‘Brextra time’ – I’m not sure which is worse, the infuriating suggestion of yet further delays in the Brexit negotiations, or the hideousness of the portmanteau – a rhetorical device with which our political discourse seems irrevocably obsessed. The phrase just induces a sinking feeling all round.
With Theresa May repeatedly turning up empty handed with no progress to report other than wranglings over the hypothetical Irish ‘backstop’, and absolutely no movement on the shape of the final future EU-UK relationship, hopes have not been high for progress at the November summit.
However, commentators have had their fingers crossed that EU leaders might have taken the hint that the Prime Minister – at least in theory – means business, given her justifiably frosty response to her rude rebuttal by Barnier & co. at Salzburg this September.
Neither side wants to see a No Deal – something that is frequently overlooked – so it’s hard to understand why brinkmanship and running down the clock seems to be the approach taken by Barnier’s team. As net exporters to the UK (we buy more from them than they do from us), EU nations have an awful lot to lose in the event that we retreat to World Trade Organisation rules, so one might hope that as time runs out the theology of the European project might be superseded by the practical requirements of trade.
No such luck, I’m afraid. The latest proposals from Theresa May is that she is willing to consider extending the transition period (the time period in which we gradually disentangle ourselves from the EU) for another year up to 2022, which will involve another £17 billion of Budget contributions. A visibly rattled Prime Minister’s voice wavered as she tried to gloss this – it’s just a possibility, only an idea, don’t judge me yet! – as she spoke to journalists live from Brussels today. In contrast, German Chancellor Merkel and the insufferable French President Emmanuel Macron enjoyed a beer together after granting May the most meagre morsel of their time, appearing like medieval monarchs casually hearing the plea of an impoverished minor noble.
The absurdity of this has been criticised by Nick Boles MP, who points out that the government is willing to pour £17 billion into extending our membership of the EU rules structure in exchange for nothing in particular, and without a definitive end in sight, while at the same time refusing to countenance a much smaller £2 billion bailout for the struggling Universal Credit rollout. Voters are within their rights to balk at this waste.
Meanwhile arch-Eurosceptic Jacob Rees-Mogg has highlighted that we would be committed to a new multi-annual financial framework, probably without our rebate and with no voting power on how the money is spent. Moreover, the Fixed Terms Parliament Act commits us to a General Election in 2022 at the absolute latest; if we are stuck in the limbo of a limitless, undefined transition period and then Corbyn is elected Prime Minister, there’s every possibility that Brexit simply won’t happen.
If Labour wins, it could go one of two ways: the Remain camp within the party wins out and suspends Brexit, possibly with the collusion of the fanatics in the ‘People’s Vote’ who seek to use parliamentary wizardry to force a second referendum. Alternatively, Corbyn could stick with Brexit in a fudged form, which seems to be his current policy – insofar as he has one. It’ll be interesting to see whether his working-class, Leave-voting supporters – a majority in two thirds of Labour constituencies – retain their loyalty to the great socialist leader in that eventuality. Either Brexit could fizzle out, or there could be an almighty Brexit backlash as people realise they’ve been sold short.
It shouldn’t be beyond the wit of man to come to some kind of deal over Britain’s future. This isn’t the Congress of Vienna, the Treaty of Versailles or the Yalta summit, but EU leaders are acting like there’s simply nothing that can be done. And they wonder why British voters regard their arrogance with scorn.