For anyone that loves to work as much as I do, it is often difficult to find the time to do little else. As a frequent flyer for business, long haul flights are an opportunity to catch up on some reading. I was particularly struck on a recent flight to Japan when reading Sam Leith’s You Talking to Me? about rhetoric in which he defines it as the “art of persuasion”, indeed “the attempt by one human being to influence another in words”.
Whatever your definition of rhetoric, we can all agree that this election has been heavy on talk and light on substance, not least with regard to Brexit. Elections are naturally full of promises and pledges but we know few specifics from any of the major parties on what they would like from a Brexit deal. Speaking on the issues on Monday, Corbyn said “crashing out would be the worst possible outcome. There is no such thing as no deal. No deal is in fact a bad deal; it is the worst of all deals”. By contrast, Theresa May spoke of the need for a great national effort in this great national moment in which “we pull together with a united purpose”. Differing rhetoric and worthy aims – but neither gets us very far. For a single issue election, we’ve hardly had a single detail on that issue.
Both parties are pursuing some difficult targets. Labour says it wants to retain “the benefits of the single market and the customs union,” but the remaining EU states have made it clear that the only way to retain all of these benefits is to remain a member of the single market. The Conservatives, on the other hand, seem very optimistic about timelines. In their manifesto, they say that they believe it is possible to agree both “the terms of our future partnership alongside our withdrawal within the two years allowed by Article 50”. Given that negotiations over the exit bill and rights of citizens – both immigrants here and Brits abroad – will not be straightforward, this deadline seems tight.
This is all the more concerning given some of the rhetoric – and, yes, substance – coming from the European Union. Their chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, has said he wants talks to begin as early as June 19, just 11 days after the general election. The winner of the election must therefore be in a position to publish a detailed list of Brexit negotiating priorities immediately following the vote.
In an election it’s perhaps unsurprising that sound bites and aspirations trump detailed planning, but the Institute of Directors would urge the next government, whoever they may be, to do exactly that. They must listen to businesses when preparing for the possibility of a no-deal Brexit. Above all, the talks simply cannot be conducted in complete secrecy: with so many players involved it would be better for everyone if we were up-front about our vision for Brexit. The sooner after the election the government can spell out its priorities the easier it will be for companies to plan. The IoD has called for the next government to assist firms to identify their exposure to our EU exit, establish a joint customs committee between the UK and the EU to prevent chaos at the border and agree a cut-off date for when we will cease to be included in trade deals currently being negotiated by the EU. Just a few of the many steps that would help to reassure businesses during this period of instability.
Advertisement
It is true that the UK trades with plenty of countries on WTO terms, but the EU is our biggest market, and a sudden and abrupt departure would be very difficult for many businesses. We are coming from a position of deep economic integration with the EU, where there are virtually no barriers to the movement of goods, few for people, and greatly lowered barriers to selling services. To give you just a small example of why we need smooth customs procedures based on current levels of trade, a single day’s worth of blockage at Dover would see trucks backed up all the way along the motorway to London and around the M25. I believe businesses recognise that our relationship with the EU will change, but to say no deal is better than a bad deal is not good enough. We must and can strive for more. The UK must push for a comprehensive trade deal, and a customs agreement which avoids large amounts of new bureaucracy.
Now, I don’t mean to put a damper on the Brexit debate. For all the challenges, I think there are great opportunities, but to seize them and to make the most of Brexit, we must have an honest and open debate. Ultimately, I am an optimist and believe that we can solve this puzzle if we listen to business leaders and utilise the adaptability of Britain’s army of successful companies. After all, Britain was a great trading nation before there was a European Union.
Lady Barbara Judge is the chairwoman of the Institute of Directors.