,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
1. This is so far from any realistic appreciation of what it would take to manage no deal. Advocates should be honest that no deal means no deal. It means severing relations, not agreeing some magic "mutual recognition" and other technical sounding words which mean nothing.
2. There are two things that follow from severing your formal relations with the EU: A diplomatic crisis and an economic crisis. Any residual goodwill from EU member states is gone and relations will be damaged for a long time. That's the context of no deal.
3. There are a further two options for what happens next. 1 is the UK very quickly accedes to the EU's original demands and we end up where we started but in a worse position. 2 the UK tries to go it alone. There is informal cooperation and unilateral mitigation but thats it
4. If you want the latter then that is a long term dramatic rift in relations between the UK and the EU and it could get very bad - Ivan Rogers talks of a kind of cold war escalating. How up for this is the UK population? What happens to the Union in the meantime?
5. We will not be spending this time signing deals, we'll be managing crises. I can get wanting to leave with no deal due to the withdrawal agreement but what is unforgivable is the carelessness, the bad faith arguments and the insouciant optimism that this paper betrays
6. It's the same kind of carelessness that Cameron betrayed in vetoing preparations for Brexit during the referendum. Just assuming things will work out fine and we'll get the result we want without engaging or planning for real consequentials that impact everyone ends/
