Editor’s note ~ This is the second part of a two-part series. You can read the first part here on UkipDaily.

Whilst our politicians were battling to score points off each other and our Civil Service was scurrying to make up a plan, Mr. Junker and Mr. Barnier were clearly reading just Chapter 1 of their Negotiation Skills Manual.  The political ineptitude that we have seen has only been surpassed by our negotiating blunders!  The EU (and it is important to remember that this is a negotiation between just two entities and not between Britain and 27 other countries) have been using very basic skills, including:

  •   Labelling. They have been referring to this as “Brexit,” deliberately creating a negative feel.  We did not choose to escape like some slave seeking freedom!  We chose to cancel our membership and move to better terms for our people.  Let’s start thinking and acting positively, “British Global Engagement” or BGE.Another example is the “Divorce” bill.  Why do they use the term “Divorce?”  Because with divorce comes financial sharing and responsibility for dependents.  This is NOT a divorce!  We are Members of the EU, not a husband or wife to it.  We have chosen to end our membership.  If you vote to build a new clubhouse at your football club and then give up your season ticket, you don’t still have to pay for the clubhouse!  Ceasing membership means you lose your membership rights and your responsibilities cease.  However, let’s consider the EU’s approach.  If (and I restate, IF) our responsibilities continue, then so do theirs – they will have to continue providing subsidies into the UK to which THEY committed.  Welsh Uplands and the Northern Powerhouse will at least welcome that.
  • Creating rules. The negotiating rules were already there.  Once we triggered Article 50 unless other arrangements were negotiated, WTO rules should kick in at the end of the 2 year period and the UK would have a border to manage between it and the EU.  It is the EU that has created the rule that certain things have to be agreed before they will negotiate trade terms.  We did not have to agree to that rule and should not be held hostage to that arbitrary rule.  Doing so has been a sign of weakness.
  • Creating artificial deadlines and causing delays in meeting them.  A very basic negotiating technique that deserves no further explanation. And, now we find that Ireland has dictated where we, a sovereign state, will position our border!
  • Demanding money. As a member cancelling our membership, even the House of Lords agreed that we have no legal or moral obligation to continue paying to the EU, nor them to continue subsidising anything in the UK after we leave.  But, more to the point, would you pay to stay in a discount club if you knew that they were going to charge you more for your purchases?  So, why are we even contemplating paying up to €50bn for access to an annual trade deficit of approximately €80bn?  Why was our negotiation stance not one of, “If you, the EU, want to continue to have free access to the UK market, we will advise you how much the EU will have to pay?”

Whichever way you voted in the referendum, thank you for voting and underpinning our great democratic principles.  Whichever way you voted, I respect your views.  But, we should now work together to show that democracy is the right way.

We must reset the current negotiations!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email