Sir Tim Barrow has been appointed as Britain’s ambassador to the EU. Yet still the row over his predecessor’s departure rages in today’s papers. Sir Ivan Rogers may well have thought that the country made a mistake in backing Brexit, says the Daily Telegraph, but it is ‘not his place to make that impression public in the way that he did’. There was ‘nothing even-handed about the way in which he left, according to the paper’s editorial, which hits out at Rogers’ apparent inability to deal with politicians not always taking on board his advice. But the Telegraph’s most stinging criticism for Rogers is the way in which this row ended up playing out in public. The paper concludes its editorial by saying the outgoing diplomat wasn’t wrong to have concerns about Brexit – but he erred by making them ‘so obvious’.
The Sun agrees. The paper says that we shouldn’t listen to Sir Ivan Rogers resignation note as evidence of a Brexit shambles behind the door of Number 10. After all, the Sun points out, it’s hardly a ‘neutral account’ of goings-on. Instead, the paper says, it’s clear that this previously anonymous diplomat ‘actively opposed Brexit’ and in the aftermath of the referendum result, it’s obvious he ‘couldn’t be trusted to fight for British interests’. But Rogers’ replacement is something to be happy about, the paper argues. And it’s clear from the speed with which Barrow was appointed that Theresa May has a grip on things and is a Prime Minister who ‘won’t be blown off course by events, especially the loss of a defeatist ambassador’.
It’s time for Sir Humphrey to stick his nose out of politics, says the Daily Mail in its typically furious editorial. The paper takes a pop at Tony Blair’s former chief of staff, Jonathan Powell, after Powell lashed out at Iain Duncan Smith over his criticism of Sir Ivan. The paper says Powell needs to listen up to the outcome of the referendum result. And he should also put a stop to his ‘defeatist’ view of what kind of deal Britain will end up with from the EU. Drawing particular ire from the paper is Powell’s claim that a good Brexit agreement is only possible in a ‘Daily Mail world’. Powell – just like Sir Ivan – is a prime example of a ‘politicised civil servant’, the paper says. So how should the Government respond? And will Britain end up with a good or bad Brexit deal? The proof will be in the pudding, suggests the Daily Mail, which says it’s vital that ‘that the last laugh belongs to 17.4million voters – not to Sir Ivan or Mr Powell’.
Meanwhile in the Times, the paper highlights one clear benefit of Brexit amidst all the uncertainty. It’s obvious, the Times says, that leaving the EU ‘will allow Whitehall to stop subsidising farmers elsewhere’. Andrea Leadsom told a farming conference yesterday that Brexit will mean farmers can ’grow more, sell more and export more great British food’. But while this sounds like a nice slogan, it’s vital that she doesn’t ‘mistake a slogan for a strategy’. Most farmers in Britain still remain heavily reliant on subsidies, the paper points out. And it’s crucial that whatever ends up replacing the current system for supporting farmers, that the Government doesn’t swap one pile of red tape for another. It’s down to Andrea Leadsom’s department to ensure this doesn’t happen, says the Times: ’Mrs Leadsom’s task is to usher in a new green revolution, but it won’t happen by itself,’ the paper concludes.
Comments