PINSTRIPE
Brexit is a dangerous thing for those who write in newspapers. By the time this article is published the landscape could have completely changed from the time I wrote it. Brexit is some warped version of Groundhog Day, every day seems to be completely different - and yet everything remains the same.
Brexit exposes not so much the failure of the UK or its Parliament but the division in our society and the dangers of a narrow referendum result.
My sense is that businesses and consumers, having been remarkably immune to Brexit, are starting to change their behaviour. People had assumed we would muddle through to something sensible in that classic British way. That assumption is wearing thin, there is a real danger that people and businesses will increasingly do what they tend to do in times of significant uncertainty - they start to wait and see, they spend less, invest less, do less. Just when we need it least the economy lurches from grinding forward in first gear to neutral and then reverse.
This is when the Brexit bad news starts to get real - lost tax revenue, lost jobs, lost opportunities. Swift action is required to stop this backward slide.
What nobody wants is more months of shambles with no confidence there will be a sensible outcome. What we need is either a sprint to the finish or a much slower arrangement within a framework which we can have faith in.
First, the sprint. Mrs May has tried hard in difficult circumstances. Recent votes in Parliament show clearly what MPs don’t want whereas Mrs May has the task of actually delivering something . Parts of the Conservative party, thinking they are looking to the future but in reality stuck in the 19th century, thwart her at every turn. Labour has had the dishonest policy of wanting something which sounds reasonable but which they know the EU will never agree to, what Labour really want is an election. The SNP in Westminster have performed rather better but we all know what they really want. The LibDems? - too small to be heard unlike the DUP whose consistency of purpose one has to admire.
Let us hope that the sane parts of the Conservative and Labour parties can come together at this eleventh hour and agree something which is actually deliverable but , we cannot yet rely on that .
The country senses these political manoeuvrings and is more sympathetic to Mrs May’s deal than the Westminster bubble realises , a majority just want an end to this embarrassing mess. If Labour will not come to the party Mrs May should take her deal to the country and ask Yes or No in a referendum? If the answer is “Yes” the deal is done in a few weeks and she can step down. If the answer is “No” she should step down immediately - what she mustn’t do is promise a general election in either circumstance.
If we have to go the long route, because there is no swift referendum or the answer is “No”, then we must bypass the politicians , too many of whom have failed our country by pursuing their narrow interest whilst claiming to work for us all.
I have sat on two Juries in my life. What impressed me on both occasions is how so called “ordinary” people do grasp complex issues, take their responsibilities seriously and act diligently. The model works when considering whether to send somebody to jail so why not when doing a deal with the EU ? Ask the EU for a two-year delay. Select 21 people at random ( no representation for any special interest groups ) from the UK wide electoral register excluding only past and present MEPs, MPs and MSPs. Give them the best civil servants and access to advice, let them come up with a deal within 2 years and then put it to a referendum. Common sense from the common people.
Pinstripe is a senior member of Scotland's financial services community.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here