Before the referendum vote, and for most of the time since then, one of the basic arguments of the zealous Brexiter has been that it won't be difficult, unless the EU chooses to make it so (though of course they'll give us what we want, because "they'll know what's good for them").
But leaving with no deal would be no problem. Indeed many of them would prefer to do just that, and look forward to "WTO terms", as if anybody but Mauritania trades that way. Liam Fox and his cronies dream of leading the WTO to new frontiers of trade in services, ignoring the fact that the WTO hasn't made a significant agreement for 15 years, and that Trump is trying to destabilise it so that his bilateral advantage seeking can prevail.
Some of them are now moving (more or less) into the realm of reality. However sunlit the uplands might one day be, however much it is worth (other people) sacrificing to arrive at the right kind of freedom, the British people will have to put their shoulders to the wheel.
Iain Duncan Smith has just popped up to advise British businesses that they will have to "learn to get by in a different world," though of course "it's not a case of less trade. It's a case of a different type of trade". Meanwhile, the EU27's negotiating guidelines note that "The United Kingdom has stated its intention to no longer participate in the Customs Union and the Single Market after the end of the transition period, and the European Council will calibrate its approach as regards trade and economic cooperation in the light of this position so as to ensure a balance of rights and obligations, preserve a level playing field, avoid upsetting existing relations with other third countries" or, put simply, if you're out you won't get the benefits of being in.
Hearing that British consumers might have to pay more for post-Brexit cheese, Michael Gove has drawn himself up to his full medium height to assure us that the British farmer will rise to the occasion. "I am deeply concerned about your unpatriotic attitude towards cheese," he told his questioner (we're assured it was a joke, but it can be hard to tell with Gove). His faith in the capacity of the agricultural sector to substitute for imports seems little short of heroic (though since the UK currently exports £320m of cheddar to Ireland every year and imports £389m of cheddar, maybe the problem in this particular case is not as big as feared).
Six weeks ago John Redwood, who is MP for Wokingham but also Chief Global Strategist for investment managers Charles Stanley (£183,600 per year for 300 hours) advised investors to move money out of the UK. He noted that the economy is slowing down, though economic sentiment is improving, but the Bank of England is tightening conditions for consumer borrowing. To quote Frances Coppola, writing in Forbes:
"Redwood's advice to investors is to flee the UK before the credit crunch bites...
"Sounds sensible, doesn't it? No. It is an absolute disgrace for this man to give such advice. You see, the Rt. Hon. John Redwood MP - to give him his full title - is... a senior member of the Conservative Party, which is currently in government and making a total hash of the Brexit negotiations. He is also a former Cabinet Minister and a member of the Privy Council.
"This senior lawmaker is advising investors to stop investing in his country."
I hope the advice he produces for his second employer is better than what he gives his first - the people of Wokingham, who elect him, and the rest of us who pay him as a parliamentary representative. In April he tweeted "You do not have to buy German or French cars. There is a good choice of models, prices & specifications available from UK car factories", only to be reminded (many times) that there are no British owned car factories of any size, that where cars are made is decided elsewhere, that all car companies depend on the frictionless market which May has decided to take us out of... then try to get back close to, etc etc.
But none of these prescriptions are as bad as Redwood's allegory "Little Red white and blue riding hood – a topical Christmas story".
Christmas media management
It's Christmas, so government likes to tell us things while they think they can control the message, and the media is happy to play along. So we had the blue passports thing with the BBC repeatedly telling us blue passports are "coming back" (sparking rows between those who can actually see the very dark navy of old passports and those who see only black) and the Sun proudly displaying a mock-up in a blue that has never been used, and the now compulsory size, shape and format which the old ones never had.
A more sober discussion came on Christmas Eve, with Margaret Thatcher's old sidekick Charles Powell telling us it was her government which adopted the new passport in the 1980s - under no pressure from the European Union. He called the clamour for old-style travel documents “part of the nostalgia on which the predominantly elderly Brexit constituency thrives”. (Mr Powell is 76.)
The same story came up in April and September (and who knows how many other times?) with all the same components:
- We can change the colour forced on us by the evil EU!
We always could, as explained here: "What is commonly called an ‘EU passport’ is in fact a national passport established under the national laws of the Member States and issued to their citizens." and "The current format of the EU passport contains common features on which Member States have agreed in non-binding resolutions such as for example paper size, the burgundy coloured cover, similar typeface for name and the use of the words ‘European Union’ in the country's official language on the cover." - Shock, horror, they could be made in France or Germany!
As Theresa May occasionally tells us, the UK is still a full member of the EU, and the tender process is governed by EU procurement rules. And surely a Tory will go for the best value bid. - Why is it costing us £490m just to change the colour?
It isn't. That's the cost of the whole five-year contract. - Why does it have to be that shape?
To comply with international standards for machine-readable travel documents, as defined by the International Civil Aviation Organisation. (And of course the template for the old one was agreed in 1920 by the League of Nations, with 42 countries signing up to it.)
Two things:
- According to the September story noted above, the contract was expected to be awarded by Christmas. Is the winner based somewhere that wouldn't fit with an "expression of our independence and sovereignty", as announced by the prime minister?
- Note the dates. The April story came at the beginning of the Easter parliamentary recess, the September one on the first Sunday of the conference recess, and now it's Christmas. Does nobody in a media organisation have a memory? Are they all complicit, or just lazy?
Will this burst of nostalgic "patriotism" draw the line at blue passports? As Mike Smithson of Political Betting observes, surveys suggest that there could be more to come.
Oh, and the UK already issues blue passports, but they're for refugees.
