Top Scots businessman tells me Theresa May ‘has destroyed UK’ – Bill Jamieson

The UK will pay for the current lack of genuine leadership, writes Bill Jamieson, with uncertainty over Brexit and the threat of a delay already damaging the economy.

Theresa May has repeatedly insisted there would be no delay to Brexit. However, there may now be a delay (Picture: Dan Kitwood/Getty)

What happens when a Prime Minister can no longer govern, and the Government itself is faced with paralysis?

In the early 20th century, David Lloyd George faced just such a predicament. The country’s miners had gone on strike, other unions were preparing to join in. The country faced a national breakdown within days, with industry at a standstill and essential fuel and food supplies disrupted.

Offers to improve pay and conditions had been rejected and talks were at a standstill. Lloyd George had no other cards left to play – other than the ultimate Black Ace. He turned to the miners’ leaders across the Cabinet table: “When an indomitable force arises in the state that is more powerful than the state”, he declared, “and can halt the functioning of the state, then it must of itself prepare to take on the responsibilities of the state. Gentlemen, are you so agreed, and, if so, are you ready?”

The gentlemen were not so ready, and negotiations began again. Different though the circumstances now are, the political stand-off today is of no less consequence and as severe in degree. If the Government cannot govern, who does? Behind the latest Brexit U-turns, prevarications, delays and confusions lie profound questions of leadership and legitimacy. And they are deeper – if that is conceivable – than the endlessly replayed doom-loop of no-deal, backstop, cliff-edge and delay in which we are trapped.

These questions centre on the collapsing support, not just of one, but two of the UK’s main political leaders. We are enmeshed, almost beyond endurance, by ever-shifting parliamentary demands on Brexit, motions and amendments with different motivations and endgames behind them, but with no evident alternative or replacement around which sufficient numbers can agree.

The anger among the ranks of previous Conservative supporters is now white-hot. But what is keeping Theresa May in place is that there is no obvious alternative leader around which Conservative MPs can unite. It is not just that the possible alternatives are too embedded in one faction or another to achieve unity. There is also an absence of credible leadership talent.

That may be a harsh a verdict on the likes of Jeremy Hunt, the Foreign Secretary, or Amber Rudd, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. She is well regarded and a likely leadership contender, but her wafer-thin majority in Hastings and Rye – just 346 – may render her vulnerable.

And if you thought it was bad enough on the Conservative benches, consider the leadership dilemma of the main opposition party. Tom Bower’s excoriating biography of Jeremy Corbyn – indispensable reading for anyone in doubt as to what it is he stands for – gives chapter and verse of his extraordinary rise to the leadership. And as if this was not disconcerting enough, it is his deputy, the Marxist John McDonnell, with his unsparing commitment to confiscatory taxes, nationalisation and class war on all fronts, that even many Labour MPs fear more. It is also still plagued with anti-semitism. And that’s the official alternative to the UK Government! Tom Watson may emerge as a leadership contender, along with Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer. But the party membership is markedly to the Left and a challenge from either would be fiercely opposed.

Meanwhile, what of Theresa May? She had emphatically and consistently repeated that there would be no delay to the Article 50 timetable. It was asserted in every speech, press conference and media interview.

Now it appears there very well could be a delay. Forced by an incipient Cabinet revolt and defeat in the Commons, she has now offered the prospect of just such a postponement. What credibility can there now be left in her utterances? What possible authority can her words command?

A new vote on the Withdrawal Agreement – whether or not it has changed materially after yet more meetings with officials in Brussels – is scheduled for March 12. If this also voted down, there will be a vote by MPs the next day to remove the option of a ‘no deal’ departure. And if that succeeds, another vote will be held on March 15 to extend Article 50.

The length of that extension is unclear. Much may depend on what the EU decides. An extension may be for only two months so that there is no obligation for the UK to take part in the European elections. Or it may be delayed, as some in Brussels have proposed, until the end of the year, to enable the UK to arrive at a more settled consideration. After then there could be a second referendum (almost certainly triggering fresh demands for a second referendum on Scottish independence) or possibly a general election.

All clear? Such an impasse might be tolerable if there was no direct adverse national consequence. But there is. An enormous price has already been paid in cancelled business investment plans and costly preparations for the stockpiling of essential goods and materials. Growth has slowed to a crawl. On Tuesday, there was a palpable relief expressed by organisations such as the Federation of Small Businesses that the Prime Minister had taken a step back from a ‘no deal’ departure.

But delay resolves nothing. The same ‘cliff edge’ could present itself in May or at some date beyond. Yesterday I received an email from a prominent Scottish businessman whose company has won innumerable awards for its success. He insisted on confidentiality but I suspect his plight is shared by many companies. “Our sales”, he wrote, “are down over 50 per cent at the moment and we now have more than four months of further delay before any prospect of leaving so the economic damage will be appalling. We are, I fear, heading for a Corbyn Government because they can blame the Tories and claim that only they are fit to govern. May has destroyed the UK.” What else he had to say about Mrs May’s leadership is unrepeatable, though the words “egocentric” and “deranged” featured prominently.

So, it’s the leadership issue behind the latest Brexit turmoil that presents an intractable challenge, one that could shatter the two-party system and plunge us into political chaos without modern precedent. At least in the past we had characters of the leadership quality of Lloyd George to stare down an incipient national breakdown. Today such quality is difficult to discern. We are at a cliff-edge, indeed – and one now altogether more acute than Brexit.