By Anna Fowlie, Chief executive, Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations
I’M no Carol Vorderman, but the numbers don’t look good for Theresa May pushing her Brexit deal through the House of Commons. A combination of opposition parties and Tory rebels make it appear a mathematical impossibility.
After two long years, the PM signed off on an agreement unpalatable to both sides. But her subsequent call for unity was misinterpreted, as hardline Brexiters, Remainers (and many in between) clamoured to trash the deal. To them, this looks like capitulation or short change – which is often how things appear when smaller partners negotiate with bigger ones. Naturally, a Jacob Rees-Mogg shopping list wouldn’t be entertained in Brussels.
In a bid to scare moderate MPs in to backing her deal, the PM claimed: “It’s this deal or no deal.” (And on one occasion even threw in “or no Brexit”). That tactic seems to have failed.
To most, the ramifications of No Deal should be unthinkable. While somewhat unknowable, it’s safe to say that allowing 45 years of complex inter-dependence to crumble on the stroke of midnight will cause problems for everyone.
A safety valve must be introduced to take No Deal off the table. The UK cannot crash out in this way by default and it’s surely common sense that the decision likely to cause most upheaval shouldn’t be reached via parliamentary impasse. No one on the Leave side campaigned for a No Deal Brexit, and it’s nonsense to suggest this would respect the outcome.
The false choice of “this deal or no deal” should be harpooned once and for all. While we’re told this is all that’s on offer; this is true only insofar as it fits within the PM’s restrictive red lines. Were we to pursue a deal guided by the national interest, new doors would open.
The priorities of Scotland’s charities are clear: a deal that protects human rights underpinned by EU laws; guarantees on funding that organisations rely on and a commitment that EU citizens can continue to live, study, work, volunteer and contribute in Scotland. These have been our guiding principles from the outset and, for us, any deal that fails to meet these requirements shouldn’t be supported.
Which leads to the “how?” The clock is ticking. Understandably, the EU won’t hit pause, unless for very dramatic reasons. A General Election, second referendum or People’s Vote would fit that bill, but look unlikely. There is another alternative. An ongoing court case presents the opportunity for the UK to withdraw the Article 50 letter that set the Brexit ball rolling.
Given Article 50 was triggered before the UK Government knew what it wanted to negotiate, it makes sense to buy back some time and ensure we’re not bounced in to rash decisions that would cause irreparable damage. The letter could, ultimately, be re-submitted after a period of serious reflection, contemplation and consultation.
While SCVO has always advocated continued EU membership, this move is no ploy to scupper the referendum outcome. Rather, it should be viewed as a serious attempt to prevent a calamitous Brexit and allow genuine discussion with people across the UK – something lost in the slogan-dominated referendum.
In 1999, SCVO played an integral role in the Scottish Constitutional Convention; bringing together a swathe of civil society. The Convention set the terms for devolution and achieved it by ensuring a plurality of voices were heard and that decisions were shaped in the national interest.
Faced with a far more complex constitutional challenge, and with no political leadership in sight, it’s time to buy time, prevent chaos and ensure people have a proper chance to have their say.
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