Wednesday 12 December 2018

Squaring the circle

I think that I've just about got this right:

The Prime Minister accepts unreservedly that any withdrawal agreement with the EU27 must include a legally binding commitment to a 'backstop' which prevents a hard border across Ireland.

In order to get this through her own party, she is asking the EU27 to give her a legally binding commitment that they won't hold her to her own legally binding commitment.

Thus far, at least, she hasn't spotted the flaw in this plan, and is busy trying to implement it.  At least she'll have something else to occupy her for the next few days...


Anonymous said...

So, the way forward ... a new referendum on:

Mrs May's way


the WTO way

So simplez!

John Dixon said...

Maybe, maybe not. Things are very simple in your world; the one I inhabit is a good deal more complex. IF - and it's still a big if - there is to be a further referendum, agreeing the question is likely to be even more difficult than agreeing to hold it. Your argument is based on an assumption that the decision has already been taken; the question is about the how. One alternative view (of many!) is that if parliament has already rejected May's deal, the remaining choice is between no deal and remain. Another is that, since parliament is unlikely to agree no deal in any circumstances, the choice should be between May's deal and remain. And another is that there needs to be three options, or a two-part question, which in itself includes several sub-options. Whilst I support a second referendum if there is evidence that views have changed in the light of events or if parliament is simply unable to agree on any option, I do understand that it's not the simple resolution as some paint it.