O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

[KerrAvon]

In response to your responses:

1. Why do you think that it hurts the EU to keep the CU arrangements in place over the transition period? I don't think that there was any danger of an end to that, by nature it is facilitating a transition.

In what way have the EU agreed to scrap CAP, CFP and end free movement, as you claim here? I've noticed the government are claiming this to be the case, but where does it state this to be the case in the agreement thus far? I've gone through the document you linked to but can't see this?

During the transition period (currently set to end on December 31st 2020) we remain members of the Single Market and Customs Union. We will be subject to EU legislation and the jurisdiction of the ECJ, but we won't be members of the EU and won't be able to influence the making of legislation that we will be subject to. It's going to be a bit like a Norway solution.

During the transition period, we will try to negotiate a deal to cover our future relationship with the EU. If that isn't complete by the end of the period, the backstop contained within the Withdrawal Agreement that was published last week comes into play. We don't like it because it is not time limited and cannot be unilaterally ended. The Europeans don't like it, because they fear that access to the CU without full regulation might give the UK a competitive advantage. It is in the deal because it solves the Irish border problem.

The document that I linked to is the Political Statement setting our an initial framework for a post transition future relationship. It isn't the withdrawal deal, which is over 500 pages long and deals with freedom of movement, CFP and CAP. I could, perhaps, have been clearer when linking to it, but overestimated your understanding of the situation. I understand that the Political Statement is likely to be expanded later in the week.

2. You claim powerlessness, and that you have no say in any part of future proceedings. Why so passive? It's true that your party are blackmailing us with 'This Deal or No Deal' but that just isn't the case. But lot's of us are standing up to it and encouraging our MPs to reject it until we see a clear future commitment to protecting a) the economy via the CU and b) protection of our workers rights and c) protection of the environment. I personally do not care that this will involve compromise over free movement and ECJ - simply as I don't trust May, and most certainly not Mogg et al to protect these rights in the event of our detachment from the EU. You may doubt that this type of deal would get through parliament - but would any? Why not fight for our type of deal as opposed to capitulation.

I don't doubt for a second that should the EU get a sense that this type of deal was on the cards via a change of UK negotiating team, be it via general election or a wish from the public that they wanted a 2nd referendum (as this was seen as the preferred outcome in recent polling when compared to May's deal or No Deal, the EU would give us the time required to reach a new deal or vote to end the deal if the public had the option of May's Deal/No Deal/Remain.

I think however that there is a danger if May falls and the Tories elect a hard Brexiteer, who rip up the deal and ask the EU to renegotiate. I think that the EU would walk away at that point as there would be no point even starting. I concede that is a danger. Starmer seems to be anticipating that: https://www.theguardian.com/politics...no-deal-brexit. This would be a good outcome and allow parliament (and us if it comes to that) to vote without a loaded gun pointing at our own heads.

If you mean the Tories by ‘your party’ I don't think they are blackmailing anyone and neither would you if you gave it some thought and tried to move away from pointless games. They are as split as are Labour and the rest of the country – I would have thought that pretty obvious. If the EU mean what they say when they rule out any further negotiation then it's either the deal on the table or no deal. In your belief, you are falling into the trap that the Leave campaigners did in forgetting that the EU get a say in what happens.

When we know what the post transition deal looks like, I will assess it and possibly waste time writing to my MP if I'm not happy, but as we don't have such a deal at the moment, I can't comment upon it.

You may not mind freedom of movement and the continuing jurisdiction of the ECJ, but I think that many Leave voters would feel betrayed by such an outcome. Labour will get panned at the polls if it stand on such a deal (but go ahead if you think it a good idea}; I don’t think you will get away with trying to hide the reality of such a deal from the electorate.

It doesn’t need the election of a hard Brexiteer to rip up the deal. The hard Brexiteers are planning to do it with a Parliamentary vote, assisted by Labour (you say that you are encouraging your MP to do just that).

The Guardian article that you linked to shows that, disappointingly, Starmer continues to play politics to try to whip in the Labour MPs who are considering siding with May on the deal. It is impossible for Labour 'to force a Commons vote within weeks that would make it impossible for Britain to crash out of the European Union without a deal', because, again, it is not just the UK who get a say in it and the EU are not bound by votes in the UK Parliament. They don’t want a no deal outcome, but I don’t think there is any real room for movement by them. The best you could hope for would be a series of mini deals on specific policy areas to try to mitigate some of the effects of a no deal outcome.