Can we please focus on future relations instead of just constantly rerunning the Brexit poll?
Those of us in the House of Commons who support Brexit are a diverse coalition, just like the 17.4 million people who voted to leave the EU. Sometimes commentators fall into the trap of treating the Leave vote as a homogeneous group. We aren’t. My concern now is that too many MPS believe that their particular view of Brexit is the only true one.
Like many Leave voters I am an optimist and happy to take calculated risks. We decided in June 2016 to reject the status quo for the promise of something more – control of our laws, trade deals that truly work for Britain, the ability to make our own decisions about immigration and an end to free movement. We all have different red lines, which means it has been nigh-on impossible to agree a compromise.
The fact that we represent a multitude of views doesn’t mean that Conservatives are irreconcilably divided. It’s just that on this single issue, the diversity of opinion within our party is being demonstrated with the same passion with which we voted.
There is so much more that unites Conservative MPS: a belief in freedom, lower taxes, national pride. I have friends in Parliament who disagree with me on the Withdrawal Agreement and who chose not to support the Prime Minister. Yes, we have robust arguments, but we still dine together most of the week. Such is parliamentary life.
I understand friends who fear our country getting trapped in the backstop. But so does the Prime Minister and everyone supporting this deal. We understand the risks, but we also appreciate the opportunities and feel it is a risk worth taking.
There are no solutions in life, only trade-offs. Balancing risks is a key part of negotiating treaties and making trade deals. For example, one of the arguments against the backstop is an inability to implement comprehensive trade deals. I always knew the Brexit negotiations would be grinding and painful. What surprises me are arguments made about future trade deals we can get with a clean Brexit.
Of course, they will bring opportunities, but there is almost no acknowledgement that these new agreements will carry similar risks, too and that, for each one, concessions will be extracted from both sides. The only discussions around this tend to be vacuous debates about us lowering environmental standards and importing chlorinated chicken.
However, there is a deeper point about the impact that opening up our markets will have on domestic producers. As someone who represents a farming constituency, this is a significant factor for me.
We know that the agreement delivers in returning control of our money, borders and laws. It’s right that we assess the risks of the backstop, but let’s not forget the opportunities. There is much in the agreement to like – we pay no money and can resist new laws from the EU even in the backstop. We can finally focus on our future relationship instead of rerunning the referendum. We will also be able to trade without tariffs or quotas with the EU, while being able to agree deals on services with our closest allies, all in the knowledge that the backstop creates difficulties for the EU as well.
I have accepted there is a risk but I believe the Prime Minister when she tells us she and the EU want to avoid an indefinite backstop. That is why I support the agreement, despite reservations. The risk I simply will not take is a risk to Brexit in its entirety.
My belief is that the parliamentary arithmetic is such that a no-deal scenario will likely be frustrated. It is the only clear majority in Parliament.
We should be embracing the opportunity that the Withdrawal Agreement offers us, support the Prime Minister and deliver Brexit on March 29 – or risk not having it at all. Kemi Badenoch is Conservative MP for Saffron Walden
‘I believe the Prime Minister when she tells us she and the EU want to avoid an indefinite backstop’