1/ Seeing this consolidated text being described as intended to "break the deadlock" a lot.
That may be what UK officials are briefing out, but that's not what consolidated texts are typically used for.
A thread.
That may be what UK officials are briefing out, but that's not what consolidated texts are typically used for.
A thread.
2/ In a negotiation as complex as this, both sides rock up with their own versions of every paragraph.
So on fisheries you have two documents, both with a paragraph 1, 2, 3, most of which cover identical things, just with different legal language.
So on fisheries you have two documents, both with a paragraph 1, 2, 3, most of which cover identical things, just with different legal language.
3/ For some paragraphs the text is going to be virtually identical and easy to reconcile.
For example, both the EU and UK probably define "fishing vessel" pretty similarly.
Negotiators can agree on a text for that part no problem.
For example, both the EU and UK probably define "fishing vessel" pretty similarly.
Negotiators can agree on a text for that part no problem.
4/ For other paragraphs, the two sides might agree in principle, but disagree on the wording of the legal language that captures this agreement.
They'll then wrangle over the two versions of the paragraph, trying to find a solution through technical legal work.
They'll then wrangle over the two versions of the paragraph, trying to find a solution through technical legal work.
5/ Finally there are going to be paragraphs where the two sides just disagree at a political level.
Say, how much access EU fishing vessels get to UK waters. No amount of clever legal drafting can square that circle.
Say, how much access EU fishing vessels get to UK waters. No amount of clever legal drafting can square that circle.
6/ Producing a consolidated text is a TECHNICAL exercise intended to help negotiators capture and make progress on the first two categories above (agreement and agreement in principle).
Not the third (strong disagreement).
Not the third (strong disagreement).
7/ A consolidated text takes the two sides' versions of the agreement and merges them, using square brackets to indicate areas of remaining disagreement.
8/ So where there is agreement on a paragraph, they put that.
Where the two sides are close, it'll use one paragraph, maybe with some sentences, even words, or alternative text in [square brackets].
Finally, where agreement is far, both sides paras sit side by side in brackets.
Where the two sides are close, it'll use one paragraph, maybe with some sentences, even words, or alternative text in [square brackets].
Finally, where agreement is far, both sides paras sit side by side in brackets.
9/ This is a purely technical exercise designed to make life easier for the technical side of the negotiation.
Politically (and the big disagreements in this FTA are definitely political) it does little except demonstrate engagement.
Useful, not impasse breaking.
Sorry.
/End
Politically (and the big disagreements in this FTA are definitely political) it does little except demonstrate engagement.
Useful, not impasse breaking.
Sorry.
/End
