Brexit - deal or no deal
Sun, 07 May 2017
One of my major frustrations when it comes to politics are the ambiguous statements - where both sides are arguing over different interpretations. It feels so unnecessary - I wish we could make an effort to be a bit more specific, so that we can focus on where we actually disagree.For example:
No Brexit deal is better than a bad Brexit deal
Everyone seems convinced they know what it means - but they don't agree. Here are a few interpretations that I’ve heard people make:
- Leaving the EU without an alternative to the default WTO terms is better than the technically worst possible deal - true, in my opinion, though they’d have to be almost inconceivably bad (maybe one where we agree to become slaves?)
- Leaving the EU without an alternative to the default WTO terms is better than the likely deal the EU would offer us (ie us not getting our way in negotiations) - questionable
- Leaving the EU without any trading / movement rights is better than the technically worst possible deal - again, technically true, but both are highly unlikely in my opinion
- Leaving the EU without any trading / movement rights is better than the likely deal the EU would offer us (ie us not getting our way in negotiations) - I believe untrue
- In order to get a reasonable Brexit deal we have to be able to ensure we could survive no Brexit deal - I’m really not sure, sometimes negotiating from a position of strength helps and sometimes it hurts
- It doesn’t really matter if we get a deal or not - clearly untrue
- We shouldn’t make much effort to get a deal - clearly untrue
- We shouldn’t (literally) kill ourselves trying to get a deal - clearly true (I haven’t actually heard anyone arguing this meaning, but thought I’d include it for completeness).