For the UK Government, Brexit is fast becoming an utter nightmare. Its parliamentary support is riven by division, the main opposition party is riding high in the polls and Theresa May’s weak leadership is becoming an international embarrassment.
Like Kissinger used to complain about who to talk to to when wanting to address Europe, nobody really knows who can speak on behalf of the UK. It is currently more akin to a dysfunctional state than a coherent body politic. It’s as if a plethora of political militias are fighting a civil war over the carcass of the Bresit referendum, as they seek to impose their version of Brexit onto the UK. There appears to be nobody with the political authority (or democratic mandate) to be able to navigate a way forward that would win majority support in the UK parliament.
Whilst May is titular head of government, the EU institutions represented by Jean-Claude Juncker and Michel Barnier will observe the normal civilities and engage with her as protocol demands. However, the interlocutors on the EU side are acutely aware that whatever the UK side agrees to in negotiations, this can only be viewed as an aspiration rather than a deliverable pledge. In that there seems little chance of Theresa May mustering a parliamentary majority on any agreed position.
The sticking point over the UK’s budget contributions is an example of how May needs to finesse her own party in order to move the talks on. Yet she has neither the political authority or support to be able to openly acknowledge the size of the UK’s contribution. Her speech in Florence was a pointer as to a way forward but it neither indicated how far she would travel or how long it would take.
May also has to manage expectations over the European Court of Justice. Her strategic foolishness over ruling out any role for the ECJ post-Brexit will lead to a host of judicial and administrative problems down the line. Firstly, her position is unsustainable anyway. Any dealings with the EU regarding goods and service will have to be conducted under the EU’s judicial and regulatory regimes, there is no escaping that. Secondly, as far as the UK is concerned it will still have to shadow most of the EU regulatory regimes (e.g. European Chemicals Agency) if its industries want to adhere to global standards in many areas.
Allied to this are the dilemmas facing Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel. As the acknowledged powerbrokers in the internal workings of the EU, both have choices as to how Brexit should proceed. However, like the UK they do not have a clear picture of a particular way forward. Why should they expend precious political capital in helping May to arrive at a reasonable settlement if they don’t even know if she will be the Prime Minister at the end of the Article 50 talks.
There is no way that the current UK Government can deliver a legislative programme on Brexit that will command the confidence of Parliament. A rocky road for all lies ahead.
