Source: Britons did not vote to make themselves poorer—as Mrs May’s “hard Brexit” will
The Economist Magazine does not pull its punches or sugar-coat its bitter pills.
“The most dangerous of Mrs May’s illusions has been her claim that no deal is better than a bad deal. … To revert to trading with the EU only on World Trade Organisation (WTO) terms would cause serious harm to Britain’s economy. It would mean the EU imposing tariffs plus a full panoply of non-tariff barriers on almost half Britain’s exports. No big country trades with the EU only on WTO terms. An acrimonious break-up would make it harder to co-operate in such areas as foreign policy and defence. And it would surely increase the risk of Brexit triggering Scotland’s exit from the United Kingdom.”
Line by line, point by point it takes the British government’s position apart. “For half the country’s population this (triggering Article 50) was a moment to celebrate; for the other half, including this newspaper, it marked a bleak day.”
The narrow democratic vote for Brexit does not make it a good idea, and in any event the choices being made by the government were never put before the people. “It is true that many Britons backed Brexit because they wanted to cut immigration and regain sovereignty, but they did not vote to make themselves poorer—as Mrs May’s “hard Brexit” will.
“In Britain, where Brexit increasingly resembles a faith-based initiative, voters have been given wildly unrealistic expectations of the Utopia ahead. Their first contact with the reality of losing preferential access to their main market will be traumatic.”