Government should be brave enough to tell the truth.

We should be thankful to William Hague in today's Daily Telegraph (24.10.17) for clarifying so publicly the fundamental flaw in the government policy on Brexit. 

He makes it absolutely clear that Brexit is bad for the country. But he thinks the Government should carry on regardless. Not because it legally must. But because it does not know how to get out of it.

He tells us that he voted Remain, and did so for reasons that largely remain true today. He thought that leaving the European Union would accelerate the fragmentation of the Western world, and he still thinks that. He thought that it would have a damaging impact on highly complex and crucial businesses whose work crosses multiple borders in finance and manufacturing, and he still thinks that. The only positive is that it may not be propelling a separation of Scotland.

Yet despite thinking that Brexit is bad for the world and bad for Britain, he explains the reasoning behind government thinking that it must carry on with Brexit.

He quotes Alasdair Campbell, who in the Guardian last week argued that Theresa May should tell Parliament that Brexit cannot be done without damage to the economy, living standards, public services and our standing in the world, damage she is not prepared to accept. 

Hague said No.

So, to be clear: if Theresa May was to stand up in Parliament and tell what he considers to be the truth, that would be a calamity!

I am not asking her to ape Alasdair Campbell: just to tell the public what she knows to be the truth. She can say, “Brexit cannot be done without damage to the economy, living standards, public services, our standing in the world, and the Western world, but if that is what the public wants I will carry on and do my duty.”

He goes further. "We are all steeped now in the tortuous complications of implementing the referendum result." He is under no illusions about the difficulties. So how is it possible that he thinks – as a leading representative of Tory government and former leader of the party – it would be wrong to stand up and tell the truth and try to extricate ourselves from the mess?

He thinks a lot of people would be angry. Well guess what, lots of people are already angry. They are angry that a tiny majority are damaging the future of the whole country in an irreversible process if we go much further. Generations will continue to be angry. Sometimes Parliament has to do what is right even when the public would have voted differently, like capital punishment or taxes.

He thinks the situation is fuzzy how the population would vote: “evenly divided”. Well guess what, that means the population is fuzzy about whether it wants to go, and lying to it will not help. Why should we be forced to do what is bad for us if we are "evenly divided"? Uncertainty about how people would vote is an insufficient reason to make a non-binding referendum harmfully binding for decades to come. 

He thinks that people in other countries would be bewildered at us changing our mind. Well guess what, they are already bewildered that we have been so stupid and have not changed our mind.

He thinks the process of cancelling Brexit would be complicated. Well, guess what, look at how complicated the process of trying to do Brexit is.

He thinks that it we have a duty to follow the democratic process. Well guess what, democracy includes the ability to re-vote on decisions and revoke legislation. This is especially true when the referendum was non-binding. In every other democratic process, there is a chance after a while to switch. That is why a 50-50 design was a very poor basis for such a big decision.

Especially when it is so ill-informed. Misinformation came from ignorance as well as deceit. Now we know even better, if the Prime Minister is not prepared to tell the truth, we continue to operate under a lie. 

The Tory party likes to claim to be the party of business and Hague has chaired or is a board member of a number of companies. He would be the first to know that in business affairs if you make a decision, for example to buy a company, if on due diligence you find that it is flawed, well you do not carry on.

And here is the joke. Not only was the referendum badly designed and badly or falsely argued, it is not even a binding referendum, only advisory. 

His main argument for carrying on with the tortuous and damaging process is that if the government does not, people will lose faith in the politicians and parliament. Half of us already have. Concealing the truth and persisting with what is manifestly bad even when you know it to be so will become a way to lose the other half as well.

If Theresa May, and the Tory party, really wants to do their duty to the British people now and for generations to come, they will be brave enough to tell the truth.