KCL European Society 2016-17, Press Review No.1, 4^th October 2016

It’s been just over 3 months since Britain surprised the entire Western World by voting by a slim margin in favour of leaving the European Union. After an increasingly intense and emotional campaign, which saw the murder of sitting MP Jo Cox, Britain on 24^th June was left more divided than ever, despite a vote which many commentators argued was former British Prime Minister David Cameron’s attempt to unify his Conservative Party with a referendum campaign which would deliver an unambiguous if not decisive victory for remain. It was hoped this would close the issue. But this did not happen.

The turmoil in the international financial markets, was reflected on the political scene by the resignation of Prime Minister Cameron, throwing the Conservative Party leadership into far more uncertainty than any could have imagined. Whilst Theresa May’s candidacy was expected un such a scenario, the Gove’s betrayal of Johnson was a shock even for Conservative MPs. Meanwhile the Labour Party plunged into an internal conflict from which it is only now just emerging, after the mass resignations from the Shadow Cabinet and a vote of no confidence passed by the Parliamentary Labour Party.

Much has changed since those uncertain June and July days. What hasn’t, is the economic situation, which was predicted to descend into calamity by almost every economic ‘authority’ before the referendum. As if that most average people in the Western World distrusted the economics profession already wasn’t enough, the proclamations of imminent cataclysm followed by calm will only send the authority of economists in the public sphere lower. It is agreed by many commentators, Wolfgang Münchau of the FT being one of them, they overstepped themselves in their powers of prediction, which whilst not nil (and the impacts of the vote haven’t been entirely felt yet), are far from as accurate and precise as many from the pro-EU Conservatives and international economic organisations made out.

Secondly, on the one hand we have a new government and on the other it has done little to restore people’s confidence in Britain, her economy and her new place in the world. The latter hasn’t been quite found yet, and the search criteria are looking vague. Of course the economy has been sustained over the summer months, but at the same time we have heard many statements form business which suggest a cut-back on investment and perhaps as a result employment in Britain. Although at the same time Apple has announced it plans to make Battersea Power station the home of its new London Headquarters, the BBC reported on 28^th September. As for the confidence in Britain, that has remained shaky. Racist incidents have been on the rise since the referendum, with hate crimes the week before and the week after the referendum up 42% from last year. The May Ministry has repeated over and over that “Brexit means Brexit”, but they have omitted what they actually mean by this. International Trade Secretary Liam Fox, Secretary for Leaving the EU David Davis, and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, whilst being put in charge of Brexit, have come up with little results so far, and have more than once been countered by a Downing Street press statement saying that whatever the Minister has said, Britain hasn’t formulated a position on the direction to take in leaving the EU yet. You’d expect these three champions of Brexit to have come up with a coherent position by now, with at least some specific features. But no, still nothing. We don’t even know when Prime Minister Theresa May intends to trigger Article 50, initiating what could be a 2-year process. Some have claimed it’ll be even longer.

Finally, there’s the question of will Brexit even happen. This seems a silly question, given the repetitive if dull and useless phrase of the government to explain their plan, the fact that a petition for a second referendum signed by millions of Britons was pretty much ignored, and everybody seems to be acting as if it is going ahead at full-steam. There are reasons to question this for several reasons however; first of all, the question of when Article 50 will be triggered makes you wonder about the intentions of the May government. They have made it clear it won’t be this year. Some members of the government have suggested it’ll be around January 2017, however this has been refuted by Downing Street who repeat that they have no specific date yet. Then there’s the question of timing; Dutch, French and German elections are all being held next year, and will put Brexit at the bottom of the priority pile for Europe’s two largest states even if May does trigger Article 50 on 1^st January.

Then we have the question of a second referendum, which hasn’t died away yet, shifting to a referendum on the deal which the British government finally concludes with Europe with an opt-in option (rare for Britain to be talking of opt-ins in the context of Europe) if nobody likes the deal. This idea is supported by former candidate for Labour Leader Owen Smith, was endorsed at the Liberal Democrat Party Conference and advocated for by many pro-Remain groups which have lingered since June due to the uncertainty of Britain’s future. Finally, we have the legal challenges. There are several, and they are getting funds from wherever they possible can. These do not want to overturn the referendum through the Courts, but want to make it law that for Brexit to go ahead, parliament must vote in favour of it. The government’s lawyers assert that the Prime Minister can use the Royal Prerogative to conduct treaties and initiate international legal articles without the consent of parliament, however this seems dubious considering that an Act of Parliament cannot be overturned without another Act of Parliament, and it is an Act of Parliament (the European Communities Act 1973) which makes Britain part of the EU in British constitutional law. If we accept the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty that many Brexiteers kept brandishing during the referendum campaign, then surely this is the first chance to adhere to it. It seems unlikely that even in such an event Parliament would be brazen enough to overturn the vote of the people, but its possible, especially if support for leaving the EU dips without doubt into the minority position. This is mere speculation however, and most recent polls suggest this is not the case.

What is certain is that we don’t know what is going to happen to Britain, where she plans to go and what she plans to do next. This goes for her people, her government and her now loathed experts. At the Labour Party Conference this week, one speaker claimed that there would be riots in the streets if immigration wasn’t cut down as a response to Brexit. To me this smells of Enoch Powell a little too much for comfort. But this is a sign of what Britain has to come, because all the real decisions we have to make about our future still lie before us, and they are difficult.

Other readables:

• British Trade Secretary says that trade has entered a post-geography world, reported by the Financial Times
• German business leaders issue warning over post-Brexit trade relations with Britain, reported in The Guardian
• According to former Conservative Chancellor Kenneth Clarke, Theresa May’s government has no policies, reported by The Telegraph