Skip to main content

Deal or no Deal? That is the question.

The problem with Boris Johnson's strategy on Brexit is that he has closed his options.  His government have devoted so much attention convincing Brexit supporters that Britain would do great if it left the EU without a deal, that it is now difficult for him to justify a deal.  Why bother with an agreement if 'no-deal' is such a good proposition?

The answer, of course, is that a deal is necessary, and even if the UK left without one, a trade deal with the EU would have to be negotiated.  Just as the UK would need a trade deal with the USA, so also it would require an agreement with the EU.

So, none of this political mess is really about a deal or no deal.  A future trading arrangement with the EU will take time to agree.  That is so for all trade deals.  They are years in the making.

The argument, now, is about the "backstop"; the arrangement that would kick in if a trading arrangement isn't forthcoming.  The backstop is necessary to keep the border with Ireland open.

This is not a problem invented by the EU to keep the UK in the EU.  An open border is a commitment made in a Treaty with Ireland and is an essential part of the Good Friday peace agreement. It allows free movement across the border.

The primary concern is that it hands control to the EU to determine whether or not the backstop remains in place.  It 'traps' the UK in a position where it has to accept EU regulations but with no say in what those rules are.  It is a tricky problem.

The EU has passed the ball to the UK government to come up with a workable alternative to the backstop - something that would keep the border open.  Boris Johnson accepted the challenge to come up with an alternative. But as far as can be seen, little or nothing has been put on the table.

This does not mean a deal is not possible before the 31st October deadline.  Unless the government has taken leave of its senses, some kind of fudge is still a possibility.   Boris will dress it up to look good and tell the country he has fulfilled the wishes of voters and delivered Brexit.

Who knows? This might be a winning strategy, but for the dog barking at the door.  Nigel Farage has made it clear that he would campaign against such a deal -  and that might be enough to tip the balance against Johnson winning.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Keir Starmer has a lot to offer

The Labour Party is in the process of making a decision that will decide whether it can recover from the defeat in 2019 General Election.  All the candidates have much to offer and are making their case well. No doubt for some the decision will be difficult.  Others may well have made up their minds on the simple binary of Left-wing-Right-wing. The choice should be whoever is best placed to pull the party together.  Someone who can form a front bench of all talents and across the spectrum in the party. That is what Harold Wilson did in the 1960s.  His government included Roy Jenkins on the right and Barbar Castle on the left; it included Crossman and Crossland, and Tony Benn with Jim Callaghan.  It presented a formidable team. Keir Starmer brings to the top table a formidable career outside politics, having been a human rights lawyer and then Director of Public Prosecutions.   He is a man of integrity and commitment who believes in a fairer society where opportunities are more

The lion and the wildebeest

Birds flock, fish school, bees swarm, but social being is more than simply sticking together.  Social groups enable specialisation and a sharing of abilities, and enhances ability, learning and creating new tricks. The more a group works together, the more effective they become as a team.  Chimpanzees learn from each other how to use stones to crack nuts, or sticks to get termites.  All around us we see cooperation and learning in nature.  Nature is inherently creative.  Pulling together becomes a rallying cry during a crisis.  We have heard it throughout the coronavirus pandemic.  "We are all in this together", a mantra that encourages people to adopt a common strategy. In an era of 'self-interest' and 'survival of the fittest,'  and 'selfish gene', we lose sight of the obvious conclusion from the evidence all around us.   Sticking together is more often the better approach.  This is valid for the lion as it is also for the wildebeest.   We don't