Brexit has been sharply in focus again in the aftermath of Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey having offered his tuppence worth on something that, whatever Leavers might claim, is very much an ongoing drag on the UK.

The arch-Brexiters of course want it to be done and dusted. They do not want the UK’s hard Brexit – an absolute folly but not in their minds it seems - to be reversed or ameliorated in any way whatsoever.

Dominic Grieve, the former Conservative MP who spoke eloquently in 2019 about what Brexit would actually mean and called for a second referendum, summed up the lamentable situation rather well.

Commenting a few days after Mr Bailey’s November 14 Mansion House speech, Mr Grieve said: “There is no one who can give a benefit of the UK leaving the European Union. I heard on the radio a businessman saying he had done well from leaving the EU, and my ears pricked up. It turned out his company helped other companies complete the huge amounts of extra paperwork that Brexit had caused.”

He also observed, most accurately, that “the main parties are turning the other cheek on talking about Brexit”.

Mr Grieve was speaking after being announced as co-president of the European Movement UK, the cross-party organisation campaigning on the benefits of close ties between the UK and EU formed in 1949 by Sir Winston Churchill to prevent further conflict between European countries.

For his part, Mr Bailey seemed relatively cautious as he addressed Brexit but he hit the nail on the head nonetheless by pointing out there were “consequences” and laying these out.

It was certainly enough to draw flak from the arch-Brexiters.

Mr Bailey said at London’s Mansion House: “Now, as I have said many times, as a public official I take no position on Brexit per se. That’s important. But I do have to point out consequences.

“The changing trading relationship with the EU has weighed on the level of potential supply. The impact on trade seems to be more in goods than services - that is not particularly surprising to my mind. But it underlines why we must be alert to and welcome opportunities to rebuild relations while respecting the decision of the British people.”

My column on this topic in The Herald on Wednesday observed: “It says much about the in-denial Brexiters that a simple statement of fact from the Bank of England Governor, made in the most cautious of ways, has set the cat among the pigeons.”

The SNP seized upon Mr Bailey’s comments, declaring on social media platform X last Monday: “The Governor of the Bank of England has urged the UK government to ‘rebuild relations with the EU’. We agree - it’s time to return to the single market & customs union.”

Reform UK chief whip Lee Anderson took a very different view of Mr Bailey’s comments.

Mr Anderson even took issue with Mr Bailey for becoming involved in the Brexit debate, which was not surprising but was nevertheless remarkable.

The Reform UK MP told the Daily Express: “It’s high time people like Andrew Bailey finally accepted the democratic decision made by the country in 2016 and focused on the day job instead.”

My column noted: “This is a typical Brexiter diversion tactic - try to claim that anyone who dares say something pertinent about the detrimental effects of what the Leavers have championed is not doing their ‘day job’.

“Mr Bailey is, in pointing out ‘consequences’, most certainly doing his ‘day job’. And good for him.”

Mr Anderson also told the Daily Express: “Parliament has failed to capitalise on the full potential Brexit has to offer but it’s still far superior to membership of the European Union.”

Mr Grieve’s observation about no one being able to give a benefit of the UK leaving the EU seems on the money.

And Mr Anderson’s comment about Brexit being “far superior” to EU membership truly beggars belief.

Richard Hughes, chairman of the independent Office for Budget Responsibility, said in spring of last year of Brexit’s effect: “We think that in the long run it reduces our overall output by around 4% compared with had we remained in the EU.”

That is a lot.

Sadly, Labour, while clearly taking a warmer approach to Europe than the Conservative Brexiters (which it must be emphasised it would surely be hard not to do), has no intention of rejoining the single market or customs union.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves continued to emphasise Labour’s lamentable red lines on Brexit in her November 14 speech at the Mansion House.

Read more

 

She acknowledged that “we face structural challenges too, including those which have come from Brexit”.

Nevertheless, she declared: “We will not be reversing Brexit or re-entering the single market or customs union.”

The Brexit issue looks like it is not going to go away.

Read more

 

 

Labour’s top brass looks to be terrified of upsetting red-wall voters and other Brexit supporters by even acknowledging the huge damage being done by the UK’s hard departure from the EU. And it is sticking with the key elements of the hard Brexit by refusing to even contemplate the UK rejoining the single market or customs union.

What is more, anyone in a position of power or influence who dares to point out the consequences of Brexit looks to be a target for arch-Leavers.

However, that makes it all the more important that the experts continue to point out calmly, based on all the evidence, the damage being done to the UK by Brexit.