This week’s newsletter challenges the dominant narrative on the Brexit economic impact. We also explore Iceland’s firm rejection of the EU and what Burnham’s upcoming meeting with Macron means for British farming and steel protection.
Dear Subscribers,
This week Graham Gudgin and Wilf Glasby dismantle the consensus that concludes Brexit has negatively impacted the UK economy, the implications of Iceland’s rejection of the EU and the concessions Burnham is expected to make in his forthcoming meeting with Macron.
This week on BfB: Doppelgangers are Double-Dutch by Graham Gudgin & Wilf Glasby
The widespread belief that the UK economy is significantly smaller than it would have been in the absence of Brexit rests on much more flimsy foundations than most commentators realise. In particular, the popular doppelganger approach is fundamentally flawed, leading to laughably exaggerated estimates for the negative impact of Brexit. This article deconstructs the dominant consensus that Brexit has done substantial damage to the UK economy, which pervades across the media and Whitehall.
Iceland says No to the EU
Iceland has voted No to reopening talks to joining the EU, the result being 52.5-47.5 per cent. The Telegraph has pointed out that this is a blow to the EU, since Iceland would have been a net contributor to the EU’s budget. It also noticed how the only area to have voted overwhelmingly to reopening talks was the capital, Reykjavik, which reflects the long-standing political tension between the metropolis and country which prevails across modern societies.
For The Spectator, John Fund has suggested that the referendum is a portent for the EU. The central issue, Fund argues, is the carelessness and arrogance with which the EU continues to federalise and centralise: since Brexit, ‘no other European nation has dared test the sentiment of its people in favour of ‘an ever-closer Europe’.’ And neither, it seems, will one risk doing so in the near future.
Burnham’s EU reset: farming and steel protection
As well as the Bayeux Tapestry’s arrival, Emmanuel Macron is in London to discuss Britain’s role in the EU’s procurement plan. Burnham has committed to protecting British agriculture and steel in light of the EU’s French-led ‘Made in Europe’ policy. EU Today has reported that Burnham’s meeting with Macron on Thursday highlighted the fact of Britain’s exclusion of the ‘Made in Europe’ policy, especially regarding its role as a supplier of defence and energy manufactures. Burnham was vague but optimistic about future negotiations: but, we might ask, at what cost will British participation in a ‘Made in Europe’ policy come?
What we’re reading:
Tom Jones for The Critic: John Healey, rug puller
Tom Jones views the actions of governing politicians as ‘charlatanism’, evidenced first by Keir Starmer’s resignation from his seat of Holborn and St. Pancras, and secondly by Chancellor John Healey. Jones argues that Healey’s delaying of the 3 per cent defence spending target (the same delaying against which he resigned in protest as Starmer’s Defence Secretary) shows that he is unprincipled. Jones sees this writ large in British political life, in which politicians ‘act like crypto scammers’. Maybe Jones could have pursued the point more historically and broadly about the tension unique to Labour politicians, since the party’s inception, between its rhetoric of virtue and progress, and the cramped nature of political decision-making which has affronted rhetoric when they have found themselves in government.
Related