Have been watching coverage of and punditry on the Barnier/Frost statements on BBC and Sky. There seems to be an awful lot of "reading between the lines" from everyone, driven in large part, it seems to me, by wishful thinking that we are "subtly moving closer to a deal". 1/5 ~AA
The straight reading of what Frost/Barnier say is that there are two sticking points: Fishing and the Level Playing Field. Unless they're resolved, there's no deal. The LPF is not something the EU will give up. Ever for anyone. It is the foundation of the Common Market. 2/5 ~AA
Once this reality becomes clear, a second fact comes into focus: shared standards require an arbitration mechanism. You can call it the ECJ or you can invent one and call it Susan. But it will be there. If you want free access to a market, you will be tied into its rules. 3/5 ~AA
The question then becomes whether the UK - posturing aside - is prepared to walk away without any deal. Popular wisdom is the coronavirus recession makes it easier for the gov't to hide no-deal effects. It's true. But it also makes it economically more unpalatable. 4/5 ~AA
This leaves UK needing a deal and only one negotiable area: fishing. Totemic, but economically insignificant in the grand scheme. So those are the outcomes. Either no deal or UK concedes on Level Playing Field in exchange for fisheries concessions it can claim as victory. 5/5 ~AA
