Brexit mistakes. There have been a few.

An overly simplistic referendum that gave no say on the future relationship.

A general election that hung Parliament and muddled the mandate.

Too many arbitrary constraints and too few requirements.

All the name calling and bad faith.

The unnecessary bombast of ‘No deal is better than a bad deal’ that has polarised both sides and made us unwilling to accept transitional states.

‘Do or die’ rhetoric escalates this towards phony war rather than constructive diplomacy.

We could be coming together around the idea that a satisfactory deal is better than no deal and taking the first steps on a long, collaborative process of withdrawal, reimagining and reconfiguring.

Instead we’re flirting with schism, radical disruption, constitutional stress and emergency response planning.

The risks and rewards of such a scenario are unevenly spread. Some can afford to be more optimistic about it than most.

Where We Are

The current government position is that they would prefer to exit with an agreement but are preparing to exit without one.

Despite having an agreement and wanting an agreement the current government has yet to sit down to negotiations with any party having set new demands around the Protocol for Ireland / Northern Ireland (known as ‘the backstop’).

The extension to Article 50 agreed by the UK and the EU ends at 11pm GMT (midnight CET) on 31 October 2019.  At that point the UK would exit the EU without any agreement on a future relationship in place.

Where We Could Go

This scenario has prompted many thoughts on how exiting without a deal could be avoided.

The simplest one, to ratify the withdrawal agreement (WA) signed by the Government and the EU, is unpopular with both MPs and the wider public.  It is widely thought this option is now unfeasible, though it is not impossible.

The next option would be for the Government to renegotiate the agreement.

The EU have said they are willing to reopen the withdrawal agreement but would be receptive to amending the accompanying political declaration.

The UK government won’t enter into negotiations whilst the backstop remains in place but have given no indication of what guarantees could replace it.

Again not impossible but someothing has to give for negotations to even commence, never mind conclude.

It’s concerning the Government seems to be pursuing the last resort contingency plan to protect against no deal with much more vigour and intent than their stated preferred way forward.

I’m not convinced by the tactical displays of overt preparedness but it remains to be seen what their approach will be come September when Parliament and our negotiating partners cannot so easily be avoided. At some point the substance of their strategy will have to be revealed.

Consequently, discussions, some more open than others I’m sure, are taking place between MPs and the public in how to challenge the Government and prevent they UK existing without an agreement.

This has become an intricate constitutional debate covering legislation, convention and democratic legitimacy.

The proposed sequences of events needed divert the government, whilst not impossible, mostly seem implausible.

It remains to be seen how this debate plays out.

Deal

Personally, I think leaving without an agreement (no deal) would be a desparate failure and an unnecessary crisis that places the nation under great pressure and flirts with disaster.

I reject the right wing libertarian vision of Britannia Unchained that embraces the creative destruction of this scenario.

Those who think this would be a desirable test of our mettle are not those who would be on the frontline dealing with the consequences and fearing for their livelihoods.

Leaving without agreement is not what was promised, the risks are too great, the rewards too unclear and it’s not even the preferred outcome of the people implementing it, never mind a majority.

It’s as extreme as Remainers advocating joining the Eurozone.

By forging towards such an outcome, the Government may succeed where May failed and open the Overton window so wide to no deal that a majority acquiesce to the withdrawal agreement.

Leaving was not my preference but I’m becoming resigned to the view that exiting into an agreed transition period by the 31st October would be the option that covers most of what most people could eventually accept.

In fact, I’m one of those few people who could accept the withdrawal agreement the government has negotiated on our behalf as it stands given it governs only transitional arrangements not the final, future state. It is not perfect but it will do.

We would exit the EU and enter transition.  The 2016 referendum mandate would then be fulfilled (it was mute on the shape of a future relationship, transition and the length of withdrawal).

By October, if the Government continues to refuse to sit down and negotiate and if Parliamentary mechanisms to force alternatives to no deal fail then Labour could, as a last resort, call the Government’s bluff and offer to support the WA.

An ultimatum.

The Government might not welcome such an offer. A clear majority for an available agreement, would really test the Government’s contradictions, coalitions and arbitrary deadlines.

No deal would no longer be a passive outcome for the Johnson administration; a default easy to blame on the inaction and intransigence of others whilst they electioneer. No deal would become an active choice, one made and owned by the Government.

To many this may feel like supporting a bad deal. It may feel like a capitulation that validates the Government’s hardline tactics. Six months wasted and the huge sums sunk into no deal planning gone. All valid feelings.

I want to remain but not as an article of faith beyond reason. Not if a perverse outcome of continued resistance would be no deal or the further erosion of democratic legitimacy.

That’s because if everything else has failed, passing the WA could still avert no deal. If we say we’ll try everything we must be prepared to countenance this.

A bitter end.

Remember though that the WA, however flawed, is temporary. It is not the end, it is merely the end of the beginning. If it’s a bad deal replace it with a better one as soon as possible.

There would still be much to do and fight for. We would be prepared for a shorter transition. Still be an opportunity to partner with the EU in many ways under a future relationship.

Ultimately, no deal is not better than a bad deal, it’s the worst.

Moving On

I would then want a general election.  This is likely to be the condition of any successful cross-party pact.

The current Parliament is hung, drawn and frayed; it will have implemented the referendum result (the withdrawal).  

A new Parliament should be elected to manage the transition, find creative ways to involve us all in a connective and collaborative national conversation, and negotiate future relationships, first with our close European partners, and then internationally.

Those negotiations would be far easier within a transition period that allowed an orderly exit from those EU institutions we wish to leave and a period of adaptation. The political declaration isn’t binding so any and all future relationships remain up for negotiation and available to us post-transition.  It’s just we won’t be in crisis management mode at the same time.

A general election would be crucial.  It will be campaign, a vote, a competition between three very different political economies about the nation we wish to be.  With exit under way it would be all about the future.  Whoever seizes that moment will likely have five years to reshape the nation in their image.

That future starts now.

---

Epilogue: A Neverending Story

Whilst clearing out old posts on another blog I found Time for the European Debate to Grow Up.  I wrote it 15 years ago.

For context it was written approaching the 2004 European elections.

Earlier, in April 2004, the government had promised a referendum on the proposed European Constitution.

That referendum was subsequently cancelled. The European Constitution was replaced by the Lisbon Treaty that was ratified in 2008 without a referendum. The BBC have a good timeline.

I look forward to sharing my thoughts on the relationship between the UK and Europe in 2034.  Not sure how I’ll be publishing that.  Immersive storycasting, information pill or mind meld perhaps.