Friday 21 July 2017

"... you defeatist twit"

A tweet I received last night ended "... you defeatist twit."

If someone is rude, they have usually lost the argument. I would usually just ignore it.  But they were the second, not the first, to say something similar yesterday.  It needs a reply

The other was Suzanne Evans of UKIP on the BBC's Daily Politics.  Her term was "pessimistic".  She also asks why Article 50 specified 2 years if this was not achievable.

Let's answer that.  Lord Kerr is the man behind Article 50.  He has explained that it was intended to cover an EU state going rogue and wanting to go off and do its own thing.  He never envisaged it being used by the UK.  A divorce with;
  • No mention of possibility of revoking the divorce notification (but not ruling it out either)
  • No mention of any ongoing trading relationship, which typically takes far longer to negotiate
Whilst two years would be adequate for a state only wanting a divorce, it is totally inadequate for the UK that wants both a divorce and an ongoing relationship.  The divorce itself is more complex, as it needs to set a solid foundation for the future.

Furthermore negotiations for new trade deals with the likes of USA and Australia cannot start, and certainly cannot be completed, before the UK leaves the EU in 2019.  Given what trade we could be losing with the EU, any new deals would be too little too late.

The BBC is obliged under its Ofcom commitments to let voices with widespread support air their views.  Suzanne Evans is dangerously naive, and the fact her views are widely shared is very worrying.  Not least when some of those peope are in the Cabinet in government.

BACK TO THE TWEET

So I received this tweet.  "Negotiations have just started you defeatist twit."  This was a reply to my commenting "too little too late" about new trade deals.

But initially it looked like it applied to the negotiations themselves.

There are tens maybe hundreds of specific issues that must all be addressed for there to be a divorce deal.  The EU have made it clear that they will not be discussing a new EU/UK trade deal until a divorce deal is at least in prospect.

So how have the negotiations gone so far?  The substance, not the bluster.  The first three issues to be discussed are key before talks can go any further.

(1) The Divorce Bill

What does the UK have to pay to the EU to cover its legal obligations in a way that sets up the right relationship for the future?  The French have suggested £90 billion. That's over 250 Boris Buses.  Some 5 years at £350m a week.  The final figure may be more like £60billion.  But that is still a hell of a lot of buses!

Talks have hit a brick wall, at least for now.  Boris Johnson's comments about "whistling in the wind" haven't helped. 

(2) EU nationals in UK and vice versa

These have also hit a brick wall.  Various issues.  Most importantly the EU want the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to have an ongoing role for the EU nationals living in the UK. 

Theresa May has set an end to ECJ jurisdiction as a red line, mainly to appease the hard Brexiters in her party.

Who will back down?

(3) The UK/Eire land broder

No surprise. This topic has hit a brick wall too.  Amongst other things, the EU are concerned about the effect on the Good Friday Agreement and the consequent risk to peace.

Maybe all these three can be resolved.  But if nothing else it shows that nothing can be done quickly.

SUMMARY

So let's summarise:
  1. Negotiations of the divorce agreement under Article 50 have got off to a bad and slow start. Completing the whole process within two years is unrealistic, especially to provide the foundations for a new EU/UK relationship.  That time was only ever intended for a clean divorce.
  2. There is a clear risk agreement on all the divorce issues is going to be extremely difficult.  No deal would mean the UK crashing out of the EU in March 2019.  No flights to EU, empty supermarket shelves.  Disrupted supply chains for manufacturers.  Much else besides.  Doesn't bear thinking about.
  3. Discussions for a new EU/UK trade deal cannot start until the divorce deal is well advanced. 
  4. New trade deals with other countries cannot start or at least be concluded until after March 2019.  They can go nowhere until the nature of the EU/UK deal is known. They typically take 10 years or so. Too little too late.
  5. All that effort not to go forward, but to avoid going too far back.
  6. Misinformed comments from the likes of Suzanne Evans are certainly not helping
That's before we consider what's already happening to the UK economy.  Growth that has fallen below both the US and EU.  A devaluation of sterling that's fuelling inflation, which in turn is putting pressure on public sector pay. A reduction in living standards for people working in both the public and private sectors.

Parliament rose for their summer recess yesterday.  They return in September.  Debate on the first "European Union (Withdrawal) Bill 2017-19", already presented to Parliament, starts on Thursday 7 September.



Let's hope by then that public opinion has caught up with the facts and it is clear that the majority of Brits do not want to leave the EU.

As long as it is acknowledged that true democracy is to regard last year's referendum as only a 'starting gun' where progress has to be kept under review, we may see some sanity. 

I'm not a fan of the EU, but it is clear that there is only one sane option.  Stop Brexit.







No comments:

Post a Comment