Skip to main content

Breaking the Brexit logjam

The fundamental problem of Brexit has not been that the UK voted to leave the European Union. The problem has been the fact that the vote was hijacked by ignorant, grandstanding fools who interpreted the vote as a will to sever all and every link between the UK and the European Union. That was then and is now a catastrophic policy. To default to WTO rules, when any member of the WTO could stop that policy was a recipe for the UK to be held hostage by any state with an act to grind against us. A crash out from the EU, without any structure to cope, was an act of recklessness that should disqualify anyone advocating it from any position of power whatsoever. That is now the most likely option because the Conservative leadership, abetted by the cowardly extremism of Corbyn, neither understood the scale of the crisis, now had any vision of how to tackle it.

Theresa May is a weak and hapless Prime Minster, and her problems started when she failed to realize that there was a compromise that would have fulfilled the referendum vote, but not totally alienated the 48% who wished to continue or even deepen the UK relationship with the EU. Her "Citizen of Nowhere" speech was a jingoist rejection of nearly a century of British engagement with Europe and showed a willful blindness to the social and economic changes that 40 years of EU membership have brought to Britain. Remain may have lost, but by a whisker and many of those who voted to leave, including Dan Hannam MEP, believed that EFTA and/or a single market were the most likely post-EU arrangements.

If seems clear that the policy of the Prime Minister: to mirror EU rules with sovereign British rules, while obtaining certain concessions on how the UK conducts trade policy, is close to breakdown. The Chequers agreement has, in fact been no such thing. The hardliners continue to reject it. Yet from the point of view of obtaining an agreement there is nothing else on offer. It's a very poor deal.

However a leader with vision would choose to avoid the crisis that a crash-out will create. That leader is not Theresa May. She has committed herself to exit/mirror and if this deal fails, she would have to go. The problem is that there is no other viable leader either. Corbyn is unelectable. Other figures in the Conservatives, such as Michael Gove are even more divisive than the hapless Mrs May. A second referendum is even less likely, despite the general support it now has.

So what is to be done?

The growing scandal around Aron Banks may yet persuade voters that a second referendum is now essential, but if it is not, then we need to think practically. The collapse of the government would need the Article 50 deadline to be extended. However the EU is only likely to agree this, if a viable policy emerges in London.

Unless the entire referendum process is discredited (which it may be) it seems unlikely that the Leavers can be reconciled to Remain, but equally Remainers cannot be expected to support the Hardline policy that is offered as the only option.

There is a compromise policy, and that policy is EFTA membership. 

A leader who has the vision to speak out for this may finally be able to break the logjam, end the uncertainty of a crash-out and begin to heal the fractured body politic that this whole tawdry affair has inflicted on our country.


Nigel Jones said…
I generally agree with this piece, but what a shame that it contains inflammatory language at the beginning which will cause most leavers to ignore what is written here.

Popular posts from this blog

Concert and Blues

Tallinn is full tonight... Big concerts on at the Song field The Weeknd and Bonnie Tyler (!). The place is buzzing and some sixty thousand concert goers have booked every bed for thirty miles around Tallinn. It should be a busy high summer, but it isn´t. Tourism is down sharply overall. Only 70 cruise ships calling this season, versus over 300 before Ukraine. Since no one goes to St Pete, demand has fallen, and of course people think that Estonia is not safe. We are tired. The economy is still under big pressure, and the fall of tourism is a significant part of that. The credit rating for Estonia has been downgraded as the government struggles with spending. The summer has been a little gloomy, and soon the long and slow autumn will drift into the dark of the year. Yesterday I met with more refugees: the usual horrible stories, the usual tears. I try to make myself immune, but I can´t. These people are wounded in spirit, carrying their grief in a terrible cradling. I try to project hop

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo

Bournemouth absence

Although I had hoped to get down to the Liberal Democrat conference in Bournemouth this year, simple pressure of work has now made that impossible. I must admit to great disappointment. The last conference before the General Election was always likely to show a few fireworks, and indeed the conference has attracted more headlines than any other over the past three years. Some of these headlines show a significant change of course in terms of economic policy. Scepticism about the size of government expenditure has given way to concern and now it is clear that reducing government expenditure will need to be the most urgent priority of the next government. So far it has been the Liberal Democrats that have made the running, and although the Conservatives are now belatedly recognising that cuts will be required they continue to fail to provide even the slightest detail as to what they think should guide their decisions in this area. This political cowardice means that we are expected to ch