[ad_1]
Tue, Oct 23, 2018 – 5:50 AM
THERE is a brand of sealants whose slogan used to be "It Does What It Says On The Tin" and, since the products work, it became quite a famous piece of advertising.
In June 2016, the UK voted to leave the EU (The question was simple: Do you want to remain in the EU?). "Brexit" was coined to mean "leave the EU", which people thought of what it said on the vote.
Formal notice of leaving was given in March 2017, and the theory was that it would happen two years later.
Since then the issue has become obscured by political point-scoring. The EU had the $ 39 billion (S $ 70.1 billion) upfront, before any real negotiation. An incredibly stupid thing to do, because it was an acrimonious tone.
The UK never joined the EU, it slipped into it by accident. In 1973, it was the "Common Market" after-prime minister Ted Heath begged them (previously, France had vetoed it – then-president Charles De Gaulle's famous "No!"). This was ratified by referendum in 1975, using the same basic question – "remain or leave". Things going on smoothly for a few years, despite the European Economic Community (EEC) showing signs of political and fiscal union. The big shock happened in 1992, when the UK signed up to the Maastricht Treaty.
Maastricht introduced the EU, with common citizenship and therefore free movement of people, common foreign and defense policy and the foundations of the euro. This was the end of European national cooperation and the beginning of the United States of Europe, with loss of national sovereignty. If everything should have been a referendum, it was Maastricht, but both the Conservatives (headed by John Major) and Labor (Tony Blair) were led by European federalists.
Post Maastricht, successive UK governments have passed EU legislation that has emasculated Parliament and the judiciary. It has been a creeping loss of sovereignty, with only the rejection of the euro as a victory for nationalism. Dissatisfaction led to the 2016 referendum.
In a nutshell, Brexit asks for an end to the free movement of people, but to retain what it could of the original idea of free trade of goods, capital and services with the EU. Brexit considers the establishment of independent trade agreements outside the EU and an independent trade agreement with the EU.
Most of this seems to be possible, except for two huge problems. The first is unspoken – if the UK is released from EU fetters, but continues to trade with it fairly freely, other members will want to do the same and European federalism will be killed off. This is always at the back of the EU (federalist) negotiators' demands.
The second is the political nightmare of Northern Ireland. There is little business on this border and it is capable of quite simply monitoring without border posts. However, the EU has chosen to put its foot down on it, because to allow continuation of any "soft" border to the EU members to leave. In their Machiavellian minds, there is a lot of rules covering this borderline, separating it from the rest of the UK. This is unacceptable to any UK politician, and the EU knows it – it is their negotiating ploy to scupper Brexit.
British Prime Minister Theresa May's "Checkers Plan" sought to resolve this by establishing a common rulebook between the UK and the US, allowing for free trade in goods and services.
The EU is in favor of EU rules for EU trade, which it sees as incompatible. Also, it ruins their ploy. Brexiteers rejected it, because it leaves EU control over certain UK legislation and customs "arrangements".
We are now in the endgame with both sides squaring off. The weasel solution is a "transition" period – to defer the hard decisions. The UK can not agree internally but the EU is petrified of a tough stance.
Logically, the next step is for the UK to declare that it does not matter what it says on the tin – the UK leaves the EU and reverts to international trading rules. It leaves the borders of the United Kingdom. If it does not get some action, so be it – both sides will suffer, but at least business will know the next steps.
- The writer is a business communications consultant in the UK
[ad_2]
Source link
