European Union, Britain, Brexit discussed on Morning Edition

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Next. We hear the case for Brexit do over no top British leader's seems quite ready to call for a second referendum in the UK. But after two and a half years of failure to work out an exit from the European Union is called for in a first referendum in two thousand sixteen. A former British leader is talking about voting again, David Miller band was once a leading member of Britain's Labour party and the British Foreign Secretary he's now the president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee in New York City. He was watching from afar this week as Prime Minister, Theresa May's Brexit plan was overwhelmingly defeated in parliament weeks remain until the UK would leave the EU with no deal at all. What is this week's politics in Britain shown about Brexit? I think that the deadlock that you see in Britain at the moment reflects a couple of factors. First of all. People voted to leave the European Union without any model for what Brexit would mean. And the government has been unable to come up with a coherent definition of what Brexit is. Secondly, there are rising levels of concern that parliament itself is so split that. There is no way of bridging the divide, and that leads people very worried that Britain might in the end is so-called crash ounce of the European Union without a deal at all. And that would be the most damaging outcome. Do you see this as a tactical problem by which I mean, perhaps Theresa May could've negotiated things differently and managed this better? Or do you see a strategic problem that that Britain is simply attempting the impossible. Well, I think that it would be impossible for Britain to achieve the Brexit. That was described by the leave campaign in the referendum, the leave campaign claimed that money would flow into the UK. The trade deals would be ready the day after Brexit. None of. Of this has come to pass. And so there is a structural problem. Relating to the way Brexit was sold essentially the lie on which it was sold. However, it's also the case that we didn't need to be in the situation two and a half years off to the referendum that we're in today. People like me who oppose leaving the European Union. I think would have had to swallow hard. We'd been sad. But if Theresa May had chosen a more, pragmatic course, I think she could have found compromise which meant that we did leave in a way that was planned and planned full and left people like me saying that it's the wrong outcome, but not one that we can object to. So what is the case for a second referendum, given that you will be told that you simply want a referendum because you didn't like the first one. Yeah. The case for a second referendum constantly be the we didn't like the outcome. I think that the case runs like this. I the Brexit that people were promised is not an offer second the first. Referendum had no, quote, unquote, informed consent. The was no detail that allowed people to know what they will voting for Thirdly. And I think critically it's better safe than sorry. And when you buy a house you put it on offer. And then you got a survey done. And if the survey reports that the substance in the house, you can revise your offer or not by the house. Oh, the home inspection. Okay. All right. The home inspection. Sorry. We you. So. So what we're saying? I'm a supporter of a second referendum both on democratic grounds. But also on economic and social grounds is that it's better to be safe than sorry, and people should be able to now they know what the home inspections revealed now that we know so much more about what leaving the European Union means they should be in a position to affirm that decision or choose not to. And so this is a situation that I think isn't about a retrial or repeat it's about some country that should be famed for its pragmatism for its maturity for the seriousness of it's a parliamentary system of government able to take the long view. I mean, it's I was minister for three years from two thousand seven two thousand ten am. I spent those three years fending off voting against leading my party colleagues against proposal for a referendum because referendums give power to demagogues and dictators and their loved by demagogues and dictators and a parliamentary system of government has to restore the balance. Which allows passion to be tempered by reason? Although you're getting at some of the complexities here, you're saying a referendum was a bad idea. And so what is needed is another referendum? Absolutely, right. And there's a paradox in this because we can't take away while the people who voted for without giving them the chance to affirm or rescind. But I do think there are big questions here about how countries like Britain after all you're going through your own trauma of the shutdown yourself. There are big questions here about how the leading western liberal democracies show that democratic systems of government can mobilize the wisdom of crowds. And not fall foul of the screams of the moment. David Miller band. Thanks for taking the time. Enjoyed it. Thank you so much. David Miller band is the president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee. If British politics have been a mess this week Sweden has been without a government since September after an election delivered no clear winner. But this morning the Swedish. Parliament voted to give the previous prime minister centre left, social Democrats. Stephan Levin, another four years in power, Maddie savage has been following the story from outside the Swedish parliament Sweden's been in limbo for four months after one of the tightest elections in history ended without a clear winner, partly due to the rise of nationalist anti-immigration party, the Sweden Democrats. They took votes away from traditional parties on the center right as well. As the social Democrats who are on the center left and have a very different agenda despite this similar name. So he's been a complicated process as the different parties have tried to figure out who should lead a coalition government today. Stephan Levin, finally got enough support to do it. Here's the speaker of the Swedish parliament Andrey's Nolan announcing LeVine had won the vote. Abc's? Stephanie starts minister. What is important about this vote? Is that a number of smaller center right parties, essentially switched sides in order to help? Stephan Levin back into power. They said they tolerate a centre-left coalition rather than risk a center right government that would have relied on support from the heart right nationalist, be prime minister has had to compromise to he said, he'll cut taxes, I'm relaxed the country's strict labor laws leaving away from his typical social democrat agenda, which many think is controversial his Samuel Ingram. A spokesperson for one of Sweden's largest trade union organisations, the thing that we have a government. It's taking longer time than usual in Sweden and longer time than usual in most countries, we're worried that it would become more easy for employers to fire people for the wrong reasons to circumvent dismissive protection legislation opinion poll suggests that all of this has rocked confidence in politicians in general. Many people think the fragile new government is in for a rookie ride, which might end up helping the nationalists. When even more support.

Coming up next