Several issues are coming up fast on the 11-week- old Andrew Holness-led Administration. Many are domestic, others are geopolitical. They all will require attention from the Government as, in most instances, there is little if any room for vacillation.

But that’s the nature of governance, and administrations that can adapt quickly place their countries in a better position to benefit from decisions.

One upcoming issue that we cannot ignore is the June 23 referendum in England on its membership in the European Union (EU).

The campaigns being waged by both sides — those who believe that the United Kingdom should remain, led by Prime Minister David Cameron, and those opposed — have been vigorous.

Just last week, Mr David Lidington, the British Government’s minister of state for Europe, in an op-ed in this newspaper, encouraged British expatriates to ensure that they vote in this historic poll.

Mr Lidington, of course, placed his position on the table, saying that it was his view that the UK will be stronger, safer and better off remaining in a reformed EU.

Prime Minister Cameron shares that view and last week advanced the position that a British exit, or ‘Brexit’ as it has been named, from the union would threaten peace on the European continent and pose a risk to Britain’s economic stability.

“Whenever we turn our back on Europe, sooner or later we come to regret it. We’ve always had to go back in, and always at a much higher cost,” Mr Cameron said.

But yesterday, in the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Boris Johnson, the former mayor of London and a member of Mr Cameron’s party who supports the “leave” campaign, said the EU’s aim to unify Europe was comparable to attempts made by Hitler and Napoleon.

According to Mr Johnson, the past 2,000 years of European history have been characterised by repeated attempts to unify Europe under a single government in order to recover the continent’s lost “golden age” under the Romans.

“Napoleon, Hitler, various people tried this out, and it ends tragically,” he told the Sunday Telegraph.

The problem, he argued, was that there is no underlying loyalty to the idea of Europe.

Of course, his views have offended some people and won support from others.

At the end of the debate, though, the British people will have their say, because, as Mr Lidington correctly pointed out, the outcome of the vote will affect their lives and those of their children and grandchildren.

How a “leave” vote would affect Jamaica, and indeed the wider Caribbean, is yet to be seen. However, we should not sit and await the result of the referendum before formulating policy positions.

Britain, for many decades, has been a great friend of Jamaica and has provided assistance in many vital areas. So, too, the EU which, over the last 40 years, has contributed an estimated 1.2 billion euros in development assistance to Jamaica, 80 per cent of which have been grants.

In relation to the wider Caribbean, readers will recall that last June the EU approved a US$390 -million funding programme for the region, more than doubling what it spent in previous years.

Those are contributions that we appreciate, especially in the context of our current economic reform programme here in Jamaica.

Whichever way the British vote, we will have to maintain and improve our trade and political relationships with the EU and Britain.

However, what Jamaica should strive to achieve is getting to the point where we will not need that level of economic assistance.