3
THIS week’s issue of The Economist, Britain’s influential weekly news magazine, has the British prime minister on its cover with her name changed to Theresa Maybe. The subtitle is “Britain’s indecisive premier”. This is the refrain now gaining increasing traction in the British media as the country approaches the March deadline for triggering Article 50 that will launch exit negotiations with the European Union.
But there was nothing indecisive about the swift replacement of the UK’s permanent representative to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers, by Sir Tim Barrow. When Rogers resigned last week, a crisis loomed over the manner of his departure.
Critics accused the government of forcing the seasoned ambassador out less than two months before Article 50 was invoked, and insisted this would weaken Britain’s bargaining position. But within 24 hours, Barrow had been named the next ambassador to the EU, and his appointment was generally well received.
The controversy had been whipped up by those in the government who had leaked a confidential memo Rogers had sent to the senior Brexit team about the complexity of the coming negotiations, and his assessment that it could take 10 years to complete them. This went down badly with Brexit enthusiasts who had earlier called High Court judges who ruled that Brexit had to be subjected to a parliamentary vote ‘traitors’.
Under pressure to resign, Rogers went out with a bang, addressing a letter to his staff in which he encouraged them to ‘speak truth to power’. His parting words should be compulsory reading for civil servants and their political masters around the world:
“… I hope you will continue to challenge ill-founded and muddled thinking and that you will never be afraid to speak the truth to those in power…. I hope that you will continue to be interested in the views of others, even when you disagree with them, and understand why others act and think the way that they do. I hope that you will always provide the best advice and counsel you can to the politicians our people have elected…”
May had been under some pressure to appoint a strong proponent of Brexit as a replacement for Rogers, and not another mandarin. But Barrow brings considerable experience of EU affairs from previous postings to Brussels. However, the quick decision to appoint him does not completely obscure the sense of drift that was best captured in a recent cartoon in The Guardian. A negotiator in a jacket with the 28 stars of the EU flag asks a hostage-taker in a derelict building: “What are your demands?” The criminal replies: “Erm… not sure yet.”
May is due to give a major speech this month in which she is expected to finally lay out the broad outlines of her government’s position on Brexit. While there is much speculation over the details, it seems fairly clear that she will stick close to the majority demand for reduced immigration. In this, her view will probably be shaped by her years as Home Secretary when she struggled to cut immigration.
Out of all the factors that led 52 per cent of those who participated in the June referendum to vote to leave, it is fair to say that immigration was the most important. But by demanding a halt to free movement, May will also be forced to give up on membership of the EU free market in which goods move across borders without incurring duties and taxes. Banks headquartered in London would also lose their edge; many may decide to move elsewhere.
While all this will impact adversely on the economy, the fact is that currently, it’s doing very well. The stock market is booming, manufacturing exports have shot up, and the service sector is doing well. Brexiters are crowing, while Remain campaigners are left scratching their heads. Institutions like the Bank of England that had forecast doom and gloom following a Leave vote are struggling to explain why the British economy is thriving.
A key reason is the sharp fall in the value of the pound against international currencies. This has made it cheaper for foreigners to import British goods, and since they pay in dollars, this increases the profits British firms earn in pounds. Thus, share prices have shot up. Also, tourists are finding it cheaper to visit Britain and shop on the high streets. However, Brexit hasn’t started to bite yet; once it does, British exporters who import components from Europe will have to pay duty, thus driving up the price of their products. This will also fuel inflation as Britain imports much of its food and consumer goods.
These are all reasons May needs to think beyond immigration once the tough negotiations begin after the March deadline. Thus far, there is no clarity about exactly what the government’s targets are. One thing is clear, though: EU nations won’t give anything away, and the talks will be drawn out and bitter. Member states fear a Brexit contagion if the Brits walk away with an advantageous deal.
May’s desire to control every aspect of decision-making is reflected in the power her two loyal chiefs of staff exercise. In a scathing lead article on Theresa May, The Economist writes:
“… For there is more to leadership than Mrs May’s procedures. There is also what Peter Hennessy, a contemporary historian, calls ‘the emotional geography’ of power. This means adapting to events and institutions, building networks and — yes — being judiciously informal sometimes: a dose of instinct, a snap decision, a deal cut, a risk taken on a wing and a prayer. It means sharing information, accepting dissent, seeking alternative opinions, staking out a position and persuading people of it. It is this emotional landscape that Britain’s geographer prime minister must master, if she can.”
This is quite a tall order for a politician who, thus far, has shown little flair, imagination or appetite for risk-taking.
Published in Dawn, January 9th, 2017
