Tories respond to own Brexit failure with worker and environment bonfire plan

Almost unmentioned in the media – apart from a tweet by the Manchester Evening News’ Jennifer Williams pointing to “the second half of a downpage story in the times [sic], but find it odd it hasn’t been picked up more” – has been a plan just floated by Home Secretary Sajid Javid in response to the Tories’ complete inability to make any progress in Brexit negotiations.

Or their endgame all along, depending on your point of view.

Javid has put forward to the Cabinet measures he claims are “necessary to keep the economy afloat”:

javid bonfire.png

Two years ago, as Jeremy Hunt announced plans for the ‘uberisation’ of our NHS, the disgraced then-DWP Secretary Damian predicted a

future economy in which jobs had no security, no sickness benefits, no holiday pay and no pensions.  

He described it as an ‘exciting‘ prospect.

And now we have actual proposals on the table for just such a bonfire of pensions and of protections for workers and the environment.

SKWAWKBOX comment:

This Tory government is so malignant, even psychopathic, that the most charitable interpretation is that the Tories are about to flush what’s left of our already-degraded social fabric down the toilet in response to their own blighted, blatant incompetence.

But in context, it looks deliberate – like what was planned all along. ‘Exciting’ for the Tories is disaster for the rest of us.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. … and thus Javid continues the Tory trajectory to trash the country.

    It’s the only ‘plan’ they’ve ever had.

  2. Yes it’s working class pensions and benefits up for attack by the Neo- Liberal Tories whilst they make massive state interventions to support upper class welfare – tax cuts for millionaires, big business corporations, tax reliefs and subsidies for big business (£93b a year – £3,500 per household), tax cuts hedge funds (£145m who then gave Tories £50m), tax cuts private landlords multiple properties, 2,000 tax reliefs for the rich and better off etc
    To them working class welfare bad, upper class welfare good? We need to get this message over to working people!

    1. The essay should have been subtitled: “making life easy by making it worse…” (Soft Machine, 1st Album)

  3. It has always been clear that the Tories entered into non negotiations right from the start. At every turn they have created chaos knowing how the EU would respond, the other side of the coin is also that Europe is not going to make it easy to leave either. So even if Labour were in the driving seat, they would still make it difficult.

    That said at least Labour would make a go of negotiating whereas the Tories want them to fail, and have already lined up a deal with Trump.

    We are currently in the heart of Naomi Klein’s description of the “shock doctrine” create chaos so that total confusion reigns, and then push through policies which would normally be unacceptable.

    A vote of no confidence in this government is all that we can do to remedy the situation, failing that an all out pledge that when they leave office we will reverse everything they have arranged with Trump.

    That will mean taking our NHS back from American companies that have already been promised the juiciest pieces of the pie.

  4. I am beginning to suspect that the Tories intend to create a “crisis” with the negotiations,and go for a minimum campaign time general election, with an appeal to patriotism and solidarity against those fiendish Europeans.It would have the effect of dividing Labour ,and uniting the Tories at the same time,since no Tory would break ranks at election time.The same, of course,cannot be said for Labour.

  5. Unfortunately, however, the ONLY way that Labour could nationalise ANY economic sector, and the only way it could use state aids for the benefit of those industries and British industry generally, is through a rock hard Brexit.

    Renationalisation policies are unlawful in the European single market, EU and EEA unless taking the form of a publicly owned company competing against private firms in a capitalist market and without the benefit of state aids. By contrast public monopoly, which should be the aim of all socialists, is entirely prohibited in all sectors, under the right of freedom of establishment (of corporations).

    In this regard the European Commission has already let the cat out the bag: it has let slip that its real fear about Brexit is nothing to do with the Tories but rather a Corbyn government using state aids to distort the European market.

      1. Nationalisation may not be against EU law, but renationalisation is, unless you pretend to have a competitive process.

  6. Labour could campaign on a Brexit for working people where we democratically get back control of labour and capital supply (rights countries had Pre-Neo-Liberalism) and then we free ourselves in our country from the Tory/EC Neo-Liberal straight jacket – and this could be an example to other countries. Labour under JC could be the first of the stars to break the Neo- Liberal chain! And then we can build a left wing democratic socialist society here again as an example to other countries. Solidarity!

  7. A very helpful link SteveH, thank you. I’m getting the impression that the (rather mild) manifesto commitments are therefore, not necessarily under threat with regards to a range of Brexit outcomes, e.g. customs unions, single market alignments, people’s votes, no deals, second referendums, or god knows what else. This is not to say that I’m not interested in those view points (Danny, Ella and others) that look beyond the modest commitments of the manifesto.

    1. But, the link provided by Adam Clifford is particularly detailed and persuasive – not to mention that it gives a very different impression re state investment/intervention! Maybe the arguments don’t need rehearsing – at least not just yet…

  8. Not remotely surprised.

    These rat-bastards have been getting away with the things thatcher used to flick herself off about but never dared do, since 2010. Had they got an increased majority last time around the DWP death toll would be infinitely higher than it is already.

    They want nothing less than a return to feudalism.

    1. Meant to say ‘Austerity death toll’. The DWP death toll being a large proportion of it.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: