The Birth Pangs of Little England

“Hold hard the breath, and bend up every spirit

To his full height. On on, you noblest English”

- King Henry the Fifth (William Shakespeare)

A grand map of the world was produced in the 1920s. A magnificent portrait of King George V adorned one corner. The purpose of the map was to show the extent of the British Empire and its Dominions. In the top left-hand corner stood Canada – dwarfing its neighbour the United States. In the bottom right-hand corner stood Australia (not forgetting little New Zealand just a bit further to the right).

Africa was dominated by Egypt in the north and South Africa in the south. India likewise dominated Asia. Wherever you looked countries were coloured pink. Indeed, it was the Empire on which the sun never set. All those countries, all that land mass on every continent of the world (bar Antarctica) more or less run from offices in Whitehall. A career in the Colonial Service the job of choice for so many leaving public school. Even the author of Animal Farm worked in the Colonies as a police officer in Burma.

The purpose of all this foreign possession was basically to serve the motherland – hence the ever-busy docks in London importing raw materials, food stuffs and goodies we could not grow or rear ourselves while we exported manufactured wares. Imported cotton from Egypt was turned into clothing in the mills of the north for the home and export markets. Dundee exported rope made from imported hemp and then imported oranges and lemons for marmalade, again for the home and export markets. My grandfather worked as a slaughterman in the London Docks with responsibility for deciding the cattle that lived and died as it was hauled off ships. The men in my mother’s family were dockers and stevedores. Imports from the Empire drove the factories and mills of the north and midlands. Their products in turn drove the ever-expanding middle class that was moving into the suburbs of the major cities.

The wheels of the system were oiled from Whitehall with the main purpose of all that pink on the map being to sustain the United Kingdom. It would be unwise to suggest the whole of the UK benefited from the resulting wealth. It was simply not the case. This was partly because of post-WWI unrest. For some jobs were scarce and Lloyd George’s promise of “homes fit for heroes” remained undelivered – some would say we are still waiting. The 1920s and 30s were a period of political unrest and for many a period of growing poverty and homelessness. The wealth generated by Empire was not for all.

In 1939 world war returned. Britain again turned to the Empire. Again, it delivered men and materials for the cause. It would be unfair to suggest that Britain stood alone until the Americans entered the war – it had support from all that pink on the map. This time the support came conditionally – many countries wanted their independence as reward.

The first country to leave the Empire was India but not without a bloody and bitter civil war which gave us today’s India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. The Queen spent the early years of her reign touring Africa, the West Indies and Asia attending independence ceremonies. The British Empire became the British Commonwealth – but not for long as the newly independent flexed their muscles and wanted the word British dropped. All that pink on the map quietly but quickly began to disappear as did Whitehall’s Colonial Office. Governor jobs in faraway places for public school boys were no more.

The myth that was created was that these were all cordial separations. Britain had, as a colonial power, been an influence for the better. We had brought order, law, culture to the uncivilised world for which the newly independent would be eternally grateful. A myth reinforced by flickering black and white Pathé newsreels that I sat in cinemas to watch as a child. No mention was ever made of slavery.

So we wind on a few decades to 2022 and the royal visit by William and Kate, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to Belize, Jamaica and the Bahamas. We were treated to scenes that would not have batted an eyelid in the 1950s and 60s. William and Kate travelling in a Land Rover, he in military uniform saluting lined up soldiers, she in a dress that looked out of a smart women’s catalogue for visiting the natives. Adoring locals were kept behind wire fences pushing their fingers through the chain link for a touch of the Duchess’s fingers.

If this looked awful, it paled into insignificance compared to what certain local dignitaries had to say. A photo opportunity welcome by the Jamaican PM was set up but before the Royals could sit down, they were told quite pointedly that Jamaica now wanted to go its own way. In other words, they do not want various Royals popping in every few years to bless them, gain a photo opportunity and to perpetuate the myth that the Commonwealth was a needed institution to replace the Empire. William looked like the party gate crasher who, disbelievingly, had been told he really, really was not welcome.

Why would Jamaica want to remain in the Commonwealth anyway, beyond its athletes picking all those sprinting medals at the Games? Jamaicans wanting to work in the UK are faced with exactly the same visa restrictions and costs as anybody else. No Commonwealth bonus there. And despite all Johnson’s bluster where was the UK’s support for its Commonwealth partners when it came to rolling the Covid jab? It was non-existent. No Commonwealth bonus there either.

Now no doubt some Empire loyalists would deem Jamaica as being ungrateful. Those that Charlotte Church might describe as “pants-on-the-outside vigilantes; heady with beer-belly machismo” (New Stateman – April 2020) who rush to defend statues of Churchill and wave Union Jacks might say that, after all we gave them, is this how people of colour reward us – but no doubt “people of colour” would be replaced by more fruity language? These sentiments would probably be shared by all those Brexiteers who voted to abandon 50 years of links with Europe so we could recreate the Empire.

Is it now likely that many other countries will follow Jamaica’s lead once Queen Elizabeth II is no longer with us? Very possibly.

Those countries of Africa from which we took slaves and those countries of the Americas to which we delivered them have found a voice. Slavery enjoyed Royal patronage. Slaves were used by Royals up to 1831. They now want not just an apology but reparations. Although William found it in himself to express sorry for slavery saying it should never have happened, he did not apologise. The reality is that it did, and Britain played a leading role and made truckloads of money out of it. I suspect William’s Whitehall advisers had said to him not to apologise as that would be the road to demands for compensation. This would mean all that slavery was would be laid out before the British people, slaughtering many myths about Britishness on the way apart from becoming a not insignificant drain on the public purse.

I suspect many counties have being eyeing an exit from the Commonwealth but out of respect to the Queen have bided their time. There are just no benefits worth having that would justify continued membership.

Now some Empire loyalists might like to categorise this as ungrateful behaviour from “black” Commonwealth countries, but will Canada, Australia and New Zealand still want a monarch thousands of miles away to be their head of state? For all Commonwealth countries, membership of the Commonwealth offers few benefits beyond a sense of nostalgia now mostly fostered by the elderly who watched the Empire slip away on all those Pathé newsreels. Indeed, a recent poll in Canada (Angus Reid Institute) indicated 51% of Canadians want to have a look at their Royal links once Charles III mounts the throne.

Over the last 50 years the countries of the Commonwealth have found roles for themselves in those parts of the globe in which they reside. They belong to trade and security agreements negotiated to mutual benefit. Over that time the UK has likewise done the same with its local neighbours through what is now the European Union.

The bottom line is that Britain cannot have its cake and eat it. If we wish to truly be international partners with Commonwealth countries, we need to offer them some real benefits. We need to refine what we mean by partnership. This would mean us not being in charge but every country having equal value and say. The reality is that this will never happen. Johnson’s voter base will never except visa free access from former Empire countries of Africa, the West Indies and Asia.

The problem here is over the years since the demise of the Empire most former members have found a new role for themselves. For most of this time we were developing a new role for ourselves with our European partners. We have chosen to leave the European family of countries without adequately scoping out a new role for ourselves. Despite some fantasizing by people such as Farage, Gove, Rees Mogg and Johnson, creating Empire 2.0 was never an option. Why should it be? What possible benefit would it offer the countries involved?

Retired white working-class men chatting to Farage might have fantasized about a new white Commonwealth with the UK at the head but nobody in Australia, Canada or New Zealand are the slightest bit interested.

The words of the Jamaican PM following the action taken by the Bahamas might just be a signal for a rush to the Commonwealth exit door. Out of courtesy many countries might be waiting for Her Maj to shuffle off the scene before making that final decision to cut all Empire links and leave the Commonwealth.

Which brings us back to the central issue of Britain’s role in the world post-Brexit. King George V’s map is no more and cannot be in anyway revised despite what some Brexit voters thought they were voting for. We do not have a role leading former Empire countries – they have and will continue to deny us that opportunity. They are quite able to look after their own interests, thank you.

Boris Johnson likes to brag about a post-EU Britain being free to embrace the world and become world leaders in this and that. The problem is, by and large, nobody in the world wants to be embraced by us.

As a trading partner we are no longer as attractive as the UK is no longer a gateway to the EU trading block – the biggest and most success free trade area in the world. Evidence for this comes from the lack of bragging over new trade deals by Liz Truss. The majority of deals she has signed off have been no more than roll overs of the previous status with the EU.

The big trade prizes – India and the USA – remain elusive. Reportedly India wants visa free access to the UK which is a big problem for a Johnson government rather proud of their racist credentials. For the US we no longer offer a gateway to the EU and have, therefore, diminished in significance.

So the next time the Government thinks about shuffling a royal or two off to some Commonwealth country, it needs to think long and hard about the purpose of the visit and what benefit it offers both parties. It needs to be better briefed on the country’s intentions re the Commonwealth. We need an answer ready the next time a PM says “hello but we are off!”

Secondly, the Government needs to work out the UK’s role in the world post-Brexit. Empty words and platitudes about “world leading” in this and that turn out to be just empty gestures and said only to appeal to Daily Mail voters. For example, we are not leading the world response on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – the US is. Our foot dragging response on the refugee issue puts the lie to that. We were nowhere near the front when it came to fighting the Covid pandemic. Indeed, we delivered the highest pro rata death rate in Europe. Even now infection rates in European countries are lower than the UK’s.

Thirdly, perhaps the determination of a future world role cannot take place until the UK has determined its own internal role. The Johnson government is hated and despised in pro-EU Scotland. Despite all Johnson’s bluster about blocking it, it is not beyond possibility that Scotland could have another referendum and vote to leave the UK preferring instead the company of European countries via EU membership. In Northern Ireland, for the first time, the Irish Nationalist party leads in the polls, and could conceivably take control of Stormont. If they used their majority to force a referendum on a united Ireland, which according to recent polls, the majority in NI support, we could find two countries shuffling off from the UK for pastures new. This would leave Boris Johnson as PM of a country the size of the one Edward I ruled over in the 12th Century.

So Boris Johnson needs to do some thinking about the country’s long term role both on these islands and internationally. Is he capable of such long-term strategic thinking? Does he care or does he prefer winging it and making it up as he goes along with priority being photo ops and playing to the vagaries of the populist gallery? We may never find out if he fails to survive the fallout from Partygate.