Getting on with the job of Brexit? No sign of it on the British side

SIR – The Prime Minister has given the nation two mantras about herself. One is that she is “about getting on with the job”, and the other that she “wants to be clear” about everything.

But many perceive a lack of clarity, and wonder why the Government has appeared so tardy about getting on with the job of Brexit. Meanwhile, the EU has “got on with the job” and appears “clearer” and better prepared in its negotiating position than Britain under the PM and David Davis.

The EU has declared ever since the (very late) invocation of Article 50 that the four freedoms (free movement of goods, capital, services and labour) are indivisible. Yet the Cabinet and the Tory party continue to oscillate back and forth about which slice of the EU cake we can keep as we leave the table, as if any of that is a realistic option.

Our civil service has seemed, since the referendum, to be ill-prepared with scenario planning. That impression has continued, despite position papers which have been short on clear negotiating proposals.

Of course it’s difficult, but surely by now we could have taken the initiative in negotiating, with our own clear and visionary proposals.

We don’t seem to have got on with the job, and certainly not with any clarity worth the claim.

Rev Canon Robin Morrison

Barry, Glamorgan

SIR – Hard Brexit? Bad Brexit? More like botched Brexit. Nigel Adams

Hertford

SIR – I spent most of my career negotiating commercial deals. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed and the ink has dried on the paper. If you are not credibly able to walk away at any time up to that point, you will be taken to the cleaners.

This is why it is essential that Britain should prepare for a no-deal future, irrespective of the apparent state of negotiations. The European Commission’s strategy in the next 18 months will be to spin these out, making encouraging noises from time to time to lure us into not committing the time and money required. As the clock ticks, we will make desperate concessions until it’s too late.

Then the Commission will find some excuse to persuade the 27 other EU countries to pull the rug, blaming HMG for “lack of sufficient detail” or competence, to a disloyal chorus of approval from the Opposition, the BBC and much of the UK press. The trap will be sprung. Britain will be given a generous invitation to rejoin – without the rebate and the opt-outs.

We need to disabuse ourselves of the notion that the Commission is seeking a fair and amicable outcome, or even one which makes economic sense. From the Commission’s viewpoint, pour décourager les autres, the next best outcome to having Britain return to the EU fold as a supplicant with its tail between its legs would be to have it leave in chaos with an onerous deal. Michael Jones

Cowbridge, Glamorgan