Originally Posted by
KerrAvon
Setting aside my suspicion that you are once again conflating the withdrawal agreement and the future relationship, I have to ask what it is that you are smoking? It’s clearly seriously heavy stuff.
I see that you now want to move away from Labour’s SU (Freudian slip?) proposal and are now looking to ‘refocused discussion’ on the SM, FoM, ECJ, no doubt in the hope of doing some of your ‘focus trading'. Why? What are you trying to achieve and what compromises do you have in mind? May’s deal, risky though it is, ends Freedom of Movement immediately. It then involves a two year transition period in which to negotiate a future relationship with both parties committing to the creation of a comprehensive free trade agreement. Should that not be completed within two years or other arrangements put in place to achieve the same end, the backstop is triggered and we remain in a Customs Union (which is apparently what Labour wants, unless May proposes it, one must assume) to keep the Irish border open.
Why do you want to reopen FoM as part of a withdrawal deal? What are you hoping to achieve by it? If you want Freedom of Movement, a Customs Union arrangement and a Single Market arrangement then the best way to do that is to remain in the EU given that is essentially what that would amount to.
You will struggle to find any Tory who would compromise on Freedom of Movement, a Customs Union arrangement or a Single Market arrangement. Those who would have done so joined TIG a couple of weeks ago (save, perhaps, Dominic Grieve) and we know that Corbett won’t even tolerate being in the same room as them let alone do a bit of ‘focus trading’ with them. The Tories won’t compromise in that manner because to do so would fly in the face of the manifesto that they stood upon and because they have the good sense to know that it would be seen as a massive betrayal by a significant section of the electorate and would be electoral suicide.
Yes, the EU would love to have us in a Norway style deal in which we accept FoM accept EU rules without having a say in making them the jurisdiction of the ECJ and the requirement to contribute to the EU budget. That doesn’t make it a good idea and there is a zero chance of Parliament passing it.
I’m afraid that you and a significant proportion of Parliament are trying to fight a battle that has already been fought and lost. The electorate voted to leave. We now need to do that.
I’m disappointed that you don’t want to do a bit of ‘focus trading’ with gf and me with a view to reaching a compromise. Doesn’t that rather fly in the face of your belief that it is all that Parliament has to do to make everything ok?