On Monday 21 February, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss and European Commission Vice President Maroš Šefčovič co-chaired a meeting of the EU/UK joint committee in Brussels. The committee, which was set up to oversee the implementation of the Brexit deal, had not met since June last year.

Following the meeting, Šefčovič tweeted that they had taken stock and that the “hard work continues”. In a press release, he said that “a lot has happened since our last Joint Committee”, and that talks had intensified “on ways to facilitate the implementation of the Protocol”. He added that his objective remains the same:

Took stock of our talks on the IE/NI Protocol. Hard work continues.

My team will continue to work flat out on the outstanding issues within the Protocol and build on our proposed solutions. They offer remarkable simplification and a big permanent impact.https://t.co/uiOJLLNQWx pic.twitter.com/FusMD2fqDb

— Maroš Šefčovič🇪🇺 (@MarosSefcovic) February 21, 2022

Citizens’ rights

Šefčovič described citizens’ rights as the Commission’s “top priority from day one”. While reiterating the importance of protecting citizens’ rights, he expressed concern over two outstanding issues:

• The loss of residence status if an EU citizen does not apply in time to progress from pre-settled to settled status
• And the lack of legal certainty for EU citizens with a new residence status, as to whether their rights are guaranteed by the Withdrawal Agreement or by UK immigration law

Šefčovič expressed regret at the UK’s position on both issues, and is currently considering the EU’s next steps.

The meeting was also attended by James Cleverly on behalf of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. Cleverly said in a tweet that he had “encouraged the EU to take a proactive role resolving cases where UK nationals continue to face difficulties with citizens’ rights in some EU member states”.

I joined @TrussLiz in Brussels today for 🇬🇧 🇪🇺 Joint Committee.

During the meeting I encouraged the EU to take a proactive role resolving cases where UK nationals continue to face difficulties with citizens’ rights in some EU member states. https://t.co/SB2GGEfQZ5

— James Cleverly🇬🇧 (@JamesCleverly) February 21, 2022

Northern Ireland Protocol

With regard to the discussion on the protocol, Šefčovič described the talks as “neither a breakthrough or a breakdown”. He said he and Truss would continue to “keep our eyes on the ball to find durable solutions for the benefit of Northern Ireland”.

In a joint statement, both sides reiterated their commitment to protecting the Good Friday Agreement. They underlined their joint “ongoing determination” to address the outstanding issues and find durable solutions “for the benefit of citizens, businesses and stability in Northern Ireland”.

Šefčovič said that his team would “continue to work flat out on the outstanding issues” while building on the “far-reaching solutions that the EU presented”. His contact with Northern Irish stakeholders had reassured him, he said, “that we should stay laser-focused on practical solutions” particularly in regard to customs and the movement of sanitary/phytosanitary goods.

With UK Foreign Secretary @trussliz, we have just concluded our ninth meeting of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee.

Our joint statement 👉 https://t.co/183uPnvgFJ. pic.twitter.com/Yy44eLgG4W

— Maroš Šefčovič🇪🇺 (@MarosSefcovic) February 21, 2022

Talks in stasis

Although recent talks between the UK and EU have been lighter and more constructive in tone, little seems to have been accomplished. The language seems more positive, and both sides describe an ”ongoing determination” to resolve outstanding issues, but Brussels and London remain far apart on some fundamental points.

The UK is still seeking changes to the deal it signed, while the EU insists that the deal is done. Minor tweaks aside, the EU says the deal cannot be re-opened or renegotiated: our prime minister must honour the international agreement he negotiated, signed and sold to parliament and the country.

As Šefčovič said after the meeting, “ultimately, this is the only way to protect the hard-earned gains of the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement in all its dimensions, while avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland and minimising disruptions caused by Brexit without compromising the integrity of the EU’s single market.”

With the Northern Ireland elections fast approaching, talks have now moved into a “discreet” phrase, according to an EU official. Nothing much is expected to happen regarding the protocol any time soon.

One can only hope that, Brexit talks or no, the UK and EU are at least working together to deal with other pressing international matters. As Šefčovič said at the end of his statement, “Today’s current challenging times call, more than ever before, for a strong partnership between the European Union and the United Kingdom”. Let’s hope so, for the sake of the UK, Europe and Ukraine.

MET POLICE PARTYGATE QUESTIONNAIRE

(only for use by Downing Street staff/residents)

CONFIDENTIAL

As an employee/resident of Downing Street, you are required to complete a questionnaire regarding your attendance at any/all social events that took place on the premises during Covid lockdown.

You will need to complete one questionnaire for every party, gathering or work event, including those taking place in the Downing Street gardens. Further copies of this questionnaire are available on request, if the 10 copies supplied are insufficient.

All the questions are multiple choice – please select one answer per question, except where specified “tick all that apply”.

You have seven days to respond. Failure to answer the questions truthfully could result in a more in-depth questionnaire, a Police interrogation, a severe telling off and/or a fixed penalty fine.

Date of party/gathering/work event ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

1. Were you at a party in No. 10 Downing Street during lockdown?

• There were no parties
• All the rules were followed
• I thought it was a work event
• Ask Sue Gray

2. Were you aware of the lockdown rules at the time?

• Yes, and I didn’t break any
• No, and I didn’t break any
• Yes, but they don’t apply to me
• What rules?

3. When did you first hear about the party?

• I received an invitation 1-7 days in advance
• I received an invitation at least 8 days in advance
• I was told about it on the day of the event
• Nobody told me there was a party, I just followed the sound of the karaoke

4. While at the party/work meeting in Downing Street, did you maintain social distancing?

• I kept well away from the general public
• I followed my colleague’s lead (keep members of the opposite sex within arms’ length)
• Apart from when I was slow dancing/snogging my colleague, yes
• Social distancing is a contradiction in terms and I refuse to comply

5 .If lockdown rules don’t apply in this instance, why don’t they? (Tick all that apply)

• Best economic growth in the G7
• World-beating vaccine roll-out
• Because Carrie says so
• What lockdown?

6. Did you consume alcohol on the Downing Street premises?

• Of course, just like every Friday
• Don’t remember
• Only the required amount
• Yes, but only under duress

7. Did you consume drugs on the Downing Street premises?

• Of course, just like every Friday
• Don’t remember
• Only the required amount
• Yes, but only under duress

8. Did you purchase or supply any items for the party? (Tick all that apply)

• Alcohol
• Food and/or fags
• Balloons, decorations, banners, party favours
• Condoms

9- Did you interact with the Police security detail? (Tick all that apply)

• On entering/leaving the premises
• My person/belongings were searched
• Assistance was provided when required (e.g. wardrobe malfunction, needing a bucket)
• What security detail? I thought they were the entertainment!

If you are in possession of any photographs/videos of the proceedings, please email them directly to the Met Police Partygate Investigations Team. They will not be used publicly without your express permission, though may be shared amongst colleagues in Met locker rooms. Please tag any officers/colleagues whose names (or nicknames) you know.

NB. You need not include any images taken using the Downing St photocopier.

Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. If we are satisfied with your answers, you will not hear from us again in this regard. If we are not satisfied, your next interview will be conducted face-to-face, either at your place of work or on Police premises.

We apologise in advance for any delays caused by the resignation and replacement of our leader. We are sure you will appreciate the position this puts us in, considering you may well find yourself without a leader/out of a job yourself very soon.

I hereby testify that I was not coerced or coached on the completion of this questionnaire. To the best of my knowledge, the answers I have provided are truthful and complete. And I’m very, very sorry.

……………………………………………………………….                    ………………………………………………………………………

Signature                                                                             Print Name

Thanks (& credit) to @Trump_ton for giving me the idea.

Unless you read the Irish press, you may have failed to notice that round three of the EU/UK Brexit negotiations took place on Friday 11 February. Maroš Šefčovič, vice president of the European Commission, was at Carlton Gardens in London for his third meeting with woman-of-many-hats Liz Truss. The joint statement was rather short on both word count and content. They might as well have released a statement saying, ‘a meeting took place and we took photos’.

Shortest ever joint EU UK statement following a round of Protocol talks between @trussliz and @MarosSefcovic

— Tony Connelly (@tconnellyRTE) February 11, 2022

The negotiations so far

The last meeting between Šefčovič and Truss took place on 24 January in Brussels. Little was achieved other than the arrangement of this latest head-to-head. The first meeting had likewise ended with nothing more than the parties taking a rain check. This time around they haven’t even, publicly at least, agreed a date for their next meeting.

Three rounds of talks later and we are barely any further forward. That’s despite both sides agreeing the need to wrap up negotiations – or suspend them – before the end of February, ahead of campaigning for the Northern Ireland assembly elections.

There was, at least, one positive development from round two of the talks in January – the agreement for a meeting of the EU/UK joint committee later this month. The committee, which was set up to oversee the implementation of the Brexit deal, has not met since June 2021.

Perceived problems with the protocol

The Northern Ireland protocol remains the main bone of contention between Brussels and London. The UK claims the EU is being overzealous in its application of protocol rules. The EU, on the other hand, is quick to remind London that we knew exactly what we were agreeing to when the deal was signed and lauded.

While we must hope that’s true of most of the UK negotiators, can it be true of our prime minister? He’s not exactly a details person. His interest was only in ‘getting Brexit done’ – not in how to make that happen, or how to make it a success.

As the European Commission said, in their official statement following the last meeting of the joint committee, “the Protocol is the solution that was found together with the UK, after four years of intense negotiations”. The aim of the protocol is, “to address the serious consequences that Brexit and the UK choice to leave the EU Single Market and Customs Union would have for Northern Ireland”.

A UK concession?

Although there was no mention of any progress in the joint statement, the Irish Times reported a “significant concession” from the UK regarding customs controls.

The UK has been demanding no checks on goods destined for end-users in Northern Ireland. While the EU expressed a willingness to take a lighter approach in its October 2021 proposals, it is mindful of the need to protect the integrity of the single market.

UK negotiators this week said they would accept certain customs controls, though not at existing levels; or even at the revised levels proposed by the EU last autumn. Whether that concession could be regarded as ‘significant’, perhaps only the negotiators really know. The Irish Times described it as “so sensitive” that it has not even been put in writing as yet. So, clearly not worth the paper it’s not written on.

A member of Truss’s negotiating team said she had, “put forward a series of constructive proposals to address problems created by the protocol”. She stressed that the UK’s fundamental negotiating position had not shifted. The EU gave the news a cautious welcome and suggested this was a positive move. However, one EU diplomat said, “We are not rolling out the red carpet yet. There is still a long way between the two sides”.

When it comes to Brexit, a dose of realism is needed

As the European Commission concluded in its statement following the last meeting of the joint committee:

“The UK has now to make a choice between fulfilling its legal obligations and genuinely engaging with the EU or continuing along its less than constructive path regarding the implementation of the Protocol. The EU hopes the UK chooses the former.”

For the sake of all citizens and businesses in the UK – not least those in Northern Ireland – we can only hope that we see more realism and less ideology going forward. At the very least, it’s high time Truss and her team accept one manifestly obvious premise: that the protocol is not the Brexit problem, it is the Brexit solution.

Unless, of course, she would like to swap it for single market and customs union membership. The country could live with that in time.

My third meeting with 🇬🇧 Foreign Secretary @trussliz. Our joint statement 👉 https://t.co/fIljgp9OIp. pic.twitter.com/FFigDmCGf6

— Maroš Šefčovič🇪🇺 (@MarosSefcovic) February 11, 2022

“Not a complete clown”

Harri was formerly a member of Boris Johnson’s team during Johnson’s first term as Mayor of London. Considering his well-regarded skills as a political communicator, it was perhaps a surprise that the first utterance we heard from Harri was that Johnson is “not a complete clown, he’s a very likeable character”. Hardly a reassuring start.

"I walked in, I gave him a salute and said ‘Prime Minister, Guto Harri reporting for duty’ and he stood up from behind his desk and started to salute but then said ‘What am I doing, I should take the knee for you."….

— Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) February 7, 2022

In a recent interview, Harri told BBC Newscast that, “Boris has always underestimated how critical it is to have a fantastic team around him”. He said he had been informed by some in Westminster that they were not interested in supporting the prime minister while the current political scandals rage on. According to Harri, one commentator told him, “I’m not interested in going in to walk into the gallows”.

Not wanting to be associated with a prime minister on his skids, and with his popularity in freefall, is understandable. What is not so comprehensible is the unwavering devotion and loyalty that (a small number of) ministers and MPs still show to their boss. In the case of a certain female cabinet minister, one can only assume it’s the sheer desperation of knowing that no other PM would ever consider giving her a job.

I am so very deeply tired of being governed by this collection of morons and halfwits. https://t.co/MnmwxJoepa

— Ian Dunt (@IanDunt) February 7, 2022

Hedging their bets

Leaving aside the loyalists, and those who have already pinned their “Get Boris done” colours to the flagpole, the vast majority of Conservative backbenchers are still sitting on the fence. Many believe, perhaps correctly, that they owe their place in Westminster to Johnson. They trusted him to carry the party over the line at the last general election, and he didn’t disappoint. In fact, he exceeded all their expectations and won a huge majority.

But the ‘qualities’ that won Johnson an election do not encompass all, or perhaps any, of the skills necessary to run a country. Not only has Johnson proved an incompetent, careless leader, but he has also mired himself and the party in sleaze, corruption, cronyism and poor judgment.

You might think Johnson’s performance would encourage more backbenchers to distance themselves from the toxic atmosphere, for fear of being tarnished by the same brush, but no. The number of letters of no confidence submitted to the 1922 Committee still falls short of the 54 required for a vote to be called.

So, why aren’t more Conservative MPs making a stand against Johnson?

Better the devil you know

One theory is that there is currently no suitable alternative candidate for PM – or at least not one who the party has sufficient confidence could win an election. Of course, the issue is not just whether the candidate is suitably statesmanlike, charismatic, strong, etc, etc. It’s whether they have the power to change public opinion about the party.

Johnson has done untold damage to the reputation of the country, but he has not suffered the consequences alone. It’s not just his personal ratings that have suffered from his leadership, he has destroyed the party’s standing in the process. It would have to be a very special candidate that could turn opinion around and convince the public that all the pain, the damage, the recklessness and the waste were solely down to Johnson, and not to the government that circled the wagons around him. That’s a tall order, even for a new leader with a strong following. And I don’t see any of those waiting in the wings.

Maybe – just maybe – with the wind in the right direction, and new staff advising the boss, perhaps Johnson can redeem himself, and repeat the one thing he’s actually good at – campaigning and winning elections. That’s, of course, assuming Johnson would ever, will ever, listen to advice.

Timing is everything

Another concern raised by wavering Tory MPs is the fear of acting too soon and potentially making matters worse. Though I don’t doubt there are many more backbenchers strongly considering submitting their own letter of no confidence, deciding when to act is not so straightforward.

Peak too soon, with an early vote, and maybe Johnson will survive it. If the PM wins the vote, then he can’t be challenged again for another 12 months. With the next general election only two years away, and Johnson in power for the next year at least, that could be a recipe for Tory disaster. Either Johnson does more damage to himself and the party, then tries to fight an election. Or, he’s gone with less than a year to attempt to build up a new leader, transform the party, and convince the public that it’s not more of the same.

One previously loyal backbencher, in a safe Tory seat, recently told me that a letter of no confidence at this time would “do no good”. Johnson would win the vote, “leaving him emboldened and safe for another year”. He added, “Is that what you really want?”

Decision time on the clown in charge

Whether at home, or on the international stage, Johnson and his government are looking increasingly like rank amateurs and outsiders. They have turned a successful, outward-looking, democratic country into an object of embarrassment, disdain and pity.

As government popularity has fallen, the opposition – most notably Sir Keir Starmer and the Labour Party – are starting to demonstrate a readiness for government. Considering how the Labour Party was perceived when Starmer took over less than two years ago, that is no mean feat. And that’s not just down to Johnson’s failures.

Tory MPs continue to contemplate their navels, and worry about their own futures rather than ours. They need to wake up. It’s decision time – support Johnson or don’t. It’s time to accept that the country needs so much more than a PM who is “not a complete clown”.

As the Tories dither, the country is going to hell in a handcart and the driver is more interested in his own reflection than important matters of state. The public, meanwhile, are considering their own leadership choices. And fewer and fewer of them are choosing Tories. Or clowns.

This is good. pic.twitter.com/jL68jMpUm1

— getnorthern – “a discrace to Britain” (@getnorthern) February 5, 2022

Most of us have heard of the ERG (European Research Group), the libertarian, hard-right group of Conservative MPs instrumental in bringing about a hard Brexit. However, there are several more, including the Covid Recovery Group and the Net Zero Scrutiny Group (NZSG).

Steve Baker MP for Wycombe and self-labelled ‘Brexit hard man’ is a prominent member of many of these groups. He and his ilk are committed to fundamentally changing the society we live in by using pseudo-scientific research, skewed analysis, and political pressure. They are doing so not just with the public purse, but with the help and support of some questionable international groups.

As a recent Byline Times article revealed, the American, pro-Trump, far-right are pushing their agenda through British politics, including the likes of Steve Baker who:

Net Zero Scrutiny Group

The NZSG’s remit argues against the government’s plan to reach net zero by 2050. It is pushing for the expansion of domestic fossil fuel supplies. Like the ERG, they are funded through the public purse and their arguments are often based on skewed data and facts.

They say they want to ease the taxpayer and public purse burden. They claim to care about reducing household bills, and are using rising inflation as an excuse to argue for reduced spending on green initiatives whilst advocating for further oil and gas exploration, including fracking.

There are thought to be around 20 Conservatives in this group. Those named are Craig Mackinley, Steve Baker, Esther McVey, Robert Halfon, Julian Knight, Anne Marie Morris, Andrew Bridgen, David Jones, Scott Benton, Damien Moore, Mark Jenkinson, Andrew Lewer, Karl McCartney, Marcus Fysh, Lee Anderson, Philip Davies, Greg Smith, Lord Lilley of Offa, Adam Holloway, and Craig Tracey.

Connections to Global Warming Policy Foundation

Steve Baker is a trustee of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (rebranded as Net Zero Watch in 2021). Its founding member is prominent climate change denier and former-chancellor Lord Nigel Lawson. In 2014, the Charity Commission ruled that the foundation had breached rules on impartiality and its charitable status. After this event, a subgroup, Global Warming Policy Forum, was then set up to become its lobbying arm. This organisation is likely where the NZSG will get much of its ‘information’.

The forum questions the scientific consensus on human-induced climate change. It promotes climate change ‘scepticism’, campaigning against policies to cut emissions of greenhouse gases. Their activities have included the reproduction of newspaper articles, with fake headlines inserted to give them a sceptic spin and are funded by, in the whole, unknown donors. The foundation has rejected freedom of information requests to disclose its funding sources on at least four occasions.

Fossil fuel industry has spent billions protecting itself

The fossil fuel industry has been exposed by many for the intense efforts it has gone to save their industry. As The Climate Reality Project revealed, fossil fuel companies have blocked climate action for years:

The NZSG is a pro-fossil fuel group. They fall under the guise of being about research and data, yet their arguments and messaging are not based on science or fact. They are a radical think tank with their own agenda to undermine the government climate policy using a group of sceptics, conspiratorial denialism, and skewed data.

The government’s work needs scrutiny but not by a radical minority that consists of climate change deniers and individuals with ulterior motives who, in all likelihood, have connections to far-right groups and individuals in America

What can we expect to see from the NZSC?

Expect spin, half-truths, and manipulation of data. Craig Mackinlay, the Conservative MP for Thanet South who is leading the NZSG, has already given misleading and inaccurate claims about the cost of the government’s net-zero target. Writing for the Conservative Home website in July 2020, Mackinlay stated that the climate change committee “has come up with a new estimate for the cost of Net Zero that details £1.4 trillion of capital spending will be required to meet it”. He talks about electoral damage, the cost per household, China and India still using coal. The same old tropes we hear time and time again.

Gross misrepresentation and exaggeration

As this LSE article by Bob Ward states, the NZSG have been relying on inaccurate and misleading claims to promote their cause, particularly about the investments required to achieve the statutory target of net-zero emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050.

Like the misrepresentation of the Brexit dividend of £350m for the NHS, they reported that the climate change committee’s estimate for the cost of net zero was £1.4 trillion. Yet, they grossly misrepresented the figure by ignoring the benefits and comparing the figure to a single year’s GDP.

The cost of taking the country to net zero is over 30 years, not one year and, just like the Brexit bus lie, it does not consider any of the benefits or savings that these investments would offset, particularly avoiding the purchase of fossil fuels which would amount to £991bn during the 30 years to 2050. Yes, there would be a net cost of £321bn, but that is over 30 years. A yearly savings of £19bn would outweigh annual investment costs of £16bn by 2050. Mackinlay twisted figures for his purposes.

What is their end game?

Fossil fuel companies hope to prolong the world’s reliance on their products. They have made common cause with conservative and libertarian think tanks that promote free-market economics, just like the NZSG do. They therefore oppose fossil fuel regulation on ideological grounds.

There is no evidence that these ultra Conservatives are genuinely driven by what is best for the population and country. If they were, they would not have pushed for the hardest Brexit possible, they would not be arguing against simple covid measures, and they would not be trying to slow down the shift to a green economy, considering it is undeniably paramount to saving the planet and society from total collapse.

Money, greed, power, and insidious relationships are the governing forces behind these groups and individuals. They don’t care about the planet, individual hardships, or our children’s future. Don’t be fooled into thinking that they do.

On Monday 24 March, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss headed for Brussels for her second meeting with EU negotiator, Vice-President of the European Commission Maroš Šefčovič. It followed their first meeting two weeks ago at Chevening House in Kent, with little achieved apart from the arrangement of further discussions.

Read my earlier article on the first round of talks here

Look forward to meeting @MarosSefcovic in Brussels today for further talks on the Protocol.

We must focus on reaching a solution that protects peace and stability in Northern Ireland. pic.twitter.com/kvKQiv5loc

— Liz Truss (@trussliz) January 24, 2022

Will the Brexit negotiations ever be wrapped up?

Šefčovič expressed a desire, a week ago, to wrap up negotiations by the end of February – ahead of any campaigning for the Northern Ireland assembly elections in May. He warned that the talks could come to an end if there was no breakthrough by the end of next month. He told members of the European parliament he did not expect Article 16 to be triggered, but that the UK had still to accept the EU’s earlier proposals. Šefčovič reiterated that an overhaul of the protocol was not possible, and progress would depend on whether Truss was ready to be a “deal-maker”.

The day before Monday’s talks, having already agreed to the end of February deadline, Truss was setting out her stall. She suggested both sides needed to focus on practical issues, and not re-visit old arguments. Truss said that, regardless of whether you voted Leave or Remain, or represented the UK or EU, “the focus must be on protecting the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement and fixing the protocol”. She stressed the need to find “practical solutions to problems on the ground and maintaining the integrity of the United Kingdom”. She said she looked forward to meeting Šefčovič, and added that “there is a deal to be done, and we need to make it happen”.

Protocol talks show only minimal progress

When reports of Monday’s meeting were released, it appears there were few developments. The meeting had followed intensive talks between the two teams the week before. Those discussions will continue and an agreement has been reached to “take stock again by the end of next week”.

🇪🇺🇬🇧My second meeting with Foreign Secretary @trussliz, following a week of intensive talks between our teams. Discussions continue and we will take stock again by the end of next week.

Our joint statement 👉 https://t.co/ISuE7K0asA pic.twitter.com/s0ufxB8iJd

— Maroš Šefčovič🇪🇺 (@MarosSefcovic) January 24, 2022

In a joint statement, it was confirmed that “the meeting took place in a constructive atmosphere with the aim to advance the talks”. Truss and Šefčovič “reaffirmed their shared desire for a positive EU-UK relationship underpinned by our shared belief in freedom and democracy and cooperation on common global challenges”.

There was progress, however, with regard to the EU-UK joint committee. The panel – set up to oversee the implementation of the Brexit deal – has not met since last June. The pair have now agreed to the committee meeting in February.

.@marossefcovic and I had further talks today in Brussels. Teams continue intensive discussions 👇 pic.twitter.com/thgxjJiaJc

— Liz Truss (@trussliz) January 24, 2022

There was progress, however, with regard to the EU-UK joint committee. The panel – set up to oversee the implementation of the Brexit deal – has not met since last June. The pair have now agreed to the committee meeting in February.

Though we’ve yet to see any evidence of much progress, it does appear as though conditions have improved since Lord Frost stepped down. Despite Truss’ initial threats and posturing, relations seem to be more cordial and cooperative. Whether the change in mood music will lead to a break though, we shall have to wait and see.

One thing that is clear though, is that it may be difficult to reach any agreement until those representing the UK’s interests get a dose of Brexit reality. That’s one element that’s been missing throughout the entirety of Brexit. Outstanding issues will never be resolved unless or until the UK finally drops the ‘cake and eat it’ attitude. It’s high time the UK appreciates it is nowhere near as ‘global’ or important as it would like to believe.