Brexit has been a fiasco from the very start. Rather than the motivation for the referendum being a genuine census of an informed people on a “fork” in the European road where either of two propositions is equally valid, the real genesis of the vote was a political machination on the part of the ruling Tory party to use the promise of a vote to secure an unlikely election victory in 2015 and to “silence” the Eurosceptic wing of the Tory party once and for all. An additional bonus of the stratagem was the political destruction of anti-EU party UKIP once a resounding remain vote had been returned. The vote was only ever advisory and the necessary precautions about obtaining a super majority; enfranchising British citizens living in Europe and really explaining the reality of the UK’s very close relationship with the EU were not taken. Like a rabbit caught in the headlights, Mrs May, the new British PM decided that “the will of the people” must be followed and that, definitively, “Brexit means Brexit”.
Just as there are two parties in any marriage, so the UK could not act in a vacuum with respect to the EU, particularly as it hoped for a “bespoke trade relationship” and “frictionless” trade with the EU once Brexit was complete. The EU 27 has acted as a single entity with no dissenting voices audible over the way that the EU would deal with its departing member. The EU mandated its interlocutor, Michel Barnier, to ensure that acceptable progress has been made on three key issues before the UK and EU can move on to discussing a post-Brexit trade deal: the rights of EU citizens resident in the UK and those of British citizens living elsewhere in the EU; settlement of existing financial commitments made by the UK whilst a member of the bloc; and thirdly, the fate of the border between the UK and the Irish republic which will become an external border upon Brexit.
Unless Michel Barnier is able to report sufficient progress on these key areas by the time of the next European Council meeting (14-15 December 2017), the stalemate will continue. The UK claims to be “within touching distance” of an agreement on the issue of citizen’s rights (a view not necessarily shared by the EU) and is showing willingness to increase its offer with regard to the “divorce settlement” the third roadblock seems intractable.
There are hard-line Brexit supporters in government that claim the UK should leave the EU without any deal and refuse to make any payment; others argue that the settlement must be modest. A fall-back to WTO trade rules would make a hard border, which neither side wants, inevitable and would generate immense economic harm in the UK as a pro-Brexit Leave Alliance blog spells out. The currents position with respect to these obstacles will be reviewed in the next two pieces.