By Nhung D, Private Philosophy, Politics & Economics Tutor in London
‘Strong and stable, strong and stable, strong and stable…’ was the slogan repeated at every opportunity during the six weeks of non-stop campaigning from Prime Minister Theresa May – however, the result of the 2017 General Election has done nothing but shown this to be the total opposite of May’s forecast on a clean Brexit from the EU.
In fact, the result has affected Brexit in a momentous way as this election has further shaken other EU member’s perception of Theresa May’s governance and overall, the UK’s ability to compose a tidy exit for itself from the EU as all this result has done is substantially and undoubtedly pushed Britain’s position into further uncertainty than ever expected.
Britain’s departure from the EU was predicted to be a hard departure. With Theresa May calling for a snap election and wholly believing that she could increase her majority, the shock result and hung parliament has forced Brexit to be moved from a hard exit to a certain soft exit instead.
It is believed that despite Mrs May teaming up with the Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), which narrowly gave her the numbers she needed to pass legislation in the Commons, it is widely speculated that the UK will be forced to seek a ‘soft Brexit’.
The original Tory hard Brexit vision pre-election advocated for Britain to end its’ membership of the single market and for the rejection of free movement within the EU to allow for other gains such as greater border control, however, this, along with other factors are now all up for grabs as the Tory government and its’ party support has been irreversibly shattered.
Of course, as with any way this election had gone, there would always be winners and losers. So, say that Britain is going for a soft Brexit, what this means is that Britain would still be a member of the European Single Market but not a member of the EU and thus, not have a seat on the European Council. However, this is arguably a win for remain voters as it shows that voters have rejected Mrs May’s vision of a hard Brexit. Therefore, this approach would leave the UK’s relationship with the EU as close as possible to the existing arrangements, which is what is preferred by many remain voters.
The belief that Britain will now be going through a soft Brexit means that less British goods and services will be subject to tariffs while sectors such as agriculture would not lose protections against cheap imports from abroad.
Additionally, Britain not leaving the customs union would mean that there would not be a significant increase in bureaucratic checks on goods passing through ports and airports.
Thus, in terms of financial goods and services for consumers and producers in relation to the EU, Britain will be able to keep their ‘passporting rights’ and not pay more to sell its goods and services and will still be allowed to operate their branches within the EU.
Furthermore, it is expected that a ‘soft Brexit’ deal would infer on Britain accepting the ‘four freedoms’ (of movement of goods, services, capital and people) which is subject to EU law through the Luxembourg-based EFTA Court. In other words, this means that there will be continued free access for European nationals to work and settle in the UK, hence, weakening Britain’s control on its borders.
Even though hard Brexiters would be aghast at this lack of control, there are some benefits which come with a softer Brexit, such as a stronger economy perceived across to other countries due to less political instability from delayed negotiations and overdue departure – which is exactly what is needed in arguably the worst divided parliamentary result in recent history.
Therefore, if it is to be said that Brexit will now be a soft exit, it can be confidently assumed that this was down to the sudden snap election. What Theresa May once thought was a safe gamble to strengthen her majority turned into a rapid and catastrophic breakdown of her political ability and party confidence. As a result, this has informally shifted Brexit from a hard stance to a soft stance and changed the mandate of Brexit completely.
Overall, it is clear to see that the 2017 snap election has radically affected Brexit – but depending on how you voted, the result may either be a good outcome or a disaster. But nevertheless, only time will tell how smoothly all this will play out and whether Britain can exit the EU adequately with minimal hassle or will it crash and burn in this prolonged climate of instability. Also, let this be a lesson to future parties that no party should feel secure enough to pull a move like May did – as it has single-handedly disrupted and ruined her vision for a hard Brexit and divided parliament even further.
Looking for a private politics tutor? Studying PPE at university? Contact Us today to enquire about arranging 1 to 1 home tutoring in London.