The European "Research" Group speaks

Yesterday, the ERG published a report on a managed no deal.

They call it "a managed clean Brexit".

Whatever that is.

It is a rehash to vague and unfounded (in reality) ideas and proposals that either don't exist, or incompatible with international law, or are just stupid.

I cannot begin to describe the feeling of frustration that the UK is now two months beyond the initial proposed Brexit day, having not learned a thing about the process that has gotten us here.

There are no alternate arrangements or facilitation that can render infrastructure obsolete on the Irish Border in the case of no deal. It exists nowhere in the world currently, and our own Government says such a system could be a decade off from being implemented, not ready to go in October.

Proposing not to pay the financial settlement means the UK reneging on its international treaty obligations, and in a single action making the UK untrustworthy just at the moment the UK would have to start multiple trade negotiations with 70 countries around the world, just to stand still. Not paying will be a major error, and then the first demand by the EU on resumption of talks would be the financial settlement, closely followed by the citizen#s rights and then the backstop. In the event of no deal, these are not going away. Unless we propose to do no trade with the EU at all. Or reach agreements on any other area affected by no deal.

The EU will not accept a temporary FTA with the UK, never has proposed it, just one with Britain, or UK minus Northern Ireland.

Without a WA there is no transition, and no going back to try to rejoin, unless the EU breaks its own rules, and would impose punitive terms.

With no WA there are no side deals, no management of a no deal. It is a fairy story.

Without the a WA, the UK drops out of every agreement and deal it is currently part of as a member of the EU. Trade related, and related to all other areas.

The report deals with only imports from the EU to the UK, not the other way, like that's not really important. I'm sure farmers will be cock-a-hoop about that.

Mutual recognition of services should be "relatively simple", this despite no trade deal in history ever including the services sector.

It goes on to claim that the EU hampers growth. It offers no proof. It proposes dropping tariffs to zero on produces not grown at home. Starting negotiations with another country from a point where the other side enjoy tariff free trade does not encourage them to negotiate anything.

The report proposes conducting major trade negotiation FTA with the EU, the US< China and major trading partners, simultaneously. Thus far the UK has failed to negotiate three small areas of trade with the EU in the WA. One is tempted to say the ERG really don't know what they're talking about.

The report suggests rewriting FTAs with developing countries, with no proposals of which or what or how. Otherwise, fine.

The UK should join the Trans Pacific Partnership, but this will not affect the UK's ability to trade with the EU. Chlorinated chicken?

The UK should be able to do what it wants in relation to trade, and if the EU objects, threaten them with action under WTO rules. Such judgments take years to be made, are unenforceable, and the US is undermining the WTO by blocking new appointments. Otherwise, also good.