Sir Ivan Rogers is stepping down from his role as the UK’s ambassador to the EU – but is his departure really such a great loss? In his explosive resignation email, Rogers urged his colleagues to challenge ‘muddled thinking’ and ‘speak truth to power’, in a parting shot at Theresa May. So is this evidence of a Brexit botch-up? Not so, says the Sun, who calls the departing diplomat ‘Ivan the terrible’ and says it won’t weep over his decision to quit. A quick glance at the ‘pathetic empty shell’ of David Cameron’s EU renegotiation deal is all you need to see as to why Roger’s resignation is no great loss, the paper says. After all, if it’s true that Rogers was ‘always ‘happy to take ‘No’ for an answer’ from Eurocrats’ then good riddance, the Sun says.
But this assessment of Rogers misses the point, insists the FT, which says that his decision to quit ‘deprives the UK of its one of its most experienced officials in Brussels’. It says it’s unfair for some to have claimed Rogers was an unwavering Eurocrat – after all, the paper says, he has stayed quiet about the referendum since the vote and is, in fact, a ‘man of a Eurosceptic hue’. While it might be the case that Rogers ‘developed something of a reputation for his gloomy prognoses’ we should mourn his loss, the FT argues. After all, the paper says, Theresa May made it clear in an interview with the Spectator that she wanted civil servants to speak their mind: given Rogers did just that we can only hope that his replacement will be ‘equally forthright’.
Don’t panic, says the Daily Telegraph which argues that there’s an obvious way of realising that Sir Ivan’s departure is no great loss. The paper says that any news greeted by Nick Clegg and Peter Mandelson as a ‘potential disaster’ is likely to be exactly the opposite. It’s clear, the Telegraph says, that Rogers was the ‘ultimate insider’ in Brussels: a useful man to have while Britain was in the EU but not so now the UK is on its way out. So don’t listen to the doom mongers, the paper says in its upbeat editorial: the Prime Minister can help lift everyone’s mood by ‘sending a replacement to Brussels who will speak up for Britain and its excellent prospects outside the EU’.
Yes, it’s true that Sir Ivan may have been a pessimist, says the Times. But it’s a big worry that Britain’s top diplomat in Brussels has decided to quit. Such a ‘hasty departure’ is a ‘blow’ to the Government, according to the paper, which goes on to say those with a working knowledge of Brussels are now in short supply. Yet the bigger worry is what his resignation might tell us about how Downing Street actually works, the paper concludes. In the last few months, Sir Ivan would frequently try to ‘inject local knowledge’ into ‘No 10’s thinking’. So if his ‘ultimate crime’ was saying what Theresa May didn’t want to hear it could be more evidence of the PM’s ‘narrow temperament’.
But the Daily Mail – which last month said the knives were out for Sir Ivan – says this isn’t the case. Rogers was undoubtedly a man who saw Brexit as a ‘disaster’ and also helped David Cameron with his ‘total sham’ of a negotiation with the EU. So don’t be downbeat, the paper urges its readers; instead this is great news and allows Theresa May to finally ‘hire an ambassador with ambition, determination and none of his relentless gloom’.
Seeing Rogers’ departure as a triumph is misguided, says the Guardian. The paper agrees with the Times in calling the resignation a ‘blow’ to Britain. It’s clear that Rogers’ cautious style has alienated Brexiteers, says the paper. But we’re in ‘dangerous territory’ if that fact alone means Rogers was effectively forced out. So it’s time for Downing Street to make it clear this wasn’t the case and also end its silence on Brexit: ‘This is the time for Mrs May to stamp her authority over the way Brexit is being run,’ the Guardian tells its readers.
Comments