Despite its politicians, the U.K. can survive Brexit

In spite of last-minute attempts to change course, the United Kingdom is hurtling toward Brexit — a full divorce from the European Union without any mitigating arrangements.

In political lingo, this is known as a hard Brexit or “crashing out.” The assumption is that it will be economically disastrous.

By Thursday afternoon, the country’s remarkably hapless politicians were still voting on a host of mainly nonenforceable motions aimed at postponing the inevitable — or even rethinking the entire Brexit project.

But barring an unanticipated breakthrough (and in the bizarre world of EU politics, the unanticipated often occurs), Britain seems to be on the way out. When beleaguered Prime Minister Theresa May says there are only two choices — the deal she has negotiated with the EU that the Commons has twice rejected or no deal at all — she is probably correct.

Can the U.K. survive such a divorce? Is there life after the EU?

In strictly economic terms, the answer is: Yes. Norway, Iceland and Liechten- stein don’t belong to the EU. Yet they trade freely with it.

So does Switzerland, which has managed to maintain strong financial and economic ties with the 28-member bloc without going to the bother of joining it.

Arguably, all of these countries could do better if they were full EU members. But the point is that they chose not to join the union, yet thrived anyway.

To put it another way, eliminating free trade does not eliminate trade. A postBrexit U.K. would continue to sell things to Europe. These exports might not be treated as favourably as they are now. But they would not be wiped out.

Similarly, Britons would still be able to buy goods and services from EU nations. They might have to pay a bit more in a post-Brexit world, but they wouldn’t starve or run out of aspirin.

Even Brussels sprouts would still be available in London.

Certainly, there would be consequences from a crash-out. Factories in Britain that manufacture commodities for sale in, say, France or Germany might find it more profitable to shift production to the continent.

But by the same logic, plants in France and Germany might shift some of their production to the U.K.

There is no obvious reason why London could not continue as an international financial centre. Hong Kong manages and it is part of Communist China.

None of this is meant to suggest that a crash-out would be desirable. EU membership has let the U.K. finesse two near-intractable political problems.

The first is Ireland. EU membership has allowed the economies of Northern and Southern Ireland to become fully integrated. In effect, Ulster and Eire are gradually and peacefully uniting into a single entity without offending the sensibilities of either loyalists or republicans. A crash-out would put all of this at risk. The second is Scotland. Its ties to the U.K. are already tenuous. Scottish nationalists prefer the EU to Britain. A hard Brexit would increase the chances of separation.

Yet throughout, British politicians have been singularly inept. The prime minister has no control over her own party. Conservative MPs, including cabinet ministers, now routinely choose not to vote with her.

In a normal world, May would have been replaced by someone who had the confidence of the House. But in this case, it seems no party leader commands confidence.

Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn’s caucus continues to undermine him. Nine Labour MPs have quit the caucus, claiming, among other things, that Corbyn has failed to curb anti-Semitism within the party. Eight of these and three dissident Tories have combined to create their own faction in the Commons.

On Thursday, MPs continued their pattern of voting against potential solutions. They voted not to hold a second referendum on leaving the EU. They voted narrowly against wresting control of the Brexit process from May. Then they voted to ask the EU to delay the Brexit leaving date past March 29.

The MPs still haven’t decided what they do want. A hard Brexit is still very possible. Luckily for them — and for the U.K. — this would not necessarily lead to the Apocalypse.

Thomas Walkom is a Toronto-based columnist covering politics. Follow him on Twitter: @tomwalkom