One of the problems
with simplistic political slogans is that turning them into reality never quite
matches the image that those targeted by the slogans took them to mean in the
first place. One obvious example, in
relation to Brexit, was “control of our borders”. It is increasingly obvious that what many of
those demanding this outcome meant was control of other people coming into the
UK; they certainly didn’t intend it to be reciprocal. Hence the outrage being increasingly expressed
by the tabloids about delays to holidaymakers entering other countries.
People who have,
for years, demanded a tightening of border controls are now complaining bitterly
about the delays which result from more stringent checks of passports and other
entry documents. But what does "controlling
the borders” mean if not paying more attention to who is entering a country and
whether they are who they claim to be?
It could be, of course, that what they really intended was for more
people to be employed to man the borders.
Perhaps it was all a giant job creation scheme for the border
agency. That might be a bit more credible
if the same tabloids hadn’t also spent years complaining about the ‘bloated
public sector’.
Personally, I suspect
that it is related to the long-standing tradition of British
exceptionalism. It’s not ‘freedom of
movement’ that they want to stop, it’s other people’s - foreigners’ – freedom of
movement. The traditional blue British
passport which they think they’re going to be getting back always asserted, as
I recall, the demand of ‘Her Britannic Majesty’ that the holder should be
allowed through without let or hindrance.
For some strange reason, however, those strange foreigners don’t see
things in the same way – they actually have the nerve to think that UK subjects
should be treated the same way as everyone else. Inevitably, this clear and logical outcome of
Brexit will be portrayed as yet another example of Brussels punishing the UK. Of course.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment