Up to now the government has kept up the pretence that we are leaving the EU on March 29th. The PM herself confirmed it in the Commons again this week. But anyone with a few brain cells can see this simply cannot be true. The Institute for Government has published a quick guide (HERE) to what the government's problem is on legislation alone. The BBC look at the report HERE.
The IfG, a body of ex civil servants who really know how things work, say the scale of the task that Brexit represents is unprecedented and usually would be decades in the planning. If we had started making preparations in July 2016 for leaving without a deal it would have been tight, but trying to do it now with months to go is really not feasible.
They say:
"The problems facing the Government in being ready for a no deal Brexit are largely a reflection of the sheer scale and complexity of the task. But the Government’s approach to no deal preparations – being unwilling to talk publicly about plans and developing an adversarial relationship with Parliament – has caused further problems. It is not just the Government that needs to be ready – business and citizens need to know how the changes will affect them and what they need to do: the Government only started its communication effort late in 2018".
Note it isn't just legislation and government departments that need to be ready, business and citizens also need to know and become familiar with new systems and procedures. There hasn't even been a start to this mass communications effort.
And:
"It looks increasingly unlikely that the Prime Minister will be able to get the six outstanding Brexit bills through Parliament in time. Some of the major bills still have not started their Lords stages – where the Government does not control time. Any piece of legislation can become a target for people wanting to frustrate the Government’s intentions".
"The Government is also behind on secondary legislation. Despite a major push from government departments, only around 100 of the 600 statutory instruments required for a no deal Brexit have made their way through Parliament. Almost half are yet to be tabled".
This morning, either deliberately or otherwise, Jeremy Hunt (HERE), the foreign secretary, gave the first hint that Brexit may have to be delayed. But even this doesn't recognise the scale of the problem facing us. The delay Hunt speaks of a bit of 'extra time' assuming a deal is approved, which would include a transition period. Without a deal, it would be the cliff edge - unless there is a delay.
"Asked if a technical delay would be necessary, Hunt said: 'That depends on how long this process takes. It is true that if we ended up approving a deal in the days before the 29 March, then we might need some extra time to pass critical legislation. But if we are able to make progress sooner then that might not be necessary.' "
So forget the idea that we are leaving on March 29th. I think not and very soon the government will have to announce a delay. Businesses are making decisions as we speak due to the lack of clarity and certainty and this procrastination cannot be allowed to go on much longer otherwise we will be losing more businesses to the EU. In fact, giving the impression we are leaving in 57 days time simply plays into the hands of the EU, which is the beneficiary of a lot of windfall investment that they never expected.
The UK car industry issued another warning (HERE) about the calamitous consequences of leaving without a deal while Barclays announce (HERE) they're moving £190 billion of assets to Ireland. This follows an Ernst & Young survey showing nearly £800 billion being moved into the EU by 22 UK based financial companies recently (HERE). So, this is close to a trillion pound shifted out of the county this month.
Even the BBC are considering opening offices in the EU (HERE).
We are not leaving on March 29th and we are not leaving without a deal. I would bet on it.
We are not leaving on March 29th and we are not leaving without a deal. I would bet on it.
