We start with the governance arrangements for TCA & WA
2/
then a reminder about all the exit clauses in the TCA: plenty to choose from
3/
Plus all that on-going work the TCA commits both parties to for the next, long period of time
4/
A summary of the dispute settlement mechanism, just in case you might need it
5/
And the rebalancing mechanism for the LPF (which can be for later this year)
6/
And the piece de resistance: the mentions of other international instruments in the TCA, to highlight how much it continues to bind the parties together
7/
Will update PDFs in my repository shortly, once I've worked out why they're not saving properly: drive.google.com/drive/folders/…
In meantime, you're welcome to use (with credit) any of these images, to offer corrections, and to ask for new graphics
/end
All updated now, for your viewing pleasure
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A propos not much, let's talk a bit about why trust matters so much to the EU in its relations with the UK
tl;dr without it, it's very hard to do anything
1/
I've talked a lot about trust over the past years of Brexit, mainly because it's a central part of all negotiating: it's the grease in the system that makes things run much more smoothly
2/
How to build trust is pretty simple, as I've sketched out below.
An apposite day to announce I'm going to be next @UACES chair
Moving out of @SurreyPolitics office, ahead of starting @OUPolitics in May, and remarking in what a big part of my professional career @UACES has been
Since I started by PhD @LSEEI in 1999, @UACES has been central to my work, first with @UACESgf colleagues and then with those working on euroscepticism, including the very excellent @NicholasStartin, whose shoes I will be trying to fill as Chair
But @UACES folk have been there since I was a student, with their numerous textbooks and research outputs, and the events so numerous that I gave up trying to count a bit before lunchtime
I'm struck by the parallels between this and Brexit: in both cases, there's a failure to accept that making rules for your state doesn't mean being able to make rules for other states
In the asylum case, Patel is suggesting that 'illegal' entries by asylum-seekers will result in rapid removal from UK
But removal to where?
How do you get other (even 'safe') states to accept what are, under international law, people who are within their rights to be in UK?
2/
Likewise, Brexit debate has been about 'taking back control', but that can't mean 'forcing others to accept whatever you want', only 'asking others to see what they'll agree to'
3/