would be, as they say, a colossal stitch-up.
	Elections are about the future, not the past, so it's time for a reality check.
	It matters not a jot at this point who voted to remain last year, be it Scotland or number four Privet Drive.
	We voted as a nation and as a nation we must act because that is how democracy works.
	Therefore we must leave the European Union.
	Then perhaps we can tackle our ridiculous national debt, our entirely unrepresentative MPs and the first past the post system that allows such Cretans to win office in the first place.
	But those are topics for a later date.
	Feel free to share or re-upload this video as you like and please do let me know what you make of all this stuff, either at YouTube or via Twitter.
	Just search for Piffle TV.
	And if you'd like to support me making more videos like this one, consider donating a dollar each month via the website patreon.com.

▲