17 Dec 2019 Every time Boris Johnson vowed to 'get Brexit done' during the election campaign, his words were met with the same sceptical chorus from Labour, the Lib Dems, BBC News and various 'fact-checking' outfits that have sprung up in recent times.
The PM can't really deliver Brexit, it was said, because several years of arduous trade negotiations with Brussels lie ahead. It was ludicrous to suppose these can be concluded by the end of 2020, as he has undertaken to do.
After all, the free-trade agreement which the EU struck with Canada took seven years to negotiate. A widespread view – admittedly one entertained mostly by Remainers – has been that the UK would be lucky to have a deal even at the end of a further extension to December 2022.
So Mr Johnson's decision to enshrine in law a commitment to complete a new trading arrangement with the EU by the end of next year has infuriated his critics, discomfited Brussels and spooked the foreign exchange markets.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson chairs the first meeting of the Cabinet in Number 10 Downing street following the general election
Prime Minister Boris Johnson holds his first Cabinet meeting following the General Election in Downing Street on Tuesday
Just when many thought the possibility of No Deal had been taken off the table, he has seemingly plonked it back on. No agreement by the end of next year, and we could jump off the 'cliff edge' so often invoked by apocalyptically-minded Remainers.
Is this an act of hubris on behalf of a Prime Minister who has routed Jeremy Corbyn and Labour, won an impregnable majority and stamped his authority on his party? Is it a sign of a reckless, gambling nature?
Or is it a way of honouring his undertaking to his new, pro-Leave (and ex-Labour voting) supporters in the North, Midlands and Wales to 'get Brexit done' – and a means of putting pressure on Brussels to come to an agreement speedily and without the dragging of feet?
Prime Minister Boris Johnson on the first day of Parliament in the House of Commons, in London on Tuesday
Not without one or two qualms, I think the latter. The Prime Minister correctly believes that EU countries want and need a workable deal, which will cover everything from tariff-free trade to security co-operation to aviation to common defence and fishing.
And he is surely right to reason that enshrining a commitment in law will emphasise his determination and strength of purpose, and concentrate the minds of EU leaders and bureaucrats marvellously.
The PM knows that if he gives the EU's negotiators five years to strike a deal, it will take five years, and the Government will be cast in the role of supplicant, as Theresa May humiliatingly was. By insisting it must be done quickly, and on his timetable, he has seized the initiative.
Needless to say, Brussels is not cock-a-hoop. The EU's chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, recently threw doubt on whether a deal could be completed so quickly. He said: 'It is unrealistic that a global negotiation can be done in 11 months, so we can't do it all.'
But as Michael Gove – who will be the UK's trade supremo in future talks – has pointed out, Mr Barnier previously said that the Withdrawal Agreement he negotiated with Mrs May could not be changed, and was ultimately forced to back down.
But as Michael Gove (pictured)– who will be the UK's trade supremo in future talks – has pointed out, Mr Barnier previously said that the Withdrawal Agreement he negotiated with Mrs May could not be changed, and was ultimately forced to back down
Other noises coming from EU nations are more positive. Ursula von der Leyen, who has taken over from Jean-Claude Juncker as President of the European Commission, said on Friday that 'the time-frame ahead of us is very challenging'. That does not sound to me like a closing of the door.
Yesterday, Sabine Weyand, director-general of the EU's trade department, also sounded conciliatory. She said: 'Given all the signals. . . we are well-advised to take seriously that the UK does not intend to go for an extension of the transition, and we need to be prepared for that.'
We should remember that the Political Declaration signed by Mr Johnson and EU leaders in October envisages agreement being reached in key areas by the end of next year, and in the case of fisheries by July.
It's true the Political Declaration is not legally binding. But Brussels can hardly now rule out the possibility of completing a deal by December 2020 having raised the hope that it could be done.
Moreover, as has been widely noted, our standards and interests are aligned with the EU because the UK has been a member of the organisation for 46 years. We are not in the position of a country such as Canada, which entered talks with virtually a blank piece of paper.
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
For all these reasons, there are grounds for optimism that, notwithstanding the naysayers, a satisfactory agreement can be reached by the end of next year, and the perils of No Deal averted.
Yet it would be stupid to deny there are risks, even if they are mostly avoidable. One is that the pressure of time will be so great that the UK will agree to be bound by EU standards so tightly that a trade agreement with the United States could be problematic.
Another worry is that, having farmed out its trade policy to Brussels since 1973, the UK does not have enough top-rate, experienced trade negotiators to take part in complex, wide-ranging talks.
Raoul Ruparel, who advised Mrs May on trade and other matters, suggests the Government is not 'match fit' for the next phase of negotiations. It's hard to know whether he is right.
What is clear, though, is that putting Michael Gove in charge of negotiations on the British side is a masterstroke by Boris. Mr Gove has a first-class analytical brain, and an eye of detail unmatched by any other senior minister.
His two-year stint as Environment Secretary has given him a knowledge of agriculture, fishing and food standards that will be invaluable during trade negotiations.
As for Labour, although it will grumble (shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer has already claimed that the plan is 'reckless' and 'puts people's jobs at risk'), it is too diminished a force, and too preoccupied with its own future, to pose much of a threat to the Government
It's clear, too, that Mr Johnson's ambitious strategy will encounter no resistance within his own party. Tory Remainers have been purged and scattered. Hard-line Brexiteers in the European Research Group will welcome the robust new policy.
As for Labour, although it will grumble (shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer has already claimed that the plan is 'reckless' and 'puts people's jobs at risk'), it is too diminished a force, and too preoccupied with its own future, to pose much of a threat to the Government.
And what happens if a deal is not reached by the end of next year? It is inconceivable that any sensible Prime Minister in possession of his faculties – and Boris certainly is – would take Britain out of the EU without a deal. The economic consequences would be too painful.
If a deal is not reached in time, the Government could change the law again, and seek another extension. It wouldn't be the first time that Boris Johnson had broken a self-imposed deadline.
Or – more likely, I think – Britain could leave the orbit of the EU with a deal which, although not complete, gave adequate protection to the economies of both parties. It could then be added to, and elaborated, over subsequent years.
All that is necessary is for EU leaders and mandarins to believe that Boris means business. They may suspect he is bluffing, but they can't be certain. For the first time in a long time, the Prime Minister of Great Britain is going to be taken seriously.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7803327/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Prime-Minster-EU-seriously.html
