Post-Brexit Trade: Or, As EU Like It

suffering fools sexuality and the city blog sam miles.jpg

Tom Miles/Motelism, 2014

This week has brought a new chapter in the convoluted Brexit saga, as a much-anticipated public speech by Theresa May sought to lay out a framework for what comes next. The whole Brexit portmanteau-ed mess feels more and more like a Shakespearean tragedy; I’ll leave you to allocate MPs to the parts. Spare a thought for those of us who have to watch the play.

In case anyone was in any doubt that the government have little clue of how to actually enact Brexit, May’s speech testified to the hopelessness of progress so far, and as far as I can see, some considerable hopelessness about what comes next. I know I’ve mentioned it before, but lest we forget: this whole costly, lengthy, conceptually blurry political impasse grew from David Cameron’s pledge for re-election as Prime Minister in 2015 to ‘let the people’ decide whether they wanted to remain in the EU, terms somewhat unspecified. As academics and policy experts warned at the time (but who listens to academics and policy experts, right?) the full rationale and information for any such decision went far beyond anything that a simple ‘yes/no’ binary could hope to address.

That didn’t stop Cameron merrily reducing the issue to over-simplified terms to get the referendum he’d promised off the campaign trail and into life. I’m sure some of you watched Charlie Brooker’s (excellent) Screenwipe 2016 over Christmas, available here. The coverage of post-Brexit politics was just stunning for showing that yep, no-one had any clue what to do. No-one. The best/worst bit of Brooker’s précis were the soundbites of different politicians describing what type of Brexit we’d have, like a loaf of bread (or sex?). Hard Brexit, soft brexit, clean Brexit… And then colours – grey Brexit (cheery) and, worst of all, Theresa May’s bizarre (un)cool Britannia riff: a ‘red, white and blue Brexit‘. It was almost as if the Conservatives regretted the whole referendum in the first place, but by that point Cameron was out to lunch permanently and the others were left to clear up his mess.

But back to the present scene. 7 months(!) after Britain voted to leave the EU, this week’s speech was Theresa May’s chance to lay out exactly what all that entailed, and show that in the absence of a government plan all summer or autumn, things were finally on track. The fact that her speech prompted more questions than gave answers seemed to go un-noticed by rightwing press, who went to town on receiving the speech as some sort of benevolent but firm mother regaining control of her borders. Forgetting that Margaret Thatcher was actually a key figure in forming the EU trade deal, enthused comparisons between the two Iron Ladies abounded (right down to their shared innuendos, suggests The Telegraph. Please god no). Not only is immigration not what the referendum was supposed to be about (migration is related to Brexit, but not interchangeable, and clearly not in regards to non-EU movement), the plan seems to me to be a wilful overestimation of both what May was promising and what May could achieve. No matter: the Daily Mail included breathless coverage of  May’s jazzy new haircut, what with that having absolutely nothing to do with anything.

Most notably, May scrapped the idea of continuing membership of the single market, which is something even the Brexiters didn’t vote for when they opted to leave the EU. In fact, David Cameron had pushed for more integration into the single market, not less. Theresa May isn’t stupid – knowing that Brexit was, for many, more about immigration than Europe – she basically said that the country will leave the single market in order to also scrap free movement of European citizens. So, the muddled and often damaging ideology surrounding migrants continues to grow. Yet when we go and live in Spain we’re called ex-pats… I know, it doesn’t make sense to me either.

Little Britain sexuality and the city blog Sam Miles.jpg

German newspaper Die Welt nailing it

This slash-and-burn approach to years of negotiation, partnership and knowledge sharing is not only wasteful, it undermines the future of young Britons – who voted to Remain in the EU on ballot day – by restricting their ability to travel, work and study freely in the EU. Why would we pay huge amounts and give ourselves an enormous administrative headache for the sake of restricting our ability for cross-country movement? It’s the 21st century! The message is that European migrants aren’t welcome here, but hey, everyone else round the globe do come and trade – although countries of lesser standing need not apply. We are once again forgetting our diminishing place in the global world order: and I say that as someone who loves my country, not least its amazing diversity (increasingly under threat). The Tory government expects countries to line up to broker expensive, protracted bilateral deals that are more necessary to us than to them, whilst wilfully giving up one of the biggest in history – the EU trade agreement. We have not been a global superpower in trade terms since the C19th century, and as this article shows we have the weakest productivity in the G7 group, but May isn’t letting that get in the way of telling (some) people what they (might) want to hear.

Why would the EU, or any new international trade partner, give us a good deal? We have no bargaining chips in either scenario. Europe does not need us more than we need them, despite the nonsense peddled by rightwing press determined to shame Remainers via bogus patriotism. Control over our relationship with the EU won’t sit with us, it will sit with them – and the potential economic loss is invariably greater for a country of 65 million people than a shared bloc of 500 million. As for global trade, the U.S and China set that agenda, and given Trump’s new revanchist position against trading with Mexico, it hardly seems likely a new partnership would benefit the UK more than it would the U.S, despite Trump’s nauseating love-in with unpalatable British talking heads (Michael Gove, Nigel Farage and Katie Hopkins enter stage left).

Trump Gove sexuality and the city blog.jpg

Lovely use of ‘Playboy’ as political certification

The sterling boost that followed Theresa May’s speech isn’t much to write home about either, as a summary by The Conversation shows here. Sterling hit a historic 32 year ow against the Dollar this week – which is a joke when you consider the political and economic division currently routing the U.S.

But for the many people sick of the current economic order that helps the rich get richer and the poor get poorer – 8  people now hold the same wealth as 50% of the global population – there was a stitch in time moment: could Theresa May’s speech really be turning to a new economic growth model? Could we be heralding a more egalitarian tax or finance system? Nope. May is essentially offering the UK as a tax haven to other countries. And spare a thought for the continuing precarity of EU citizens living and working in the UK. They are no clearer on what comes next for their livelihoods and their families, as this excellent state-of-play report by The Migration Observatory shows.

Meanwhile, Scotland are – as anyone could have predicted over the past few months – considering another referendum on independence from the UK, because Scotland (and Northern Ireland) voted to remain in the EU and are being dragged out of it by England and Wales. It’s hardly Macbeth territory when you consider Scotland’s position and its frustration. Cameron’s foolish referendum could yet spell the extended dissolution of the United Kingdom, a depressing prospect. In a supposed era of the global citizen, England looks smaller than ever. Say what you like about Nicola Sturgeon (and plenty do, with abandon), she is an intelligent, clear-headed and determinedly representative politician for her constituents; her verdict of May’s free market move as potentially ‘economically catastrophic’ is worrying.

Through it all, I ask: why would we want to impair international relations? Why would we want to cut ourselves off from Europe in favour of uncertain and unproven trade deals with other countries that aren’t even as geographically proximate? Brexit was hardly a decisive democratic mandate – 51.9% vs 48.1%. I’m increasingly perplexed at the way that Leavers and mainstream media paint those who voted Remain as ‘Remoaners’, poor citizens, or children having a tantrum.This spoof Daily Mash piece says it all. Given that nearly half the population falls into the Remain camp, it can’t really be thought of as a disparate minority, nor can the range of concerns with a Brexit be dismissed as somehow unpatriotic.

The way the political (and tabloid newspaper) rhetoric around Brexit is progressing is deeply unhelpful to the U.K’s cohesive social identity. There is a creepy return to populist/nationalist rhetoric, kickstarted by Farage’s ‘Independence Day’ (a term aimed to misguide, as we were never not independent). To suggest the UK is free from the yoke of EU oppression is nonsense – there were plenty of ways in which this country benefitted from EU partnership, and those include, y’know, UK legislation for LGBT couples who aren’t married, free movement for university students studying abroad, and globally respected human rights protection. Politics has become bogged down in meaningless imagery. Take, for example, Boris Johnson’s bizarre reference to World War II today whilst conjecturing about the way that France might deal with Britain’s exit from the EU. He’s reacting to a political situation that hasn’t even happened. (In keeping with the Shakespeare theme, a spokesperson has just clarified that Johnson was not ‘suggesting anyone was a Nazi’, just making ‘a theatrical comparison’. It’s as if he knew I was writing a theatre themed piece!)

Our politicians and rightwing media are painting us as inward-looking and isolationist when that’s the opposite of what many of us want to be – especially those who travel, and young people. In doing so, they paint the 48% who never consented to this costly political headache as unhelpfully negative, when what we are trying to express is the unprecedented shortsightedness of the political decisions made and the promises broken to areas of the electorate who most needed economic help. Now we wait for the next act.

shakespeare-brexit-sexuality-and-the-city-blog

As EU Like It

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Post-Brexit Trade: Or, As EU Like It

  1. An interesting article. One thing I would point out, is that Mr Cameron was clear that leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market– he said precisely that on the Andrew Marr Show on 12 June. Andrea Leadsom said it on Newsnight on 28th April. Michael Gove was emphatic on 8th May (again Andrew Marr Show) that leaving the EU would mean leaving the Single Market– Boris Johnson agreed on the same programme on 5th June. George Osbourne told Andrew Neil on 8th June that “Britain would be quitting the single market”, if the vote was to leave the EU.

    Examples there of MPs for the current government, on both sides of the debate, being clear that leaving the EU is to leave the Single Market.

    By the way: European Human Rights convention and laws are separate from the EU, many non-EU countries are signed up to it.

    As for deals with countries that aren’t geographically approximate; they are countries that have similar legal systems, accountancy systems, business culture and the same language– so seen as easier to trade with.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks David, some good points here.You’re right that exiting the EU single market was oft-stated in 2016. I guess I was thinking more of the contrast to ideas of UK protections in the Tory election manifesto (see Financial Times on it, for example: http://blogs.ft.com/david-allen-green/2017/01/16/brexit-leaving-the-single-market-and-the-constitution/). Not binding, of course, but more suggestive of ideas ‘soft Brexit’ than what has resulted.

      Regards the ECHR, true – not EU-binding. But as Norwegian academics and policy advisors have noted, tying in with European systems whilst not enjoying membership of the union has proven costly enough to make some consider whether it wouldn’t just make more sense to ‘formalise’ the relationship via union.

      Incidentally, I’ve always thought it odd that some on the ‘leave’ campaign have suggested the Norway-EU model as something to replicate. By all accounts, Norway seems to pay through the nose for the right to some shared policy/trade/strategy agreements, gaining them disproportionately little in the process. Not an area I have expertise in, but the interest is there!

      Thanks for reading,

      Sam

      Like

      • You’re most welcome, thanks for your response and there are some sound points you make, I agree on the Norway bit. You’re also right about the certain sections of the media; if they keep contriving divides in society, and telling us we’re divided, it will become true by self-fufilling prophesy (… though only if we chose to seduced by the likes of Waily Sexpress, Daily Maul– or their mirror opposites the Grauniad or Indy)

        On the human rights front as well as EHCR, we are also signatories of the UN Human Rights convention. And we are lucky to have common law in the UK, a system that gives remarkable liberty and protection from the state in comparison to other systems: Magna carta, habeas corpus (although recently undermined by the EAW/juris copis– ditching that is at least one advantage of Brexit if nothing else), Bill Of Rights, the principles of “everything is permitted that is not expressly prohibited by law” and “innocent unless proven guilty”– all of which have meant we have avoided the sort of mass tryrannies to that visited other countries

        You mentioned studying, and I’m pleased to note that non-EU countries are permitted to take part in Erasmus. I would hope during negotiations, that is on the table. On a similar note there are number of organisations that foster cross-European co-operation, that are not of the EU (OECD, Council of Europe, to name but two)

        You’re young and handsome; which I am no longer, so I can remember life before 1993, when the EU was founded. Young people still managed to travel across Europe; the difference was a visa waiver form if I recall, which just took a few minutes to fill out. It could be that we have a common travel area with the rest of the EU as part of the negotiations; after all the UK has such an arrangement with the Republic Ireland, which long pre-dates the EU.

        You’re also right about the chaotic strategies by the government. Some of those involved it in, campaigned for Remain; I like to think they are not deliberating trying to sabotage things, so they can say “I told you so”, in that peculiarly masochistic mindset some have adopted. If nothing else leaving the EU means the UK regains its own seat on the WTO; if the UK plays its cards right it can become a beacon of free-trade, to contrast with the more protectionist EU. Luckily for we mere plebs, the era of cheap flights and the internet makes it far easier for to trade with those who want to trade with us across the world these days.

        All this talk maybe academic, as by the time Brexit has played out, there may not be an EU to depart from, the signs are showing already. Plus history has repeatedly shown us that Europe is too diverse for an “ever closer” political union. The EU has many similarities with structures and philosophies of the last one– Soviet Union– which suddenly unravalled after over-reaching and alienating itself. I predict in coming years the EU will revert to something like it was pre-Maastricht; a common market, which proved unproblematic for its members in the time it existed.

        Anyway enough of my ramblings. I look forward to reading your more of your posts in the future.

        Like

  2. Pingback: Art as resistance in the age of unrest | sexuality and the city

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s