Thread by @pmdfoster

So the #brexit debate is still fogged by confused and wishful thinking.

Here's what I think I know, after chats with both sides. 1/Thread

Let's start with the negotiation in Brussels where @Geoffrey_Cox is trying to secure enough changes to the backstop to change his legal advice that the Irish backstop is a potentially permanent trap.

There was a reason he didn't make his promised speech last week... /2

@Geoffrey_Cox It's because he's struggling (and going to struggle) to get what the ERG wants: either a 'time-limit' or an 'exit mechanism' from the Irish backstop.

My understanding is that discussion is not on time limits, but on "elucidating" the exit-mechanism process/ 3

@Geoffrey_Cox But there is a limit to this process - which is that the EU will not contradict or undermine the spirit of the Backstop which (after all) they built to our specifications to avoid a hard border without splitting the UK.

A unilateral exit clause will obviously do that. /4

@Geoffrey_Cox So the UK aim is plan is explore the space “doing more than simple elucidation, but stopping short of contradiction”.

That's a narrow space! Bundle it with more on how we explore 'alternative arrangements' (tech on border etc) and some Labour-wooing additions to PD and... /5

@Geoffrey_Cox The hope is that, per source, Cox will be able to say "on the balance of probabilities" that the backstop is no longer a trap...or that he's confident that EU will use best endeavours etc to move out of the backstop, were it ever to kick in.... /6

@Geoffrey_Cox Is that enough to split ERG? It's sure not what they asked for (time limit/exit-clause) and there must be a fair chance on March 12, they say 'no' - that it turns out No 10 has miscalculated a) EU willingness to bend b) the ERG's willingness too. /7

What then? Well, both sides say they see this next negotiation to be a 'one shot deal' - if May fails on March 12, then it wont be back to the the European Council (Mar 21-22) for a third go-over.

At that point the discussion is about extension - how long, what conditions? /8

I keep reading odd sentences that say MPs will "force May to take a 'no deal' off the table'....by mandating her to sue for an extension.

But an extension - certainly the three month one that Cooper/Boles envisaged - doesn't do that. /9

The only thing that takes 'no deal' off the table is a) revocation, probably via another referendum b) a deal.

That's why I don't buy the No 10 threat to ERG of "May's deal or extension" - unless that extension is a very long one. /10

If 3 months, then if I'm the ERG and see 'no deal' as the only route to a Brexit that takes us outside SM and CU, then fine - just keep running down the clock.

Perhaps, as @DanielBoffey reported, the EU cd say 'have a 21-month' extension to end of this budget cycle, but.../11

@DanielBoffey I don't think it's a foregone conclusion the EU will agree to play it that long - certainly there was strong pushback against that story, though frankly until all the leaders get in the room, we'll not know.

But recall it takes UK to ask, and EU to agree.../12

@DanielBoffey But in the event of a short extension, you need some Tory MPs and ministers to be very brave - it's one thing to vote for Cooper-Boles, another to stop a #Brexit that your voters and members demand..../13

@DanielBoffey Because if you do resign and step in to back a revocation or second referendum, then the 'no deal' experience will never have been lived - you will always be a traitor, not a saviour.

At that point a General Election cd start to look like the least overtly divisive option.. /14

@DanielBoffey Or, if extension runs down a bit longer, towards the back end of the year, then the threat of a 'no deal' starts to recede; the EU lays in its preparations; the UK polity starts to tire...and a 'managed no deal' takes on an inexorable political logic. /15

@DanielBoffey As I report today, we still end up paying the bill - this week the No Deal preparedness Cabinet Cmme agreed the legal basis on which that would happen....and the EU takes a more benign approach, electing to boil the British frog rather more slowly. /16

telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/…

@DanielBoffey This risk a gross miscalculation by BOTH sides.

- the EU that the UK politics doesn't simply boil over, causing a really deep rupture with the our strategic allies.

- the UK that the EU won't stick to its guns in the face of what it sees as the collapse of UK reliability. /17

@DanielBoffey Needless to say, this would be a very, very, very dangerous dynamic to get into.

You'd like to think that logic dictates that MPs will choose the safety of transition and a trade negotiations over this option, but we live in truly febrile times. /18

@DanielBoffey Politics doesn't have to be rational - the conflation of sovereignty arguments with trade arguments (freedom = leaving the EU customs union) is completely nuts, but sovereignty and nationalism IS a visceral thing. This is now about politics, not policy. /19

The history of Europe shouldn't fill anyone with confidence.

Economic self-interest is not a reliable guide to the behaviour of nation states. It would be madness, but 'no deal' could yet become the politically expedient option.

Let cooler heads prevail. 20/ENDS