Brexit: fuzzy deadlines
By Richard North - October 4, 2020
Just about every paper has covered yesterday’s phone conversation between von der Leyen and “bonker” Boris. But, while the Guardian headlines that the pair have extended the Brexit talks “by a month”, the Sunday Times doesn’t seem to agree.
This paper runs the headline “11 days for a Brexit deal — Boris Johnson sets deadline”, with the sub-header, “The PM has phoned the head of the EU to say: ‘Time is very short'”. The text tells us that Johnson has set a deadline of 15 October to secure a Brexit deal, “as the two sides agreed to 11 days of ‘intensified’ talks to finalise an agreement”.
According to this report, Johnson made it clear that the UK will leave without a deal unless it looks like one is all but completed by 15 October, with talks beginning tomorrow. He intervened, it is claimed. “amid concern in Downing Street that the EU may try to run out the clock on talks until Britain goes cap in hand to them”.
In fact, the Mirrror – no friend of Johnson – seems to think that the prospect of a no-deal outcome has edged near, as the prime minister “fails to break the deadlock” – not that he could have done so.
There is a joint statement on the conversation but, in the manner of such communiqués, it is less than helpful. It tells us is that the pair “agreed on the importance of finding an agreement, if at all possible, as a strong basis for a strategic EU-UK relationship in future”.
We are then told that “they endorsed the assessment of both Chief Negotiators that progress had been made in recent weeks but that significant gaps remained, notably but not only in the areas of fisheries, the level playing field, and governance”. And they have instructed their chief negotiators to work intensively in order to try to bridge those gaps.
The Guardian, though, doesn’t altogether contradict the ST. It says that it is “understood” that while the UK government is open to talks later in October, it has stressed behind the scenes the importance of having clarity by the European Council on 15 October on whether a deal is possible, given the need to prepare for a no-deal exit.
In other words, it is possible that Johnson’s original deadline could be extended, but only if there are clear indications that the two sides are close enough by the time the European Council meets to bring the talks over the line.
Whether that is even possible lies within the realms of speculation, but the cause cannot have been helped by Johnson emphasising to von der Leyen that “he would prefer the kind of arrangement the EU agreed with Canada”. Whatever he does get, it is likely that it will fall way short of that.
Nevertheless, despite the Guardian headline, it looks as if nothing much has changed. However, Barnier told members of the European Parliament on Friday that he believed the last two weeks of October would prove to be the “crunch period”, with the hope that a deal might be ready for ratification at the start of November.
Thus, the EU side is signalling that it is prepared to go the extra mile, which would seem to leave Johnson having to read the runes from the coming European Council – a meeting he will not be attending – and decide whether it is worth continuing the talks.
Various EU representatives, however, have signalled that they are not prepared to walk away from the talks, which might mean that Johnson has been manoeuvred into a position where he is the one seen to pull out. If there is no further progress from the “intensive” talks over the next week, then it would seem as if he must pull the plug.
Although the date of 15 October is constantly being quoted, the key date is actually 13 October, when the General Affairs Council is scheduled to meet. Most likely, it will be taking a briefing from Barnier, on which basis it will prepare a position paper for the European Council two days later.
At the Council, the leaders could make it easy for Johnson, by delivering an optimistic message, but if we get the same downbeat phrasing, to the effect that there are still “significant gaps”, then there might be some difficulty in justifying extending the deadline.
Maybe something in Johnson’s recent statements may give us a possible clue as to where we are going. According to the BBC website, we get the ritual wish for a Canadian deal, and a reiteration that the UK “was ready should it have to leave without a deal” – which, of course, it is not.
But then Johnson says: “We’re resolved on either course, we’re prepared for either course and we’ll make it work but it’s very much up to our friends and partners”. This is not the first time we’ve seen this phraseology, and one wonders whether this is being used to pave the way for a walk-out.
If, for instance, the European Council doesn’t come up with an offer for an all-singing, all-dancing Canada offer, Johnson could take it as a rejection and use this as his excuse for ending the talks.
For all that, in a separate piece, the Guardian is saying that, come what may, the talks have to finish by the end of October.
EU officials cite the volume of work required to turn the deal into a legal treaty, now expected to run to 1,000 pages. “The end of October is a genuinely hard deadline”, says one of the those officials. “I honestly physically don’t know how things would work in a shorter time. Normally we would do this in 18 months. But I know no one in the UK believes that”.
We then have David McAllister, a German Christian Democrat MEP and close ally of chancellor Merkel. He says that “a ready text must be available by the end of October” to start ratifying the agreement.
“This is not a technocratic position, but a legal requirement”, he adds. “The council [of EU ministers] and the European Parliament must have the necessary time to scrutinise the agreement and give their consent. We have expressly communicated this to the British side”. And, as we’ve remarked previously, there is that little matter of the UK Internal Market Bill, which might have the EP refusing to ratify on principle.
For the moment, though, although we can take it that we are not much further forward, the 15 October deadline has now become somewhat fuzzy. Otherwise, it seems more like a game of “chicken” as we wait to see who swerves away first.
