According to an article in Bloomberg, ex governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, considers the proposed EU withdrawal demonstrates “less a carefully crafted diplomatic compromise and more the result of incompetence of a high order.”
Aside from those who might suggest that King would know all about ‘incompetence of a high order’ it is still true that “None …. believe this deal makes any sense. It is time to think again, and the first step is to reject a deal that is the worst of all worlds“.
King goes on to cast doubt on the effect of Brexit to the economy as compiled by the Bank of England, which is a nice reversion of loyalties, but it still seems to me he is concentrating on gloss and not essentials.
Basically any Brexit will entail significant economic disruption – why else has Rees Mogg sent his investment management operations scurrying to Dublin or Redwood advised his clients to avoid investment in Britain during the period of Brexit?
What is gained in return for this disruption?
Possibly first, the dissolution of the United Kingdom without consent – which, first nobody voted for, and second, Northern Ireland voted to remain and so in favour of the Good Friday Agreement which prevents physical infrastrucure on the border and enshrines free movement.
Possibly second, keeping the UK as an ‘EU vassal state’ as Rees Mogg would term it, which stays, pays and has no say – which is pretty much May’s agreement.
All of these things are likely to make the vast majority of UK citizens more endangered and poorer.
Now it could be argued that this is a temporary penalty – and it may be – but even Rees Mogg has suggested the hit might be 50 years. So making two generations poorer seems to be worth it for the third and fourth generations. Really? Have these geniuses ever studied history?
Still, in the event of the break off of Northern Ireland from the UK there would be a trade deal negotiated for mainland Britain – albeit amid even more prolonged uncertainty. How is that advantageous?
Yet the plan B could be only an exit on WTO terms, which would make the UK unique in the world and at a time when Trump wants to break up the WTO and has prevented the appointment of appeal judges with just four of the seven left – and with another two due to retire in 2019. Sunny uplands they are not.
How, practically, can it be worth it?
Candidly, it cannot.*
Idealogues do not believe in practice of course, thus the idealogically driven ERG Tory Brexiters had never thought of anything but the idea. And zealotry defines them. And yet they are a substantial portion of the supposedly practical and ‘one nation’ Conservative Party.
Conservatives which are not one nation and not practical is quite an indictment. No wonder Ken Clarke thinks he will retire.
It certainly looks like incompetence of a high order but equally as important is that idealogues don’t think.
Every schoolboy knows that if you ask a stupid question, you get a stupid answer.
*It’s only possible accidental purpose, if as I suspect, we eventually stay, will be to marshall all forces for ‘better together’ (which, even the SNP may have to accept if we stay)