Speaking to Preston on Sunday before Christmas Amber Rudd commented that “it is incumbent upon MPs to find the centre ground in Parliament”. She was of course referring to the, so far illusive, idea of a form of Brexit that could get through the House of Commons. But more broadly there is an interesting question. Is there a centre ground on Brexit?
Its a confusing question in part because unlike on other issues those who are considered moderates are not moderate on Brexit. Indeed Blair, Adonis, Clegg and co tend to be for Remain in all circumstances. So their position tells us nothing about a compromise. Nor of course does the position of Hard Brexiteers, who are increasing tending towards ‘no deal’ and leaving on WTO terms. Not only is this the most extreme form of clean break from the EU, it is also not something that was supported by Vote Leave in 2016.
The two clear candidates for the centre ground with which we started were of course either remaining a member of the single market and customs union, the so called ‘Norway Model’, or a straight forward trade deal, the ‘Cannada Model’, that does not involve single market or customs union membership. Both have been well documented. The problem is neither of these options seems very much like a compromise. The Norway Model, which is gaining ground with a number of MPs, would almost certainly come with continued Free Movement of people. Something that was clearly rejected as part of the 2016 vote. Equally a Cannada style free trade deal removing us completely from the EU’s orbit gives little regard to the closeness of the vote and the voices of those who want to stay close to the EU. Neither seems to fit the bill of a middle way.
This might well be why so far neither May nor Corbyn has not gone for either of these two options, they have looked for some other illusive fudge. In general that has meant staying away from continued single market membership but entering some form of customs union. May’s plan hints at a ‘customs arrangement’ (although the Political Declaration is somewhat vague). Labour’s evasive position supports a new ‘customs union’. Here may be where both major parties feel the centre of gravity lies on Brexit. The problem they have is that when tribes are so divided and entrenched, the risk of the middle way is that you neither please or placate anybody.
Placing kinds of Brexit deals in boxes may sound a little semantic, and it is, however it could matter politically. Whatever happens is likely to further divide our already fractured country. Too soft a Brexit will lead to greater calls of betrayal, too hard a Brexit will lead to greater Remainer anger. Each of the main two political parties have to different extents coalitions of leavers and remainers. Tony Blair in his memoir quips, “when you decide, you divide”. This is acutely true on Brexit. The fact that both parties cannot afford to divide their supporters nor compromise with either extreme is one of the things that makes Brexit so difficult.