Thu, Mar 30, 2017 - Page 9 News List

British PM is determined to move toward a bad EU divorce

Hong Kong’s last governor has a thing or two to say about Prime Minister Theresa May and the Cabinet’s choices in the aftermath of the Brexit referendum

By Chris Patten

As Britain formally triggers the doleful negotiations to exclude itself from the mainstream of European politics and economics, Prime Minister Theresa May refuses to use the word “divorce” to describe what is happening.

My wife, a retired family lawyer and mediator, thinks May could be correct. After all, the family house we are exiting still contains much of our history and family silver, as well as our future economic interest. In that sense, divorce is scarcely an option.

Britain has not been as insular an island as some people take it to be. From our reigning royal family — which is German — to our exports — overwhelmingly to Europe — we have helped to shape and in our turn been shaped by developments in the rest of Western Europe.

We are separated by just 33km of water — these days, apparently a very wide 33km — at the Strait of Dover.

So why are we leaving? The cause is a mixture of frustration, delusion, mendacity and bloody-mindedness. We were fed up with Europe’s inability to tackle some of its biggest challenges — from competitiveness to immigration — without seeking to acquire more central powers.

In addition, our political leaders have for years played into the hands of those hostile to the EU, by appearing to accept any and every criticism of it, many of them a compound of falsehoods. We refuse to see ourselves for what we are: A mid-sized country that no longer rules much of the world. We are too easily persuaded that you cannot be a patriot without being a nationalist.

We can and should manage the consequences of this break-up without bringing further woes down on our heads, but the process of separation thus far does offer great hope.

The June 2016 Brexit referendum was itself a disaster. A parliamentary democracy should never turn to such populist devices. Even so, May could have reacted to the 52 percent vote to quit Europe by saying that she would hand the negotiations to a group of ministers who believed in this outcome, and then put the result of the talks in due course to parliament and the people.

Instead, she turned the whole of her government into a Brexit machine, even though she had always wished to remain in the EU. Her government’s motto is now “Brexit or bust.” Sadly, we will probably get both.

So what happens next? No one has a clue. The cliff beckons; the lemmings are lining up.

We know that almost half our exports go to the EU, five times more than go to the entire Commonwealth and six times more than to the BRICS countries, but we have given up on staying in the single market — which would require us to accept European jurisdiction and the free movement of labor — or the customs union.

Apparently we want a free-trade agreement with the EU on our own terms, covering our main industries and services.

May’s foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, argues that the cards are in our hands in these negotiations, because Europeans want to continue selling — Prosecco, for example — to us, but anyway, May’s ministers say, it does not matter if we have no deal at all. We will simply walk away.

No deal would not necessarily be a bad outcome, they insist, because the world is eager to do more business with us, which will be cheaper in the future as sterling continues its steady decline.

All of this, to return to the word May will not use, feels like a rather unamicable divorce. Every twist and turn in the talks will be accompanied by xenophobic outrage on the right wing of May’s Conservative Party and in the tabloid press to which she is now so beholden.

Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.

TOP top