BlogsBridgingBridging Introducer

Bridging Introducer: The Brexit effect

Here we are again. Another fad word, made from two other words, that is being discussed in every office, every pub, every street corner and every football stadium (at least it should be given the amount of European players that would have to leave the premiership if we leave the EU) around the UK.

At the time of writing this there is a little over a month until we all cast our votes. That is a seriously scary deadline as I still do not know which way my vote is going to go. As it stands I am about 51% out and 49% in. Personally I think I would like to be out, but professionally I think we should stay in. I’m torn, non-committal and very much still perched on the fence. Why though, with a month to go until I make one of the biggest decisions of my life voting wise, am I still undecided? That scares me more than the uncertainty of our future as we head into this unknown void.

I like David Cameron, for the most part and I like Boris Johnson an awful lot. Living and working in London I have agreed with and enjoyed the majority of Boris’s decisions. I do appreciate that a lot of readers are based outside of London and may have differing feelings towards him. He looks a bit funny, sounds a bit funny and is utterly un-relatable to the majority of the country.

But I think he has been a breath of fresh air. If I agree with the vast majority of what he has done, then shouldn’t I trust him with my Brexit vote? I have used this argument/line of thought with a few people now and the response has been along the lines of suggesting that Boris is separating himself from David Cameron in preparation for his run to become the next Tory leader.

Possibly true to a point, but I cannot see someone as intellectual as Boris planting his flag into an idea that could go catastrophically wrong for the country if he is not right. His role as David’s likely successor would be over before it has even begun. Surely he has legitimate facts and figures to base this decision on, there must be proof that leaving Europe would be in our best interest?

David Cameron has been taking a bit of a hammering recently, thanks to George and his new budget. My personal feeling is that overall, he has been a good PM. You will never keep an entire country happy and given that we are such a diverse and magically different collective of people he was always going to alienate himself from pockets of the UK. It is simply unavoidable.

But, again, I live in London and I work in London and the majority of what he has achieved has been beneficial to me. A good friend of mine is a fireman in London and he has a very different view and I appreciate and understand all of his issues. I definitely cannot tell you what he thinks about Boris!

So, if David is for staying in and I am fair and use the same logic applied to Boris Johnson, then I should support David and vote to stay in? You can see my predicament can’t you? You would think that the government could put together a much better argument on staying in, one that cannot be batted back by the out camp.

They have access to all the figures involved, they have intimate conversations with the governments from the Germany, France, and Spain et al. Why can they not play a little dirty and tell us what is being said around Europe in these meetings? I know Germany would never in a million years stop selling BMW’s to what I believe is their 2nd biggest market just because we left. It makes no sense at all. Would they stop buying from us? Maybe. Would that mean that we stopped buying from them? Maybe. Has a conversation between David, George, and the Germans taken place, pondering over such possibilities? I would think so, why wouldn’t it have? So why not tell us what was said, that would surely help the In campaign cement the victory. Telling us what will actually happen if we leave, scare us, secure the votes. Seems simple doesn’t it?

You will have noticed that I have asked way more questions than any article should have. It is on purpose and I hope it highlights the problem. Or at least the problem in my eyes. We just don’t know what will happen and there are a huge amount of questions that need to be asked and answered before I and I assume a large number of the population feel comfortable enough to make an informed decision and cast our votes.

It seems like a lot of campaigning has been done without any concrete evidence and fact being disclosed, at least not that has been rebuffed immediately by the other side. There must be undeniable facts that we can hang our hats on. I just have not seen it yet, I am not aware and I do not know which way to go. Again, one month out, that is not good at all. This article has been more opinion than factual writing and I apologise for that. I suppose it sums up what I have been whittling on about though, not enough facts and an awful lot of waffle.

Hopefully I get to a point where I am comfortable in my decision and I’m not voting based on a 51% majority. The solution, in my eyes, is a live debate between David and George and Boris and Nigel live
on TV. Failing that, at the next Bridging Introducer round-table.

Show Comments

Enter your e-mail address to receive updates straight to your inbox