Morning Call: pick of the papers

Ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers.

Why I, as a journalist and ex-editor, believe it is time to regulate the press (Observer

Will Hutton gives his support to the forthcoming Leveson report.

 

Despite the sabre-rattling, an attack on Iran is now unlikely (Independent on Sunday

 

Patrick Cockburn explains why it's now too late for Israel to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities.

 

Gaza grabs the headlines as Congo once more descends into chaos (Observer

 

Ian Birrell calls for the world to pay more attention to the rebel takeover of Goma.

 

The first law of social work: politics trumps parental love (Sunday Times) (£) 

 

Minette Marin comments on the recent case of social workers removing a child from foster parents who were members of UKIP.

 

Unlike Europe, the Tories can bind together (Sunday Telegraph

 

Janet Daley excoriates the European governing class.

 

I see one last, if faint, hope for a truly free British press (Sunday Telegraph

 

Matthew D'Ancona argues that Cameron should offer the press "one last chance".

 

Why Dave doesn't give a hoot about the EU budget (Independent on Sunday

 

John Rentoul argues that Cameron is right to pursue a "wait-and-see" policy on Europe.

 

David Cameron's boldness over Europe does him credit (Sunday Telegraph

 

Iain Martin praises Cameron's tough stance during the EU budget negotiations.

 

Houdini Dave can slip the Leveson trap (Sunday Times) (£) 

 

Martin Ivens calls for a voluntary regulatory arrangement among newspapers.

 

Buck up Britain - regrets are mere whinges (Sunday Times) (£) 

 

India Knight says she has no time in life for regrets.

Getty
Show Hide image

I'm a Remain voter who feels optimistic about Brexit - here's why

Take back control is more than just a slogan. 

Most politics geeks have found themselves deliciously sucked into a soap opera over the last few days. It’s fast-paced, personality-based and ripe for speculation. But underneath it all, the deeper, harder questions remain – what does Brexit look like, and how can we make it work?

When news of Leave’s victory broke in the early hours of Friday morning (is it possible that was just a week ago?) I felt like the only Remain voter who had some kind of optimism. Fellow Remainers still reeling from the result berate me for it, but I continue to find two reasons for hope.

First, leaving gives us a chance to build a different type of economy. I don’t wish to belittle the recent economic fallout, but with the right leadership and negotiations, we could use this moment to push for an increase in trade with the Commonwealth and beyond. A fall in the pound will disappoint many, but it could help with a much needed rebalancing of our economy, moving from one predominantly based on financial services in London to manufacturing across the regions. 

Second – and perhaps more importantly – leaving is a chance to rebuild our politics. For too long, millions of people in this country have felt ignored or exploited by those who call themselves democratic leaders. In protest, they have left mainstream parties to join UKIP or the hordes of non-voters. In winning this referendum, they have finally been listened to. Perhaps the pressure cooker of discontent can finally be taken off the boil. Perhaps parties can use this result as a chance to rebuild trust and shake up some of our other institutions that are badly in need of reform. 

This point was really brought home to me by a student in the school where I teach. The morning of the referendum she told me that she didn’t think we’d leave the EU, even if the people voted for it. Her friends agreed, saying it was “weird you have to vote in pencil”. They were scared the people’s voice could so easily be rubbed out. When I saw her the next day, a small part of me was relieved that these students had seen that people can genuinely trump the establishment. 

If you’re not convinced, just imagine the backlash if Remain had won by a point or two. We almost certainly would then have voted in an extremely right-wing government, much the same way that the SNP saw a boost after they lost the independence referendum last year. 

Of course, a positive path for Brexit is far from guaranteed. Any leader that goes back on the vote, or tries to fudge it by saying that open borders are a price worth paying, is going to do worse than plummet in the polls - they are going to undermine our entire democracy. And a whole generation’s trust in politicians is already dangerously low.

But this doesn’t have to be a moment for the right. Good leaders understand that Leave’s “take back control” message was about a genuine concern with our borders. Great leaders will acknowledge that it also reflected a deeper concern about the need for agency. They understand the vote was a rejection of a neoliberal approach to the economy that fails to make space for well-paid work, family and community.

The public voted for decreased pressure on public services and a Britain that would negotiate as hard in India as it would in Germany for trade deals. They voted to end a perceived overcentralisation of power by elites, and create a more democratic Britain that gives more dignity to its people. I might not have believed that leaving the EU was the best way to achieve these things, but I’m on the left because I believe we are best placed to make these desires real.  

The vote to Leave or Remain was a binary decision. But Brexit is not. What type of path we take now depends entirely on the direction we choose, and the perseverance we show along the way.

Rowenna Davis is Labour PPC for Southampton Itchen and a councillor for Peckham