Brexit Essay: 2nd Place

A few weeks ago, we announced an essay competition – The Vice President, Education's Award. The task was to submit a short eassy (1,500 words), on a topic. We chose Brexit. Not an easy task to complete in such a small allotment of words. 

Today we present our winning essays. In second place, Cessiah Lopez. To see our other winners, check out the third place submission and winning essay. 

What should a Post-Brexit Britain look like?

Following the EU referendum that effectively decided for the divorce of Britain from Brussels, some of us seem to still be in the early stages of a hangover after a night of bad decisions, with the only cure being a definitive reassurance of what Britain’s purpose of singleness will be post-Brexit. The answer? A newly baptised, or a newly resurrected Britain anointed by the Brexit trinity: the money, the people, and the sovereignty, blessed with “a new vision…of a more tolerant, inclusive globalization, one that brings people with us rather than leaving them behind.”[1]

“The British people did not vote on June 23 to become poorer”

A post-Brexit Britain should not (by any means) be a financial utopia. However, “the British people did not vote on June 23 to become poorer”[2] either. Britain as a divorcee should take into consideration two elements for self-healing and growth: the “long-term trends of the world economy [and] the shape of the global economic cycle.” The first shows “that the developing world will grow faster than the developed”, meaning Britain should be more invested in free trade agreements not just with major players in the global economy, such as the US, China, and Japan, but also with developing countries in the Commonwealth like India, or the Philippines within ASEAN. This way, Britain will be holding hands with states that already have strong grips in the global market, which will be an advantageous aid to Britain’s future. If however, Britain is too impatient and desires immediate positive surge in its economy that global trade cannot instantaneously offer, then maintaining and improving current negotiations/deals with existing partners should be one of Britain’s focus regarding “money”-- the first entity of the ‘Brexit trinity’. Other focuses then should be in light of the global economics’ shape, one that the IMF predicts to have “no serious recession around the corner, but a longer-term challenge of slow growth.” [3]Albeit slow, growth is still better than “secular stagnation” and a post-Brexit Britain’s role combatting such challenge should be met with governmental agreements with corporations in all sectors, proposing awards and incentives for any business ventures “linked to the long-term value they create and the wealth they build[4]” to help induce faster progress. This in return will reduce the probabilities of the Sterling falling during uncertainties, as a post-Brexit Britain focused toward enhancing and increasing interrelations with countries intra and/or extra EU via bilateral trade deals and mandates, will most probably perpetually amass foreign investments. But as aforementioned, Britain should be seen through a realist’s eyes. It should be remembered that the fiscal effects of Brexit will not be perfect, but they should at least look better than the nation’s current condition, with landscapes designed for a stronger city to be built upon for the people.

“26% of doctors are non-British”

One of the factors that led to Brexit in the first instance is the fear of immigration; a fear caused by disillusioned comprehension accepted by Leave voters, given by the political establishment. This showed a conspicuous division between the country and “the gap between public perception and empirical reality.” [5]The Financial Times showed those who voted overwhelmingly for Remain were younger but were fewer in numbers, whilst the Brexiteers were much older, mostly pensioners yet made up most of the turn out percentage. The divide wasn’t just generational, but geographical too, with London and Scotland reacting like children strongly opposed to their parents’ divorce, whilst the rest of the UK were either ready for the break-up or were still unresolved, awaiting closure. Therefore following Brexit, it’s important that such polarisation ought to be narrowed and harmonised. But first, it must be recognised. A post-Brexit Britain should have a collective response toward the gap that has expanded between the people, and should function to destroy fears of globalisation and immigration.

A newly baptised Britain should be filled with platforms that encourage dialogue between extremists and liberals, where conversations may yield more cultured and educated interactions amongst diverse groups of people. After all, what is community without communication? The nation reborn should penetrate changes in the educational system as early as primary school where the benefits and effects of globalisation should be taught, and exchange programs are offered in secondary school, as well as colleges. There should also be a concentration toward institutions that are not as well funded. This should eventually be translated over to work places, where more engagement and synergies of open discussions are stimulated and fostered. Therefore what eventually bridges the gap and patches misconceptions in a post-Brexit Britain, will be the interactions amongst the people who may not have the same mother tongue, but all speak a language of acceptance and not fear. Immigration should then not be a taboo, but instead a standard practice when it comes to constructing a country that wants to excel in the intercontinental markets. Just as a person cannot make a name for himself in his neighbourhood without knowing, understanding and respecting the value of his neighbours toward him, is the same way a post-Brexit Britain cannot function successfully on the world stage without acknowledgement and appreciation of other nations and their people.

“Brexit should not stroke the Vote Leave campaign’s egotistical slogan of ‘Take control’ ”

It is difficult to establish boundaries between sovereignty and patriotism because a want for one is a need for another. So much so that Brexiteers claimed, “If leaving has a price, it is worth paying to regain control”[6], suggesting a retort to nationalism. However, it is too late for that. Britain pre-Brexit was already heavily emerged in a plethora of different cultures, with 13% of the total population born outside of the UK. Statistics also show 11% of all NHS staff and 26% of doctors are non-British. Brexit should not stroke the Vote Leave campaign’s egotistical slogan of “Take control” but instead should be a manoeuvre toward shaping a more democratic nation.

On account of this, a divorced Britain should be a land that rejects monoculture and au lieu, appreciate reliance on foreign nationals; it should not desire a Little England. Politicians, whether they advocated for Leave or Remain, should all work harmoniously in demonstrating that the revised UK’s legal and political constitutions will cater for the people without the former EU law constraints.  Whilst the move out of the EU is meant to enhance the power of our domestic laws and Parliament, it is pivotal for a post-Brexit Britain to understand that more independent power does not automatically equate to more influence. Therefore in affiliation with the final branch of the ‘Brexit trinity’, sovereignty in a Britain away from the EU should be shown through the new founded freedom of politicians and thus their representation of the nation’s citizens should reflect that of a country that found hope, contentment and comfort after a divorce through their forward thinking visions and unchained policies.

A post-Brexit Britain should have the overriding objective of achieving a strong, positive, in so far as possible effect for Britain and its people. May the fire it used to burn the bridge with the EU light up new ones for the gaps between its people, to accommodate those pro-EU and those against it. It should also have a plan that mimics the ‘S.M.A.R.T’ criteria (specific, measurable, assignable, realistic and timed) for domestic and international agreements with other states to continue its path toward elevation in the competitive world. Withal, Britain after separation should look like a determined survivor swimming the “very choppy waters ahead” forecasted by David Cameron, with an ambition to not let Britain “become a 1950s nostalgia theme park floating in the Atlantic Ocean”[7].  A Post-Brexit Britain should be a nation of modern visions, welcoming arms and liberty, because those are what the things required from it, in order for the country to not become just an adrift land on waters, but a sailing and unsinkable united kingdom.