,
7 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
I've already written on why Malthouse is an absolute non-starter for the Commission, mostly focusing on the fact it clearly doesn't offer an Ireland border solution. But in fact go back to the source material, and the flaws are obvious... short thread 1/
The essential parts of the compromise are a transition period to 2021 and an underlying free trade agreement. The first though is a deadline of the sort the Commission has repeatedly declined, so all hangs on the trade agreement 2/ 
First of all, the trade agreement specifically excludes Geographical Indications. Their inclusion is an absolute Commission red line. And are excluded, according to the author, to allow a UK-US trade deal. Unacceptable to EU and most member states 3/
Rules of Origin - Commission approach rejected, in favour of a simplified approach. Also unacceptable to Commission 4/
Maintain single market regulations? Just a simple case of having a chat about whether we are equivalent or not. Clearly not acceptable to substitute for the entire single market 5/
@SamuelMarcLowe has already written extensively on customs and SPS checks, lots of problems there as well 6/
You can point out more inadequacies but there's no real need. The underlying document to Malthouse compromise "a better deal" is simply an inadequate basis. UK and EU officials know this. So the whole thing can't work and is a time waster 7/ end
