MPs know no deal will be bad – so why won’t they pass a deal?

The Yellowhammer report – outlining the impact of a no-deal Brexit – was published earlier this week. Nigel Farage has issued his detailed and informed analysis, calling it “utter tosh”, which will be more than enough to ensure his fans dismiss it out of hand. Is he right, or it a realistic analysis and cautious planning?

Despite the anticipation of its release and the number of words written on it already, there really is nothing new or surprising contained within the report. The government’s previous report, “Implications for Business and Trade of a No Deal Exit on 29 March 2019” was basically the same. And, the dire picture is similar to many previous papers issued by a variety of think tanks and articles published by experts and informed commentators (some of which I wrote about in this previous piece for Reaction).

There is a consensus now that a no deal Brexit is going to have severe economic consequences. There has been more than enough objective analysis to show that this is not scaremongering. Even this government, which has been perfectly willing to contemplate a no deal Brexit, is not being complacent about it. It’s established fact that although the government has re-labelled the document as a “Reasonable Worst Case”, it was originally described as the base scenario.

We are unlikely to face a financial crisis of the likes of 2008 nor are we facing power outages and any food shortages are likely to be an inconvenience rather than a risk to public health. The Department of Health has been addressing the risks to the supply of medicines so we can take comfort that the worst fears in this area shouldn’t be realised. Britons in Europe and EU citizens in the UK will have their rights protected in the immediate aftermath.

The government is working to mitigate the impact. Private companies likewise will try to cushion the blow to consumers and their businesses. Still, the consequences of a no deal Brexit are all on the bad-end of the spectrum. No deal will be an economic shock, and nobody should be complacent.

I know many people will still be sceptical and want to dismiss it out of hand, but I’ve been warning about this scenario since before the referendum as part of my pro-Brexit campaigning. No deal is a failure of Brexit. It’s a betrayal of what Leave campaigners promised.

An economic shock is a logical conclusion to severing forty years of economic and political integration in an instance. It means demolishing the UK’s entire system of trade and cooperation with the world overnight. As the government document says, “the UK reverts fully to third country status.” That means tariffs, customs checks and other controls on the border between the UK and the EU.

Around 70% of trade with the EU is via lorry traffic, 45% is via a “roll-on, roll-off” free flowing system which will be severely disrupted. There will be delays and some businesses will simply stop importing and exporting because it’s not financially viable.

Hence there will be an increase in food prices and probably some shortages (as the major food retailers have repeatedly warned). There will be legal complications aplenty for Britons abroad who need access to healthcare. British residents in EU countries are feeling insecure and under this scenario they are right to. Unsurprisingly, “low income groups will be disproportionately affected by any price rises in food and fuel.”

Even more worrying are the realistic warnings of “a rise in public disorder and community tensions” with protests absorbing “significant amounts” of police resources. Severe damage to the Northern Irish economy will likely lead to an increase in criminal and paramilitary activity. Exactly what residents there and in the Republic of Ireland fear, and what the backstop is designed to prevent.

But this has all been said before. I’m surprised I’ve mustered the energy to write it again. It’s the same thing over and over. Yet how many of our MPs who are currently up in arms about the Yellowhammer document have done all they can to ensure a managed Brexit was achieved? How many have said they are willing to see Brexit through but have done all they can to prevent a deal being made?

The Labour Party say they will do everything they can to prevent no deal, but they did everything they could to prevent a deal. They voted the deal down because it was politically advantageous to them. The screeching children in parliament, who this week made the Ukrainian parliament look functional and respectable, are taking us to the brink collectively, albeit with short extended deadlines every few months.

This government is acting irresponsibly in a number of ways but has also inherited a terrible situation that already exhausted the previous administration. Considering the analysis in front of him, I can well believe that Boris would rather get a deal, avoid all this and try and get on with a domestic agenda, but he’s trapped in his political situation. The Brexit Party is poised to destroy his electoral chances.

Parliament is celebrating preventing an election and “taking back control” but what does it plan to do with it? Because even with this celebrated extension we are merely putting off the deadline until January. We all know what they’re against, but what kind of deal are they for?