Withrespect (or not) to the Labour Party's decision making processes, backing an EU FTA should be one of the easiest decisions they will make.
Far harder to decide if they are prepared to propose to challenge the government's approach to "sovereignty" theguardian.com/politics/2020/…
Why is an EU deal so easy to back - because having no trade deal with neighbours is so obviously nonsensical, something that practically every country in the world has recognised. That should also cover a no-deal policy. But will Labour go further? theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
Part of the UK government's trade policy is to have the closest relations with majority white English speaking countries however far away. There are reasons - to take on the EU's regulatory power, join a new club. But most countries prefer deeper relations close to home.
The reason - whether selling services or goods - is that is is generally easier and cheaper to sell to markets close to home. Whether selling legal services or car parts. Not exclusively, but in general. The UK government disagrees with the world on this. What says Labour?
Then policy towards the EU. For the government, one of extreme suspicion, an organisation that wants to entrap the UK, threaten our sovereignty. Does Labour agree with the government's absolutist definition of sovereignty, and fear of the EU? It doesn't. But will it say that?
Overriding the whole EU debate - does the Labour Party believe in trade? In our topsy-turvy UK all free market think tanks now advocate higher trade barriers, and some pro-Brexit figures are starting to advocate autarky. But left-leaning parties are often trade-sceptical.
So Labour's choice with regard to the EU is going to be to continue to be afraid of the issue, therefore tucking in closely with the government, or set out an approach more in keeping with how the rest of the world sees trade and the EU. How brave are you feeling Sir Keir? /end
A further thought for Labour - surely a serious party of opposition would be playing on Conservative splits on the EU, supporting any deal by congratulating the PM for dumping Brexit ultras? And blaming no deal on not doing?
This doesn't match what the EU has said. Again, maybe it will be right and a deal on fish will unlock a UK EU deal. Or maybe it is wrong but the UK side has decided fish is the most explicable reason for no deal. We simply don't know, and have to be a bit sceptical.
If the UK side are understating the difficulties of level playing field and governance in EU talks, thinking them on the verge of resolution because the EU will back down, that would be a repeat of something we have seen in these talks several times before.
As Charles has previously noted, I don't share the optimism he expresses here! Some technical progress doesn't I think make up for serious political and philosophical difficulties - on both sides. A big jump to a deal both parties can sell - achievable but very difficult.
The other part of the Brexit jigsaw. Same broad issue, technically achievable (though hard), politically extremely delicate particularly on the UK side. And mid-December completion is cutting things extremely fine.
"Next week" has been the key week for Brexit talks for several weeks now.
If there was an agreement struck towards the end of next week there would be <20 working days for legal scrub, translation, discussion, ratification, implementation.
Still this @ShonaMurray_ and it looks like the EU are happy to facilitate UK indecision such that both sides can be blamed by business with insufficient time to prepare.
There are many reasons in a negotiation, at this stage, you may want an urgent meeting. Let us say the UK offered the EU a final deal, same fish for a transitional period, no further on Level Playing Field. The EU say no. Need to clear with Member States?
That's just an illustration though, we don't know, until one of the well placed folk gets to find out what's happening. But it does feel like, finally, the next few days will see a deal / no deal decision point on UK-EU talks.
The latest development in an 'anti-any-EU-deal' campaign that has been growing among Brexit circles in recent weeks. Sovereignty so defined as to require the Northern Ireland Protocol to be rescinded in a deal, therefore a test which won't be met.
A big problem for the PM is no trade deal wouldn't be the end of the Brexit ultra revolt, as the next stage will be to seek a UK renunciation of the Withdrawal Agreement, or at the very least non implementation of the Northern Irelant protocol.
So in that decision which the PM has to take imminently he has to decide whether to side with the Brexit ultras on full collision course with EU and US, side in part for no-deal but quietly implement the NI protocol, or split and do the deal.
It is notable how little trade has been mentioned around the spending review. A government that seems to know little of how global trade works, in part due to four years of listening to those who invented their own worlds to claim no economic cost to their preferred hard Brexit.