I blog for my own amusement and edification but readily confess to a
thrill when the clicks soar to 750 which they did yesterday – presumably as
readers sensed we were reaching Brexit
End-game.
In the 1980s I was active in European networks and starting to understand the differences in cultural style.
From the 1990s I was in the middle of the European Commission procurement system and able to see with my own eyes some of its corruptions……..
I am very conscious that English is a
second language for some 70% of my readers and therefore take my role as a guide to the specifics of the UK very seriously
indeed.
So before offering any comment on today’s events, let me try to spell out
in a little more detail how I see that role.
I do not pretend to be an
impartial observer on either Brexit or the UK – but I do try to be fair-minded
and reasonably “inclusive”. I learned the importance of this initially from my parents and then from my
own experience of negotiating the
various boundaries of class, group, profession, intellectual discipline and
nation. That soon taught me that seeing the different sides of an issue has its advantages
I am, for example, very open about my Scottishness; am no friend of the
nationalist cause (whether Scottish or English) but am pretty critical of the perverse
influence of the upper-class elites on the British political culture. Too much
of the rhetoric practiced for decades by people such as Boris Johnson smacks of
the blinkered arrogance one expects from imperialist adventurers…..
I was deeply disappointed (and personally threatened) by the results of
the 2016 Brexit referendum – although I can well understand (if not sympathise
with) the emotions caused by migration trends. And the European “project” has
been technocratic and secretive. In the late 60s and early 70s as the debate
raged in the UK about membership of the “common market” I was a bit of an
agnostic - although by 1979 I was openly European.
In the 1980s I was active in European networks and starting to understand the differences in cultural style.
From the 1990s I was in the middle of the European Commission procurement system and able to see with my own eyes some of its corruptions……..
I hope this helps readers understand my background a bit better…
So
– today’s events
There will be drama at Westminster today – but it might not be quite the
historic day people expected…...One of the early amendments to be dealt with is the one covered in my last post which would require Parliament to confirm any Brexit deal with its Final Reading of a Withdrawal Bill. (That seems to me fairly obvious - so I confess I don't quite understand why Lewin and Benn felt it necessary to have Thursday's vote)
The latest numbers
I have is that Johnson could win today by 2-3 votes. Everything is down to the
votes of a few maverick Labour MPs and the new
MP from Grimsby has just indicated she will join 8 other Labour MPs to support
the hard Brexit which Johnson is asking the House to approve. Even if he wins, parliamentary procedure requires 2 further stages of "reading" and things are so finely balanced that the exact votes for these 2 stages can't be taken for granted. People have to be present physically and move into the appropriate voting place.....
I was, however, impressed
by an article which suggested that there was too much focus on such tactical
issues and that most people were ignoring the elephant in the room
The talk is
mostly on the numbers in parliament. Occasionally it veers into the
provisions for a dual customs system in Northern Ireland and the reliability of
the level playing field concession. That makes sense - it's where the votes
will make or break.
But it is extraordinary that we are not talking about
the real issue of what is happening here, the actual underlying reality of what
this decision involves. It is more than an elephant in the room. It is a
monster, filling up all the space, breathing fire on us, and yet we are somehow
managing to pretend it isn't there while our hair sets alight.
The issue is:
What would Johnson's deal actually do to
the economy of this country?
That's not
about Brexit. You can leave the EU and stay close to its trade regime. This is
about how you do Brexit.
The Johnson
deal is the hardest of hard Brexits. It pulls Britain completely out of the
customs union and single market and envisions a very minor free trade agreement
to replace it.
It's not
fashionable to talk about this now. These arguments were made after the referendum.
As Brexit bored on, we all desperately searched out new areas of debate and
focused on the aspects which caused most division in parliament. And somehow we ended up in this place,
where the fundamental choice we are about to make is barely discussed. You
could watch dozens of hours of TV news without even a mention of it. So it's
worth, one last time, providing a reminder of what's actually going on before
we decide to do it.
“Taken together, the single market and customs union are the most
advanced examples of international economic cooperation in the history of
mankind. They do two things. The customs
union harmonises tariffs so that
goods pay no tax and experience no country-of-origin checks inside their
territory.
“The single market aligns regulations,
so that goods can move freely without worries about whether they're against the
rules in one country or another.
This project
massively increases trade and improves the economic well being of the countries
who are members of it. It means that investors from countries like Japan use
Britain as a beachhead to Europe.
It means services, a core and criminally
under-discussed part of the British economy, can sell their products all
over a continent of well-off consumers.
It means you
get infinitely more than any trade deal, because it does not involve the
country-of-origin checks which make exports complicated and laborious. It means
just-in-time supply chains can operate with lightning efficiency, because they
know there will be no blockages.
It keeps you locked in to one of the most advanced regulatory climates on earth, with high standards for food safety, agricultural rules, worker safety and environmental protection. It gives the UK access to major trade deals with countries like Japan and Canada, on terms negotiated using the leverage of the massive European consumer market, and secured using some of the most impressive trade negotiators in the world.
It keeps you locked in to one of the most advanced regulatory climates on earth, with high standards for food safety, agricultural rules, worker safety and environmental protection. It gives the UK access to major trade deals with countries like Japan and Canada, on terms negotiated using the leverage of the massive European consumer market, and secured using some of the most impressive trade negotiators in the world.
It allows lots of medium-sized economies to club
together so that they can go toe-to-toe with larger economies. China and the US
can bully almost anyone. They're big enough. But they can't bully the EU. In a
world that is slowly degenerating into a dog-eat-dog system without the old
rules-based order, it offers strength and protection.
“Outside of that system, Britain
is going to hurt. A recent report by UK in a Changing Europe projected a reduction in UK GDP per capita after ten
years of between 2.3% and seven per cent under Johnson's plan.
The gap will
be defined by whether we try to make up the loss by bringing in lots of
immigrants and find a way to improve productivity. The best case scenario is a
£16 billion hit to public finances per year. It's £49 billion hit in the worst
case.
This will not
be made up for by securing new free trade deals overseas. These agreements are
tiny and inconsequential next to the European project. The government's own
analysis suggests that even at peak British negotiating success they would
amount to an increase in GDP after 15 years of somewhere between 0.1% and 0.2%.
People's
lives will be damaged. They will be poorer. They will be £2,250 a year worse
off by 2034. The nation's finances will be hurt. There will, in the end, be
more austerity. And this will be done just as the world is most uncertain, amid
a bitter trade war between China and the US, when the WTO is being brought to
its knees by Donald Trump.
These
arguments are treated with scorn nowadays. We're told that people who still
care about economics have lost sight that this is a debate about identity and
sovereignty. That's fine. It's about those things too. But when you experience
hardship, everyone cares about economics. A man without bread is not concerned
with where the regulatory decisions are made on lawnmower levels.
“We are about to sabotage our
relationship with the most successful economic project in the modern world. It
is the biggest decision we'll take in our lifetime and one which, if we do it,
we'll regret for a long time to come. It's worth mentioning that - the actual
reality of what is happening - at least one more time before MPs vote.
No comments:
Post a Comment