fbpx
Comment

Nick Ferrari makes killer case for slamming brakes on Brexit

by Luke Lythgoe | 10.04.2019

Leave-voting LBC host Nick Ferrari gives up. “Just bloody stay and we’ll move onto other things” he told his listeners this morning.

It’s an argument pro-Europeans have been making for years: Brexit is swallowing up all of the government’s time, energy and money. The problems that led to the Brexit vote in the first place are being neglected. What’s more, at a time of great global change the UK risks being left behind.

Ferrari easily reeled off a list of issues that politicians would do better to spend their time on: “The people who are being stabbed and shot, and the schools that are underperforming, and the hospitals that aren’t working, the NHS that’s creaking at the seams.”

He could have added the housing shortage, our ageing population, the social care crisis, cash-strapped local councils, neglect of our post-industrial towns, rising political extremism, or having a frank national discussion about immigration. All of these were on the minds of at least some Leave voters in 2016. Brexit stops us doing anything meaningful about them.

Then there are the big issues on the horizon which the government needs to focus on sooner rather than later. Climate change, a resurgent Russia, the displacement of millions of people across the globe, trade tensions between China and America, the technological revolution. The UK, with its diplomatic expertise and cultural clout, could have been a voice of sanity in troubled times. Instead we find ourselves distracted on the sidelines.

Some Brexit diehards will think Ferrari has thrown in the towel too soon. He has always described himself as a “reluctant” Leaver. They might think that within just a few more weeks or months we’ll be out of the EU and free of this political quagmire. Not so. Any form of Brexit – the prime minister’s deal, a May/Corbyn compromise, even crashing out with no deal – will see us arguing over our place in the world for years to come.

By contrast, if we have a People’s Vote and decide to stay in the EU, our politicians won’t have to squabble about Brexit and can instead fix the country’s real problems. They will also have much more money to do so.

Ferrari has hit upon something very important. A choice to push on with Brexit now is a choice to neglect everything else that affects people’s daily lives. If Ferrari is concerned about this, surely others who voted Leave in 2016 are having second thoughts too? That’s why it’s so important that, whatever form of Brexit politicians eventually get behind, the final decision must be put to the people.

Demand a vote on the Brexit deal

Click here to find out more

Edited by Hugo Dixon

Tags: , Categories: Media

14 Responses to “Nick Ferrari makes killer case for slamming brakes on Brexit”

  • I think we should take May’s deal. The remoaners deserve to have the next 50 years lamenting their decision. I look forward to it TBH. Can’t wait for the **** to hit the fan and enjoy it.

  • I will ignore the stupid remark above but must admit I have heard similar several times in the media and on the BBC.
    The last time I heard Mr Ferrari he was advocating a hard Brexit. It is extraordinary that he was changed his stance. Hope he is being genuine. Rather than another vote I think we should now be demanding a revocation of Article 50. At the start of all this many contributors to this website said that it would be impossible (and irresponsible to try) to extricate ourselves from the EU. If we leave it will be like starting all over again from baseline zero. Plain crazy

  • Could Jason be asked to set out why he thinks we should take May’s deal?

    Could he explain why the remoaners would lament their decision? Actually I am not clear what decision by remoaners he is referring to – could he please clarify that too.

    And, while he is about it could he tell us what he thinks the **** hitting the fan will be? What is his view of how things will go in the future?

  • We need to give brexiters a way to back out of Brexit without losing face. This is one route.

    I’ve been posting on the Newcastle Chronicle website about how “if Brexit was a horse you would shoot it”. It’s not clever but it does seem to resonate rather well with brexiters.

  • It would appear Nick is following in the footsteps of Peter Oborn who also had his own penny dropping moment a few days ago.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/peter-oborne-brexit_uk_5cac872ee4b02084ce8fc662?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9kdWNrZHVja2dvLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAABVJyS4PrWi_KSHoCqiE8arZvb46bhlRabe4bzUDiyEziKWqrgANirzCl35OTrLTJy1-PowB6ELeNMiEGyPSx1DWGZPGjoENssnxQO_mfsXPJhZDSwQFOFEAc-dAb6sWst306tmpO1Zz3pz_UZWSlw-ZGRcWv2CofgqaEClVUVK2

  • Another interesting article recently in the media was about Uri Geller (the entertainer of spoon bending fame) and Brexit.
    Apparently, he wrote to the prime minister, saying that: he felt “psychically and very strongly” that most Britons were anti-Brexit and he promised to stop the process telepathically.
    Apparently through his psychic energy, he’s hoping that Theresa May will withdraw Article 50. Mmm…
    If the French president continues to play hardball, therefore preventing any extension, it could be that Theresa May will very much be forced to take this course of action.
    However, those persuading her to do this are more likely to be the likes of the Queen, or the Archbishop of Canterbury.
    Whoever might be influencing Theresa May here, I would only applaud Nick Ferrari and Peter Oborn for having eventually seen the light!

  • I agree wholeheartedly with the analysis but once brexit is off the table we will still be left with the party who created most of the problems in the first place. The current situation has highlighted the fragility of our democratic system and the unrepresentative nature of many of the politicians who are willing to put party above country.
    A reforming Parliament is needed to correct the inadequacies of our current system and the current government will not be willing or even capable of achieving it. A general election will offer an opportunity for a fledgling party to canvas on a reforming and non- austere platform.

  • Does anybody believe that the utter incompetents in parliament are actually capable of sorting out the other national issues mentioned above?????
    They are careerist politicians obsessed with politically correct policies and an obsession with diversity and equality. The issues suffered by the mass populous are way down their list of priorities!
    One of the plus sides of if they decide to revoke article 50 is that a great number of them could be drawing the dole within a year.

  • Peter,
    Do you not agree that we should appreciate the efforts of many MPs across all parties to hold the Government to account? This is evident from the Commons debates: do you listen to them? There is also much that they do behind the scenes – committee work for instance – that we don’t always get to see.
    A number are approaching Brexit with consistent, clear vision and forceful, compelling arguments within the framework of our Parliamentary democracy. They deserve full credit at this critical time, when so much of our national interest is at stake. Many represent their constituents’ interests as best they can, in the face of regular threats and abuse. Some have had to compromise party loyalties.
    Let there be no return to 1970s Britain with its ‘orderly management of decline.’

  • I wish I could agree with you Edward but I can’t.
    It is so plain to see that the remain element in parliament has been hell bent on overturning the referendum result from from day one! I really don’t think they are truly considering the best interests of their constituents just their ideological positions. They consider themselves to be the progressives, I just think they are anti democratic and scared to death of being held to account by people like me.

    I will now never vote for a pro-EU politician ever again.

  • It’s a relief to learn that some people are prepared to think again, in the light of new facts. As the economist Keynes once said to a critic accusing him of inconsistency, “If the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?”

    Let us not forget what May told us in her 2017 manifesto, that we need:-
    Theresa May stated on the first page of her 2017 manifesto that we need:-

    “a strong and stable government to get the best Brexit deal…
    “a strong and stable leadership to make the most of the opportunities Brexit brings…
    “a clear plan.”

    We have none of those things and are unlikely to get them before 31 October. So we must assume we will not get the best Brexit deal and we will not be able to make the most of the opportunities Brexit brings. Pursing Brexit under these terms to the detriment of everything else is not in the best interests of the Nation. The only sane solution now is to revoke or re-vote.

  • Responding to Peter, based on his comment:

    “It is so plain to see that the remain element in parliament has been hell bent on overturning the referendum result from from day one! I really don’t think they are truly considering the best interests of their constituents just their ideological positions. ”

    If one were to analyse the indicative voting – please pay attention Peter – there are fortunately many MP’s not on the side of government who fortunately for us are not opposing May’s deal to serve their careers or protect their party’s. Instead they are opposing May’s deal because they consider it to be detrimental to the UK economy. They recognise that if we must have a deal, there are far better ones which include being in the EU customs union and being part of the single market. That’s what they’re arguing for.

    It’s not difficult to understand the following: If you take away the ability of British companies, to trade freely without tariffs with other European countries, this will logically cause companies to collapse and jobs to be lost.
    The consequence of this is for the government to loose tax revenue therefore reduce the amount of national income to pay for schools, health and education. Not a very wise idea?

    By the way Germany trades very successfully with the rest of the world whilst being a member of the EU. The UK does the same but of course could do better. That’s a matter for the UK as a whole to organise better.

    If there is a failing of the two larger political parties in the UK, it has nothing to do with being a member of the EU, but instead it’s a failing to recognise and deal with older industrialised regions. This needs vision and investment. A much heralded push in this direction, but a vision which is progressing too slowly, is the concept of the Northern Powerhouse.

    For this to really take off, the UK needs a new influx of MP’s who understand this. These MP’s need to have the intellect, competence and will to change the whole balance of power between London and the English Regions. They need devolution like Scotland and Wales.

    The Regions need to be given the right to take control of their own budgets and the freedom to set their own objectives, and take their own regional socio-economic decisions.

    This is the crux of the debate, not the debate about being part of the EU. This message now needs to be got out to the Brexit-voting public. As soon as public forums can be set up between now and 31 October everyone in the UK will feel that they’re in a better place than they are now come this date.

    By then most of us will be clamouring for a new referendum.

  • Please pay attention NJ ( I’m not normally this condescending but thought I better enter into the spirit) , the majority of the MPs you mention voted for article 50 which states that if a deal cannot be agreed then we leave with no deal. Staying in the customs union and single market is not leaving!

    It makes me laugh to think that so many of the EU zealots on this site think we can’t survive outside this political project. Certainly from a business perspective we will have to change and hopefully we won’t have to be so reliant on the banking world.

  • He is not a sincere man, I would be wary of anything he says. Take Le Pen for example, she was anti EU but changed her tune about leaving, not because she likes it, but would rather destroy the EU from within. These are spiteful people.