A dog’s breakfast

Hasan Suroor

BRITS don’t do revolutions; and when they try to play amateur insurgents they end up making a real “dog’s breakfast” of it. Not my words, but of a crusty old Tory. The post-Brexit mess, which is threatening to tear the UK apart and has plunged continental Europe into an unprecedented turmoil, is a cautionary tale of what happens when a nation of hard-nosed pragmatists wanders off into uncharted territory seduced by starry-eyed romanticism. The outcome of last week’s UK referendum on its future relationship with the EU was the more shocking because it was  so very un-British. Passions are not Britons’ strong suit and when, on the odd occasion, they do work themselves up into a lather it is not long before the famous British common-sense  kicks in bringing them back on terra firma. 

Seldom in its recent political history has Britain taken such a momentous  decision in the heat of the moment. There have been times when it has gone to the brink but then pulled back just before taking the plunge. The Scottish referendum on leaving the UK two years ago saw a highly emotionally charged campaign, but ultimately the head won over the heart. British pragmatism trumped Scottish nationalism. In voting to leave the EU, however, Britain has embarked on a journey without the foggiest sense of the road ahead. Brexit leaders have been likened to military generals who lead their troops over the cliff not having a clue to what lies on the other side. Millions of voters were tricked into “jumping  into the sea” on a false prospectus, one commentator pointed out.

All through the campaign, Leave leaders were repeatedly asked whether they had a roadmap for a post-Brexit Britain, but they ducked the question every time, responding instead with banal rhetoric. Banalities that they continue to mouth except that now they can’t get away with them. The difficulty is that they themselves don’t know the answer because they  had no plan. Little wonder, then, they have already started to row back on  two of their most hyped campaign promises: reducing EU migrant numbers; and boosting  investment in public services with the money saved from Britain’s current EU contribution. Of course, it was an open secret all along that both these pledges were based on dodgy “facts”  but Brexiteers continued to peddle lies to their starry-eyed audiences. It is these lies that are now coming home to roost.

On immigration, the actual position is that if a post-Brexit Britain wishes to retain access to the single common market, which it seems it does, then it will continue to be bound by EU rules on free movement of its citizens. It cannot stop it altogether. At best, Britain can impose limited restrictions on claiming benefits and residency rights. But the EU had already agreed to this in pre-referendum negotiations with David Cameron, and there was no need to leave the EU. If Brexiteers have any other brave new ideas on curbing EU migration they are keeping them under wraps. There’s also no clarity on the status of  1.3 million British expatriates who live in Europe and whose future has been thrown  into uncertainty.

On investment in public services, the Brexit campaign touted a figure of £350 million which, they claimed, Britain paid to EU every week and would be freed up after Brexit to be invested in NHS, schools and housing, etc. They continued to plug this figure even after it was hotly contested both by Brussels and Downing Street. But having won the referendum on the back of bogus statistics, they’re now trying to distance themselves from them. Lacking a blueprint for the future, those who were so impatient to regain “control” over British sovereignty have developed cold feet and are seeking time to set in motion the Brexit process. Now, it is Brussels that is impatient to get rid of Britain to prevent the “Brexit” contagion from spreading to other countries.

The truth is that people were conned into voting for Leave by promising them El Dorado: a Britain unshackled by EU rules, sans EU migrants, and flush with public investment. Immigration then got inflated with other issues; and the referendum became a lightning rod for all the pent-up frustrations and prejudices. That’s how it was won. But close to half the country voted against  it. And they believe that the referendum was hijacked by a cabal relying on misinformation and hate. A petition on the parliamentary website demanding a re-run of the referendum had been signed by more than three million people at the weekend. Both the political class and the country are more divided today than they have ever been in recent memory.

The entire  exercise, wholly unnecessary to begin with, has not only damaged Britain’s relations with Europe, but will diminish its role in international affairs and weaken its economy, tipping it into another recession. More ominously, Brexiteers may have inadvertently triggered the unravelling  of the UK itself. Northern Ireland is demanding a referendum on reunion with Ireland, and Scotland is talking about a second Independence referendum.

So, how did it come to this? Cameron is typical of the cocky public schoolboys whose exaggerated sense of their own confidence blinds them to the risk of playing a blinder. When he was contemplating taking a punt on an “In/Out” referendum to appease his Eurosceptic party colleagues, he was warned against it by people whose political instincts are  sharper than his own. Yet, he went ahead grandly, declaring that he believed in taking problems head-on and not ducking them. Nick Clegg, former deputy PM, says Cameron “breezily” told him he would pull it off. To be fair to him, though, even sceptics didn’t anticipate it was going be so difficult and messy.

The post-Brexit crisis is arguably the worst in Britain’s post-war history. The country is on an edge. EU migrants are facing abuse from right-wing Brexit groups, adding to their fears about their future; native Brits are asking questions about its economic implications;  and there are worries that with the pound falling, foreign travel will become more expensive. And it looks as though the mess is not about to be cleared any time soon. Guess who was the crusty old Tory who invoked the “dog’s breakfast” analogy? Norman Tebbitt, the original Tory Eurosceptic and xenophobe who devised the notorious “cricket loyalty test” for Asian immigrants. Yes, even he is horrified by Brexit amid a deepening political and constitutional crisis with no sense of where Britain goes from here.

 — The writer in an independent London-based commentator.