Skip to main content

Will Brexit end with a whimper or a bang?

As many commentators agree (including myself a week after the referendum result), and most recently The Brexit Minister David Davis in front of the Lords Select Committee, the talks on the UK leaving the EU are likely to carry on until the very last minute.

Although the UK was never going to be completely satisfied with the outcome of these talks, I have been a little surprised by the unity of the EU27, and by contrast the sheer lack of preparation by the UK government. I would have expected a lot of political infighting by Leavers as their ideal vision of Brexit is shattered, but that hasn’t happened yet simply because the UK government doesn’t have any kind of coherent position to criticise.

With the clock running down, as Ian Dunt said in his latest Remainiacs podcast, the number of options is reducing. David Davis still claims to be on track for a comprehensive trade deal to be signed by March 2019 but this claim is so ridiculous that it’s embarrassing. That the Brexit Minister can still claim that shows just how bad the UK’s position actually is.

It’s possible that an exit agreement will be signed by March 2019, covering the bare minimum to avoid a chaotic Brexit, but I actually doubt this will be possible. The border in Northern Ireland is an intractable problem, and even comparatively simple issues such as money and citizen’s rights seem to have gotten completely bogged down due to goading by hard line Brexiters in the UK Conservative party. Then there’s the issue of transferring all EU competencies to the UK, and most observers cannot fathom why work hasn’t started to actually improve customs capacity, implement new IT systems and set up all the additional agencies. It seems that Brexiters just aren’t good on details.

Nothing will actually happen until March 2019, which unfortunately has engendered complacency. Predictions of another general election, or a change of leadership in the Conservative party are starting to look less likely, and this is all due to the lack of a coherent position by the Conservative government. It seems as though Vote Leave are still in campaign mode, promising all things to all people without ever being to pin down the precise Brexit they want. This constructive ambiguity has give the Conservative party more time, but has given the UK much less time to sort out its affairs by March 2019.

This whole situation has been brought about by the bizarre time-limited nature of Article 50, which could force a very painful and unnecessary Brexit, when the alternative, years of talks ending in failure and deadlock is actually looking much more appealing.

When March 2019 comes around, about the only thing that will be agreed is that the UK isn’t ready to leave the EU due to nothing being in place, and the UK will be hoping for some kind of associate membership. However this kind of arrangement takes a lot of time to arrange, and consequently, isn’t really on the table. There isn’t the political will in the EU for this kind of bespoke deal either.

Consequently, we would be looking at (a) cancel Brexit, (b) an extension as EU membership, or (c) a hard, chaotic Brexit. The EU has already made it clear that it does not want the UK to leave and will let the UK change its mind. The EU is keen to emphasise that the decision to leave is the UK’s choice and the responsibility for its choice and its consequences lie with the UK alone.

None of these options are at all palatable for the UK. What is not on the table is the kind of deal that Vote Leave Brexiters promised. As is painfully obvious to most Remainers like myself (August 2016), it was never on the table. This is entirely the fault of journalists and voters for letting Vote Leave get away with this lie. Eventually, there may be some mutual recognition of standards, and some reduction in tariffs with a trade agreement, however such an agreement is a long time away, and it may be sensible to split these treaties up, instead of attempting everything in one big bang.

Given the state of chaos in the UK, it is anybody’s guess what the UK government will decide to do in March 2019. This decision is far too big to entrust to Theresa May and her Brexit cronies. However I now doubt that the UK government will pull the trigger in March 2019 in any circumstances, and after much huffing and puffing, will agree to an extension to its EU membership, i.e. option (b). 

There is still potential for catastrophe, but I’m not a lawyer so these are just idle speculation:
  • One of the EU27, maybe France, decides to deny this extension
  • The UK hasn’t finalised its exit arrangements, or is being difficult about its financial obligations
  • The EU parliament might vote it down
  • Time may run out and there’s no way to ratify the agreement
  • The UK has a general election or in some way its government loses its legitimacy
  • Negotiations become completely deadlocked.
Nevertheless, this softening of the EU position means that I will no longer be stocking up on quite so much food in March 2019. What’s apparent is that the EU does not want the UK to fail, and it does not want the economic hit from Brexit, and doesn’t after all want to close the door on the UK. Our budgetary contributions are also handy.

Sadly, the UK won’t have a clear idea what it wants even after March 2019. There’s a real danger that there could be another general election with a Labour government before the second exit period runs out (to 2021), but of course the Labour position is as confused as the Conservatives’. Labour is much more likely to want to stay in the EU Customs Union, changing direction on the talks completely.

This all leaves the fundamental question of how long, exactly, is the mandate of the 23rd of June 2016 actually supposed to last? The reality is, the election was advisory (hence why no supermajority was required), and so is simply a matter for parliament and Conservative party policy. No government can bind its successors, and it’s purely a matter of policy and manifesto commitments how long we actually want to carry on with this debacle.

The horrid Catch-22 situation is that a hard uncomfortable Brexit may be the only way for the UK to get Brexit out of its system. Argument and reason don’t seem to work. Even joining the EFTA/EEA, a thoroughly sensible option, would simply rekindle arguments about leaving the “evil” EFTA, and there would be another Brexit.

The choice isn’t any more between hard and soft Brexit. The choice is whether Brexit finishes with a whimper or a bang. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Can information theory prove the existence of God?

I recently came across this website by Perry Marshall, which makes a really interesting proof of the existence of God. The argument is basically that DNA constitutes information (a code), yet all information that we know of is the product of a mind. Randomness cannot create information. Therefore, God exists. Lovely argument. Now let's pick some holes. 1) My first observation is that this argument is almost exactly the same as entropy. The argument is that DNA is a low entropy state. Yet randomness always increases entropy. Therefore DNA cannot be the product of random processes, therefore it must be the work of God (or Maxwell's Demon). However this argument is invalid because localised decreases in entropy are perfectly possible, and expected, even though the entropy of the system as a whole increases. Considering that the site claims to make use of information theory, it presumably is aware of information entropy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_entropy It fo...

When will the UK trigger Article 50?

Article 50 (A50) represents the point of no return, where the UK formally announces that it is withdrawing from the EU. The real point of no return was of course the referendum result, but A50 represents the next milestone in the Brexit process. Those calling for an early A50 argue that there is no benefit to delaying, as this just adds uncertainty and delays the entire process and inevitable recovery. They (mainly Leavers) don't want the referendum result annulled. Those who want to delay A50 say that we need time to prepare (not least, set up a new department for Brexit), and entertain the notion of pre-negotiations, as well as buying time to set up trade deals elsewhere in the world. The EU is very clear that there can be no exit negotiations until Article 50 has been triggered, and it looks very unwilling to compromise. The markets have taken the Brexit vote relatively calmly, and so far it's been very smooth going. This is because nothing has actually happened yet, and wo...

Identity is taking over politics

Mark Lilla writes in the New Statesman ( September 2017 ) that the "Left", i.e. the US Democratic Party, social justice and anti-facism movements, lost the US election due to being side-tracked by gender and race issues. Enough of the electorate weren't buying it and Trump won. In hindsight attacking a large proportion of the electorate based on their gender and race is never a good idea, no matter which race or gender you are talking about. No, it's not acceptable to denigrate men or white people either. Trump of course did the same, by attacking foreigners, Mexicans, Muslims and women, but he got away with it due to media bias and partisan politics. At home, Peter North, a prominent pro-Brexit blogger, tweeted about "self determination". This immediately raised the issue of what is "self", and lo and behold we are back to identity again. If we all feel European, then being governed by the EU is indeed self-determination, and let's not ki...