Amidst the total confusion that surrounds the government's approach to Brexit I believe that three things are becoming clearer, by default.
The first is that a transitional deal is essential.
The second is that like it or not this means leaving all EU participation in decision making behind but otherwise carrying on exactly as before, in single market and customs union membership, subject to the European Court of Justice, with free movement and with a full contribution payable.
Third, no one has a clue what might happen when this transition ends.
That's not as such a negotiating position. It is more akin to a plea for help to get the UK out of the mess it chose. But with Labour having seemingly adopted this as policy and the Tories having nothing else to offer that is viable, let alone vaguely responsible, the likelihood of it becoming the default option seems very high.
In that case I did think it worth checking that this is possible. The April 2017 EU guildelines on negotiating Brexit say:
The British government has indicated that it will not seek to remain in the Single Market, but would like to pursue an ambitious free trade agreement with the European Union. Based on the Union's interests, the European Council stands ready to initiate work towards an agreement on trade, to be finalised and concluded once the United Kingdom is no longer a Member State.
20. Any free trade agreement should be balanced, ambitious and wide-ranging. It cannot, however, amount to participation in the Single Market or parts thereof, as this would undermine its integrity and proper functioning. It must ensure a level playing field, notably in terms of competition and state aid, and in this regard encompass safeguards against unfair competitive advantages through, inter alia, tax, social, environmental and regulatory measures and practices.
Nothing in here precludes this transition, even if it was not anticipated before David Davis' inability to negotiate became clear. What it does say is that there is no cherry picking, at all. It is take it or leave it.
I now have little doubt we will take it for a long time to come.
And then ask to go back because we never will agree on the alternative.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
All I have to say in addition to this is that with Davies and Fox popping up in non-EU countries recently, the biggest unknown is what have they been saying? What dodgy deals have they been up to in two countries who have a tendency to defend ownership of their home grown corporations and ‘invest’ abroad (the US and Japan)?
My concern is that these fools will cut our noses off to spite our faces in order to save their face with this EU debacle that they have created. We – ordinary people – will live with it for a long time whilst pro-BREXIT Tories (and Labour) MPs will make hay and act as well connected and rewarded cogs in what comes out of it. And of course the Tories will get their long desired ‘ structural reforms’ of our economy.
I had always wanted to get this BREXIT business over with as soon as possible in order realise that we just need to be back in. At least it is becoming more and more evident that it is much harder than we thought. But if Japan and the US and others increase their stake in then British economy in the mean time, what does this mean for any continued relationship with the EU and the ability to go back in at some time in the future?
Better a flawed stability than not at all? I think that is the awful lesson that is being learnt right now.
Given how much opposition there is to Trump visiting the UK, I can’t see people going for a trade deal with the USA.
Given the terrible impact any such deal will have on any key industries like farming, I can’t see even the Daily Mail going for it (or can I? )
To me a proposed Trump Trade Deal with the UK will result in riots on the streets.
‘Third, no one has a clue what might happen when this transition ends.’
Given what became known as ‘project fear’ did not even mention it I wonder if they had done their homework transition would be necessary , i rather suspect they will make it up as they go along and ‘transition’ till people grow tired of it and then will transition back into the eu as quick as you can say rejoining. They do not seem to be doing any preparatory work, such as a tory mp if memory serves the treasury are more interested in HS2 then put systems in place at dover. Whether or not brexit always was going to be bad or very bad or even good the people authority do seem to going out of their way for it to be worse. Makes you wonder how much Corbyn will be undermined should be become PM.
The very real danger is that the government will take bad short-term decisions in order to save face, which are not in the long-term interests of the nation. Probably they already are. Such a strategy is nothing new, of course, and not limited to one political party. However, the difference with any Brexit deal is that it will be hugely more difficult to reverse than run-of-the-mill legislation which constitutionally can be undone by another parliament. The managerial ego of the Tories leads me to believe that they are significantly more likely to put party before country. Furthermore, the LP’s shilly-shallying compromise gives the Tories a bit more space in which to screw up. What a legacy to leave the next generation. Only the Green Party and the SNP will come out of it with any integrity.
Have just seen PSR’s response after posting, which makes my point more comprehensively.
What an absolute load of sad, bitter Remoaner drivel. Talk about dredging up all the worst possible outcomes and make them sound plausible.
Why is anyone giving this pile of codswallop any publicity??
Good old project fear puppet media.
The UK is Leaving, as voted for by the majority of the electorate. Cameron is the biggest liar ever going, threatening to give notice the day after a Leave vote, then chickening out on the say so of his elite paymasters so they could orchestrate a rearguard action mirroring the project fear of their Remain campaign.
Luckily the elite own most of the media so getting stories like this fairytale published isn’t difficult. Sad to see so many gullible Remoaners sucked in.
It’s good to be reminded of the coherence of the Brexit argument occasionally
Neil
Even if you are right (and I do not believe that you are) you cannot honestly believe that leaving an established (and admittedly flawed) trade treaty is the right thing to do now?
The effects of THE worst financial disaster ever in 2008 still hamper economic growth. So not only leaving the EU is a bad thing but doing so in the midst of a moribund post 2008 crash, real world economy makes no sense whatsoever. The timing of this is worth a moan believe you me – and a big one at that.
@PSR Is it fair to say your proposition is that membership of the EU post the GFC has been of net benefit in terms of recovery from the GFC to the members of the EU?
If so then I wonder if the PIGS would agree?
We are ourselves left with the machinations of QE which I believe Mark Blyth has likened to using a high pressure hose stuck through the letterbox in an attempt to fill the kettle in the kitchen!
@ Neil –
“The UK is Leaving, as voted for by the majority of the electorate.”
Not true: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/10/24/brexit-is-not-the-will-of-the-british-people-it-never-has-been.
Just watched Keir Starmer and David Davis on the Marr show. I strongly suspect that, if you are a Leave voter, you will say “Yah sucks boo” to Starmer and Yeay to Davis. Davis’s only “positive” attribute is his appeal to the hard Leaver.
Davis says our lawyers (and we have the best lawyers, hugely great lawyers) have assured him that there is no legal obligation to pay anything, but he goes on to say that perhaps there is a moral or political obligation. He then alludes to payments for retaining existing benefits, which *might* be interpreted as the political obligation (in his mind anyway). I have no idea where morality is supposed to enter the frame.
Perhaps we need a “Gina Miller” to ask the court to look at this claim that we legally owe zero. However, given the reaction when her case was won, I’d not wish that on anyone.
Taking the bigger picture the world’s in trouble because it has no reciprocal way of resolving trade imbalances. The Tories romantic or unworldly notions of “free-marketery” do nothing to resolve this problem despite the fact they should be aware of the history of John Maynard Keynes’s efforts to do so at Bretton Woods and Wynne Godley’s later Post-Keynesian efforts. Reliance on national chauvinism may or may not result in a country having a positive balance (despite the Brexit rhetoric British chauvinism’s effect on economic prowess appears to have dwindled) but positive balances are always by dint of logic always at the expense of other countries having to run negative balances, not very reciprocal.
https://www.concertedaction.com/aspiration/
http://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/prospects-for-the-united-states-and-the-world-a-crisis-that-conventional-remedies-cannot-resolve
Good point
I believe it’s Labour’s position itself which is transitional. As soon as they feel confident they can survive it politically, they’ll be saying Brexit can’t and won’t happen.
I feel exactly the same about the Labour position Bill.
Having been in the music industry for the last 30 years (one of the UKs biggest exports and one that is routinely ignored) the idea of Liam Fox and David Davies doing deals to promote it is utterly absurd. I am sure many other sectors feel the same about their products. It reminds me of those pointless business initiatives promoted regionally by councils…
My belief is that this will devolve in to a facesaving effort to benefit the wealth of the Tories and their financial cronies. It will never benefit the country as a whole which is amply demonstrated by the way social protection has been withdrawn from our most helpless populace. The destruction of the Welfare State is nearly complete and democracy is by-passed altogether.
Roger
I have acknowledged that the EU is flawed so I am being consistent. It’s most flawed bit at the moment is the ECB whose austerity programmes are the worst thing ever to come out of the Union. The ECB and the Euro should be scrapped ASAP in my view.
And do not forget that orthodox austerity is shared by politicians in the member states themselves.
But trade is another matter (albeit related to the circulation of money in the zone – yes I know). To scrap a beneficial trade deal in the wake of the GFC is simply adding fuel to the fire. It will not put the fire out.
We all know that people and the trade links that they set up are resilient. But not when a stupid Government decides to break with a treaty whilst it is still recovering from the global GFC.
The only analogy I can come up with is that it is like someone who has taken overdose of pills then taking some more pills because the overdose has given them headache!!!
@PSR
“The ECB and the Euro should be scrapped ASAP in my view.” – 100% Agree
A transition period is built into the guidelines that the council laid down for the commission. I’m not convinced that this whole approach isn’t geared to creating a brexit that will be so bad that parliament have no choice but to block it, leaving May to declare the opposition and any rebels as sabatuers and vowing to keep up the fight.
As someone who knows very little about economics, what I can see is experts trying to predict the future in what is an unusual situation i.e. Brexit. So maybe this is beyond our ability to see what will happen and we need to take this step by step and not panic. I also see the Tory determination to destroy our NHS etc. and needlessly impose austerity (learned from RM blogs) and this seems to be what seems to be more important to fight against.