There are two articles this weekend in rival newspapers but on more or less the same topic by two what you might call soft Brexiteers. Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan writes in The Telegraph (HERE) and Henry Newman of Open Europe writes in The Guardian (HERE). Essentially they are both arguing that the EU is demanding too much as the price of leaving although they have quite different solutions.
"Theresa May has gone as far as any British leader could go to accommodate Brussels – indeed, arguably further. She has accepted a paying but non-voting role in European agencies, signed up to a transition period where Britain has all the existing membership obligations with no input, agreed to hand over £39 billion, and offered to stay in the single market in goods (where the 27 have a surplus with Britain) but not services (where they have a deficit). She is even prepared to match EU social and environmental....".
We have "offered to stay in the single market" as if it's the UK making a concession! This is like a landlord being told by a tenant who has just terminated a tenancy that he's prepared to carry on sleeping in the bedroom. He says Mrs May has "accepted" a role in (some) EU agencies, odd that because I thought we had "begged" for one. Hannan, like many Brexiteers as the moment of truth approaches, can't seem to quite bring himself to believe that Brexit means Brexit, or that out means out. But his answer is to double down and threaten to leave anyway, in other words do what we said we would do in March last year.
He seems genuinely shocked that the EU don't find his "offer" very attractive although every remainer told him this is what would happen before the referendum.
The realisation is slowly dawning that the price of Brexit, economically and politically, will be a lot higher than was ever anticipated. It's the cold sweat of a man who has promised a friend he can get him something valuable very cheaply only to realise he is going to have to pay far more and get a poorer bargain than the friend had started with. He is now feverishly looking for excuses but thinks we should walk away unless the EU bends to our proposal.
Meanwhile, Henry Newman, director of the Open Europe think tank writes in similar vein that, "Europe must wake up to the looming nightmare of a no-deal Brexit" as if they had more to lose than we do.
He goes on:
"A messy Brexit without any deal would be far worse [than the deal on offer from the EU now]. It would by definition mean relations had broken down to such an extent that agreement couldn’t be reached even to tie up the terms of our exit, let alone our future. Inevitably, bilateral relations would be soured, leaving Europe damaged.
"Some might argue that this is an inherent risk of Brexit, or that it’s the UK’s fault for voting to leave. Perhaps. But the EU isn’t a prison. Under the Lisbon treaty members have a lawful right to choose to leave the EU. Anyway, opposing or regretting Brexit isn’t an answer to the current predicament. Politics and diplomacy are about dealing with the world as it is, not as you want it to be. An accommodation needs to be found".
He has noted the EU is not a prison and we had a right to choose to leave. Of course it isn't a prison, it's more like a hotel. But seems surprised that after checking out we aren't going to be allowed to get back in and use the room until we find another one elsewhere. He's another Brexiteer who doesn't seem to appreciate that out means out. But Newman says leaving without a deal would be a disaster and he simply pleads for an "accommodation" - code for Brussels softening its position.
Both men are guilty of wishful thinking. They genuinely believed before the referendum that we could negotiate something that gave us all the rights and benefits of EU membership but without the obligations. That the UK could enjoy single market access while free of the regulatory burden and able to diverge where and when we please. The binary nature of Brexit has come as a complete shock.
Hannan is perhaps more realistic but is happy to sacrifice a lot of jobs and prosperity. Newman's Open Europe think tank has campaigned for years against the EU, demanding a looser trading arrangement. Now Brexit is upon us he is shocked to find he had a tiger by the tail. The Ultra tiger wants a hard Brexit solution and he is terrified they will get it.
Brexit is like an electronic bi-stable device sometimes called a flip-flop. It can only exist in one of two discrete states. We are either IN the single market and the customs union with all that goes with it or we are OUT. There is no middle way. It's a hard Brexit or no Brexit. We can't have our cake and eat it. Both men are about to find this out.
On looking at Henry Newman's background, I stumbled across a very interesting article about Open Europe and I'll do a blog post on it in the coming days.
