Britain, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

Government contingencies needed if Brexit fails to deliver a trade deal

BRITAIN

Intro: We will all shortly find out precisely where we stand as Theresa May triggers Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty

In an era of political turbulence, the weeks and months ahead promise to be momentous in recent British history. The passage of the Parliamentary Bill to begin the process of leaving the EU is now complete. The legislative reality of the bill will now make possible the decision that was taken by the British electorate almost nine months ago.

Some people argue that this process has taken far too long, but the political upheaval that followed the referendum and the protracted court case over parliamentary sovereign rights have delayed matters. In many ways, though, this should have been hugely advantageous for the Government. It has had time to prepare for what promises to be the most complex set of international negotiations since we sought entry into the Common Market and EEC in the early Seventies. Indeed, given the complexities, they will pale into insignificance by comparison with what lies ahead for the British prime minister and her team.

A report from the Commons foreign affairs committee urged the Government to devise a contingency plan in the event of Britain leaving the EU with no deal and said it would be a ‘dereliction of duty’ not to prepare for such an eventuality. This point is well borne out if we consider that reverting to basic World Trade Organisation rules will leave us facing trade barriers and increasing levels of tariffs on trade. The country clearly needs to know before we leave what a “no deal” will entail.

The biggest danger is that British pragmatism will clash with EU romanticism. While a deal allowing British goods and services the same access to the single market they enjoy now is in everyone’s interests, this won’t necessarily be the view held on the Continent, especially in Brussels.

There is a risk that this process, once handed over to the European Commission by the Council of Ministers, will become enmired in the very bureaucracy that led Britain to lose faith in the whole project. While some of Europe’s elected politicians might be inclined to recognise the good sense of a British position they will likely become too distracted by their own domestic politics to focus on ours.

Undoubtedly, The Commission will have huge influence over these talks, how they are handled and the direction in which they travel. Jean-Claude Juncker and Michel Barnier, the Commission principals in charge of the EU negotiations, will be anxious to deny the UK anything that might encourage others across the EU which they too might wish to emulate. The rise of populist movements across Europe, particularly in the wake of Brexit and Donald Trump’s election victory in America, will weigh heavily.

While most should wish for a mutually beneficially agreement, the Government must prepare fully for the possibility that there won’t be a trade deal. The time for further discussion is almost over – even if Scotland continues with its position of holding a second Scottish independence referendum.

We will all shortly find out precisely where we stand as Theresa May triggers Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.

Standard
Britain, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

View: Sir John Major and the Brexit vote

BRITAIN

john-major2

Intro: Crucially, however, if Sir John accepts the democratic decision, his counsel would surely be better deployed by helping Theresa May achieve the best possible deal for Britain

IN the space of just ten days, we have had two high profile speeches from two former British prime ministers. Both have entered the Brexit fray at a critical moment in the passage of the Article 50 Bill through Parliament.

First, Tony Blair, the former Labour prime minister, has called for a mass movement to overturn the result of the June 23 plebiscite. Mr Blair is orchestrating his campaign through a new foundation, a lobby group, titled Open Britain. Now, Sir John Major, the former Conservative prime minister, has waded into the debate. Sir John warns of all sorts of pitfalls ahead as Britain negotiates its exit from the European Union.

The former Conservative leader does not follow his successor in Downing Street by proposing a campaign to reverse the democratic decision of the electorate. Unlike Mr Blair, Sir John says that while he considers Brexit to be a ‘historic mistake’ it was one the British people were entitled to make.

John Major’s principal concern is with what he regards as the over-optimistic and rather simplistic expectations of those who desire a clean break with Europe. He fears for the future of the United Kingdom if Scotland were to hold another independence referendum, as well as for peace in Northern Ireland. Sir John says trade deals will be hard to achieve, the cost of leaving the EU will be substantial and that there will be long-term political consequences.

All of these points were made by various factions within the Remain camp during the referendum campaign, but the vote went against them. Sir John says that Remainers are howled down when they continue to express their opposition to Brexit, inferring an impingement against the traditions of free speech in Britain. Some will believe that Sir John’s protests are overexuberant.

One reason why some Brexiteers are overreacting to the criticisms of the referendum result is because they believe efforts are under way to reverse it. Indeed, some have argued that Mr Blair is leading those efforts in consort with Sir John Major.

Crucially, however, if Sir John accepts the democratic decision, his counsel would surely be better deployed by helping Theresa May achieve the best possible deal for Britain.

Standard
Britain, European Union, Government, Politics, Society, Uncategorized

Sir John Major delivers a stinging attack on Brexit

BRITAIN

sir-john-major

Former Conservative Prime Minister Sir John Major has referred to Theresa May’s language on Brexit as “cheap rhetoric”.

Intro: In his Chatham House address, Sir John pulls few punches over his fears for the consequences for the UK once Article 50 is triggered and the UK prepares to quit the bloc

Sir John Major has delivered a withering assessment of Brexit, warning the UK will become reliant on an unpredictable Donald Trump, risks making the poorest “worse off” and could unleash Europe-wide populism marked by “bigotry, prejudice and intolerance”.

In a speech, the former Conservative Prime Minister, making a rare intervention in British politics, calls the vote an “historic mistake”, warns Theresa May of “cheap rhetoric”, and criticises Brexiters for “shouting down” those who want to remain in the European Union, encouraging them not to “keep quiet and toe the line”.

His comments echo those made by fellow ex-PM Tony Blair, who two weeks ago waded back into British politics by urging the public to “rise up” and change their mind on Brexit if Theresa May tries to quit the EU “at any cost”.

Both Sir John and Mr Blair campaigned for Remain ahead of the referendum, and shared a platform to make the case not to quit the EU.

In his Chatham House address, Sir John pulls few punches over his fears for the consequences for the UK once Article 50 is triggered and the UK prepares to quit the bloc.

He says he has been contacted by Remain voters of all political persuasions who are “in dismay, even despair”.

“They do not deserve to be told that …. they must keep quiet and toe the line,” he says, appearing to encourage protest.  “A popular triumph at the polls – even in a referendum – does not take away the right to disagree – nor the right to express that dissent.”

He says “freedom of speech” is not “undermining the will of the people”, a frequent charge levelled at ‘Remoaners’.  “They are the people,” he adds. “Shouting down their legitimate comment is against all our traditions of tolerance.  It does nothing to inform and everything to demean – and it is time it stopped.”

Sir John goes on to back Parliament having the final say on the Brexit vote: “Our Parliament is not a rubber stamp, and should not be treated as if it were.”

He also fears breaking ties with the EU will mean becoming “far more dependent upon the United States”, and appears to have little confidence in President Trump being the UK’s salvation, arguing the UK is reliant on a “President less predictable, less reliable and less attuned to our free market and socially liberal instincts than any of his predecessors”.

He goes on to suggest Brexit will diminish the ‘special relationship’. “Once we are out of the EU, our relationship with the United States will change. She needs a close ally inside the EU:  once outside, that can no longer be us.”

Against a backdrop of right-wing parties in strong positions ahead of elections across Europe this year, Sir John thinks Brexit has “energised the anti-EU, anti-immigrant nationalists that are growing in number in France, Germany, Holland – and other European countries”.

He says: “None of these populist groups is sympathetic to the broadly tolerant and liberal instincts of the British.  Nonetheless, their pitch is straightforward.

“If Britain – sober, stable, moderate, reliable Britain, with its ancient Parliament and anti-revolutionary history – can break free of a repressive bureaucracy in Brussels, why, then ‘so can anyone’.  It is a potent appeal.”

He adds: “I caution everyone to be wary of this kind of populism.  It seems to be a mixture of bigotry, prejudice and intolerance.  It scapegoats minorities.  It is a poison in any political system – destroying civility and decency and understanding.  Here in the UK we should give it short shrift, for it is not the people we are – nor the country we are.”

Sir John fears trade negotiations are “already sour”, and calls for a “little more charm, and a lot less cheap rhetoric”. And he is concerned the people who voted to leave Europe to improve their lives will be disappointed.

“If events go badly, their expectations will not be met, and whole communities will be worse off.  The particular fear I have is that those most likely to be hurt will be those least able to protect themselves.”

Standard