May can’t afford to ignore new thinking on Brexit
All sides can see that absolutism is foolhardy and could unite around a temporary Norway deal
Ihave underestimated the Prime Minister. She’s often described as lacking an ideological underpinning and is regarded by many as utterly pragmatic in her political outlook. She believes in what works. However, it would seem that, like many classically liberal Conservatives, she also believes in shrinking government. Literally.
The huge roar of the demos expressed at the EU referendum has been sifted, processed, desiccated and refined, bypassing Parliament, the Conservative Party, as well as the Cabinet, and now rests with a tight ad hoc group of political advisers, civil servants and hand-picked ministers around No 10. The energy and optimism of June 2016 seems to have withered on the Whitehall vine.
One by-product of this obfuscatory and exclusive regime is that new ideas which might have strengthened the UK’S hand in the Article 50 negotiations are being ignored by a clique convinced only that their role is damage limitation. The weakness in political direction, a function of a hung Parliament, a bitterly divided Tory party and an incoherent Opposition, has led to the Prime Minister being trapped in a very big hole.
Chequers won’t fly, the Northern Ireland backstop is a key point of principle which seems at present unfudgeable, and MPS are unlikely to sign off on committing billions of pounds of their constituents’ taxes for a vague commitment to a new trade deal. The prospect of asking voters to support an extension of the transition, at a likely cost of £15 billion, leaves many Tory campaigners incandescent.
Remainers are said to be in despair, while most Brexiteers fear betrayal. Even the Whips Office is impotent, its advice ignored and its power diminishing. People are flailing in desperation.
The whole thing resembles a tower of cards, the removal of one bringing the whole edifice crashing down.
Having tied herself to the mast by betting everything on a Chequersminus deal and refusing even at this late hour to fully engage with the Cabinet on alternative options, Mrs May cannot be surprised that, in extremis, her colleagues are discounting her future and looking past her. To many, her removal is but a matter of time. Congenitally allergic to teamwork, she has nevertheless just enough time to signal that innovation is urgently needed.
I still believe Tories are willing to compromise with each other in an effort to secure a workable consensus before the hard deadline in March, when – putting aside the fantasy of a second referendum or an extension of Article 50 – the UK will legally exit the Union. Each side understands that the Prime Minister’s botched negotiations mean that absolutism cannot be an option and time is passing.
And the outlines of a concordat between the Tory tribes are already emerging. Wise heads across the party are positing the idea of a temporary European Economic Area (EEA)/ European Free Trade Association (Efta) waiting room, leading to a Canada-plus deal by December 2020 – the so-called Norway-then-canada option.
The benefits are many. We would be able to chuck Chequers and the tortuous backstop, and we’d be no worse off than if we remained under the legal aegis of the EU during the implementation period. Compared to the transition the Government is currently negotiating, it would be less costly and we would have the capacity to leverage the UK’S exceptionalism during the temporary EEA period to vary our obligations on free movement, and be outside the bailiwick of the European Court of Justice but within the Single Market.
It won’t be easy. Norway is likely to be fixed against us regaining total autonomy as an independent maritime nation as we leave the Common Fisheries Policy, and negotiating a legally watertight and unilateral entry to and exit from EEA membership (so we could be sure it wouldn’t become permanent) would be tricky. Once we leave the EEA, however, an almost complete legal text for a Canada-plus trade deal with the EU would be good to go, as would bilateral trade deals across the world. Our backstop would be extra time to prepare for operating on World Trade Organisation rules if necessary.
As the clock ticks down, both sides of the Tory Brexit family need reassurance. For Remainers, time would be granted to allow businesses to make the changes needed to be ready for the new dispensation and the danger of a disorderly exit would recede exponentially. For Leavers, international treaty obligations and domestic legislation are the balm to soothe their fevered brows.
The Prime Minister can lead this debate or she can remain in her bunker, eschewing compromise with reality. MPS, businesses, the electorate and the EU are crying out for a plan. It would be a national disgrace if she were instead to ignore people of good faith and different perspectives who are working hard to dig her out of the hole she’s in.