As the first phase of Brexit draws to a close, attention is naturally turning to the second. The coming trade talks will be the most decisive and complex but I wouldn't rule out some sort of deal by the end of next year. Johnson is certainly a man in a hurry. Setting deadlines is his new modus operandi so the trade talks will be unusual for several reasons. They will be the first to create barriers to trade rather than reducing them: they will be the first pitched against the clock and the first where the consequence of failure is not the status quo but something dramatically different.
This article on the Politico website begins to set the scene. It gives some insights into EU strategic thinking and planning for the timing and structure of the talks.
Firstly, the 27 are well aware that unity played a huge part in helping them achieve all their aims in the Withdrawal Agreement. They know it will be severely tested in the next phase but I think they will remain largely united - to do otherwise would weaken their own position so it would be a surprise to see major public splits despite the different objectives.
Secondly, Barnier will use Johnson's own ticking clock against him, just as he used the Article 50 two year period against Mrs May.
Thrdly, they want to hear from us very early on about our objective. Barnier is asking the fundamental question, "Does the U.K. wish to distance itself, and to what extent, from our regulatory model?" He wants an answer to that question "in the next weeks". This will determine everything and will soon be made clear and very public, although I suspect it will still look like we want to have our cake and eat it too.
Fourth, talks between the EU27 will begin in early January with the plan being to have a draft mandate prepared by February 1st and a final version completed ready to begin talks on March 1st. This is light speed stuff. It's an indication that the Commission is keen to avoid any blame if it all goes wrong.
Fifth, a bare-bones deal is possible by this time next year but crucially, it will depend on two conditions. The UK will need to sign up to level playing field conditions and the trade agreement cannot be a "mixed" one where competence is shared between the EU and the member states (MS).
Areas where the EU has exclusive competence in signing international agreements are covered by Article 3 of the TFEU:
Article 3
1. The Union shall have exclusive competence in the following areas:
(a) customs union;
(b) the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market;
(c) monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro;
(d) the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy;
(e) common commercial policy.
2. The Union shall also have exclusive competence for the conclusion of an international agreement when its conclusion is provided for in a legislative act of the Union or is necessary to enable the Union to exercise its internal competence, or in so far as its conclusion may affect common rules or alter their scope.
Article 4
1. The Union shall share competence with the Member States where the Treaties confer on it a competence which does not relate to the areas referred to in Articles 3 and 6.
2. Shared competence between the Union and the Member States applies in the following principal areas:
(a) internal market;
(b) social policy, for the aspects defined in this Treaty;
(c) economic, social and territorial cohesion;
(d) agriculture and fisheries, excluding the conservation of marine biological resources;
(e) environment;
(f) consumer protection;
(g) transport;
(h) trans-European networks;
(i) energy;
(j) area of freedom, security and justice;
(k) common safety concerns in public health matters, for the aspects defined in this Treaty.
3. In the areas of research, technological development and space, the Union shall have competence to carry out activities, in particular to define and implement programmes; however, the exercise of that competence shall not result in Member States being prevented from exercising theirs.
4. In the areas of development cooperation and humanitarian aid, the Union shall have competence to carry out activities and conduct a common policy; however, the exercise of that competence shall not result in Member States being prevented from exercising theirs.
A bare bones deal is therefore only possible if it does not encroach on items in Article 4. It cannot be anything like the Canadian CETA deal. This was definitely mixed and had to be ratified by all national and regional parliaments. It doesn't take a genius to see that the choice is a stark one. Accepting a very limited deal in the time available would be highly damaging to British industry. Having gone over a lower cliff edge, we would then have to get started in 2021 on all the other areas, a process that is likely to drag on for years and years.
But trying for a deep and comprehensive deal like Canada will take several years anyway and mean extending the transition period. It is not an easy choice for Johnson.
"Some EU diplomats expect that the intra-EU discussions about the scope of the deal — and the consequences this could bring for ratification — will be postponed.
"EU countries could agree to a comprehensive mandate in February and then come back to the issue in June, when the EU and U.K. have to consider whether to extend the transition period beyond the end of 2020.
"At that point, Brussels could try to put pressure on London to agree to such an extension, despite Johnson’s reluctance, by showing that it was unrealistic to negotiate and ratify a deal before year’s end. If that fails, the EU might then have to switch strategy.
" 'In that scenario, it will be time to prioritize,' said a diplomat. 'Which topics have to be agreed on before the deadline and which are less urgent? That discussion is going to be very tricky'."
Now, is Johnson as clever as people think he is? I ask this because I am not at all convinced.
Did he actually recite Homer's Illiad in ancient Greek from memory on a Melbourne talk show as the clip below would indicate? A native Greek speaker, Yiokasti Mouratidi, says she didn't understand a word of it.
As a native Greek speaker who studied ancient Greek, the Iliad and Odyssey (and other ancient Greek texts/plays) over 4 years at high school (part of the compulsory curriculum in Greek state schools) I can confirm I understood absolutely nothing of what he is saying. https://t.co/E4Yxrp4nCn— Yiokasti Mouratidi (@YiokastiM) December 24, 2019
It may be Johnson really is as clever as people think he is. But I rather think he isn't. Certainly, among those who know him he is thought to be monumentally lazy and manically disorganised. On TV he does not come across as exceptionally bright, in fact quite the opposite.
He has all the appearance and attributes of someone who has spent their whole life winging it and convincing others there is a bit of serious grey matter under that blond mop when the truth is there is not.
As for reciting the Illiad from memory before an audience that probably wouldn't know ancient Greek from the runes, this is something Johnson could pretend to do quite easily. It would be perfectly in keeping with what we know. He is a buffoon who doesn't care about making a fool of himself.
The next phase of Brexit will show us if the Downing Street degenerate is up to the job or not.
The next phase of Brexit will show us if the Downing Street degenerate is up to the job or not.
