,
7 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
This May-Corbyn letter may be conciliatory in tone but is unchanged on substance and quite revealing as to the PM's approach to Brexit... starting with finding the alternative arrangements to the backstop, despite having failed to do so for 18 months...
Next paragraph is interesting "the political declaration cannot be legally binding and.... provides for a spectrum of outcomes". That is quite some admission because it renders much of the rest of the letter invalid. Note no substance on Parliamentary consultation
First bullet point is pure cake on having all access to frictionless trade without single market or customs union. The PM still doesn't realise this is undeliverable, and only offered as a framing device by the EU (and non-binding...)
Third bullet point on workers rights is convoluted but ultimately no. Legislate in UK law can obviously be overturned easily, unlike treaty commitments. Again though the nature of the future relationship will ultimately decide
And again on security "we have secured agreement" clashes with the non-binding nature of the Political Declaration.
In summary too close a relationship for the Brexiteers, and too vague for Labour or anyone else (or to be rid of a backstop). Which is why she lost by 230.
In summary too close a relationship for the Brexiteers, and too vague for Labour or anyone else (or to be rid of a backstop). Which is why she lost by 230.
PS On the May-Corbyn letter. Given the admission that the Political Declaration is non-binding and Parliament will have more say on the next stage, why not offer a free vote on whether to have a formal Customs Union or not? This would test both sides sincerity.
The May-Corbyn letter is internally incoherent. And it is the incoherence which means the EU doesn't take the PM seriously, and why the PM lost the vote by 230. The backstop row is the outward representation of Government muddle and confusion.
