How it all turned to Brexit.

For reasons that will one day become clear, I have recently spoken with a number of business owners and entrepreneurs outside the UK. After a while, they all ask the same question, 'So...what happened with Brexit?'

Here's my answer.

It was 2016 when the UK Prime Minister of the day, Mr David Cameron, decided that it was time to scratch a persistent itch that had been troubling him, the growing debate surrounding Great Britain’s membership of the European Union (EU). The itch was mostly emanating from a small faction of the political right wing led by the Euro MP and minor cult figure Mr Nigel Farage. The interesting thing about Farage was that, although he was consistently elected as a Member of the European Parliament (MEP), he had never managed to win a seat in Westminster. Nonetheless, he led a British political party, UKIP, and held popular sway with the electorate as an outspoken, beer-drinking man of the people claiming to be both anti-establishment and anti-politically elite. Quite an achievement for a politically elite member of the establishment.

Because UKIP supporters were spread thinly throughout Britain rather than being concentrated in one constituency, the vagaries of the British electoral system meant that they struggled to find parliamentary representation. All the same, their collective social voice was significant enough for the Conservative party to promise them a referendum on EU membership, providing they won the 2015 election. This had the effect of winning over UKIP supporters who, realising that their party stood little chance of election success, surrendered their vote to the Conservatives in exchange for a chance to register their desire to leave the EU.

So far, so good for Mr Cameron who presided over the subsequent referendum debate with the air of a public-school headmaster refereeing a pillow fight.

The country, in the meantime, took to the debate with uncharacteristic enthusiasm. It wasn’t that we didn't have an opinion on such a meaty political issue, it’s just that nobody had ever asked us. At least not for a long time. Suddenly everyone was asking each other whether they were a leaver or a remainer. The option to say neither, or even both, didn’t really exist. Britain’s exit was shortened to ‘Brexit’ and, alarmingly, Nigel Farage found his status lifted to that of superhero. Brexitman, didn’t have any real super powers, other than the ability to regularly consume seven pints of beer and twenty Marlboro Light, but he did have the one thing that regularly beats logic, honesty and reason - charisma.

Soon, the Brexit movement gathered momentum and were given credibility and hope by several other high-profile political heavyweights who decided, for various reasons, to get behind it headed by none other than one Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.

On the morning of June 24th 2016 as news of the referendum result slowly seeped out through the news media, there was a genuine feeling among most of the country that the joke had gone a little too far. The country had blindly mixed together two unstable liquids and caused a rather loud explosion. The resulting mess was both costly and unnecessary.

Three years later, we were still arguing about why we caused the big bang in the first place. As an exercise in pure politics, it was a raging success. In years to come our children and grandchildren will study the entire process and map the social, political and economic impact on not only the UK but across Europe and beyond. We managed to witness the fall of PM David Cameron, the rise and fall of PM Teresa May and the rise and rise of the one who calls himself Boris (in preference to Alexander and certainly to de Pfeffel). All this whilst Her Majesty’s Leader of the Opposition, Mr Jeremy Corbyn, sat motionless and mainly speechless. Corbyn adopted that deadpan, expressionless face that Buster Keaton used to wear as buildings collapsed around him, mistakenly believing that it conveyed a sense of dignity. The unthinkable had happened, the public had exercised their democratic right to ask the government to turn their omelette back into three raw eggs.

Over the last three controversial years nobody, despite repeated requests, has come up with a single proven benefit for leaving the EU. The whole thing has eventually been sold under the guise of ‘the will of the people’ and ‘democracy in action’. Both are incorrect.

52% of those who voted at the time does not constitute the will of the people. 17.4 million votes are equal to well under 1/3rd of the UK population. Nobody born this century voted for Brexit.

Democracy is not defined as ‘majority rule’ and it never should be. If anything, democracy is concerned with protecting minorities rather than imposing the will of the majority. If we wish to adopt majority rule in this country I would be the first to propose a referendum on whether we should pay income tax.

In all honesty, there were sensible arguments either way in the Brexit debate. A true reflection of public opinion if given the facts known at the time would have probably produced a 50-50 result. The scales, in the end, were tipped by a section of the electorate who fell for some fairly sneaky tactical racism, some misleading economic forecasts and a false vision of a Great Britain that never existed and probably never will.

There is, however, light at the end of the channel tunnel, and that light is 'commercial necessity'. Bear with me...

Political questions are not answered by a ‘yes’ or ‘no’. That is why politicians deal with them. Yes or No questions are decided by trade and commerce. Straightforward questions are answered by Business. If it makes a profit it will probably happen. If it makes a loss it doesn’t and is usually referred to the politicians to solve by means of compromise and legislation.

Brexit is being done, for better or worse, and business will find a way of dealing with it. Money and goods will move between locations if there is good reason for them so to do and where there is waste or duplication, politics will have to decide. All the same, it is the political issues that will cause the most consternation and change and compromise will follow. It will be hard to convince those adversely affected by these changes that Brexit was all for the good of some democratic nirvana. Already companies have moved out of the UK, unwilling to risk seeing existing export markets jeopardised by renegotiated terms and tariffs.

Be all that as it may, the UK is still a willing partner when it comes to trade. Yes, our politicians have got some wriggling to do when it comes to policy making but they have skilled and experienced advisors. The government mandarins will find a way to oil the commercial wheels, a sub-clause here and an amendment there – good as new, old boy!

In conclusion, Brexit was a political wrong turn, caused by a misplaced faith in populist rhetoric, the demonisation of immigrants and the lack of an effective opposition. Whilst the socio-political impact of the process of leaving the EU will be felt for years to come. The economic impact of Brexit will be cushioned by the very nature of commercial necessity. Whilst this may cause some short sharp shocks to some sections of the economy, others will survive and, in some cases, thrive within the new regime.

As an exercise in crystal-ball gazing, that’s the best I can offer.