As I have noted this morning on Twitter, there is a certain curiosity in watching a state descend into chaos, unless you happen to be living in it. Such is the fate of those living in the UK at this moment.
It's fair to say that this is not good news:
European Commission statement on meeting with Boris Johnson pic.twitter.com/7iN394MRl8
— Steve Peers (@StevePeers) December 9, 2020
Having noted Johnson's performance at PMQ's yesterday, where he seemed to make clear that he expected all movement to now be on the EU aside, I think it fair to presume that there will be no deal by Sunday. All the talk of oven readiness, and all the guff offered since 2016 on how this would be the easiest deal to agree in history has proved to be utter nonsense. There is no deal to be had because the UK has not sought one.
Even now it is worth understanding why that is. And the answer is not hard to find. The obduracy, closed mindedness, or whatever else you wish to call it, on the part of the UK negotiators, starting from the top, is based on a naive belief in three things.
One is in competition. The Tory party has become obsessed with an ultra-naive version of economics that suggests that gains are always maximised when unconstrained competition is permitted. Hence the objection to the EU, and its principle of cooperation. This is anathema to this economic belief.
The second is an objection to regulation, because this naive belief presumes that all regulation is anti-competitive by definition, and so contrary to well being. Hence the objection to the level playing field, for example. Since this belief holds that all regulation might limit the opportunity to exploit, whether it be fish stocks, people living in the UK or the environment, in the interests of profit then it follows that regulation must be bad.
And third, there is a belief in British exceptionalism. Underpinning the naive economics is a belief that we are simply better than everyone else, and that all the EU has tried to do is constrain our excellence to prevent us achieving our potential. Decades of evidence of British failure, much of it the consequence of arrogant belief that we have only to turn up to win, has shown that this belief is utterly misplaced, but it persists nonetheless.
These three beliefs are enough, in themselves, to explain the British (or rather, English) negotiating position. Johnson evidenced all three in his performances yesterday. I think we can safely assume based on the statement issued by the EU from Brussels that all three were in evidence over dinner last night.
I see no prospect of any change in these positions over the next three days. The beliefs are too firmly held to be changed now, however stupid and misplaced they might be. Once upon a time in the decidedly basic lectures on economics provided by Oxford PPE courses these ideas were taught as truth, by an institution itself grounded in an arrogant belief in its own natural superiority that recruits those taught to believe in their own pre-eminence. To dislodge what was taught as faith cannot happen now.
We will as a result get what I have long thought likely, which is no deal. And we will descend into chaos as a result. The hard evidence that competition requires intense levels of cooperation to work, and that effective regulation is the lynchpin of effective markets has been ignored because a few in this country are certain that they are right to ignore facts of that sort because ‘the few' who reject that evidence know best.
There is, though, no hope that they are right. The reality is that no company is better than its supply chains. There is no market that can exist without rules. And exploitation is most certainly not a route to long term prosperity. But to learn this it seems that we must break supply chains, undermine regulation and seek to permit exploitation of the many by the few.
The crisis of neoliberalism has arrived. I thought that would happen in the States. But they have had the sense to evict Trump before it was finally too late. For the UK that chance came and went a year ago, and tepid opposition aided and abetted Johnson to win a majority for his plan to wreak havoc.
That is what he will now deliver. There is no way out of this. The reality that we face is that the UK is the first nation that might have consciously chosen to tear itself apart.
What will survive this process I do not know.
I very much doubt the Union will.
I suspect that the new states that will emerge, in whatever form they take, will reflect in their behaviour rejection of the chaos that will give rise to their creation.
But what really troubles me is that I cannot see this as being a peaceful process. It is no comfort that those in the civil service tasked with managing 2021 do not do so either. The risk of civil disobedience is clearly factored into their plans. I think it will happen. The stresses this process is going to create would seem to make that unavoidable.
This country has no prospect of prospering mightily as this year now comes to an end. The best that can be hoped is that from the ashes of the chaos that we must now endure a new vision will emerge that is very far removed from that which has brought us to this point. I can live in hope. But the journey is one I would never have wished to take.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
It’s worth noting that for all it’s flaws the US system did have the checks and balances to constrain Trump, the tripartite oversight and strong decentralised structures through the states.
Here, those checks and balances on Johnson don’t exist in anything like the same meaningful way. Our political and societal governance has been ruthlessly exposed by this tyranny of a bare majority.
Great blog by the way.
I agree with all of this post.
The way I see the current attitude of Boris & Co is that they seem to want to agree a bunch of things now as a means to get the deal, but then effectively be at their leisure to rip up the deal as soon as it is signed.
What sort of deal is that?
That is not a deal. It’s just a convenience.
It has no enduring meaning.
Appalling, that’s what it is.
Quite – and the ultimate sign of this mixture of delusion and dishonesty is to be found in Johnson’s “response” to the EU’s announced measures to handle a ‘No Deal’ situation.
His pompous and reality-denying answer?… “the prime minister’s spokesman just said that the UK would be studying the proposals and that it had its own no deal contingency plans.” – and this despite the benign fact that the EU’s measures would include another six months of continuity in road transport and air access being maintained.
This idiot and his ‘government’ demonstrate, again, that they have no discernible contact with their actual position – beggars who cannot, no matter what they may want, cannot be choosers, let alone dictators of the outcome.
[…] sector economy it might have its worst year in living memory, and beyond, in 2021. But, a government committed to the dogma that has already delivered Brexit will believe these companies to be zombie enterprises that are best left to go to the wall. That […]
Here is the wake up call to the ordinary Briton – you’re holiday is cancelled because you are outside the EU.
“Most Britons face bar from visiting EU under Covid safety rules” from January 1, as reported in many papers today. We are now in an elite European club alongside Albania and Turkey.
We’ve taken back control!
Raab had the temerity this morning to deny there would be any change on travel (each state has its own coronavirus regulations, of course, which change over time, but the ability to cut through some of that with the EU right to free movement of persons will be gone in January 2021: the question he was not asked is, if each country’s rules were to stay the same as they are today, would some travel be possible today which will not be possible on 1 January, to which the answer is undoubtedly yes).
Yesterday Gove falsely asserted that UK travellers will continue to entitled to free healthcare in the EU (those who are there already might if they don’t leave, but most of us won’t) .
I despair when our political leaders are able to utter such bare-faced lies with little to no come-back.
I agree
That really angers me
This would not happen in the USA
But here ‘objectivity’ means ‘not challenging’
The first two beliefs are two pillars of neoliberalism. The third is really ugly, and let us not forget the influence of institutions like Eton. The consequences of Brexit coupled with covid will likely also be ugly. Even though there will be vaccines, it will take time to get them out to everyone who will need them. I sort of envisaged Brexit + covid to possibly lead to a bad deal. But after Johnson’s shenanigans last night, I have come round to thinking the result after Jan 1 will be an awful shambles. Although in Robert Frost’s poem, The Road Not Taken, the traveller took the less travelled one, the road that looks like we will be going down is not one that I would have chosen. And I don’t know anyone who wants to go down it. In this case, the road less travelled is so for a reason.
The load less traveled, isn’t that always the least desirable one for obvious reasons?
No, not necessarily
open your mind
Richard – not British Exceptionalism – but English exceptionalism. We Scots were not taken in by the English Tory bluster.
It is tragic that it has come to this and how businesses who sell into the EU can be expected to advise their customers of their prices for next year at this late stage is criminal negligence by the government – you would think they want businesses to fail and people to lose their jobs
I think IU make the distinction somewhere in this morning’s output
I agree with you, of course
The book Britannia Unchained was an early indicator of the strategy of the Conservative right wing. Two of Richard’s three points can be seen in that book-the third, exceptionalism is only there in the sense that although Britain has become lazy, could be a tiger economy like Singapore with the right policies.
Four of the five authors, Kwasi Kwarteng, Liz Truss, Dominic Raab and Priti Patel are in the cabinet the latter couple occupy two of the ‘great offices’ of state.
If, in a general election, their policies had been put before the electorate, I doubt if they would have been elected.
I just have the feeling that the country has been manipulated into acquiescing to virtual coup.
I wonder if I ma alone in that.
No…
The Gov’t could learn a lot from supermarkets, but it seems a former lawyer with little grasp of reality has a better handle on what might happen to e.g. food prices than Tesco.
Supermarkets themselves, regardless of their often unfair buying practices, do want regulation so that they compete on similar terms to their competitors.
Trouble is the Great British public is bored of Brexit and has mostly forgotten what was promised. They just want it all over…..
……except it won’t be, as we still have to make agreements on the same issues, no matter how long it takes.
My wife has of this morning banned me from talking about it.
My talks about it, endlessly…
perhaps I had best talk with her…
when i go home this evening, I shall do as instructed many years ago: avoid talking about religion, money and sex and instead converse about the weather and the price of fish…..but I guess now fish is off limits..
…unless it is turbot.
OK, try something else
Phil Collins’ greatest hits? That should last about 10 seconds…
Part of me thinks(slightly perversely)that the EU should encourage a no deal to bring the chaos on.Although it will be a bad outcome for the EU,it will be worse for the UK.Will it bring the people and/or the ruling classes to their senses? – I think not.Will it bring the Scots to their senses,and find their own way to a better future – I hope so,but fear not.I do appreciate that the EU cannot understand the UK position in all of this,and Scotland thinks similarly to the EU(I feel),but I feel that we need to burst the boil once and for all,and then attempt to come together in a new confederation of independent states within and out of(or beside)the EU.Not quite the calm before the storm,but more the storm before the calm(relatively speaking).
I’ve long had the view that the EU wouldn’t be devastated with a no deal situation as it would surely provide a situation to ‘encourager les autres’ when it came to the separatists in other EU states. Brexit is heading to be such a shitshow that it will surely cut the support for these groups in other countries off at the knees.
There are various interesting analogies with Spain and how long it took for the reality that the country was a minor power rather than a member of the top table. This means that the UK will need time to grow up and mature in their attitude towards the rest of the world.
Oh, do go on, Alan: when did Spain cease to be a major world power, when did it realise that was the case, and what did the Spanish do in the meantime in the mistaken view that they really mattered?
For better or for worse, while our Prime Minister and his government may be a laughing stock, and we have burned our reputation for pragmatism and respect for the rule of law, the UK still has its seat on the UN Security Council, which can’t be taken away without the UK’s consent. Even in its reduced state, it is one of the larger and more competent world powers in conventional and nuclear weapons terms. We have a large economy in terms of GDP, and punch well above our weight in terms of financial services and other services such as the arts (music, film, TV, software, etc.). We have an international reputation for education. The English language is the lingua franca of the world, and we have historical links to many peoples and places.
The US, China, India, the EU, we are not. We are not even Japan or Russia. We are in fact somewhere between Ireland and France, or between Iceland and Germany.
Andrew mentions that the Arts in the UK “punches well above its weight”, but the unspoken truth is that the UK has consistently undervalued the Arts, apart from elite companies & high-profile individuals. By far the majority of professional musicians, actors, visual artists, writers etc earn so little from their endeavours that they have to rely on other part-time work to survive.
The grass roots play a vital, if unsung, role in discovering and fostering talent, without which much talent would never be discovered, let alone prosper and graduate into the elite arena.
The impact of Covid on grass roots venues and the freelancers whose work is featured there will be massive. The paucity of UK Government financial support for this sector during the pandemic has already endangered their existence and it’s highly probable that large numbers of venues, promoters, performers and creative artists will not be active in the post-Covid era.
A country that fails to foster its culture loses its soul and that, given its indifference to the wider Arts, the impact of Covid and the forthcoming strangulation by Brexit, appears to be where the Tory Government is heading.
Oh, for sure, the UK consistently fails to give enough financial support to the arts, not just because the sector is an economic success but also because the arts are in a true sense public goods – good for general flourishing and happiness and mental health, and a host of important social impacts – ever since the first hand was painted on a cave wall, or the first people told stories about the hunt and sang and danced around a fire. Alongside science, the arts are what make us human.
On the UK’s failure to realise it is a minor power and parallels with Spain, I was taken by this quote which I had not seen before, from the Danish finance minister: “There are two kinds of European nations. There are small nations, and there are countries that have not yet realized they are small nations.”
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/a-small-nation-that-thinks-its-a-world-power/
Very good quote
The analogy with Spain is that there was a golden age when they were THE European power and perhaps the strongest global power (Charles V, Phillip II). The country lived on its past glories for years until the Napoleonic Wars. This was a rude awakening.
The UK has managed its decline (end of Empire, decline in manufacturing) through alliances with Europe, the US, the development of financial services, and to an extent soft power (culture and education). Delve into any of these and Brexit is destroying each of these pillars of the post war transition.
Fig leaves of nuclear weapons, aircraft carriers, and a seat on the Security Council are dangerous in hiding the reality of the trend. This reality is what requires addressing.
With Johnson, as with every one of his wretched ministers, I see no point in taking any notice of what they say. Given their proven dishonesty and stupidity, why bother? Shame they’re not challenged more by our ludicrous so-called free press, which mostly act as shameless cheerleaders to it.
So it could be Johnson was engaging in the usual bullshit and bluster and he will actually get some kind of very poor trading arrangement, to avoid disaster i.e he will cave in because there is no way the EU is going to let a country that wants a race to the bottom to be part of the SM and CU. And then he will present this a triumph of ‘standing up to the EU’ British ‘pluck’, etc, etc. And presumably his cheerleaders in the press will go along with this rubbish, and their idiotic readers will believe it.
Equally, if not more likely unfortunately, you are correct Richard and the UK is heading for disaster. Of course the liars in this ‘government’ will blame the EU and the liars in the Tory press will support them. And again, the readers of such dross will probably believe it.
Contrary to the global Britain claptrap of the right, not only is the UK already in freefall as a country in terms of prosperity, reputation and quality of life, it is now heading for dissolution. As Old Codger has noted, the English exceptionalism which led to this is not shared by many in Scotland. And I suspect not many in NI either now.
I am hoping Wales too
Thanks
‘YesCymru!’
The Aberystwyth contingent in my family might well agree
Yes, hopefully. The Welsh deserve to be free of the wretched combination of dishonesty and stupidity that constitutes English politics now as much as the Scots and NI. Quite a few of us in England, dare I say, deserve better too.
Unfortunately we’re up against the toxic combination of FPTP, the Tory/Labour duopoly, and the exceptionalism of a lot of the English.
Actually there is quite a large number of the English who do not share it either.
Interesting article, I’m new here found the link posted in a comment in a Guardian thread
Its instructive to note that in Oct while addressing a legal meeting ex-President of the Supreme Court Lord Neuberger commented that the UK was on the slippery slope to tyranny.
This has a long historical context. The English Civil War was fought over the right of Parliament to review and amend rule by decree of an (near) absolute Monarch and shifted the balance of power from the Monarch to Parliament.
The supremacy of Parliament grew slowly and 250 yrs later the Victorian Jurist AV Dicey in his great work “The Study of the Law of Constitution” which is considered a foundation of the uncommodified UK constitution, stated that Parliament was ‘omnipotent’ and ‘could make or break any law’ and the only restriction on it was that it could not bind the action of future parliaments.
However soon other jurists realised that a sitting government with a large majority could lead to a ‘New Despotism” as was the title of a book published by the Lord Hewart (a Liberal Law Lord) in 1929 in which he noted the worrying development of the strategy of powerful governments ‘to subordinate Parliament, to evade the Courts, to render the will, or caprice of the Executive unfettered or supreme’ via use of Parliamentary procedure to nullify and block debate, and also to use Statutory Instruments which don’t pass through Parliament so they cannot be debated or amended and can be issued without any notice.
They are UK equivalent of Presidential Executive Orders in the US but unlike in the US are permanent and don’t die with a new President.
In 1976 the Conservative peer and Law Lord, Lord Hailsham, said in a BBC Dimbleby Lecture that there was a ‘danger of an elected dictatorship’ in the UK due to the ‘fragility of its constitutional arrangements’ which he said in essence depend solely on the ‘consciences of members’ of government.
At the time of the illegal prorogation last year Lord Hailsham’s warning was remembered and seen as prescient.
We are seeing the fears of Lords Hewart and Hailsham come to fruition
As of Jan 1st a huge raft of laws in the UK on all sorts of topics falls away as they are all EU law. These are not automatically rolled over and require responsible Ministers (not Parliament) to review these and issue Statutory Instruments to reimpose them in UK law
The 2006 Regulatory Reform Act hugely expanded the scope and ease of use of Statutory Instruments, and indeed most UK anti-terrorism legislation consists of such and has never been debated in Parliament.
Currently the Government is using the statutory instrument provisions of the Public Health Act of 1984 to rule by decree on imposing Covid related measures. So far the Johnson government has issued over 200 such statutory instruments without notice or debate and some restricting ancient freedoms such as freedom of movement, freedom of association or assembly. The ‘Rule of Six’ is a statutory instrument and was issued as a law with no notice to Parliament.
Coming down the pipe is the fact that the so called ‘Henry VIII’ provisions in the Brexit legislation come into effect post transition and these further expand the powers of ministers to rule by decree without reference to Parliament.
However whats little understood is that the minister can in fact change the falling away EU law and impose a new one.
So for example aspects of laws regarding human rights on such matters as treatment of refugees will fall away and Priti Patel will have a free hand in rewriting and imposing draconian new ones hence the ferocious talk and you can bet that when the new statutes are issued after Jan 1st refugee advocates won’t be able to challenge them.
The hoopla surrounding withdrawal of the treaty breaking clauses of the IMB ignores the fact that the rest of it will pass and it will expand the scope of direct ministerial power further as Joanna Cherry QC MP pointed out in the HoC because it breaks the 1707 Treaty of Union by empowering English Ministers to impose English law on Scotland and de facto a step to destroying devolution.
You are very welcome with comments like that
The underrated and deliberately under exposed to the public by her employers the BBC, and the embedded DS News Management , Katy Adler does actually a proper job of reporting on the EU and therefore Brexit. Most of her reporting gets buried quickly by layers of gaff by the mafiosi.
I mention it because that is where I saw the report first yesterday and the fishy menu the EU Commissioner fed Bozo.
He really is a throwback – raised to stand on the poop deck and utter schoolboy certainty.
Yesterday he suggested de-masking for a photo-op, the commissioner agreed that it would only be for a minute and that 2 meters had to be preserved , Bozo recoiled back at that instruction and then condescended to her that ‘she runs a tight ship and rightly so!
What a complete arse.
Of course he won’t be demanding to crash the actual heads of governments meeting like Trezza did. And go try his bs on Merkel as she would easily send him home without a shirt and trousers holding a jolly good extension for another year… there is no way his string pullers are going to take that risk again, especially with him, as he is much dumber than May.
I think she is very good
As someone who has researched negotiation for thirty years (mainly in supply chains!) it is clear that what has brought us to this pitch is this Eton/Oxbridge confusion of negotiation with debate. A debate has a winner. A negotiation has to have a win/win outcome – if the agreement is to be implemented satisfactorily. If this happens trust is built and trust in business is the stuff of productivity across the enterprise system.
Because of the nature of politics politicians are very mistrustful and therefore understand neither negotiation nor business. The EU understands the need for this, largely, and has institutionalised avenues of consensus to narrow the mistrust. The Tories and the Leavers have created the conditions for anomie. Out of the nemesis which we all to encounter perhaps a new written constitution will arise as might a smaller but better nation. Perhaps.
You are so right
Spot on, John! Another factor which causes this UK Gov to conflate negotiation with debate is the FPTP electoral system and the adversarial way in which Westminster politics is conducted. This is in total contrast to nations using PR in elections, where the politics of consensus generally result (for all the claims of Scotland being a one-party state, the current SNP government is a minority government, so accommodation of differing views is commonplace). The current UK-EU Brexit outcome is no surprise: the Tories, with their massive Westminster majority, imagine they have the right to dictate (as they are doing in the UK), but that goes down like a lead balloon wherever consensus politics are the norm, and creates an aura of insufferable arrogance which inevitably makes meaningful negotiations impossible. It’s obvious in the Brexit negotiations and will resurface if/when the Scots decide on independence.
Can anyone confirm that the ‘level playing field’ works both ways? So that, should UK raise its standards (unlikely, I know) and thus put its companies at a competitive disadvantage, the EU would have to apply the same standards or face tariffs. All the media coverage I have seen implies that it is all one way – to our disadvantage.
The LPF is lowest common denominator standards
Yes, but does it mean the EU has to match our standards?
I am sure not, but we are at liberty to demand it is we so wish
The strange thing is… this country could prosper mightily, freed from the neo-liberal straight jacket of the EU.
We could institute a Job Guarantee, we could nationalise all natural monopolies, we could fully fund our health care, social care, etc, etc.
but you can do that inside the EU!
No… no you can’t.
All the national monopolies like the SCNF & DB, etc are grandfathered in. You can’t create new ones.
Article I-3: The Union’s objectives
2. The Union shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, and an internal market where competition is free and undistorted.
“Where competition is free and undistorted”
Sounds great eh? A level playing field?
Some things (like the NHS) do not lend themselves to a level playing field.
Any endeavour in which there is no place for the profit motive (health, education, elderly care, prisons, social housing, etc, etc) are FORCED by the EU to tender to private companies.
ATOS, Carillion, G4S, Serco, Capita, etc.
The UK is actually spending a fortune on its public services but the money is all going into their pockets, not the employees who most likely aren’t employees but are zero hours “contractors”. Something, I might add, the EU could have legislated against and chose not to (quelle surprise).
Yes, we should have a solid trade agreement with the EU but there are red lines that we should not cross and control over “state aid” (a euphemism for the fiscal power of the state) is one of them.
We have just nationalised our railways
The EU would not have injected
This idea that the EU does not change is just so wrong
It’s not necessary to overstate claims
I think you’ll find that we’ve agreed to nationalise the debts of the trains operators.
Which is not really the same thing.
”
The ONS said that because the rescue package was “temporary in nature”, it would review the classification status of train operators again in the future if the emergency measure agreements are amended or expire.
”
Can you *really* see this Tory government nationalising the railways when they can be used to funnel buckets of public money to their chums?
Please….
The EU change all the time. They create 2000 new laws, rules & directives every year.
But they will not change their most fundamental principles as laid out in Article I-3.
The EU is a “bad thing”. Its a neo-liberal, old boys club for industrial capitalism.
Where would I even start?
The Euro… an Austerity promoters dream.
Phenomenal levels of tax avoidance, shielded at the highest levels.
Their handling of Greece.
The endless graft scandals.
The revolving door between the Commission & the FIRE sector.
TTIP. A supra-national arbitration court staffed only by company lawyers.
Really?
Oh, and their law making body is not elected.
All this may be perfectly fine if you’re on the harder side of the right but as a Bennite Socialist, none of this is acceptable to me.
Benn & Foot fought the EU tooth and nail. They were both there at its birth. They saw how it was evolving. They spoke to the people who were creating it.
“I saw how the European Union was developing and it was very clear, that what they had in mind was undemocratic” Tony Benn.
Who would you trust? Benn or Heath ?
Shall we not be enslaved by dead politicians?
It would be so much better if we thought what was best now for ourselves
Lets imagine that Benn & Foot never existed.
TTIP.
Tax Avoidance.
Greece.
Austerity.
General neo-liberal friendly policies.
Ok, I’ve thought about it. I don’t like the EU.
Say what you like about Benn & Foot but they had the best interests of the ordinary UK public at heart.
“Side hustle” is a term that could have been invented for the EU.
The EU has been the most effective agency in beating tax avoidance
I’ll just put this out there. Johnson may be intentionally driving at pace towards the precipice with a chorus reaching a crescendo of wailing and gnashing of teeth, only to swerve away with at the last moment with a triumphant fanfare to announce an unexpected deal, which turns out on closer inspection to be in most respects a capitulation. He has done it before, just over a year ago. https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/boris-johnson-fold-brexit-negotiations-level-playing-field
I’ll happily admit I got it wrong if true
The EU has form for folding like a wet rag at the 11th hour (c.f. the EU bank bailout).
I think Boris’ paymasters would like a WTO option which has confused the living merde out of the net recipient states who cannot imagine life without the EU.
But the ball is in their court.
I’d tell Boris to go raffle his tiny doughnut. He cannot have tariff free access AND have divergence.
I’m all for leaving the EU and I’m all for them applying tariffs if we decide to make our goods cheaper by diluting our standards.
I hate myself for saying this but Ursula von der Leyen is correct.
I hope both sides have the courage of their convictions and stick to their guns.
I am sure there is some logic in there
I am not sure I can spot it