Still think it’s worth putting a fiver on UK/EU #trade negotiations going into December.
Why? Four reasons…
1. This government are firm believers in deadlines focusing minds (it’s the journalists in the them).
2. Brexiteers have never stopped believing that the #EU will fold in the face of no-deal.
3. Brexiteers are inexplicably convinced that the #EU only makes deals at the eleventh hour and that running down the clock works in the UK's favour.
4. The closer to Christmas the deal is done the easier it is to bury noise from the ERG & Farage about "betrayal". Managing the narrative & headlines might be the No. 10’s top priority.
Plenty of the assumptions being made by No. 10 about the way the #EU will behave during the end game are wrong (see 2 & 3 above). It’s hard to understand why these mistakes a re being repeated, but David Davisism dies hard.
For me all this points towards government running negotiations with the EU as close as possible to Christmas, and Parliamentary recess.
Govt. know the EU won’t walk away from the negotiations.
They know that hard Brexiteers are in no rush for a deal.
They know that the public isn’t really watching/doesn’t really care (what matters most, a deal with the EU, or seeing family at Christmas?)
They also know that the only real deadline is 31st December, and they still believe running the clock down is a safe gamble.
And as for ratification, process isn’t something that keeps this govt. awake at night, & they most likely see this as the EU’s problem, not theirs.
After all, it’s the EP, not the UK Parl. that has a genuine ratification role.
Now I might be proved embarrassingly wrong on this as early as next week, but I think we’ve got a few more weeks of "negotiations" yet, and it's only 20 days until December, so it’s probably worth a punt.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Interesting article from @JGForsyth on the geo-political impact of no-deal, but it’s been obvious for quite a while that the UK/EU relationship has been seriously wounded by Brexit & four yrs of insults (both petty & serious) and acrimonious negotiations. thetimes.co.uk/article/no-dea…
Deal, or no-deal, the UK and the EU are now set up to be economic rivals. The rushed negotiation on the future relationship ensures that there will be numerous loose ends come the end of the yr and disputes are almost inevitable.
At the beginning of the year, Pascal Lamy said that these negotiations would result in a “geopolitical and geoeconomic rivalry…[couched] in nice friendly diplomatic language”. He’s right, although the nice language is often absent.
This is really good. All eyes are on the EU FTA, but there's a lot to get over the line with third countries around the world just to maintain the status quo. We might get a deal with the EU, and still end up with no-deal with Mexico, Canada, Singapore and others.
To be fair to govt, there has been plenty of focus on continuity deals, but as with all things Brexit, the system has been given too little time, and some things might fall through the gaps.
Some continuity deals have also spent a long time in the "too difficult" pile in DIT. This was definitely the case with Turkey, a crucial market for automotive, food and drink, and textiles.
Some future gazing regarding #Brexit. Two possible scenarios for consideration, and under both, Brexit just doesn’t go away.
1.We get a deal this year. It's thin for goods, with the benefits broadly limited to zero tariffs, at least on paper if not always in practice (see rules of origin & #automotive), & largely non-existent for services.
This new FTA world comes with considerable new cost that sends some businesses to the wall, and new friction that will cause significant disruption in some places (see Kent), but not everywhere.
...Sounds pretty cool, if a bit old. But, it's a multilateral treaty, rather than an Australia deal with the EU. Plus it doesn’t relate to trade. Not to worry, there are loads of others.
Some future gazing on #Brexit. Two possible scenarios under consideration...
1. We get a deal before the end of the transition. It's thin for goods, with the benefits broadly limited to zero tariffs, at least on paper if not always in practice (see rules of origin &#automotive), & largely nonexistent for services.
The new world of trading on an FTA comes with considerable new cost that sends some businesses to the wall, and new friction that will cause significant disruption in some places (see Kent), but none in others.