Brexit Bitterness

Ever since the 2016 vote, Brexit has been an almost daily feature of the news in the United Kingdom. However, with Brexit expected to bring about drastic change, this is understandable. By now, with the end of March 2019 the agreed departure date of the United Kingdom from the European Union, it would have been hoped that clarity would have been reached and a path would have been set for the next few years. Alas, we are now in February, with this path now perhaps at its most uncertain since the Brexit vote.

There seem to be countless directions Brexit could head in, with three standing out most: Brexit based on Theresa May's deal, no deal, or a second referendum- with the latter implicitly offering the chance to cancel Brexit. I will now outline, from worst to best, my stance on these options:

- Second referendum (with the option to cancel Brexit): worst option. A vote supporting Brexit again would take us back to where we already are, except prolonging the whole process even more. A vote overturning Brexit would provoke an almost inevitable backlash from Leavers: for all those prospectively backing Leave twice, after at least one time of winning the vote, it would indeed be seen as a betrayal to ultimately remain in the EU. As we all know, Brexit provokes strong feelings, and its cancellation would disrupt voting patterns even more as public vent their anger on Brexit's conduct. A violent, mass response is also foreseeable. In any case, the arguments for this option are very weak: saying "people didn't know what they were voting for" is incredibly patronising and, seeing as Brexit still hasn't happened, no-one yet knows what Brexit will be like in practice; while saying that those too young to vote missed out is a foolish case, given that there will always be generations missing whenever a vote is held, and the implication of this argument is that the desire is to manipulate the vote. Moreover, a second vote resulting in "Remain" raises the argument that we would need a "best out of three" decision in the future, prolonging the process again. After the vote on Scottish independence, the SNP quite graciously accepted the result- despite it being close. Remainers calling for another vote should do the same, and not open a Pandora's box on having whole series of referenda on the same topic.

- No deal: This would deliver on what was voted for, i.e. departure from the EU. However, this method is expected to be particularly disruptive for all concerned and leaves a great deal undecided on our relationship with the EU for the foreseeable future. No doubt steps would be taken to smooth the process, but in my view this would be avoided by...

- Theresa May's deal: whatever eventual form it would take, I support its basic principles. It honours the basic result of the vote, by taking the UK out of the EU. It would also honour the spirit of the vote, considering that immigration is widely accepted as the key factor behind most of those supporting Brexit, and the deal would stop "freedom of movement", and enable the government to control all forms of migration to the UK. Meanwhile, on the other hand, it smooths the process by bringing clarity in many areas of continued ties with the EU, and enables valued trading links continue largely as they currently do with our principle trading partners.

This deal also reflects a compromise, and the fact that the vote was so close suggests that a Hard Brexit should be not be sought. It also provides far greater certainty that businesses are looking for, while the public can see tangible progress being made when Brexit already seems to have dragged on for a long time. Any measures to delay Brexit, such as a second referendum or pushing back the departure, just prolong the uncertainty many agree is damaging business, as well as unity among politicians and society generally.

The current messiness is something I neither blame on Brexit voters or the government, but parliament. Whether intentional or not, Gina Miller's push for parliament to vote on the outcome has made Brexit more damaging and divisive when, by now, the withdrawal agreement had already been passed by the UK government and EU, which was previously all that was sufficient. Passing an agreement bringing about Brexit to an institution that is primarily opposed to Brexit provided too much temptation for trouble. Either side of those supporting Theresa May's deal are those pulling towards Hard Brexit and no deal, and many of those opposing Brexit altogether, when those extremes make the polar opposites of what the outcomes of what they want in terms of Brexit more likely.

The elephant in the room is the backstop, whereby Northern Ireland would remain in a customs union with the EU in the event that either a hard border or other outcome deemed unsatisfactory is in place by the time the UK is due to end its transition towards leaving the EU completely. However, I feel that there should be mutual trust that all parties do not desire a hard border between Norther Ireland and the Irish Republic, so a backstop should be unnecessary. Nevertheless, as a backstop is also undesirable for all concerned, this shouldn't be allowed to obstruct Brexit from happening as no parties would want a backstop to be in place indefinitely.

I therefore hope that some form of Theresa May's Brexit deal is accepted, and as soon as possible, to deliver the Brexit voted for and bring undesirable uncertainty to an end, so everyone can adjust to a post-Brexit United Kingdom.

Royal Round-up: 2018

The countries' royals annually reviewed are as follows, with the key developments over the year outlined afterwards:

Existing hereditary monarchies: Great Britain, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Spain, Monaco.

Former monarchies: Russia, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Albania, Serbia, Montenegro, Austria, Germany, Italy, Portugal, France.

2018

Prince Henrik, consort of Queen Margrethe II of Denmark, dies aged 83.

Having surpassed the milestone of 44 years on the throne, King Carl XVI of Sweden becomes the longest reigning monarch in his country’s history.

With encouragement from his mother, Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Commonwealth leaders unanimously agree that the heir to the British throne, Prince Charles, should succeed Queen Elizabeth II as Head of the Commonwealth of Nations- a position which is not hereditary.