Chair’s blog

Follow My Blog

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.

Four years on and some of the gloss is coming off the Brexit dream

Were you out celebrating on the evening of 31st January? Really, no? Well, let me let you into a secret. I wasn’t either. It was the fourth anniversary of Brexit, and I suspect that with each passing year the celebrations have become more muted. That is not to say nobody was celebrating.

Just as in America there is a hard core for whom Trump can do wrong, in the UK there are those for whom Brexit and sovereignty, whatever that means, axiomatically are good. Many have fallen victim to the sunk-cost fallacy, i.e. if you invested enough in a project then, no matter how it is failing and how much you are throwing good money after bad, you cannot admit that it was a mistake.

Others may be celebrating because they fall prey to the idea that Brexit will be fine in the long-term (and remembered that for Rees Mogg long-term means 50 years from now, by which time many of the people reading this will be dead).

This Government publication is further evidence that the gaslighting continues

And a few will be celebrating because they are the genuine beneficiaries of Brexit, e.g. international criminals, people smugglers, insolvency practitioners, disaster capitalists and perhaps the many EU enterprises who have seen competition from the UK effectively wiped out. But for the rest of us in this country there is very definitely no ground for celebration. We have watched Project Fear turn inexorably into Project Reality. We knew it would, but there is no satisfaction in being proven right. And year after year there will be fewer and fewer people celebrating. Already in the latest opinion poll 63% of those who had an opinion were in favour of “rejoining“ against 37% to the opposite view. And with the inevitable demographic shift those figures can only become more marked in years to come. Politicians take note.

Bear in mind what a changed world we live in. We have never in the past 70 years been closer to war than now, with potential flashpoints in the Middle East, Eastern Europe and China/Taiwan, all presided over by a US president who could, by this time next year, be either a very tired and confused old man or a dangerous psychopath, or indeed both. Add to which the climate crisis, thrown into front stage by this week’s news that the much feared 1.5 degree rise was actually reached last year. So never have we needed solidarity with our European partners more.

Even more barriers

And at precisely the same time, with its very muted celebrations, things just got worse. February 1 was the day on which the British government finally stopped breaking WTO rules. Remember all those years ago the cries of “let’s go WTO“ as if that were in some way going to be this country’s salvation, rather than the most nonsensical slogan from among many coming out of the same stable.

On the day the transition period ended, just over three years ago, the EU started to impose import controls on British goods, including veterinary checks and other non-tariff barriers – just what Johnson promised would not occur, but also tariffs under the rules of origin where certain thresholds of product from another third country were exceeded. How difficult that made life for British exporters is a matter of record. However the UK government made a decision several times not to erect similar barriers to products from the EU, even though WTO rules dictated that they should. Rees Mogg, in his wisdom, claimed that to impose such barriers would be “an act of self harm“. In one sense he was right: the need to impose them was a component of a much larger act of self harm, namely Brexit itself. However while this anomaly persisted it created the situation where British manufacturers were on an uneven playing field: they were competing on their home market with imported EU products while being unable to compete on equal terms in the EU market.

When Brexiters squeal about the EU being “protectionist”, what they actually complaining about is the fact that the EU protects its member states, which used to include the UK itself, at the expense of third countries, which now include the UK. Under WTO rules the UK should’ve been acting in a protectionist way, eg by applying checks to imported food products, but delayed doing so because it would have added significantly to the price of those products, and the UK has no prospect of being self-sufficient in food (it currently produces under 60% of what it needs). What is predictable is that we will see a gradual further increase in food price inflation, and it is equally predictable that this government will try to blame the Red Sea Crisis or the Russians. Why? Because that is precisely its default position in such circumstances.

Using Northern Ireland to distract

Equally certainly, the government will try to distract us from what is going on by trying to get us to focus on its triumph in Northern Ireland. Yes, getting NI Assembly together after a 2 year delay was a substantial achievement, in part by means of a creative fudge on the Windsor framework and in part to a £3 billion investment .

Whether it proves to be good value for money we will see over time. Whatever your politics, it was a historic moment to see the new first minister and deputy first minister take their places in Stormont. The top job in Northern Ireland is now held for the second time by somebody called O’Neill, but I suspect that Terence (whom I can remember) and Michelle probably have very little in common beyond their surname. Let’s hope that, contrary to predictions, this assembly lasts the course and manages to sort out at least some of the many difficulties it is facing as a result of the two years of non-government.

The ironic thing is that none of this delay needed to happen. The DUP would never have felt the need to throw their toys out of the pram over the Northern Ireland protocol if it had not been for the decision to leave the European Union. Yet before the referendum they were the only party in Parliament who were in favour of that decision. And the one gain for Northern Ireland – the continued ability to trade effortlessly with the EU – is something the DUP despises. As Eoin Burke-Kennedy puts it ‘For the chief defenders of unionism to have supported a process that diminished the North’s constitutional status within the UK while helping Sinn Féin become the largest party in the North and holders of the office of First Minister must go down as one of the most spectacular own goals in Irish political history. ‘

Stormont during a long 2 years of inactivity (photo: author)

Politicians hate to admit that they have made a mistake, and they hate to make a U-turn. But sometimes U-turns are needed. Perhaps the DUP could learn something from Keir Starmer, or indeed from John Maynard Keynes, who reputedly said: “when the facts change I change my mind, what do you do?”.

One other hope: That the gains made in Northern Ireland are not derailed by the Rwanda Bill. You don’t see the connection? The Rwanda Bill claims to give the UK government the power – something without precedent – to set aside rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. If this is taken to its conclusion, as the extreme Tory right demand, that will potentially take away one of the mainstays of the Good Friday Agreement. And did the architects of the bill foresee this? Do they care? What do you think?

Looking ahead

So there are 2 historic milestones this month. For us in Oxford for Europe and in the European Movement, the 4^th anniversary was not a cause for celebrations. However, a few of us got together with Steve Bray and SODEM for a solemn commemoration. Several staged “die in” To mark the fact that tragically Brexit-related medication supply chain problems are starting to impact health and, for some even their life expectancy. That is, of course, in addition to the well-established Brexit-related NHS staffing problems. Rishi Sunak recently, in answer to a question from Stephen Flynn of the SNP, told us about the benefits of Brexit, foremost – at least for the average person – among which was the “Brexit pub guarantee“, i.e. a possible 10p or 2% off the price of a pint (but some other drinks will go up). Perhaps before indulging in such fatuous rubbish Sunak should’ve come across the road to look and reflect that life-saving medications are more important than marginally cheaper beer.

SODEM at Westminster on 31st January (photo: author)

At Oxford for Europe we are very conscious of the bizarre priorities of this government and a big part of our mission is to tell the public that it is OK to question them. We hope to continue this mission through our next pubic meeting – which will at last be face to face – on 20^th March. Details here.

The views expressed here are the author’s own and not necessarily representative of Oxford for Europe

If you wish to comment on this blog, please email oxfordforeurope@gmail.com

Previous blogs

Please also keep an eye out for our series of meetings featuring brilliant speakers. Details here.

95. A very muted celebration