Thread by @pmdfoster

Extend transition to obviate backstop and get deal over line by Oct? Maybe. But you still need something, if you’re Boris, to convince ERG that this “vassalage” won’t be permanent. Otherwise why is full-fat transition (all EU membership obligations & no say) better than backstop?

https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1148867366022995970

The real issue (I’m a bore on this I know) still remains in transition.

Boris still believes that an FTA, with U.K. outside SM and CU, can deliver irish border solution. At the moment Brussels, Dublin (and Whitehall and most trade experts) don’t. /2

So u can have transition for ever, but it won’t end until this issue is fixed - which is why ERG crowd hate it. Along with payments/ECJ jurisdiction “vassalage” etc.

And as @Mij_Europe points out Boris has been vocal opponent of transition terms. /3

Which is why, if you listen to what Boris has said, he wants a “pic n mix” transition, built outside current WA.

This is total cakeism and won’t fly, but looks to be the plan. /4

I guess the question is whether this idea could become Plan B (rather than no deal) when Plan A fails.

And if so, how do you dress it up so that Phase 2 process has a visible end point? Timetables etc might work. But they didn’t for May. /5

Because the issue remains.

If the goal is an FTA the Irish border is a massive problem, unless you crabwalk to some form of NI-only solution. /6

Extended transition *could* create space for that, but as others have noted, the ERG and co will need to be in frame of mind to want to suspend their disbelief somewhat; and prefer this over ‘no deal’.

Tldr: the politics is dang tricky. /8 ENDS