As an analysis of what has gone wrong with Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union, John Vassallo’s simplistic, biased, ill-informed and insulting diatribe of March 3 (‘Oldest Democracy’ in Action) adds nothing positive to this important debate.
Presumably he is aware that the Greek city-state of Athens is credited with being the oldest democracy – “the cradle of democracy”? Can he really believe his own assertion that the over-mighty European Commission, the President of the EU Council of Ministers and the European Parliament are truly exemplars of representative democracy?
Vassallo, who was briefly accredited as ambassador to the European Community some 10 years before Malta joined the European Union – but signs himself as “a former ambassador of Malta to the EU” – won’t let the facts get in the way of his prejudices in taking a wild and inaccurate swing at Britain and its institutions.
He is right about one thing: the United Kingdom’s exit from the EU has been an unmitigated shambles. But he is wrong in blaming it on Britain’s democratic institutions or its first-past-the-post electoral system.
The last 32 months have been essentially about the poverty of leadership in the United Kingdom, not its vibrant representative democracy. The Brexit process has exposed the dearth of leadership of both main parties as not up to the task. The United Kingdom has been divided into two warring camps in a debate conducted in the most uncivil terms. The respect for truth has been notable by its absence.
The vote for Brexit in June 2016 was a mutiny, a vote against the established authority, not a strategy for the future. The consequences have been to deepen polarisation in Britain, leaving no coherent and united government or Opposition stance on the best withdrawal option, and no House of Commons majority in favour of anything.
Theresa May actuated Article 50 with no pre-negotiation and no inkling where it might end up
But the essence of the problem is that the negotiation to leave the European Union has been handled poorly, compounded by cack-handed leadership. Theresa May’s government – grossly weakened by an ill-judged election – chose to trigger Article 50, which started the process of leaving the European Union even though it had no real notion of how it would then proceed. May actuated Article 50 with no pre-negotiation and no inkling where it might end up.
Secondly, she compounded matters by laying down “red lines” which further inhibited her room for manoeuvre in an extremely complex negotiation. And thirdly, the Prime Minister signed up to a withdrawal agreement that endorsed the Irish backstop and no exit from the customs union without the permission of the European Union. She is currently – amidst Tory in-fighting – trying to change this. With time running down, Mrs May has walked into a problem with the Northern Irish border which may well prove to be insoluble.
In all my 25 years as a civil servant in Whitehall, I have never known a less impressive group of government ministers. In ordinary political times in Britain, incompetent government has at least been mitigated by the presence of an Opposition that was a viable administration-in-waiting. One has to go back 40 years to recall when there was one as unappealing and dangerous as Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party. At a time crying out for clarity, it is still almost impossible to tell what the Labour position on Brexit might be.
This abysmal failure of political leadership has immediate consequences. The prime impact is that, with only 19 days until March 29, Britain might be on the cusp of a damaging departure from the European Union without a withdrawal agreement in place, leading to serious administrative, economic and social consequences – a crisis which would be entirely home-grown and wholly self-inflicted.
If a no-deal Brexit can be avoided, both the European Union and the United Kingdom need to be thinking strategically about the long-term relationship each wants. For both, each will be its most important economic and security partner in this hemisphere.
The trade negotiations ahead will be vastly more complex and difficult than the withdrawal agreement the United Kingdom has just been through. A very different style of British leadership will be needed throughout the domestic UK debates in the next, even more crucial, phase if a successful long-term EU/UK trade and security relationship is to be established.