Politicians are regularly criticised for not telling the truth. Keir Starmer is now being criticised for pointing out what should be obvious to any sensible person – the UK is in a dreadful state economically (and in plenty of other ways) and it will take a long time and quite a bit of widespread pain to improve it.
With Rachel Reeves, his trusty purse-strings-holder-in-chief, at his side, the PM is very keen to remind we citizens the Labour government has inherited a £22 billion black hole from the previous incumbents, who, let’s not forget, were in charge for 14 years.
What Starmer and his well-rehearsed Cabinet colleagues have not said, however, is that one of the significant causes of all this is the calamitous “deal” the serially-inept Tories dumped on the UK to withdraw from the European Union.
How Starmer, with his massive majority of Labour MPs, manages to salvage something from the wreckage of Brexit will be one of the toughest challenges of his term (or terms) in office.
My concern here is not to rehash the merits (or otherwise) of the idea of Brexit, but rather to remind us how badly it was executed. Arrogance and incompetence from the British negotiators has resulted in a situation that, surely, is far worse than anyone could have predicted.
It was obvious that the EU negotiators would make leaving as burdensome as possible for the British to discourage any other of the 26 member-states from contemplating a resignation from the club.
And in the immortal words of Bruce Forsyth, didn’t they do well? I cannot think of one benefit the UK has achieved from Brexit. Or am I missing something?
In the interest of full disclosure, I must confirm I voted Leave on 23 June 2016, largely because I feared the EU was drifting inexorably towards being some sort of pan-European superstate, a sprawling bureaucracy far removed from its original idea of being an agreement for movement of free trade and free people.
Both those elements I approve of very much. Having worked for about 18 months first in Amsterdam and later in Milan, I personally benefited from the ease of working elsewhere in the EU.
I was the only one of my family and friends to vote for Brexit as far as I know. They have all let me know in strong terms what they think to my decision.
I can become mildly irritated when people who don’t know me presume I must be some sort of Faragist right-wing headbanger to have voted for Leave. I always point out that among the very wide spectrum of folk who thought there might be a different role for the UK were a line-up of former British generals (who were concerned at the bonkers idea of a pan-European army) and left-wing firebrands like Dennis “The Beast of Bolsover” Skinner, who always felt the union benefited big business more than its citizens.
While I do not feel the need to apologise for my vote, I will admit to naivety in expecting what the Tories’ strategy would be after the referendum. I thought there would be something like a five-year period of dancing round the diplomatic handbags while the EU and the Brits looked at how Brexit might work.
That would be followed, I imagined, by another couple of years at least of the more serious negotiations to get the details down on paper. I was in no hurry for Brexit to happen. And I did not want it to happen if we could not agree on a reasonable deal – whatever that might have looked like.
What I should have been aware of, I now understand, is that the Conservatives had pledged to start the process much faster. They intended to be out of the EU, come what may, within a little over two years. With David Cameron having jumped ship, it was Teresa May in charge on March 29 2017 when the UK triggered the trapdoor of Article 50, which meant March 2019 was the initial expected date of UK’s exit from the EU.
As it turned out, Brexit Day slid on to 31 January 2020, by which time it was obvious that the “talents” of Tory negotiators like David Davis, Oliver Robbins and David Frost had proved no match for those of Michel Barnier and his EU team across the table.
Now, almost four years on from the exit and more than eight since the referendum, we are where we are, which is in a shitshow (to borrow the description given to me by the MD of a leading Made-in-Britain brand).
What can we expect Starmer and his lot to achieve to get us better trading arrangements, which is my major concern? I must leave that to brighter brains than mine to answer but surely the main element to consider here is what the EU are prepared to countenance.
You can imagine the EU bureaucrats have little time for the British, whose enthusiasm for membership of the EU was often lukewarm. I fear any rearrangement of the status quo will have to have obvious tangible benefits for the EU. Can anyone tell me what they might be? I can think of a lot of British-based companies that would like to know.
Will Starmer and Co stand up and reveal just how bad the Brexit deal is, or is it still too decisive a topic to address head-on? As ever, the thoughts of readers are very welcome.
And just as a final thought on Brexit, for all the strong, not to say bitter, opinions expressed since 51.89% of those who voted went for Leave, while 48.11% voted to Remain, it’s worth remembering that the voter turnout, at around 33.6 million, was only 72.21% of those registered as eligible to vote.
So, more than a quarter of the population were not bothered enough to express an opinion. What an odd bunch we are.
