Perhaps though nobody thought the EU was soft. For UK reasons include lack of trust, proximity, size, and not to encourage others.
All of which is largely irrelevant to the main question, what are we going to do about it? Because until we find leverage, they can do as they will.
All of which is largely irrelevant to the main question, what are we going to do about it? Because until we find leverage, they can do as they will.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1359555354099605517
The current government and Brexit partisans have no coherent answer on how to address EU action that harms the UK. They alternately talk tough, say we're taking our ball elsewhere, or whimper. There is no sense of UK agency like priorities or influencing, and little consistency.
And this is also the problem with a government that doesn't open itself to scrutiny and an opposition that doesn't want to push the issue too far. Who is pointing out the failures of the UK's negotiating strategy with the EU, and what can be done about them?
We can't be sure that a different strategy would lead to a different result. But maybe try? Recognise the EU Ambassador, start engaging with member states, try to find common ground. Or walk away, say we're having nothing to do with the EU. Choose.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1359562957043208194
"We left, we don't care about the EU. Your loss. But we'd quite like equivalence. Though your loss if you don't give us it. And we're going to stop you doing business in London if you don't give us what we don't in any case want" is not going to help us get anything.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
