Thread by @DavidHenigUK

A letter from the PM on the EU talks which is confused, exaggerated, and internally contradictory. There could be no possible basis for a trade deal if the letter was to be taken seriously.

The EU-Canada agreement is not based on "friendship and free-trade" but is absolutely full of conditionality. I've clipped a random bit of text, but frankly there are dozens of similar examples.

"They want the continued ability to control our legislative freedom".

Distortion / exaggeration. All trade treaties involve a restriction of legislative freedom. You might as well say the same about other members of the WTO.

"Given the EU have refused to negotiate seriously for much of the last few months"

David Frost - October 2 - "constructive discussions conducted in a good spirit"

"Arrangements that are more like Australia's" - Australia has multiple agreements with the EU and is negotiating an FTA.

"simple principles of global free trade" - what are those precisely?

"not willing to offer this country the same terms as Canada". You don't just negotiate a trade agreement by crossing out one country and writing in another.

"An independent, free trading nation" - but one putting up barriers to EU trade. Remind me of that free trade definition again?

A "Canada-style agreement" would "control our legislative freedom". As does any Free Trade Agreement.

The letter is an embarrassment of ignorance about trade deals.

Preferential trade agreements come with conditions.

I think we better stop focusing on the specific areas of disagreement between the UK and EU, which in truth are pretty minor, and focus on a UK lack of understanding of what any trade agreement with the EU entails. I wrote this 16 months ago. It still holds. More tomorrow. end/