INCONVENIENT REALITY

John Boydell - Friday, 4 August 2023

As always, I’m not on anybody’s “side” politically, just trying to champion common sense.

Queues and shortages produce terrible images in the media for incumbent governments. With modern technology, there’s also total recall of what was previously promised and that can be contrasted with what subsequently transpires on the ground. I’ll summarise but, essentially, what was promised with Brexit was that we’d have the best of both worlds, retaining the upside of the EU club while able to separate ourselves from it and “take back control”, able to forge our own destiny.

Things, of course, have not worked out as presented. The economy has, as a matter of fact, taken a big hit as a result of leaving the EU, despite government denials assisted by the camouflage of Covid and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (both of which have also caused economic damage, too). While the issue has been around for a while (and was always going to be), clips are doing the rounds at the moment of Michael Gove promising citizens in the run-up to the 2016 referendum that Brits would be able to come and go to enjoy their properties and retirements in EU countries. This was the promise but it’s bumped up against the reality of numerous complaints (many from Brexit-voting expats) that investments and retirements abroad are being ruined by the restriction of being allowed to stay only 90 days in 180 and the loss of NHS-equivalent health care. There were always going to be consequences, in reality, but it was just that such reality was inconvenient to one side of the political argument.

This week we have a couple more examples of politics bumping into the real world. With some fanfare, the Government previously announced the “crowning glory” of being able to restore the Crown symbol to a pint glass (this was always possible and did not require Brexit) in conjunction with the plan to scrap the EU’s product safety symbol, the CE Mark, and replace it with a UK version, the UKCA. The commentary was that this would “free” British businesses from EU regulation and replace it with something better. There had been no significant commentary from business that the CE Mark was deficient in some way; they were well used to it. It seemed symbolism was also at play, with the need to demonstrate being different, even though the CE mark seemed to fit in the ‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ category. Many British businesses have spent significant time and money preparing for UKCA, while pointing out that it is unnecessary. Ministers have repeatedly delayed its introduction and that introduction has now been delayed indefinitely. It’s also been announced that the CE mark will continue to be recognised, effectively admitting that it is as good as the proposed replacement. What’s going on? Reality, of course: a) businesses don’t want it, for it will add unwanted cost and complication, not the promised opposite; b) we need certain imports and many product suppliers to the UK may choose not to supply if it means creating products to different regulations; and c) many of our businesses still want to sell to EU countries, so would have to (continue to) comply with CE Mark requirements, anyway.

On 1 January 2021, the EU implemented third country controls on British exports; the UK should have introduced similar controls for EU exports to Britain, but didn’t. Why was that? The EU had made preparations and implemented them, while the UK had not made any significant preparations. Such preparations would, implicitly, recognise that the “have cake and eat it” promises of independence but, otherwise, business as usual were false. In addition, dishonesty in politics and fantasy rhetoric does not mean that calculation has been dispensed with. If full controls are implemented, there will be a very clear demonstration of additional bureaucracy and cost, not less of it, as promised. Importantly and returning to those damaging political images in the media, if you put up barriers it will create delays and cost, while (as has happened to many UK companies previously exporting easily to the EU), some suppliers will just cease to supply, cutting choice. Images of empty shelves and miles of traffic queues play out very badly with the British public and, of course, there’s an election on the near horizon. So, the calculation is that fudging the position with repeated delays to the introduction of controls is a better political outcome than introducing what should have been implemented long ago, according to the negotiated position. If we’re not applying controls and standard checks, apart from lessening shortages and queues, what are the consequences? Unsurprisingly, British businesses complain that the playing field is not level: they have to comply with standards on their exports, while EU exporters to the UK [effectively] do not. Smuggling is, naturally, much easier causing loss to the Treasury (and so less resource to provide for citizens) and, in the case of certain products, particularly food, allowing goodness knows what to get through and appear for sale. In the case of food, checks have now been delayed for the fifth time! The Government says it will publish details of rules applying to food imports “very soon”. Really? The [understandable] public outcry about inflation and, particularly, food price rises is also driving Ministers’ calculations. Proper controls will increase costs, which will be passed on to consumers, so fudge and delay is a better political outcome than the triple whammy of extra inflation, shortages and traffic queues.

And who’s holding the Government’s dishonest feet to the fire for these (and other) outcomes in the face of what was promised? Not much of the press and not the Labour Party, which has an open goal to aim at but, for it’s own political calculation, is keeping quiet other than mutterings about “improving” arrangements. Dishonesty in politics seems to have moved to another level. Perhaps it’s the rise in certain parts of the world of noisy populism, creating tribalism where loyalty to the team is, ultimately, more important than facts and common sense. Boris Johnson, a liar to suit the moment, brought that to British politics and while it’s been dialled down a bit, it’s still there. And our citizens, where are they? Confused, bewildered and more cynical of politicians than ever before, with some justification. Does this matter? Of course it does, it’s the fabric of our society, and it damn-well does matter – unless you’re in a tribe already.