English

Remaking Britain

Jul 13, 2016 Gordon Brown

As Theresa May takes over as Prime Minister, at least seven uncertainties surround the UK's future. When and how Britain leaves the EU – and whether it can get out of it intact – is just the start of the challenges that lie ahead.

LONDON – Britain will have a new prime minister today – but the country’s post-European Union future remains uncertain. Indeed, prolonged delays are likely in implementing the voters’ decision to leave the EU.

The first uncertainty is the date when exit negotiations will start. The process should be completed within two years of invoking Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon; but the incoming prime minister, Theresa May, has already said she would not want to trigger negotiations until the end of the year.

The second uncertainty is whether the negotiations can simultaneously resolve the United Kingdom’s terms of exit from the EU and its future trading arrangements with Europe’s single market. While the UK will claim that, under Article 50, negotiators should be “taking into account the framework of future relationships,” the EU trade negotiator is insisting that future arrangements can be discussed only after Britain leaves.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

US President-elect Joe Biden may have promised a “return to normalcy,” but the truth is that there is no going back. The world is changing in fundamental ways, and the actions the world takes in the next few years will be critical to lay the groundwork for a sustainable, secure, and prosperous future.

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world’s foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

Give Britain Time
Bloomberg/ Getty Images

Give Britain Time

Uffe Ellemann-Jensen recalls Danes' calm and careful deliberation in 1992, after voters rejected the Maastricht Treaty.

6
Neville Cameron?
Tolga Akmen/London News Pictures via ZUMA Wire

Neville Cameron?

Mark Leonard thinks that the UK's worst-ever prime minister will be the one who loses a referendum on the EU.

10
The Brexit Alarm
Ulrich Baumgarten/ Getty Images

The Brexit Alarm

Adair Turner calls on economists and policymakers to recognize that free migration really is a problem.

7

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 21 in all 21 Comments on this article

david b Jul 18, 2016

Note the assumption of a certain truth which I don't agree with. Why is the job to minimize uncertainties? Because upon what I'd call a markets don't like them and what good for the market is good for everyone. You see it's a premise based on a neoliberal truth, which is in fact the cause of brexit itself. To make an argument on an invalid assumption negates the argument. A fact all too many economists don't understand either
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Robert Merrifield Jul 17, 2016

Thanks Gordon. You've done enough to help already...
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Jul 14, 2016

According to former prime minister Gordon Brown, "remaking Britain" requires its ability to overcome the myriad of uncertainties it faces in the post-EU era, saying "prolonged delays are likely in implementing the voters’ decision to leave the EU." Theresa May has become Britain's a new prime minister, and her meteoric and uncontested rise to power in the wake of the political turmoil following the referendum has left her a daunting task.
According to Brown, the "first uncertainty" is the date when exit negotiations, which should last two years, will start. May said she would not invoke Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon "until the end of the year." She has appointed Boris Johnson as new foreign minister. It's unclear whether he would lead the negotiations or she might appoint an ad hoc minister for this purpose. Boris Johnson was seen as David Cameron's presumptive successor, before he withdrew. As one of the leading Brexit campaigners, he misled voters. It is interesting how he is going to mislead the world. That May appointed him as foreign minister reminds us of the Obama/Clinton rivalry in the 2008 presidential election. After Obama became president, he made Hillary his foreign secretary.
The "second uncertainty" is how Britian can secure "future trading arrangements with Europe’s single market." According to Article 50, both sides will be “taking into account the framework of future relationships." However "the EU trade negotiator is insisting that future arrangements can be discussed only after Britain leaves."
The "third uncertainty" is what sort of trade relations Britain wants to have with Europe. There are models at hand, like the Norwegian option - full access to the single market; or the Swiss option - not full, but partial; or "the Canadian low-tariff option; or simply trade with Europe on the same terms as all WTO members. What Brexiteers dream of is Britain's freedom to "negotiate its own trade deals (for example, with China and India)," noting the "global economy's center of gravity toward Asia."
The "fourth uncertainty" is how to gain full access to the single market, without losing the leverage over restricting immigration. The Swiss and Norwegian models have been discussed. Norway and Switzerland have access to the single market, but they have to accept EU laws, and they also have far higher levels of EU-immigration than the UK. Norway is a member of the European Economic Area (EEA). Brown urges May to negotiate with the EU "on the basis of the Norway option of membership of the EEA," and its "safeguard clause," which "might allow restrictions on migration if inflows rose too quickly."
Brown says Britain's public services are overstretched, due to population growth and immigration. The grievances have been hijacked by populists, blaming migrants for benefiting from British welfare. He sees it important to improve public services, and to invest in depressed areas, whose industries went bust. Brexiteers put the blame on globalisation, which outsourced their jobs to low-cost countries. But they also have to adapt themselves to "technological innovations that are revolutionizing industries and occupations." Their "anxieties about their employment prospects and future livelihoods" won't be eased by putting the blame on migrants.
The "fifth uncertainty" is which institution - the European Commission or the Council of Ministers - has the negotiating power within the EU to deal with Britain. Brown says, "Angela Merkel has already made it clear that she will not give the Commission carte blanche to negotiate on Germany’s behalf." Another question is whether anything will be agreed upon before the presidential election in France and the general election in Germany next year.
The "sixth uncertainty" is in which state Britain's economy will be when the negotiations start. Brown had been trade and finance minister, before his premiership. He says, Britain "appears to be sliding toward recession as companies put their investment plans on hold. Business pressure on the UK government to move more quickly will thus grow, as a longer wait means a further ebbing of confidence and, in turn, a weakening of Britain’s bargaining position."
The "seventh uncertainty" is whether the bond that holds Scotland, Northern Ireland, England and Wales together will survive. Brown says, "Lord North is remembered for losing the British union with America. Two centuries on, the outgoing prime minister, David Cameron, may be remembered for losing two unions – with Europe and between England and Scotland. Whereas Conservatives want Scotland to be in a Britain without Europe, Scottish nationalists want Scotland in a Europe without Britain. And with Northern Ireland’s Republicans, led by Sinn Fein, demanding a vote to reunite with the south, the very existence of the UK is now squarely on the agenda."
The "eighth and even greater uncertainty" is about Britain’s "future global role." Although Brown reamins silent, but it is now under scrutiny. For 70 years, even after it had lost its empire with colonies across the globe, Britain has been able to hold on to a vital piece of power: a permanent veto-wielding seat on the UN Security Council. Now it will be questioned by the other two anti-Western veto-powers: China and Russia, which have been annoyed by Britain's important role as America's most reliable ally on the council. Critics say: “The U.K. will hang on to its permanent seat for dear life, just as Moscow did after the collapse of the USSR.”
Indeed, Britain is facing a myriad of challenges and uncertainties. Brown's Labour Party is in disarray. The reason why Jeremy Corbyn enjoys support is the discontent of many Britons, who resent the globalisation of economics and politics. Brown says, "as long as globalization appears leaderless, anti-globalization protesters will stifle reform, shout down proposed trade deals like the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and make national economies less open. Now facing life outside the EU, Britain cannot ignore or sidestep these global issues. The UK must now decide whether it will stand up to the protectionist impulse that drove Brexit and what part it can play in making globalization work for all. " But Brexiteers have no appetite for it.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
David Emery Jul 13, 2016

I'd like to see a Free Trade arrangement among "The English Speaking Peoples" that takes advantage of not just common language but also common legal concepts, etc. UK, US, CA, AU, NZ, then other Commonwealth nations, particularly India and South Africa. This would provide UK with some needed alternatives when discussing post Brexit trade with the EU.
- Robert Coleman Aug 13, 2016
  
  I don't like this idea at all. The banking crisis of 2008 arose from 'concepts' invented and relised in English-speaking countries that have wrought disaster. Just because we speak English does not mean that we have the right to treat others as inferior to us or to exclude or gang-up against them. Many learn our language and know a hell of a lot more about us than we will ever know about them. If we act in this culturally imperialistic way non-anglos will rightly act against us at every turn. I wonder given the unconstructive attitude of the UK towards the EU, why Europeans even bother with the English language. Prestige can depart much faster than she arrives. Languages come and go. Moreover the Americans would soon grow tired of a contingent of English purists correcting their spelling, grammer and pronunciation. Et moi. desormais je parlerai Francais...
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- jagjeet sinha Jul 13, 2016
  
  + 1
  
  The United States of Anglosphere - time to be cognizant of the millions who gave their lives in World Wars to create The Anglosphere.
  The agreement like that with Europe - Free Trade/ Capital /Migration - perhaps easiest within CANZUK.
  America and India perhaps bridges too far - but yes, more teeth perhaps with preferential treatment.
  There may be several Europeans - Scandinavians and North Europeans - who may wish to stay with The Anglosphere.
  Life outside Europe may be the blessings Britain needed - and the markets seem to love it.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Daley Jul 13, 2016

Good article. It makes clear how idiotic it was Britain to try to take on issues of globalization on its own. Varoufakis had it right; the proper stance for any dissatisfied EU state is "in, but against," if only because that stance allows you to be specific about what exactly you oppose. Once out, you have to choose from a menu of prepared options, none of which may exactly meet your needs.
- Stefan Gerlach Jul 14, 2016
  
  This is a superb article that spells out with great clarity the tremendous uncertainties triggered by Brexit and the complexities now facing the British government.
  
  One wonders if Prime Minister May appointed the three Brexiteers -- Messrs Johnson, Davis and Fox -- to lead the negotiations in order to shield herself from the inevitable fall out if the negotiations fail and things go spectacularly wrong.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Public Jul 13, 2016

The most important question was not asked. How will Britain enfranchise those people who have been disenfranchised and are demanding a change. The very fact it is not mentioned here indicates that you and the traditional political establishment consider it outside the realm of possibility - and that they should simply learn to content themselves with the new lot in life. China has no problem lifting themselves from famine under Mao to the World's largest economy (on PPP). Germany has no issue rebuilding a nation in ruins after WW2. Japan too. Are you telling me that Britain is somehow exceptional and is doomed if it cannot be the banking centre of the EU? A complete lack of vision and ambition seems to be the only real issue here.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
koen van peteghem Jul 13, 2016

" we will make better trade deals"... i keep wondering what that means. if you make a better trade deal with pe India, what does that actually mean? "We will create more jobs" . When does that happen? "when there will be less regulation" What regulation will be abolished? Product safety regulation? "No more protectionist EU". Does that mean anyone can dump at any price?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steve Hurst Jul 13, 2016

The question is not what does the UK want, but who exactly will the UK be negotiating with as the EU belief system will have to change to face reality. Negotiating with the hothead fundamentalists may well morph into talking with realists. It is not exactly that the EU is healthy, it is morbidly obese with debt and unemployment

This article is unneccessarily uncertain and uses the word far too often, since when was anything certain

'German Chancellor Angela Merkel has already made it clear that she will not give the Commission carte blanche to negotiate on Germany’s behalf.' Union, what Union, its time to call Ghostbusters and get the ghost in the machine evicted. There is no Union, just a collective of veto bloc refusniks living in a dream world

'As long as globalization appears leaderless'. It is leaderless, it is not a system, it is raw random opportunism playing off short term mobility to undermine people locked in on longterm liability. Your dream on Elm Street is a Nightmare. Globalisation is asking people who work under Health and Safety regs, etc etc to compete with countries where factories have no regulations and suicide nets rigged up around the buildings to stop job unsatisfied workers jumping.

'Managing Globalisation'. Nope, no evidence of that whatsoever

'Tougher enforcement of minimum-wage and other legislation protecting workers is needed' Totally misses the point, a lack of jobs, lack of prosperity
- Steve Hurst Jul 13, 2016
  
  @M M
  
  I am not sure that 150K Conservative party members electing a new PM is more or less democratic than 330 Conservative MPs electing one. The King is dead. Long live the King
  
  And on the other side we have a Leader who is reviled by the majority of his MPs and supported by the majority of the 500K party members who clearly never want to be in power. This is the problem with the core of Labour, to get elected you have to cross dress it, which is what Blair did, then sooner or later you see it naked in all its glory
  
  Like a bad Hammer Horror B movie
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- M M Jul 13, 2016
  
  Steve, the UK establishment is in control and will not let anything happen that might endanger their interests, democracy or the lack of it is no consideration. A PM was appointed in a matter of hours bypassing all democratic channels that should have been used (party member voting, etc.). This whole Brexit affair has been a very sick joke and totally irresponsible.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
M M Jul 13, 2016

Incidentally Gordon, migration (to exclude the refugees) and trade are a double edge sword whichever way one touches it, one guarantees to cut oneself. The expatriate Brits, who are in the millions, and were excluded from voting in the referendum (and one should now put into question the legal argument for the UK court decision) have already started to pay the price and are being asked to start packing and go. So it is well and fine for the Brits that are living in Britain to say we want out, when a large majority of the citizenry that were excluded from voting are now having to pay the price and you yourself made this comment when this lady heckled you about migration during your 2009 election campaign by stating that Britain had a large number of people working overseas. Regarding trade, one can hardly see how the UK can negotiate better terms with counterparties or other countries when it is on its own and with no significant trade to speak of. The UK can get either the same trade deals as other countries, meaning as they are at the moment, so no change to the status quo, or worst, trade deals that have got very stringent conditions attached to them, e.g. the Greek scenario.. Very interesting times ahead.
- Steve Hurst Jul 13, 2016
  
  @M M
  
  At present the Leavers have made pretty much everybody poorer and many appear to fail to understand that, they soon will when prices go up, which they will on new contracts for imports
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- M M Jul 13, 2016
  
  Well, numbers are not a consideration if one takes into account that the majority of the economic migrants in the UK are from 3 specific Eastern European countries and there are 27/28 countries in the EU, whilst the Brits are spread all over the world. If one combines trade and migration, and they are two sides of the same coin, the British expats have got a lot to lose and have started to lose.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Steve Hurst Jul 13, 2016
  
  @M M
  
  There are roughly 3x the number of EU citizens in the UK compared with the number of UK citizens in the EU
  
  Poverty will address the trade imbalance, nobody will be able to buy anything from Overseas
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ali Barbari Jul 13, 2016

Nice well thought and so true again we still do not a a good leader from no where that can truly unite us all.

Such a tragedy watching labour destroying itself. We need people like you who can safe labour from itself.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
M M Jul 13, 2016

Gordon, a good leader is the one that is able to make a very good situation out of a very bad one and such a leader as you hinted in your article is not out there. The biggest problem in the UK has always been and is the establishment. T. Blair tried to change it from within but failed. When you have so many positions of power (and the UK establishment is not short of them) within the same establishment, power gets diluted. The current UK is not geared for any future potential challenge. It will take decades to get things sorted and even then there can never be any guarantees since events and always unforeseen events are the ones that shall be dictating any course of action. In short, there are many more uncertainties ahead and the UK, should it decide to invoke Artlc. 50, shall be sailing in unchartered, and very dangerous waters.
- M M Jul 13, 2016
  
  Correct Steve, they want a “Yes” person that says his pre-written lines and is plausible! There are plenty of those about and that is why the world is in the mess that it is in today.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Steve Hurst Jul 13, 2016
  
  @M M
  
  What makes you think the current elite (or past elite) are interested in a good leader, a good leader is not top of the wish list
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/Yl8wwIM

Cookies and Privacy

Remaking Britain

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

Give Britain Time

Neville Cameron?

The Brexit Alarm

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

Cookies and Privacy

Remaking Britain

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification