Inflexible?

In an article in yesterday's Financial Times it was suggested that the EU have failed in not being more flexible towards the EU, and may have harmed their own straegic objectives.

Thing is, the EU behaved as properly as you would expect an organisation well versed in trade negotiations. That the UK did not, and still does now what it wants at the end of what we laughingly call Brexit, is not their fault.

The EU's objectives is to protect the single market, it's citizens, businesses and manufacturers. Apart from that, they would be willing to talk.

Many time, in the aftermath of the Cabinet rejecting her WA, May went cap in hand to several EU summits looking for "a deal". What is it you want? Merkal would ask every time.

She did not know.

The EU negotiated in good faith with the UK, through whoever was Brexit Secretary at the time; DD, Raab or Barclay. Although it knew getting a WA and WAB through Parliament would be difficult, they had to believe that May knew the UK Parliament and had the numbers or could do deals that could get it passed.

What should the EU have done, offered a deal that harmed the Single Market? Weakened regulations for UK companies? No, it treated a UK that had left the EU like any other third country, as WTO rules demanded.

No, all 27 remaining member states, got together and agreed what they wanted, then gave their chief negotiator, Mr Barnier a mandate. The UK Government gave David Davis a packed lunch.

Not agreeing what is wanted at the end, meant that the other side, the EU, will decide the direction for you. And that, Ladies and Gentlemen is taking back control.

But yes, (looks a paper) let's get Brexit done.