Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

On the second referendum point, I recall that Nigel Farage, in the last days or hours before the 2016 referendum result, said that he/UKIP would campaign for a further referendum if 'Leave' lost (which at the time looked likely, if narrowly).

I don't see how one can have a principled objection to a further referendum, when relying on the 2016 referendum which asked a simple question. The question now being suggested is rather more complicated, or nuanced. Nonetheless, I am not in favour of a new referendum. It would be politically divisive, and framing the question neutrally but meaningfully would require more adroitness than any leading politician has displayed over the last three years.

On the basis of the ECJ's ruling (however much one may criticise it) there is a further option, which is withdrawal of the current Art. 50 notice and the serving of a further notice, either immediately or when the Government has made up its mind what it really really wants. This would however create another unholy political mess.

Missing from most of the commentary (and, it appears, the thinking processes of most of the politicians) is any serious consideration of the EU's overall position, and its 'red lines.' These would appear to include maintaining the integrity of the borders of EU states. Thus Ireland was completely overlooked by the UK at first, and the realities of the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic not considered. It may, in the general scheme of things, seem a minor point, but had there been a little more prior consideration of the EU's position and its possible 'red lines', possibly the trap could have been avoided.

But we are where we are. Much as I dislike May's deal - solely because of the requirement for unanimity in accepting new border arrangements, with no alternatives - it does look to be the best possible. Trading with the rest of the world, including the EU, on WTO terms may not be beneficial: as I understand it, WTO terms are overall more onerous than those in individually negotiated trade deals. Should the pound fall, it may assist exports, but alas alack, we import far more goods than we export, and they will be more expensive. Perhaps for the longer term that is pain we should just bear. But I can't see that going down well with most of the electorate, especially the 'just about managing', who may find they can no longer 'just about manage.'

The sooner we can be shot of this unholy mess and get on with other business, the better.

Your details

Cancel