Thread by @Usherwood

Some thoughts on Art.50 contingencies:

1/

There's been a steady increase in rumblings about these in recent weeks, on both sides

2/

COM has been running its 'Brexit preparedness' website for some time now (ec.europa.eu/info/brexit/br…) but has also indicated need to step up activity

3/

Likewise, HMG has made more noise, esp since Raab moved into DExEU.

Overnight reports on flood of notices point to more low-key work than was previously supposed

4/

Contingencies for a failure in Art.50 are a bit of a double-edged sword

Need to have them, just in case

But also risks looking like you're not serious about finding a deal in 1st place

5/

Moreover, by laying out in more explicit terms what 'no-deal' means, might also have impact on attitudes.

Then again, might also be taken as Project Fear Mk whatever-number-we're-on-now

6/

A final issue is that of sunk costs. Some contingencies can't be rolled out straight away, so businesses will have to make investments to be ready for something that might not happen

7/

And remember it'll only be in Dec that we'll have a much firmer idea about what's what, so not a situation that'll resolve soon

8/

Of course, as @jdportes points out (thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/h…) fleshing out your alternative might improve the credibility of walking away, although that depends on what you can flesh out

9/

@jdportes However, on balance, given non-negligible chance of no-deal exit (by accident at least as much as by design) makes covering the bases a sensible move

10/

@jdportes More proper Q might then be whether contingency guidance is sufficient, robust and actionnable.

/end