Enough of the nonsense, good advice for the UK

It is well known that Barack Obama He said “don’t do stupid things”. (In fact, she said something even stronger.) That’s always good advice. This is especially good advice for United Kingdom Nowadays. It would be wonderful if you could start doing sensible things. But their hopes must be kept in check. However, you should definitely stop doing really stupid things.

The brexit that in itself was stupid. Few people with serious knowledge of the matter have any doubts about it. In making this decision, it has raised barriers against the country’s closest neighbors and most important trading partners. As pointed out this month by Office of Fiscal Responsibility (OBR), “the latest data suggests that Brexit has had a fairly significant negative impact on trade.” It has reduced the total trading volumes and the number of trading relationships between UK and EU companies. The OBR believes, quite rationally, that “Brexit will result in the longer term that the trade intensity of United Kingdom be 15 percent less than if it had remained as part of the European Union”. Meanwhile, “Global Britain” faded as hopes for a closer trading relationship with Britain faded. China yes United States of America.

If he brexit that was stupid, as is the idea that there is an easy way back to a closer relationship with the European Union. Renewal of membership is inconceivable. This is not only because it would aggravate the political civil war of United Kingdom. It is also because the members of the European Union they are too reasonable to believe that this nation is an enthusiastic member of the bloc, as it is and likely will be.

From his point of view, the vision of a United Kingdom staggering is a useful lesson in the dangers of leaving. More importantly, Brexit has allowed the European Union to move faster than it would have under the usual Brexit hurdle.

Most alternatives to full membership – such as joining the single market, the customs union or both – would also restart the Brexit civil war, in both major parties. These options are also obviously worse than signing up, as you’ll have obligations without being able to comment on the rules. Above all, again, the European Union he has good reason not to trust the UK: his behavior towards the Northern Ireland protocol certainly demonstrates it.

Trying to alter the main characteristics of the current unhappy relationship is futile. But that can’t justify making things worse. It is, for example, a fundamental conservative principle that you only make changes if there is no good alternative to do so. The change itself is expensive. So what’s the point of the “Retained European Union Law” (repeal and reform) bill, a plan to “revise or repeal” up to four thousand pieces of legislation derived from the European Union that form the basis of much of life national today? This will simply increase the uncertainty and costs of doing business.

Sensitive companies don’t want to operate under a variety of different regulatory regimes. This was the rationale of the single market project for Margaret Thatcher, something Brexit supporters are apparently still unable to figure out. This type of plan must do United Kingdom become less and less “attractive for investment”. The depressing statistics available on this matter do not contradict this fear.

What would have been a positively sensible approach for British policy makers? It would undoubtedly start from a realistic view of weaknesses and priorities. Consider the difficulty of building on green land, the inability to make buildings more energy efficient, persistent regional inequality, excessive government centralization, chronically low national savings and investment rates, the inability of pension funds to invest in the country’s productive capital, the inability to build world-class companies, and the sustained inability to raise skills to a high enough level.

None of this had to do with the European Union. But all this has long been “too difficult” to do anything about. So instead we have Brexit as a diversionary exercise, culminating in the spectacle of Liz Truss yes Almost quartet, which was as inappropriate and irresponsible as it was intellectually hollow. That was Brexit as performance art in its purest form.

I have little hope that this government will do anything very positive before the next general election, especially in the midst of an energy and inflationary crisis. But it’s not too much to ask you to stop being silly.

So don’t mention regulatory changes unless they are clearly positive. Don’t promise migration controls that you can’t guarantee. Do not cling to the option of divergence on food standards, which makes the settlement of the Northern Ireland question so intractable. But make efforts to preserve the ability of our scientists to cooperate closely with their European colleagues. And above all, stop the British bulldog’s incessant barking.

Perhaps now it will be impossible to deal with the big problems. But, although the government of United Kingdom If you’re in a deep hole now, you can at least stop digging even deeper.