On
Friday, the Western Mail’s leader column pronounced in large bold letters that “Brexit must not hit our country's poor”. As a statement of what most of us would hope
for, it’s hard to argue with that. But
how widely held is that view in reality?
As
part of the argument in support of its position, the opinion column went on to
say “Regardless of how anyone voted in
the referendum, nobody will want Wales to fall off an economic cliff in 2019
when the UK leaves the EU.” I’m far
from certain that that is a true or accurate statement. I have the impression that a quick and total
break is exactly what many want and thought they were voting for. And it was, I thought, perfectly clear during
the referendum itself that many of those arguing for Brexit wanted exactly that
outcome, believing, in effect, that the ultimate gain from Brexit was worth the
pain involved. That may not have been –
indeed was not - what they actually said, but there was enough information to
the contrary available for people to understand the likely outcome. But – as we all do, in our own ways – people
chose to believe the ‘facts’ which supported their own predispositions in a
classic real-world illustration of confirmation bias.
And
from reports I’ve seen on opinion surveys since the vote, including those where
respondents have said
that the ‘benefits’ of Brexit are so great that they’d be prepared to see
relatives thrown out of work in order to realise them, I’m not sure that
opinions have changed very much. Whether
I like it or not, I cannot escape the fact that the majority of those who voted
in Wales supported Brexit, nor the conclusion that by doing so they voted in
favour (in the short term at least) of damaging the economy of Wales, in favour
of ending the regional assistance from which Wales has benefited, and in favour
of making themselves and the rest of us poorer.
The reasons for doing that are varied: perhaps a belief that ‘taking
back control’, or reducing immigration were valuable ends in themselves, or
perhaps in the belief that short term pain would lead to long term gain. Whatever the reasons, they voted for leaving
the EU with all its consequences, and much of what the Western Mail and Wales’
politicians seem to have been saying since amounts to an attempt to remain a
member for as long as possible, but call it something different.
The
desire for Brexit was never primarily an economic one; those making the case
always knew that there would be an economic hit as a result. It wouldn’t fall on the leading Brexiteers,
of course; it was always going to be the poorer families, nations, and regions
which would suffer. In the same way, my
own wish to remain was never primarily an economic one either; it was about
Wales’ place in the world and how best to get there. There are economic consequences, of course;
there will be winners and losers, but over the long term, the economy will adapt
– it’s what economies do. Whether it
will recover to the extent that it makes no difference over the very long term
is an open question to which we can never really know the answer, since we only
get to live through events once. It’s a
wholly unnecessary and self-inflicted pain in the interim but sadly it’s what
people voted for, no matter how much the Western Mail and others may try to
argue otherwise.
The
real problem that I have with all the arguments about mitigating the effect and
seeking a way through the mess which causes as little damage as possible is
that they’re not tackling the underlying problem, and may be in danger of
confirming rather than challenging the views of those who supported
Brexit. What was lacking at the time of
the referendum – and is still lacking from our nation’s ‘leaders’ – was any
attempt to make a positive argument for the European integration which brought the
trade and economic benefits rather than a simplistic negative argument against losing those benefits. Those who built the EU’s structures – just
like those who argued for Brexit – never did so for primarily economic reasons. It was always about a vision for the future
of Europe. There are flaws in the way
that they have attempted to realise that vision, but that doesn’t detract from
the fact that they had one.
Underlying
the whole debate about Brexit and its consequences is a major gulf between differing
views about what sort of Europe we want to see and what our role in it should
be, whether as Wales or as the UK.
Treating it as solely an economic issue and concentrating the debate on
mitigating the economic effects is ignoring that clash of world views. It does no more to change the world view of
those supporting Brexit than repeatedly telling them that they were duped and
misled (even if that happens to be true).
But it is on the underlying conceptions of the world and the role of
Wales and the UK in it that the debate needs to be centred if there is to be
any chance of a change of attitude.
Changing course for solely economic reasons will only reinforce the belief
that we are somehow being ‘dominated and bullied’ by ‘Brussels’ into doing what 'they' want.
Posts
1 comment:
Another excellent blog post. Sadly, none of the main players on the remain side attempted to make the positive, non-economic case for the EU before the vote took place. Had they done so, perhaps the narrow defeat might have become a barrow victory. We will never know for sure of course but I cannot escape the feeling that it would have made a difference.
Post a Comment