It is fair to say that the Brexit process has not gone as smoothly as many people would have hoped. On the plus side, the British economy is not in recession, but it is underperforming against all other European economies at this time.
On the down side, the UK is nowhere near having any trade deals with either the EU nor anyone else for that matter. Assurances by David Davis that we would have the final deal with the EU ready by October are laughable, and there are no trade deals lined up with an other countries either, in spite of David Davis claiming that the UK would have dozens of trade agreements ready to sign in March 2019. Negotiations with the EU are going very badly for Britain, with the UK ceding to all of the EU's demands, and getting bogged down in details such as the role of the ECJ, citizens' rights and of course the border in Northern Ireland.
The slow progress is due to several factors. First is "inflexibility". The EU has been rigid, and quite inflexible, in its adherence to process. Unlike Britain, the EU has a lot of experience negotiating trade deals, and knows that trying to hammer out a full trade agreement within 18 months simply isn't possible, so is focusing on the withdrawal agreement. Personally I think the talks would have gone even slower if they had tried to discuss everything at once.
The second, and main reason, is "overpromising", and that the UK and EU positions are very far apart. The Leave side essentially over-promised (some would say cynically lied) about what the new relationship with the EU could look like. These promises were not sufficiently challenged before the referendum, and what is extraordinary is that the UK government are still trying to implement these promises. As I've argued before, some Leave promises are deliverable, but certainly not all at the same time.
Boris Johnson for example, promised Norway+++, basically giving Britain full access to the single market, whilst delivering all of the benefits of leaving, i.e. cakeism, or a load of cack. Such an arrangement simply isn't possible as the UK government are finding out. Talk of "they need us more than we need them" are so 2017, and you never hear that any more, but you never hear any Brexiters saying sorry they got it completely wrong, oh and maybe they are wrong about, I don't know, other things like the whole Brexit thing altogether.
The third factor is what I would call "details". Details of exactly how the Northern Ireland border would work. What will new customs arrangements look like? Because as soon as you start talking details, you realise that Brexit isn't actually very good at all. Claims that "it'll all be ok" don't wash any more.
The fourth factor is "indecision". Unlike Remain, who are a largely homogeneous group, with some being Europhile federalists, but the majority simply agree that the EU is generally a good idea, and the least bad option, without being too religious about it. All of these want the same thing. The Leave side on the other hand is fractured, with some soft Brexiters wanting to join EFTA, others preferring a trade deal, and yet more wanting a no deal. If the EU ballot had been between remain, hard Brexit and soft Brexit, Remain would have won. And Leave promised sunlit uplands after Brexit, without going into specifics. So now the government is horribly split and can't make up its mind. Both of the governments proposals are in a state of disarray and will be rejected by the EU, adding yet more delay. The first option, "mega trade deal giving UK all the benefits of SM membership" doesn't exist, and now the UK government doesn't know what to do.
The fifth factor is "competence". Rather, incompetence. Fox, Davis, Johnson, Leadsom, Redwood, Mogg etc, all very low calibre individuals. They appeal to voters in the same way as Donald Trump, say no more. All the competent people have left or been excluded. The remaining leavers are now confused as to why things are going as they are, because they don't understand what's going on.
The sixth factor is "power", or "staying in power". The Convervatives have prioritised staying in power over making decisions, because once decisions are made, it will alienate a portion of leave voters and most people will be unhappy. Best to keep it vague and everyone can still hope to get what they wanted. But this simply delays Brexit.
The seventh factor is "red lines." In her Lancaster house speech, Theresa May set out the plans for quite a hard Brexit - presumably to make the EU blink and give us a good deal. Well they didn't and now we are stuck.
The eighth factor is "power imbalance". The EU is quite used to its members taking the piss, for example with its southern states racking up huge debts because they aren't brave enough to tax in proportion to expenditure. The EU is much bigger than the UK, and the UK isn't used to negotiating on its own because it's always had the weight of the entire EU behind it. Leavers who regarded the EU as an incompetent waste of space are once again being surprised. The UK now has to shift its position which takes time.
If you were to ask a Leaver why the talks are going very slowly, we could expect to hear the following:
- The EU are trying to make it as difficult as possible for us to leave.
- The EU need our money.
- Remainers are undermining our negotiating position.
- The EU are punishing us.
I don't consider any of these arguments to be credible. For example, if "they need us more than we need them", then how could the EU be in a position to punish us? Remainers have been totally excluded from the decision making process, and have no influence over it at all.
The EU aren't going to give the UK a good deal simply because the single market is complex enough and having a load of exemptions for the UK doesn't really work. They have no incentive to do so. They don't want us to leave, but accept that we are going and want to get the whole thing over with as smoothly and quickly as possible. It's the UK asking for extensions, not the EU. It's the UK that's delaying because once the promises of Vote Leave can't be delivered, they simply don't know what to do.
On the down side, the UK is nowhere near having any trade deals with either the EU nor anyone else for that matter. Assurances by David Davis that we would have the final deal with the EU ready by October are laughable, and there are no trade deals lined up with an other countries either, in spite of David Davis claiming that the UK would have dozens of trade agreements ready to sign in March 2019. Negotiations with the EU are going very badly for Britain, with the UK ceding to all of the EU's demands, and getting bogged down in details such as the role of the ECJ, citizens' rights and of course the border in Northern Ireland.
The slow progress is due to several factors. First is "inflexibility". The EU has been rigid, and quite inflexible, in its adherence to process. Unlike Britain, the EU has a lot of experience negotiating trade deals, and knows that trying to hammer out a full trade agreement within 18 months simply isn't possible, so is focusing on the withdrawal agreement. Personally I think the talks would have gone even slower if they had tried to discuss everything at once.
The second, and main reason, is "overpromising", and that the UK and EU positions are very far apart. The Leave side essentially over-promised (some would say cynically lied) about what the new relationship with the EU could look like. These promises were not sufficiently challenged before the referendum, and what is extraordinary is that the UK government are still trying to implement these promises. As I've argued before, some Leave promises are deliverable, but certainly not all at the same time.
Boris Johnson for example, promised Norway+++, basically giving Britain full access to the single market, whilst delivering all of the benefits of leaving, i.e. cakeism, or a load of cack. Such an arrangement simply isn't possible as the UK government are finding out. Talk of "they need us more than we need them" are so 2017, and you never hear that any more, but you never hear any Brexiters saying sorry they got it completely wrong, oh and maybe they are wrong about, I don't know, other things like the whole Brexit thing altogether.
The third factor is what I would call "details". Details of exactly how the Northern Ireland border would work. What will new customs arrangements look like? Because as soon as you start talking details, you realise that Brexit isn't actually very good at all. Claims that "it'll all be ok" don't wash any more.
The fourth factor is "indecision". Unlike Remain, who are a largely homogeneous group, with some being Europhile federalists, but the majority simply agree that the EU is generally a good idea, and the least bad option, without being too religious about it. All of these want the same thing. The Leave side on the other hand is fractured, with some soft Brexiters wanting to join EFTA, others preferring a trade deal, and yet more wanting a no deal. If the EU ballot had been between remain, hard Brexit and soft Brexit, Remain would have won. And Leave promised sunlit uplands after Brexit, without going into specifics. So now the government is horribly split and can't make up its mind. Both of the governments proposals are in a state of disarray and will be rejected by the EU, adding yet more delay. The first option, "mega trade deal giving UK all the benefits of SM membership" doesn't exist, and now the UK government doesn't know what to do.
The fifth factor is "competence". Rather, incompetence. Fox, Davis, Johnson, Leadsom, Redwood, Mogg etc, all very low calibre individuals. They appeal to voters in the same way as Donald Trump, say no more. All the competent people have left or been excluded. The remaining leavers are now confused as to why things are going as they are, because they don't understand what's going on.
The sixth factor is "power", or "staying in power". The Convervatives have prioritised staying in power over making decisions, because once decisions are made, it will alienate a portion of leave voters and most people will be unhappy. Best to keep it vague and everyone can still hope to get what they wanted. But this simply delays Brexit.
The seventh factor is "red lines." In her Lancaster house speech, Theresa May set out the plans for quite a hard Brexit - presumably to make the EU blink and give us a good deal. Well they didn't and now we are stuck.
The eighth factor is "power imbalance". The EU is quite used to its members taking the piss, for example with its southern states racking up huge debts because they aren't brave enough to tax in proportion to expenditure. The EU is much bigger than the UK, and the UK isn't used to negotiating on its own because it's always had the weight of the entire EU behind it. Leavers who regarded the EU as an incompetent waste of space are once again being surprised. The UK now has to shift its position which takes time.
If you were to ask a Leaver why the talks are going very slowly, we could expect to hear the following:
- The EU are trying to make it as difficult as possible for us to leave.
- The EU need our money.
- Remainers are undermining our negotiating position.
- The EU are punishing us.
I don't consider any of these arguments to be credible. For example, if "they need us more than we need them", then how could the EU be in a position to punish us? Remainers have been totally excluded from the decision making process, and have no influence over it at all.
The EU aren't going to give the UK a good deal simply because the single market is complex enough and having a load of exemptions for the UK doesn't really work. They have no incentive to do so. They don't want us to leave, but accept that we are going and want to get the whole thing over with as smoothly and quickly as possible. It's the UK asking for extensions, not the EU. It's the UK that's delaying because once the promises of Vote Leave can't be delivered, they simply don't know what to do.
Comments