Well done, Mrs May – but worse is to come

Kipling called triumph and disaster “those two impostors”, and Theresa May has met with both in the course of a hectic few days. On Monday, a calamitous breakdown in communication between the Government and the Democratic Unionist Party scuppered an agreement with the EU to move on to the next stage of Brexit negotiations. By yesterday, the Prime Minister was hailed as a conquering hero, after Brussels finally accepted that “sufficient progress” had been made to proceed.

The reality lies somewhere in between. Monday was always a setback, rather than a complete breakdown; and the first-phase deal struck yesterday is merely the precursor to an even harder slog ahead.

None the less, Mrs May deserves praise for her stamina and doggedness, as does David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, and his officials. They always said the bargaining would be difficult, and so it has proved. Brinkmanship is the very stuff of European politics, and not for the first time a British prime minister has had to work through the night to deliver a bleary-eyed statement announcing an 11th-hour rapprochement.

Perversely, it may have helped Mrs May politically for this process to have been so problematic, because the direction of travel she is now taking is at odds with what many Brexiteers wanted to see. The unfolding narrative is more acceptable to Remainers, who want as close a relationship as possible with the EU, than to Leavers, who favoured a clean break. However, reconciling these two approaches is no easier and the tensions will continue, particularly inside the Conservative Party. But it has given Mrs May the breathing space she needs and her Cabinet colleagues rallied to her side.

The agreement required compromise on both sides, though far more on the part of the UK than the EU. The Brexit payment will be up to £39 billion net and the rights of some three million EU citizens in Britain are protected, just as the Government always insisted they would be. But the European Court of Justice will retain a role in upholding those rights for eight years after Brexit, which is something Brexiteers will find hard to swallow.

The agreed form of words over the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland reflects the ambiguities that run throughout the document. The constitutional integrity of the UK will be protected, but there will be no hard frontier. Regulations will be held in alignment, even if a trade deal is not agreed. Michel Barnier said this would be a special arrangement that would apply only to the “island of Ireland”, not to the rest of the UK, which does seem to treat the North separately.

This vagueness will be obviated if the Government secures a beneficial free-trade deal after the transition period. The EU’S draft guidelines for the next phase state that the UK will remain a “member” of the customs union and single market after March 2019, something that Mrs May had previously ruled out. During this period of “around two years”, the UK would be subject to the full jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and the “four freedoms”, including free movement of people. Furthermore, any rule changes during the transition period will apply to the UK even though we will not have a say in them.

If we accept these terms then, to all intents and purposes, we would still be in the EU and paying towards its upkeep, only without any say over what is going on. However, Mrs May has to accept the reality of her political position. Given that a majority of MPS favours what might be termed a “soft” Brexit, her approach is the only one that would get through Parliament.

While preparations for “no deal” continue, in Whitehall there is a sense that the Government is going through the motions. Mr Davis admitted this week that no impact assessments for a hard exit have been drawn up, nor is anyone talking any more about a cliff-edge departure, or saying “no deal is better than a bad deal”.

It is, after all, the policy of the Government and of the EU to reach an agreement on our future relationship. The big question still to be answered is, on what terms? Michael Gove, the Environment Secretary and leading Brexiteer, looked forward to a deal that would effectively replicate what we have now in terms of frictionless trade and include an agreement on services, which is the biggest part of the UK economy. But while this is a worthy government aspiration, whether the EU will agree to it is another matter entirely.

To get this prize, the Prime Minister will need to demonstrate far greater political dexterity over the next six months than we have seen over the past six. Britain has just agreed to pay close to £40 billion into the EU’S coffers, so we are entitled to some of the prerogatives of a buyer and we need to leverage our position, not surrender at every turn. The next phase will not start until February at the earliest and will initially focus on the transition phase, with no proper trade talks until after the UK has left in March 2019. The timetable envisages an agreement by October, so there is not much time left. But at least we are still at the table.

If we accept these terms then, to all intents and purposes, we would still be in the EU, only without any say