Brexit: A costly pick-and-mix deal?

Yes, the Donald is still the Donald. He appears to be ruling by Twitter decree and his appointee list thus far seems a mixture of what he said he would do and the opposite of what he said. The hardline national security and defence appointees include General Flynn and ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis to run America’s external affairs, which is entirely in line with what he said on the campaign trail. To run America’s economy the appointment of a number of billionaires and members of the banking elite seems entirely counter to the concept of ‘draining the swamp’. His endless attacks on Hillary for being too close to Wall Street turn out to have been words rather than intended action. The concept of Trump never really meant more than a voyage into the unknown, and still does.

Brexit on the other hand was presented as a binary choice. Leave the EU or Remain. And the people chose ‘Leave’. Upon becoming prime minister, Theresa May made the crystal clear simple statement that ‘Brexit means Brexit’. We presumed therefore that she meant that it meant that Britain would leave the EU and all its structures. But the admission that the UK will almost certainly end up paying to access to the EU single market as both Norway and Switzerland do, appears to indicate that ‘Brexit means Brexit’ is far more complicated. As perhaps it was always going to be.

Worse, from the point of view of those who seek to leave the EU, we are to remain in Europol, although we shall lose the British official who heads it, as we shall in the cyber security organization, in which we also intend to ‘Remain’.

When it comes to trade, ministers talk of negotiating trade deals through the World Trade Organisation (WTO), save that the WTO is run by the Quad, which consist of the USA, Canada, the EU, and Japan. So in leaving the EU, we might be automatically leaving the Quad. A source in the WTO tells me there is no prospect of the UK joining the Quad. India, China, and Brazil are in the queue ahead of us and the organisation is seemingly as resistant to change as is the UN Security Council structure.

So Brexit could actually mean leaving the EU, and losing influence its elements – principally security and the single market. The payments themselves, to access these will be substantial – some believe that they will add up to representing a substantial proportion of what we already pay.

In short, so far, Brexit might be heading for a costly pick and mix deal, perhaps denuded of the power to influence either the EU or, perhaps even more critically, the WTO. Still, it does have a ring to it, even if it is a voyage, for us, into the unknown. Trump means Trump, Brexit appears to mean ‘pick n’ mix’ which is perhaps what many wanted .

I happen to be writing this in Cromarty in the far north of Scotland where I am attending a film festival. I am meeting people who voted against independence in the Scottish referendum. A number of them tell me they have changed their minds and now argue for it, though polls put the support for independence at 44%, a percentage point lower than in the actual vote. Much it seems is in flux on this voyage.