Brexit has been one of the most controversial political moments in British political history; a moment that has divided the country and public opinion, turned citizen against citizen as those on either side of the debate chastise each other for their position on the EU and left British citizens on either side of the debate with a deep uncertainty about the future.
Whilst politicians that backed the Leave camp appear to be unsure of what to do in the future; the Remain camp desperately clings to the past in the hope that we can turn back the hands of time on what is a democratic decision by the British public. With this uncertainty about the future it is imperative that the next government to-be maps out a plausible, coherent and compelling vision of Britain in a post-Brexit world that can bring the country together and secure Britain's economic future.
Moving towards a vision for Britain in the future, outside of the EU, means first coming to terms with the democratic decision made by the public in the referendum. It means refusing to join the chorus of those that characterise all Leave voters as uneducated racists lacking in understanding of economics and accepting that there were a plethora of reasons why voters decided to tick the Leave box. Some campaigners were obviously making immigration the centre of the referendum in an attempt to whip up an emotional anti-immigrant frenzy but there were also sound arguments about free-trade, democracy and Britain's economic future; arguments that should not be ideologically foreign to liberals. As the party committed to evidence backed policy it is important that we look closely at the rational arguments offered by Brexiter' and come to rational conclusions on the merit of the arguments, offering careful rebuttal's to the arguments where we disagree and incorporating arguments that we believe to be rational and reasonable.
We liberals should steer clear of building our post-Brexit politics around the scaremongering speculative media reports that imagine an economic apocalypse once Britain leaves the EU. As high-minded Liberal Democrats we should put aside the Punch and Judy politics where we revert to emotional prophesies of doom and apocalypse to gain a short-term increase in members. Whilst this may increase membership for the short-term it also increases the potential of the party being left out in the cold when the ashes are settled and the pain of defeat drifts away and another more immediate issue captures the public's imagination. In accepting our democratic fate and looking to the future of Britain post-Brexit we will become the party with the answers and not the protest party; we will become the party of the future preparing for the future.
So, where do we start? Well, firstly, I believe that we begin with a position on what Brexit looks like. What do we want the relationship to be between Britain and the EU once the dust has settled and Article 50 has been triggered? It is clear that we want to avoid a hostile relationship and to remain in a close friendship with EU nations. We still seek trading relationships with the EU just as say China or the US do and still want to work with the EU on transnational issues such as climate change. As a political party it is for the Liberal Democrats to position ourselves as the internationalist party best placed to lead friendly negotiations with the EU. As the Liberal Democrats have largely championed the EU and Nick Clegg is one of the best minds on the EU and European policy in the country, the Liberal Democrat Party is in a good position to argue that we are the party most endearing to a European political audience considering our policy commitments to the EU and the fact that we have Nick Clegg on our team. We must argue that at the EU negotiating table a pro-European party would have a better chance at keeping negotiations friendly and civil and perhaps possess the ability to soften any desires that the EU has to punish Britain for its controversial decision by making it more difficult for Britain's to trade and travel within the EU.
Secondly, and perhaps most importantly we should begin to re-frame the way how we think about the referendum. Instead of considering the referendum an argument about immigration, we should consider it to be an economic and cultural argument about whether we place our economic future with the EU or the Commonwealth. We must accept that a large part of the rational argument put forward by the Leave campaign revolved around developing a deeper trade and economic relationship with the Commonwealth. As a party committed to evidence based policy and being the internationalist party, it is imperative that we engage and build upon the arguments of those that see the economic future of Britain tied to the Commonwealth rather than the EU. It is imperative that we accept the potential of a new post-racial internationalism being developed through building closer relationships with the Commonwealth nations and that we offer the vision of a more integrated Commonwealth as our post-Brexit political position.
The Commonwealth grew out of the relationships that had existed between Britain and its former colonies in the British Empire. After the independence struggles that liberated many of Britain's former colonies from British colonial rule, the Commonwealth was formed as an alliance of former colonies that had decided to gather together as free and independent nations. Today, largely through the efforts of Queen Elizabeth II, the Commonwealth has 53 nations in its membership; representing 2.2 billion people of many hues and backgrounds, across 5 continents with a collective GDP of $10 trillion, who share for better or for worse a political and cultural history that comes from being embroiled in the colonialism of the British Empire. Today, unlike in the past, Commonwealth independent Heads of State gather together as equals to discuss ways of improving relationships between Commonwealth nations and tackling important issues such as climate change, gender equality and poverty.
Today, many economists believe that there is a great future in Britain working to build more extensive trade relationships with Commonwealth nations. The IMF estimates that the GDP of the Commonwealth will reach to 17.7% of global output within the next decade making it a larger market than the EU that is estimated to be trading at 15.3% of global output. Many feel today that perhaps Britain should have never turned its back on the Commonwealth considering the great growth that many Commonwealth nations are experiencing. They have also argued for a more inclusive internationalism that is global rather than regional. Whilst there were emotional campaigning tactics employed by Leave campaigners that attempted to reduce the referendum to a debate about immigration there were also deliberately misleading interpretations of the debate by the Remain camp that focused on the rhetoric and antics of Nigel Farage - making him out to be far more influential that he actually was during the referendum - whilst not responding to the considerable body of rational arguments offered by the Leave camp on why they believed that leaving the EU would be better for Britain's economic future and the world and allow Britain to pursue closer economic and trade relationships with the Commonwealth.
We have completely ignored the humanitarian nature of the argument put forward by for example Lord Howell, who quite eloquently offered a humanitarian aspect of the argument emphasising Britain's ability to give a better deal to farmers in the developing world and his desire to open the markets to agricultural producers in the developing world free from the tariffs and protectionist policies imposed by the EU thus creating a better deal for both British consumers and Commonwealth agricultural producers in the developing world. The rational arguments put forward by a large segment of the Leave camp made no mention of immigration at all. In fact many Leave campaigners and those that support the argument for greater integration with the Commonwealth have argued that Britain needs more immigration from the Commonwealth as part of its future economic plan.
The campaign is now over, the electorate have decided to leave the EU. Now is not the time to imagine what could have been or to cry about the world as it should be but to look at the world as it is. The opportunity has passed but we still have an opportunity to do something great for our country; we still have the chance to make sure that Britain's relationship with the EU in the future is not completely diminished; and we have the opportunity to chart a new path into the future for all of Britain's citizens on either side of the referendum debate. A future that I believe must include the Commonwealth as a major element.
God Save Britannia!
No comments:
Post a Comment