The great Victorian Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli once lamented that Britain had become ‘two nations’ between whom ‘there is no intercourse and no sympathy; who are as ignorant of each other’s habits, thoughts, and feelings, as if they were dwellers in different zones, or inhabitants of different planets’.
Disraeli was writing of the gulf between rich and poor in the 19th century. But his words echo down the decades.
It seems, at times, that our country is now just as divided — between those insulated by wealth from the effects of globalisation and those who feel shut out; or between those who compete on Twitter to signal how virtuous they are and those who are made to feel that patriotism is prejudice and love of country is now the love that dare not speak its name.
There are other divisions, too — between politicians in Westminster and a population becoming alienated because of those politicians’ failure to listen. Between broadcasters who seek to serve the public and a public that is increasingly switching off.
Between elites who think their professional success means they know all the answers and those who wonder why these elites failed to see the banking crisis coming and failed to spread economic growth more fairly in the boom years.
Disraeli was writing of the gulf between rich and poor in the 19th century. But his words echo down the decades
Those divisions in our society were exposed for all to see by the Brexit referendum. There were different reasons why people voted to leave the EU, but at the heart of the campaign was a wish on the part of the majority to take back control from unaccountable elites, to make politicians more answerable to the people, and to make our country work in the interests of all: one nation once again.
But since the referendum, it has often seemed as though that desire for a fresh start has been continually frustrated by an unwillingness to come together behind that democratic vote.
Listening to some partisans in the ongoing Brexit debate, it is clear that they behave as though they think the other side are indeed ‘dwellers in different zones’ or ‘inhabitants of different planets’. Insults are hurled, cries of treachery traded, any suggestion of finding common ground denounced as a heresy. Sympathy for others seems in short supply.
But for democracy to work, there has to be understanding between people; there has to be compromise and a coming together.
Along with a majority of other people, I voted to reinvigorate our democracy by taking power back from unaccountable institutions and taking back control of our laws.
I recognise, however, that while the majority to leave was decisive, executing that decision, like all democratic decisions, means respecting everyone in our democracy.
Forty-eight per cent of the country voted to remain. Their voices need to be listened to, their hopes incorporated in our plan for the future. That doesn’t mean giving in to the much smaller number who want to overturn the decision and frustrate Brexit.
But it must mean that none of us Leavers should try to make our perfect Brexit the enemy of the common good.
Which is why I hope that everyone who believes in our democracy — in the importance of delivering Brexit and in the critical need to unite our country — will get behind the Prime Minister’s deal this week.
It is, of course, a compromise. But so many of the great British traditions and institutions I and many others value are the result of compromise.
Which is why I hope that everyone who believes in our democracy — in the importance of delivering Brexit and in the critical need to unite our country — will get behind the Prime Minister’s deal this week
We are governed by a system that reconciles the different interests of Government, Parliament and the Courts; our constitutional monarchy is underpinned by centuries of compromise, as is our national Church.
The devolution settlement is a compromise; our Press balances freedom of speech with a responsibility to be accurate in reporting; our economic system and welfare state balance the individual freedom to pursue success with the collective need to protect the vulnerable.
As the great liberal thinker Isaiah Berlin rightly argued, when one value or a single perspective is valued above all others, the tree of liberty is hacked at its roots.
So while the Prime Minister’s deal is a compromise, it is not to be rejected for that reason alone. Quite the opposite. In balancing the freedoms that Brexit brings with assurances that smooth our path out of the EU, it provides the best way of delivering an exit that can secure our country’s unity and prosperity.
Of course, there are some who voted Remain for whom no Brexit is acceptable. Whatever deal Mrs May secured, they would find fault with it. But their answer, a second referendum, would only deepen and inflame the divisions it is our duty to overcome.
As the great liberal thinker Isaiah Berlin rightly argued, when one value or a single perspective is valued above all others, the tree of liberty is hacked at its roots
The demand for another vote is a declaration that those who voted Leave in 2016 were too stupid to know what they were doing or too prejudiced to appreciate the consequences.
Holding another referendum would only confirm the feeling among many that politicians don’t listen and won’t change.
It would undermine confidence in our democracy and any campaign that ensued would further fray the bonds that hold us all together — not least by fuelling demands for new votes in Scotland and Northern Ireland to break up the United Kingdom.
But it’s not only those calling for a second referendum who are, I fear, making a mistake. Some of those who believe most sincerely and passionately in Brexit have allowed arguments to be made about the Prime Minister’s deal which don’t reflect the reality of what’s been achieved.
It is not the case that this deal makes us a colony or vassal state. How could it when it gives us total control over our borders and ends our automatic payments to the EU? Colonies, by definition, don’t have control over their borders and they give up their natural resources to others.
This deal means we have the absolute freedom to decide who comes into this country, and on what
