EU Hauteur is delaying negotiations not the UK - Letter to The Independent 10th October

Referring to your editorial of 10^th October (On Brexit, the EU’s view is the one that counts), I fear you have ignored one of the basic features of negotiation – if you believe you enter the negotiations as a supplicant then that is where you will end up!

The EU is making it difficult as they believe it is in their interest – deter others and make the UK pay. However a more careful analysis will show that the UK has plenty of cards to play even if some think they should not be used (security and defence spring to mind). Moreover the EU has tied its own hands so tightly that they have little flexibility. This can be seen from the Guidelines published 31^st March 2017. This lack of flexibility is reflected in the stances adopted by Barnier and Juncker. The need to accommodate views of 27 countries further restricts the ability to engage in flexible negotiations leading to finding the lowest common denominator (conservative,cautious and very risk averse).

The document of 31^st March is extraordinarily arrogant – just to take three items: Section 11 para. 3 - “The European Council will monitor progress closely and determine when sufficient progress has been achieved to allow negotiations to proceed to the next phase.”; para. 12 - “The Union should agree with the United Kingdom on arrangements as regards to Sovereign Base Areas of the United Kingdom in Cyprus….”; para. 22 - “After the United Kingdom leaves the Union, no agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without the agreement between the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom.

The UK on the other hand (while there are self inflicted difficulties in the government) has to play the cards of reciprocal Citizens Rights, Financial Settlement and preservation of the frictionless border between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland (it should be noted that the Common Travel Area is nothing to do with the EU!).

As regards reciprocal Citizens Rights this should be solvable via a mechanism whereby the UK Supreme Court and the ECJ consider the views of each other in any dispute. On the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland – Common Travel Area and frictionless border – the provision of electronic pre-registration of individuals, vehicles and goods is already operable elsewhere. So far as a Financial Settlement is concerned I think it is instructive that following the recent 3 hour presentation by UK lawyers as to the legal basis of such claims Barnier could only pull a face (this may be his permanent demeanour). If the EU was sure of its grounds then a reference to International Arbitration would seem appropriate. It is, of course, a nonsense for the EU to suggest such a matter should be determined by the ECJ (the EU’s own court). Reference must also be made to page 1 of the statement of 31^st March – The EU “…will be constructive throughout and strive to find an agreement”. The UK has made substantial offers in these areas it is time for the EU to be constructive.

I have not gone into detail regarding other areas such as security and defence which your editorial suggests should not be on the table. All I would say is be very careful EU in not over-playing your hand – this was done with eastward expansion of the Union leading to difficult relations with the eastern neighbour.

One last thing, I voted to remain but now is a time for re-constructed Remainers and pragmatic Brexiteers to come together to negotiate for the UK. Another referendum is not the answer as we all know it would not end there – a decade of “neverendums” would be the worst of all possible worlds! Outside the London/Westminster bubble (“Isn't outrageous that the plebians have the audacity to reject the wishes of the establishment”) this is the majority view – let’s get on with it!