The Guardian carries an article this morning on what might happen if the UK leaves the EU on 23rd June. It is interesting, but misses the fundamental point by concentrating largely on process.
I happen to think the article is right when suggesting that over all that process will be slow and deeply revealing of the error that Brexit will represent. There are, however, two fundamental points of difference that I have with the analysis.
First, I think it quite wrong to assume that if Brexit happens there will be a smooth transition to a Boris Johnson premiership. I cannot see some in the Conservative party accepting that. I cannot see many in the nation being willing to accept that. And Michael Gove would just make things worse. To be very clear, I cannot see a Tory majority based on the 2015 mandate surviving in the House of Commons. In that case the assumption that it will be Johnson negotiating our new relationship with Europe is, I think, dependent upon his prospect of winning a general election, and that I doubt. The Tories are at war, far more than Labour could manage, and the electorate do not vote for parties at war.
Second, the assumption that a referendum would lead to us leaving the EU may, again, be misplaced. I do not dispute that it might lead to the commencement of a negotiation process, but as the reality of leaving becomes apparent I think that the government elected late in 2016 without a strong commitment to leaving could wisely, and appropriately, suggest that the actual terms put on the table by the EU should be the subject of a second referendum, and I very strongly suspect that such a vote would go in favour of staying.
The interesting questions in that case are whether or not Labour could lead such a process ( which I leave to others to discuss) and what the consequences of it might be.
The first consequence will be the diminishment of Britain. The last vestige of the idea that we are somehow 'Great' will fall away. Our special relationship with the USA will be at an end. So too, pragmatically, will be our EU rebate if we are to stay: that will be the price that will be extracted.
Second, the Union may end. I have little doubt that a Brexit vote will encourage the Scots to explore independence again, and this time successfully. I suspect that they will have a remarkably smooth transition to EU membership. Questions on much more marked devolution to Wales and Northern Ireland will follow.
Third, England will suffer a period of significant self-doubt as a consequence of this process. This will be extremely stressful and will expose the massive challenges that hosting the world's biggest tax haven financial centre creates for us as a society. The prospect of London separatism should not be ignored, but will have to be strongly resisted.
And in amongst all this there will, also, be real prospect for beneficial change. I do believe neoliberalism is dying. It is good to note Aditya Chakrabortty's article on the same theme in the Guardian. I am increasingly believing that a vote for Brexit will not mean that we leave the EU. And I do think the EU will vote to keep us even if we vote to leave precisely because the turmoil within the UK that a Brexit vote will create will crush the hopes of those parties opposing the EU in so many other countries. No one else will be foo, enough to replicate our experience.
But, more importantly, out of the turmoil a vote for Brexit will create I do see some prospects for hope. Those promoting Brexit as a political cause are doing so from a fundamentally right-wing, small-minded, neoliberal perspective. There is no real spirit of emancipation in what they're doing: the aim is to capture the UK as a bastion for fundamental market freedoms that are not in the best interests of most people in this country. If this becomes apparent then another nail in the coffin of neoliberalism will have been delivered. And, whilst the City will not go down without a fight, the idea that its view of unfettered capitalism should prevail would have been lost, with the result that whatever outcome arises, even within the Little Britain that England will then represent, there will be better prospect for achieving the appropriate checks and balances that are necessary to create the better structured society that this country really needs.
This does not change my view that voting Remain is the right thing to do. It does make me think that there is life beyond Brexit.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I agree that a Brexit vote would create as much of a political earthquake in Brussels and Strasbourg (not to mention Paris, Berlin and Washington) as it will across the UK.
I am still waiting to see what pre-emptive strike the EU will take to try to avoid such a result occurring, but also agree that the really serious negotiations will start if the British bulldogs get their way on 23rd June.
Either way, I do think we are entering a new phase for UK politics as we now see both major parties fractured along partisan lines on key issues.
Which personally I think is a good thing and long overdue as it gets the public thinking about what their politicians have been doing for them as individuals for the past several decades!
‘Either way, I do think we are entering a new phase for UK politics ‘
My own rational for voting OUT was based on the notion that this phase could move on and the incompetence of the Right more swiflty exposed by leaving the EU. But I’m now not so clear about that and back in the ‘don’t know’ camp-I might even have to abstain as, if I remember rightly, Paul Mason advocated as a reasonable stance.
‘it gets the public thinking’ – well anything that contributes to an ‘awakening’ from the neo-liberal sleeping sickness is good but after 40 years of narcolepsy it won’t happen soon.
Still some thinking for me to do!
“Either way, I do think we are entering a new phase for UK politics”
Not just UK politics as the dear old US of A is demonstrating!
As ever, I enjoy listening to chomsky’s view on world affairs from a US perspective
https://youtu.be/P2lsEVlqts0
As Prof. Murphy may recall, this is a subject where I disagree with him.
However, it is a decision between a rock and a hard place.
If the Brexiters are pushing for a “exit on the right side”, the EU is pushing a right wing agenda as well, and, maybe, even a more extremist one.
The difference is that the UK government is still elected by people and may change overtime, while the EU governing bodies are not, they are accountable for their actions only in name and have shown no scruples in subverting the democratic process in the member states, like in Italy’s coup d’etat in 2011, in Greece with the Papandreu government or the recent Austrian presidential elections.
There was no coup in Italy. The ‘PM’ lost his majority ina slow and damaging (to Italy) process that began at least a year before when Gianfranco Fini and his supportes left the govt. The President played a major role in determining what happened next, but that is his constitutional prerogative.
The “Special Relationship” is long gone, insofar as it ever really existed in the form we think it did. We stopped being “Great” when the Royal Scots left India in 1947, only we have not been prepared to admit it. As for “self doubt”, most of us are too busy watching the TV to notice much.
Isn’t the word ‘Great’ in Great Britain merely a geographical term -which has been conflated with something else?
Self doubt can be a positive thing if you can face the psychological discomfort. As far as self-doubt is concerned-bring it on.
We are definitely Grande Britannia and not Vraiment Bien Britannia in the eyes of many in the EU.
But sometimes being small and perfectly formed is much better than big and ugly!
Looks like the hedge funds are trying to make the most out of the referendum, no self-doubt there!:-
“Hedge funds have asked for exit polls and for hourly polls on the day. Banks are certainly commissioning polls for their own consumption that are never released,” one pollster told the Financial Times.
Another pollster said his firm was getting lots of calls from asset managers asking when their next research was coming out: “We are also being asked if we will do polls on the day. People in the City are wanting a head start.”
The cost of a rudimentary exit poll where researchers record votes electronically and send them to headquarters is about £500,000, according to a source in the investment management industry. That is far lower than the potential profits available from finding out whether Leave or Remain is likely to win.”
See:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-uk-hedge-funds-to-run-polls-in-bid-to-profit-off-vote-by-betting-on-sterling-a7057296.html
“
Very interesting and thoughtful – lots of intellectual roughage here – thank you!
In relation to an argument for a Left Brexit campaign, Bill Mitchell today uses Iceland as an example of how a nation state as an non-affiliated agency can deal with Neoliberalism:
‘On May 27, 2016, Statistics Iceland (the national statistical agency) released the news — Iceland economy to grow by 4.3% in 2016. The nation is enjoying strong household consumption and investment growth and tourism is driving export growth. Inflation is low and the exchange rate, which depreciated sharply during the crisis, is stable, if not steadily appreciating again. Compare that to the Eurozone Member States, which are in varying states of moribund. We also learned this week that the Icelandic government has increased the intensity of its capital controls and is forcing speculative capital to behave itself. For those who think the state is dead, particularly those on the Left who promote grand (delusional) schemes of a Pan Europe Democracy as the only way of taking on the powers of corporations, Iceland proves that neo-liberalism has to work through the legislative capacities of sovereign states. Corporations do not have armies (usually). They have to manipulate the legislative process in their favour. The currency-issuing state is still supreme — globalisation or not — and the Right know that. The Left have been duped into believing otherwise. That is what has to change before progress is made in restoring some decency to the policy making process around the world.’
The Labour Party in the UK is too divided to articulate anything approaching this so I don’t think Bill’s observations about Iceland (very small poulace and less diverse) can relate to Britain directly but it is a good reminder of what the State can CHOOSE to do if it were not enfeebled by finance capitalism.
I’m usually a big fan of Bill Mitchell. His forensic analyses and the solutions that MMT bring to the economic debate are brilliant. But, in this case, I fear he’s making an illogical comparison. The history, politics, culture, demographics & economies of Iceland & the UK are simply too different to support his premise. It’s a dilemma for me, exacerbated by the EU referendum. My default position is usually Schumacher’s ‘Small is Beautiful – A Study of Economics as if People Mattered’ and Iceland meets the core criterion. But I fear that, owing to our complex social and industrial history, the UK is a unique case-study that doesn’t readily fit into any existing ‘frame-work’. That’s a problem in its own right. Of course there are broad general principles in common that apply, such as the defeat of the neo-liberal austerity ideology which Bill Mitchell vehemently criticises. But I just don’t think it’s helpful to look to Iceland as a practical model for the UK. I wish it was! Having said that, we could have jailed 29 of our bankers!
Following yesterday’s “love in” between David Cameron & Sadiq Khan I wonder what about the chances of some form of national government if a brexit vote occurs? Could well be made up of pro EU Tories, Lib Dems & right wing labour leaving the brexiteers, Corbynistas and nationalists as opposition prior to a general election.
Another event that could well happen soon is that our tax dodging head of state will pass on to be replaced by another tax dodger?
This article has once again sewn the seeds of doubt in my mind. To be stuck on a island ruled by right-wing corporate terrorists with no checks and balances but, with the opportunity for change in 4 years or possibly sooner should Brexit trigger a snap election. Or, to remain in a right-wing captured Europe where we can hope to influence the political spere (you can’t change the club rules if you aren’t a member of the club). Neolib zealots won’t go down without a fight whichever way we turn. Oh for the certainty of fanatical ideology! How I envy them.
My brain hurts.
Little Britain will be like Little Japan, Little US, Little Australia, Little Canada.
Am out in Oz at the moment visiting my family. Well run, confident country.
Has independence but free movement/free trade arrangements with NZ that work very well for the benefit of both countries. Why can’t the European countries have similar arrangements?
Think about the geography for just a moment
Is there a period in history when geography has been less relevant?
I’d suggest that it is much easier for UK to trade with NZ (with common law, English language, similar culture) than Romania (with none of those things). In the scheme of things, the distance is not that important.
I beg to differ
The evidence that geography still matters is compelling – especially in trade and politics
‘Well run, confident country.’
If you consider 12% youth unemployment being the sign of a ‘well run’ country with a choice of parties between neo-liberal and neo-liberal all arguing for ‘balanced budgets.
If you take neo-liberalism to mean economic freedom, then a country has more freedom when it is running a balanced budget. That freedom can include specific policies to help the young unemployed.
Now in which of my punting coats did I leave that monograph on balanced budgets being the best way to tackle excess capacity in the economy? I must look again.
Absolute nonsense
A country with its own currency has no reason whatsoever to run a balanced budget
Simon, youth unemployment in the EU is scandalous and a subject I would ordinarily expect Remainers to keep quiet about.
Australia’s rate (which has just come down a bit) would put it well in the top half dozen in the EU. and well below the EU average (over 19%).
As for your ‘neo-lib v neo-lib’ – at least Australians get a say. There are plenty of left wing candidates but they don’t appeal to voters, as in the UK.
By contrast, how do the people remove Juncker and the Commissioners? Please tell me, I really don’t know.
The issue of the break up of the UK if we vote out, which you rightly mention,needs further examination. Scots, by all account, are likely to vote for remain, so would be entitled to seek another referendum which they would be likely to win. Wales, I expect, could not afford to break with England, but Northern Ireland poses the biggest problem as the choice for the new out UK government would be to keep the open border with Eire or renege on the current power-sharing agreement and the links with Eire. Closing the border would be a nightmare- so many roads go in and out and free movement is vital to both economies. But what is to stop EU migrants crossing from Eire, to which they would still be entitled to travel, to the new UK? Have any of the Brexiteers really thought this through? Do they care?
I take the risk and vote leave, great points though.
Having read this: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/278259b8-233e-11e6-aa98-db1e01fabc0c.html#axzz4AHBb25nI and living in Christchurch, I’m so glad that I have a postal vote and will not have to share space with the bigots when I place my cross for Lexit. I know some of the characters – one of them at last year’s hustings spoke of ‘those Asian men assaulting our girls’. You rarely see a face that’s not white here. It was absolutely disgraceful – I was forced to heckle a lot. It’s tough living in True Blue Geriatrica-by-the-Sea.
A couple of thoughts from a “Tory nut job”, I agree, whatever happens after the referendum the Tories will be so split, there will be a leadership challenge, whatever the result on 23/6. It doesn’t bear thinking about that Boris could be our new “leader”, there are too many comedians running the UK, and another one won’t help!
More seriously, the Scotish issue. If the the UK votes to remain, then that stops the SNPs chances of having another referendum to leave the UK. If per chance, the UK votes to leave, then the SNP will strive for another referendum. However, that would depend on how Scotland voted on 23/6, but if Scotland did vote to leave the UK, then EU membership will be very difficult because Spain would certainly object, simply because if they agreed, that would give the “green” light for the Basque and Catalan regions to separate.
Finally on the Scottish issue, they want separation from the UK because they’re fed up being “dictated” to by London, so what do you think is going to happen if they join the EU? Completely lost on them!!!!
The referendum outcome makes no difference to the EU.
It only affects them when they’re informed that the UK wishes to leave the union, and the only way is to invoke article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. Once they are informed of this, negotiation to stay is not on the agenda, negotiation on terms of withdrawal is the only option. From the start of us informing them we intend to leave negotiations will be formal….I do not expect them to be particularly friendly, and I expect an element of any agreements would be a deterrent to other nations either leaving or negotiating better terms to stay. Unlike many others I do not expect that trading will continue as it is now, although it will continue for some two years, which is the period allowed for negotiation within the treaty. After that, it is anyone’s guess (although that two-year term can be extended by agreement, that agreement would need all 27 members to approve). Since the future of the union is at stake here, I expect no concessions and no preferential agreements.
There are many other things of concern here, the “fate” of expatriates who retired abroad within the EU for one…especially their state pension arrangements and healthcare.
Then there is the very thorny problem of Gibraltar, within the union it continues to cause UK-Spain problems…outside the union?
I won’t even go into Eire/N Ireland problems…..
I may be voting to remain…even if only because RupertM dislikes the EU. Anything he dislikes has got to get something to embrace..
A useful reminder – if Murdoch plus the Barclay brothers, Dacre/Rothermere and Desmond are all saying vote Leave when we know only too well what their agendas are…
Agreed
But likewise-Goldman Sachs and many hedge Funds and much of the financial industry wants IN so where does that leave us? Devil and deep blue.
‘Broadly speaking the City has been supportive of the Prime Minister’s renegotiation of the terms of British membership. It is strongly supportive of the EU single market, access to which is an important source of the City’s success as a global financial hub’
Although the article speaks of divides within the hedge funds.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2016/03/22/the-uks-financial-services-sector-is-divided-over-the-referendum-vote/
Wherever you look there is no way to form a binary scenario.
Most hedge funds are out, i believe
My “sources in the city” tell me that the hedge funds have hatched a post-Brexit plan to frack the hell out of the UK until it floats off on its own accord out into the Atlantic far enough for no migrant boats to sail to and then they will flood the channel tunnel.
This new British Virginless Island will be anchored above the mid-Atlantic trough so there is enough deep water for a whole fleet of nuclear submarines pointing in all four corners of the globe at anyone who dares challenge our new found global supremacy.
All business will automated and robotised, tax will be zero on everything apart from the few manual labourers who have to look after the robots and wipe the ars*s of the hedge fund managers, the public sector will be reduced to just a non-elected prime minister subservient to the hedge funds only.
The Queen and all other non-essential residents (i.e. 99% of us) will be sent to colonise the newly emerged Arctic wasteland which will by the time all that fracking has finished be without an ice cap and enjoying tropical summers. Apparently there’s lots of new raw material, oil and essential spare parts to be made for all the robots doing our work back in blighty.
But don’t worry, because the un-elected PM is going to be Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson and apparently a deal has already been done with Donald Trump that they are going to each share the same barber so nobody will be able to tell the difference between one baffoon and the other.
It will all be fine (as long as you’re in the 1% remaining) so go on just get your pen out on the 23rd and vote BREXIT – the hedge fund managers are really nice people, honest!!
IT’S ALL TRUE COS I READ IT IN THE SUN
I don’t read the Torygraph, but from the headlines I’ve noticed, they seem to be behind Cameron and remain.
The Scottish issue is not just Scottish. I expect Wales and NI will also vote remain so if the UK as a whole votes to leave, they could band together to establish a federal United Kingdom of Not-London. This in turn could cause various regions in England to start asking questions and it will become clear that only the bottom right hand corner of the UK (London, South-East England and East Anglia) actually voted to leave. Those other English regions may then want to join with the UKNL rather than leave the EU.
The net result will therefore not be for the UK to leave the EU but for London and its environs to leave the UK. I’m missing them already.
I sincerely hope that these issues might come out, and be explored
We’ll need a combind Passport and Oyster card!