Thread by @Usherwood

To be clear, this is a nonsense line of argument from No.10

1/

theguardian.com/world/live/202…

There has been no instance where EU rules have limited or blocked UK action so far in this crisis

2/

Moreover, any move out of transition on 1/1/21 will mean more barriers and uncertainty to public policy

With or without a deal, UK would have to put in place new policies/processes/institutions that don't exist, and whose creation will distract from corvid work

3/

At very best, this is 'take back control' V2

Yes, UK will have more scope to make its own rules, but right now none of those rules are a substantive barrier (just a political one, in that they didn't make them alone)

4/

All this is very self-evident, so let's maybe focus more on the fact that it's being said

This marks a return to line-in-the-sand-drawing from No. 10 after some weeks of careful phrasing

5/

Still not sure it means that much until Johnson is back in the building (although maybe let's note Cummings has returned), but I'm not taking it as a good sign for extending, closing as it does the face-saving route

6/

Again, points to the innately political nature of this exercise: fail to see that and you'll continue to be shocked at each new step

/end

Lots of comments and replies on this that you can read for yourself.

Worth adding that there's an element of not wanting to get entangled in corvid-related programmes, but still small beer against the general economic impact of ending transition

a/

Also worth saying that this is a classic case of subjective perception trumping objective facts, so judging it by utilitarian calculations isn't going to get you very far

b/

and yes, I should have written covid, not corvid