On Friday the 31st of January at 11.00 PM the United Kingdom will formally no longer be a member of the European Union. The agreed upon period of transition where much stays the same is set to one year and, according to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, will under no circumstances be extended. When Boris Alexander de Pfeffel Johnson is categoric about things most people have come to realize that the opposite is just as likely to be the case. For all the talk of a no deal crash out Brexit desired by some acceptable to others, the consequences are far too damaging, not only to ordinary people but pertinently enough to the holders of an eighty seat majority, to harbour credibility. The risks of not only losing this majority but destroying the Tory party´s chances of winning an election for a generation are too great.
Recently the Chancellor of the Exchequer Sajid David claimed there will be no alignment with EU rules in the forthcoming negotiations. For reasons of the above that sounds like posturing to me but it also casts a shadow on Johnson´s claims that he will get a good deal by the end of the year. All very confusing as, again for reasons of the above, some sort of accomodating deal is essential and believing or lying that it can be done without alignment is like saying you would have no problem claiming an expensive seat at the Proms without having bought a ticket and dressed only in your underwear. I get the impression we are dealing with politicians who think that keeping the campaign alive will somehow make do in lieu of tangible politics. Theresa May began the process with her ”no deal is better than a bad deal” which ended in political humiliation. This kind of blackmail did not wash with the EU and ended up with Theresa May agreeing to a dogs dinner like withdrawal deal. True to form, on becoming Prime Minister, Johnson bamboozled his way to and boasted about getting a better, revised deal by putting a border in the Irish Sea, something he had voted against during May´s tenure.
After this, much was made of getting a future trade deal with the EU and the, in the government´s view unnecessarily long transition period of two years for negotiations was reduced to half. Since then the new mantra is ”no alignment.” This makes the one year withdrawal period less understandable as no alignment will undoubtedly lead to Britain leaving the transition period without a deal. The obvious question is why bother with any period of transition at all? I can´t rid myself of the feeling that Johnson and his government have not learnt any lessons and are putting the country at risk in a new chicken race. I am reasonably convinced there is no intention of a cliff edge exit as the transition period would seem to underline and that bluffing despite the risks will see us through and the EU will eventually back down.
As with any country, Britain´s future is reliant on where the money is made to pay the bills. After forty years of membership of the EU decisions now have to be made on the basis of non membership.
The first step might be seen as deciding on whether to align to US standards and any potential trade deals there. Politically this would be like eating chocolate with the paper on and geographically akin to doing your shopping in Manchester whilst living in London. The obvious choice is of course to turn to our nearest neighbours and start talking which I despite everything, believe will be the outcome. All things considered the man on the street would appear to have little understanding of EU membership outside of the government´s Pied Piper sound bites, ”we want our country back, we want control of our borders, we want our sovereignty back.” It is frightening how easy it is for a government to mask its own failings by demonising something or someone else. There is little danger that Johnson and Co. believe any of this clap trap as so often with mindless campaign slogans but there are many people who do.
When it comes to living up to politics based on false promises, obfuscation or direct lies, there comes a time when they have to be addressed. In that sense shortening the transition period to one year is the child of ”no deal is better than a bad deal” and we know how that ended.