By Eric Vandenbroeck
Theresa
May’s transition moved ahead rapidly today. Prime Minister David Cameron
chaired his 215th and final cabinet meeting, planned to go to Queen Elizabeth
II with his resignation after a final appearance before Parliament on Wednesday
and was already preparing to move out of 10 Downing Street to make room for Ms.
May.
Yet while this makes
the political situation clearer, the country's political problems are not over.
With a slender parliamentary majority of 17 May will lead a divided party and a
divided country at a time when unity is needed.
Some legal experts in
the United Kingdom have said that the prime minister needs
formal authorization from Parliament to start withdrawal negotiations with the
European Union, though other government lawyers contradict that view.
Regardless, getting authorization will be anything but easy for the prime
minister in the current social and political environment.
How she will approach
the new job is
only starting to emerge because, despite her years in the cabinet, she has
done one job, home secretary.
Talks on the exit are
most likely to come down to a trade-off between the amount of access Britain
wants to Europe’s single market of goods and services and the extent to which
it curbs the free movement of workers that this entails. While big business
will press for access to the single market, May will be under pressure from
Brexit supporters to deliver cuts in immigration.
Which brings up the
question, will she seek full access to the single market (the Norwegian
option), or to part of it (the Swiss option),or will it go for the Canadian
low-tariff option, or just trade with Europe on the same terms that all World
Trade Organization members do?
And finally there are
the even greater uncertainty about Britain’s future global role. In particular,
how will it respond to the irreversible shift in the global economy’s center of gravity toward Asia, and to the technological
innovations that are revolutionizing industries and occupations – and thus
increasing voters’ anxieties about their employment prospects and future
livelihoods?
The referendum result
revealed high concentrations of pro-Brexit sentiment in towns once at the center of the British industrial revolution but now awash
with derelict factories and workshops, owing to Asian competition. These areas
rebelled against the advice of political and business elites to vote “Remain”
and instead demanded protection from the vicissitudes of global change. The
“Leave” campaign’s very slogans – centered on
bringing control back home – aligned it with populist, protectionist movements
that are fracturing old political loyalties throughout the West.
The result has
exposed a Labour Party divided between a leadership that elevates
anti-globalization protest above winning power and a Parliamentary group that
knows it has to explain how globalization can be managed in the public
interest.
But the governing
Conservatives are also split on how to respond to globalization. Some believe
in a global free-for-all; others believe that Britain should be free of foreign
entanglements; and a third cohort wants, like Labour, to be part of the EU,
viewing it not as the problem, but as part of the solution to managing
globalization. But, because of these divisions, none of the leadership
contenders have put forward any proposals that address in any meaningful way
the grievances of those who feel left behind.
So post-referendum
Britain needs a more comprehensive debate on how it will cope with the
challenges of global change and how it will work with the international
community to do so. A viable program for managing globalization would recognize
that every country must balance the autonomy it desires with the cooperation it
needs. This would include coordinated monetary and fiscal policies across the
G20 countries; renewed efforts to expand world trade; new national agendas
addressing inequality and promoting social mobility; and a laser-like focus on
science, technology, and innovation as the key to future growth.
As long as
globalization appears leaderless, anti-globalization protesters will stifle
reform, shout down proposed trade deals like the Transatlantic Trade and
Investment Partnership and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and make national
economies less open.
For updates click homepage here