‘Hard’ Brexit was act of national self-harm
YOU ask whether Brexit is ruining the UK. No doubt we shall survive, but how much less damaging it would have been had we stayed in the EU – or at least the single market.
Of course, there are other pressures on the economy, but my own view is that the ‘hard’
Brexit chosen by the Johnson administration has made a difficult situation infinitely worse. It will, I believe, go down in history as a major act of national self-harm.
To my mind, it was sheer folly driven by right wing, libertarian, free-market ideology dressed up as patriotism. We were sold the fantasy of ‘global Britain’ – some sort of offshore, free market tax haven with whom the whole world would want to do business. This delusion has not only harmed our economy but has also put the Union itself at risk.
I have great sympathy, therefore, with the views of your correspondent J Tomlinson. As a businessperson, he or she knows only too well the difficulties that Brexit has caused – particularly to countless small and medium-sized businesses.
Many have ceased trading with EU customers. Others have folded altogether. Some have moved all or part of their operations to the EU, with the loss of jobs here in the UK.
Trade is the lifeblood of the economy. To have deliberately erected trade barriers between the UK and the world’s largest free market – one that was right on our doorstep – can only be described as the economics of the madhouse.
What of all those wonderful trade deals we were promised? The much-vaunted deal with the USA is a non-starter. The deals with Australia and New Zealand have not been met with unalloyed joy by our farmers. And most other deals do no more than replicate what we already had as an EU member. Overseas trade is down 12%, inward investment is down and, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility, our GDP is headed for a fall of 4%. The level of decline is estimated at around £100 billion per year.
Significantly, we no longer have a Minister for Brexit Opportunities – and the Minister we did have was not able to articulate a single convincing benefit for the ordinary man or woman – unless you count Crowns on pint glasses and the re-introduction of pounds and ounces.
What of all those EU migrants “taking our jobs”? Several sectors of the economy, including healthcare and agriculture, remain desperate for labour, so who was taking who’s job? And soon we will have the nonsense of the ‘bonfire’ of retained EU laws to look forward to. Laws that the UK helped to put together. Laws that include workers’ rights and consumer and environmental protections. What is to be put in their place?
Those who describe the EU as a ‘dictatorship’ might care to look at what Putin is doing and ask themselves whether that description is really apt. And surely, as a nation, we had the confidence to resist attempts to dictate to us without taking our ball home. Whatever you may think of her, Margaret Thatcher demonstrated how that could be done. I venture to suggest that, with Brexit, we have ‘gained’ what we never lost and have lost so much more that we could have had.
Currently, there is a deafening silence among politicians and elements of the media over Brexit. Some leavers try to shut down such debate as there is with silly namecalling; “remoaners”, “remainiacs” and the like. Hardly original, but certainly tiresome. It seems nobody wants to talk about the emperor’s new clothes. Sooner or later, however, we will need to do just that.
PJ Knowles Taunton, Somerset