Soft Deadlines
The 11-month negotiation period in which the UK and EU need to make a post-Brexit deal runs out in December.
Numerous soft deadlines posed by UK prime minister Boris Johnson and the EU have come gone like rain goes down the gutter.
Failed EU Summit
Last week there was a Failed Summit in which EU leaders called on the UK to “make the necessary moves” towards a deal.
That “deadline” came and went but the sides are still talking.
Sticking Points
The BBC discusses the Outstanding Issues.
First of all, there is what is known as the level playing field. That means measures to ensure businesses on one side don’t have an unfair advantage over their competitors on the other.
All trade agreements have such measures, but the EU wants the UK to stick particularly closely to EU rules on things like workers’ rights, environmental regulations and particularly state aid (financial assistance given by government to businesses).
The UK, on the other hand, says the whole point of Brexit was to break free from following common rules.
Then there is fishing: the UK would like full access to the EU market to sell its fish there, but in return the EU wants full access for its boats to fish in UK waters. British negotiators say that’s not possible because the UK is now an independent coastal state.
A third area of disagreement is what is described as the governance of any future agreement. That is partly about the overall structure of any deal, but it is also about how any new agreements would be enforced and about the role of the European Court of Justice.
Another issue which will remain extremely sensitive is the way the UK proposes to implement the agreement it made with the EU before Brexit, on keeping the land border in Ireland (which is now the border between the UK and the EU) as open as it is at the moment.
The EU has been concerned that the UK may not live up to all of the commitments it has made here; the UK strongly disagrees.
No Progress Since January
There has been no progress on any of these points since January.
When dealing with the EU, there never is. Progress only comes at the last second.
This time however, the EU made such absurd demands that the UK is discussing not honoring the withdrawal agreement.
Whom is to Blame?
Eurointelligence, a very pro-EU newsletter, accurately blames the EU in its October 20 free edition, Barnier’s Overtures Rejected.
Michel Barnier [the EU’s top negotiator] tried to undo some of the damage done last week by the European Council, by offering a genuine concession: the EU is now willing to discuss legal texts. This is exactly what the UK had been demanding for some time now. But that concession was not enough. A UK government spokesman noted politely that Barnier’s offer to intensify the talks was welcome, but that there is no basis for discussions unless there is a fundamental shift in the EU’s approach. In other words, the UK is expecting nothing less than a reversal of the council declaration, which boldly stated that all movement in the negotiations would have to come from the UK side. We think the declaration last week was an unnecessary provocation that has actually weakened the EU’s position.
We think the European Council made its third tactical error during these negotiations. The first was to bet on an extension, and the second to insist on sequencing. The combined result of all of these mistakes is that the deal will ultimately require more concessions in a shorter period of time than would have been necessary otherwise.
The EU relented also on another UK request. Instead of a permanent office in Belfast, it is now happy with a team of border officials in Northern Ireland.
The probability of a deal remains impossible to calculate because it will depend on whether Boris Johnson wants one or not, and whether he is ready is to compromise on the level playing field. He would need to do this. Another necessary condition is for Emmanuel Macron to drop his extremism on fisheries. Our hunch remains that this will happen, but we can’t be sure. The big danger we see is that Macron will make it easy for Johnson to pull the plug. The process will not survive another accident of the kind we had last week.
Doubling Down
In “Doubling down – EU/UK edition” on October 21, Eurointelligence had additional comments.
One of the mistakes some EU officials have been making in the last few years is to draw their intelligence about UK politics from their usual, mostly pro-European, sources. Tony Blair’s personal interventions in Brussels had a disproportionately strong effect on opinion, and were instrumental in the EU’s fateful decision to play along with the opposition in the House of Commons by forcing several deadline extensions last year.
Reliance on poor intelligence leads to poor judgement. This problem persists today. Judging by some of the comments we have read over the last week, everybody seems to be doubling down on the mistakes they made before. The issue is not what we think about Johnson as a prime minister, on which there seems to be a consensus in Brussels and national EU capitals. It is about what he will actually do.
In this context, we noted a report this morning that the EU’s strategy was now based on giving Johnson bragging rights. Letting him decide when to return to the table and declare victory, and then force him to concede on all the substantive issues. The EU should prepare itself for the possibility that this might not be the trajectory in the next four weeks. We think the UK may well return to the negotiating table. We think a deal is possible, but it will have to include a readiness by the EU to compromise as well. Judging by the discussion in the European Council last week, that has yet to happen.
We do not claim to have any special insights into the ever-changing mind of the British prime minister, but we do know that he is surrounded by advisers who accept a no-deal outcome, and some who advocate it. It would be another mistake to rely on the idea that Johnson will fold because of economics.
Another Last Second Deal?
I have long learned not to bet against EU deals at 1 second to midnight.
In that regard, a No-Deal Brexit (not to be confused with the deal-or-no-deal post-Brexit discussion now) was nearly a miracle.
Brexit happened because the negotiation was not totally internal. Had the EU thrown the UK a bone at any stage of the Brexit game, there would not have been a Brexit.
EU stubbornness and arrogance is why we are here now. A basic deal should have been easy but the EU again foolishly thought it held all the cards.
The EU is great at last second deals, but only internally.
Will Macron bend? Johnson?
Both have to and it is not at all clear if they want to.
Moreover, if the EU makes another mistake, there will not be a deal, even if both sides want one.
If there is no deal, both sides will suffer, with Germany taking the biggest hit to exports.
Mish
The UK also misapprehended who needs a trade deal with the UK more. It certainly is not the EU.
I would like to suggest that the outcome of the Brexit talks was almost a given because of British stubbornness, jingoism, and small-mindedness. On the other hand, talking to European is like negotiating with the Chinese — the guys in charge are never in the room.
Europe has made many errors, as has Britain, they are now looking at losing Scotland, and maybe Wales (less likely) as these countries seen many benefits in staying in Europe (and sticking it to the English).
The fundamentals are that the whole process was flawed, The Brits couldn’t get the ducks in a row for the longest time, and the European dealt with the UK they did with Cyprus (check it out); our way or the high way.
Simple negotiating tactics say that you always leave an exit strategy to your opponent; Europe decided that not only would they not give an exit to the UK but would humiliated them in the process —
Now Britain has no friends (at first they thought the Americans would be there for them0 they concluded a single trade agreement (with Japan) and that’s the extent of the diplomatic trading efforts.
Once again Britain has scewed the pooch. There will be hell to pay in a few months
Boris is as big a phoney as Don the Con.
Buy a comb, Boris…
Younger days…
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. —– Hunter S. Thompson
A little bit of self-awareness should tell you that the possibility of the FORMER British empire dictating terms to the ROW is foolish indeed. Hail Brittania, indeed.
A nice place to visit, but a people a little full of themselves.
Licking the boots of the aristocracy for centuries, including those arriviste lot from the crumbled Germanic states–meanwhile thinking they are astride the world like atlas.
Yearning for the good ol’days of bowing to the carriages while proclaiming their independence…it’s all rather awfully funny.
Woah, dude. That’s a bit harsh. lol.
Which EU country do you hail from?
“but a people a little full of themselves.” Not everyone’s the same in any country.
Generalising about groups of people is one of the main causes of civil unrest everywhere.
I’ve only gotten to visit the UK once….and it is high on my list of places I’d love to spend more time exploring. My gut level feeling is that my ancestors would not have left had they had a place…a future..there. The story of the younger sons, I think. Nine generations here…and I still felt it..the connection…..hard to explain.
People in glass houses?
The UK is not dictating terms to the ROW, not even to the EU. Its the EU that’s acting like an empire and dictating terms to the UK.
“A nice place to visit”
An opinion stated in English, under a British based legal system, from a former British colony.
“In this context, we noted a report this morning that the EU’s strategy was now based on giving Johnson bragging rights. Letting him decide when to return to the table and declare victory, and then force him to concede on all the substantive issues.”
This won’t happen, the last thing the EU want to portray is that the UK have had “their cake and eaten it”. This is the main sticking point, they’ll be no deal until the EU give up on this ridiculous stance and focus on what’s best for everyone.
Neither side will back down and they shouldn’t. The UK wants out and they will get it. The EU wants to discourage other states from leaving and will probably get that too. With no deal then trade drops down into WTO rules. The fishing problem is more a local issue in both blocks. EU citizens want fish and don’t care where it comes from as long as it comes from sustainable fisheries. Germany loses. France gains. And the UK? Knowing them they will do just fine because they have interesting alternatives.
“… EU citizens want fish and don’t care where it comes from as long as it comes from sustainable fisheries….”
My understanding is that when UK was part of EU French boats could fish extensively in UK waters. This will now stop. The legal situation now is that French boats cannot fish in the UK’s EEZ. Hence Macron’s stubbornness on this point. The EU is asking them to give free access to UK waters same as before – that’s a crazy demand no sensible person will agree to.
What can you expect ? The EU is a nonthinking, unwieldy, awkward institute with 27, mostly clashing, opinions ! A circus composed of an army of grossly overpaid, worthless, nationally failed clowns, officially named politicians, not giving a shit about any agreements with the UK whatsoever !
Pro Brexit commentator Peter North today in his blog “Turbulent Times”…
This, though, is not simply a matter of having a “bonfire of regulations”. Whatever we get rid of, we’re going to need alternative policies – for which there are presently none. We know not what the Tories intend to deregulate, what they intend to replace it with, and there’s no reason to believe they know either. It will fall to the whims and obsessions of one Dominic Cummings.
The second problem is that this government, as much as it doesn’t have a master plan for Brexit, it doesn’t have the stones to start severing the long reaching tentacles of the EU. Furthermore, we’ll find a great many impediments to the exercise of sovereignty come not only from the EU but also by way of a number of international conventions and global norms. Asylum rules for starters. The Tories don’t have what it takes.
That, therefore, is the essential problem with no-deal. We are taking a maximalist approach to sovereignty but there’s no outward indication we are going to wield it in any meaningful sense. We are still committed to Net Zero eco-austerity and Johnson’s Tories are still largely in step with global regulatory trends despite Brexit.
If we are to leave without a deal then we should at least do something with that new found sovereignty. Decide what sort of country we want to be and then talk about trade. We cannot have the tail wagging the dog.
The [way] it looks right now, a deal with the EU looks highly unlikely (unless what we’re seeing is “optics”) in which case the hard liners have prevailed. But they won’t get their Brexit revolution. All we’ll succeed in doing is cutting ourselves off from our main export market while the Tories fiddle around the edges, to eventually be replaced by a managerialist Labour who will try as best they can to put things back how they were.
Though I always preferred the EEA Efta route as a long term interim solution, if only to minimise the economic harm, there always was a case for a more radical Brexit. That case, though was never made. What we got instead was hopeless misinformed dribble about “free trade” and WTO rules, allowing the remainers to win the argument on deregulation because the Brexiteers could never credibly outline what they would go after and why.
Looking at EU regulation in totality, there is much that could be done to improve sustainability of our agriculture and our food ethics, being that the single market favours factory farming and low wage exploitation. Brexit could take its inspiration from those older left wing themes while still exploring ways to liberate our economy from regulations only the multinationals and the big four can afford to comply with. That then massively increases the competitiveness and fairness of our economy.
We didn’t get any of this from the Brexit blob though. They’ve been winging it from the outset and when they get their no-deal Brexit, they won’t have the first idea what to usefully do with it or how mitigate the loss of the single market. I have no problem with radicalism just so long as there’s a plan – but with a feeble Tory government and no intellectual basis for no-deal, I really struggle to see the point.
This, I suppose was the ultimate folly of the Brexit movement allowing the Tories do do Brexit for us. The Tories aren’t the radical right wingers the Guardian insists they are. It wouldn’t be so bad if they were. Vote Leave wasn’t interested in starting a revolution. Its main interest was in preventing one – absorbing the insurgency on the right and safeguarding Tory incumbency. Thanks to the gullibility of the hard liners and the Boris fanboys, it looks like they succeeded. Consequently we’ll get the wreckage of a no-deal Brexit, but the revolution is back to square one.
New asylum rules for UK:
1.
Geneva Convention ONLY requires countries to take asylum applications on their borders or inside the country if the person wanting to leave asylum claim came DIRECTLY from a country where they were persecuted.
2.
Asylum seekers come to UK through SAFE countries and most from France and some from Belgium or Netherlands.
3.
Therefore UK should take ZERO asylum applications and instead return everyone to France or Belgium or Netherlands and leave their asylum applications in those SAFE countries.
4.
Asylum seekers only come to UK because the welfare benefits are larger and because the acceptance rates are higher due to UK Asylum officials being naive worldsavers so once UK starts returning EVERYONE to it’s neighbors soon there will be ZERO arrivals
Of course there will be agreements after the deadline.
All this past few years of BS is done is just push Britain into a weaker and weaker position.
To function, there will have to be trade agreements and something approaching harmonization on key issues.
Otherwise the irrelevance of Britain deepens.
Is that you there, Mr Macron?
The EU has misunderstood the UK mindset on three fronts and the result will be no deal and eventually, no EU. I say that as a former reluctant European, who viewed the EU as deeply flawed but ultimately better with the UK inside to help keep some semblance of sanity.
Firstly, the description of it as the “divorce deal” is quite telling. We all know people who’ve got divorced. Some have done it amicably, cared jointly for the kids, remained friends and gone to each other’s second wedding. Some have been bitter, acrimonious affairs with bile aplenty and efforts to punish or cling on long, long after it was time to let it go. The Eurocrats think we are happy to be pushed around and will come crawling back next year. It won’t happen. The only way to fix this mess is the political equivalent of a heartfelt and genuine, “sorry, I was wrong, let’s at least try to get along”.
Secondly, they believe the EU is the best game in town. Almost without exception, the EU 27 feel an emotional need for European bonding, after experience of either dictatorship, occupation or both. The Germans still feel guilty about WW2, the French still to pretend they didn’t surrender and collaborate, Spain, Greece, Italy had dictators, most of the rest were subjugated, usually by Russia. Only Luxembourg, who held on to the Nazi gold for them and Sweden who sold them ball bearings and allowed free access to Norway, stand slightly to one side. Britain on the other hand has none of that sort of emotional baggage. Plus, we’ve spent 1000 years winding up the French and doing our very best to get one over on them, usually successfully.
Thirdly, they persist in the fantasy that the tighter they turn the screw, the sooner and more enthusiastically we’ll comply. The reality, as Mish rightly points out is that if there had been a little ground given, we wouldn’t even have voted to leave.
No deal is now finally baked into the cake and there’s almost an enthusiasm for us to take any short term pain just for the sake of sheer bloody mindedness. Covid has been an immense political gift – the UK impact will be masked by the wider pandemic effects whereas within Europe things will be a lot more tangible – fishing, car manufacture, cheese and wine, tourism, etc.
I read today that some in the EU are clinging on to the hope that sleepy Joe gets to be president and because he’s 5/8ths Irish he’ll sort out the UK. Well the last president to interfere in the process was Obama and he arguably turned the tide in favour of an out vote at the referendum.
.
.