A Week Wasted.

Unless something dramatic happens Britain will leave the European Union (EU) on Friday (12/4/19). The Brexit.

Despite having had four months the British Parliament has so far failed to agree the terms of this Brexit. The Withdrawal Agreement. As a result Friday's (12/4/19) Brexit will be a No Deal Brexit.

You would think then that both Parliament and the government would be frantically working around the clock to find a solution. Instead both are now refusing to even engage with the issue.

Parliament is currently discussing Medical Cannabis. The government is hosting a summit on restricting the Internet.

On March 25th (25/3/19) Parliament did begin a process to find a solution to the Brexit problem. The Indicative Votes process.

Indicative Votes are essentially a conversation starter.

The type of thing you would use at a social gathering, such as a dinner party. Where everybody knows the host but nobody really knows each other. It allows people to introduce themselves and find out what they've got in common.

Indicative Votes are the Parliamentary equivalent of something like the Eurovision Song Contest or an Olympic Opening Ceremony. A much more tedious and far less sparkly equivalent.

The Indicative Votes process began with the lower house of the British Parliament, the House of Commons, passing what's known as the; "Letwin Amendment." Named after its sponsor Oliver Letwin.

The Letwin Amendment simply made a request of the government. That the business put forward by MP's be given priority over the business put forward by the government on one particular day. Wednesday, March (27/3/19).

The specific business MP's wanted to bring forward on March 27th (27/3/19) was a series of Indicative Votes. The specific business the government wanted to bring forward on March 27th (27/3/19) was a series of Indicative Votes.

So the government had absolutely no problem granting the request expressed in the Letwin Amendment.

Indicative Votes were held on March 27th (27/3/19).

The session ended with another request of the government. To hold a second round of Indicative Votes on Monday, April 1st (1/4/19). Again that is what the government was going to do anyway. So the request was granted.

Indicative Votes were again held on April 1st (1/4/19).

The session ended with another request of the government. To hold a third round of Indicative Votes on Wednesday, April 3rd (3/4/19). Again that is what the government was going to do anyway. So the request was granted.

Although it would only be formally made at the time the expectation was that the April 3rd (3/4/19) session would end with another request of the government. To hold a fourth round of Indicative Votes on Monday, April 8th (8/4/19).

Unfortunately the British Parliament finds itself dominated by The Remoaners.

This roughly 300 strong faction do not want to find a solution to Brexit. Instead they want to trick people into thinking that Brexit is unsolvable. Allowing them to cancel Brexit entirely.

As the day of Brexit draws nearer these Remoaners are finding themselves under increasing pressure. Once Brexit has happened they will no longer be able to block it. Forcing them to admit to all the lies they've told in their effort to cancel Brexit.

So on April 2nd (2/4/19) panic took over. All of the Remoaner toys came flying out of all the Remoaner prams.

The Remoaners abandoned the Indicative Votes process. Instead putting forward a new proposition. Known as the Cooper Proposition. After its main sponsor, Yvette Cooper.

The Cooper Proposition does away with any attempt to show the public that an agreement cannot be reached to solve the Brexit problem. Instead it just demands that Brexit is cancelled outright or subject to years of delays which are equivalent to Brexit being cancelled outright.

Cooper and its other sponsors would like this proposition to be known as; "EU Withdrawal Bill Number 5." Attempting to give the impression that it is a Parliamentary bill. Which would have the legal force of an Act of Parliament if passed.

The Cooper Proposition was not introduced in any of the three ways that a Parliamentary bill can be introduced.

It has also not followed the five stage; First Reading, Second Reading, Committee, Reporting, Third Reading procedure which Parliamentary bills must follow.

These are five distinct processes so can only occur on five separate days. The Cooper Proposition ignored at least two of the stages and made its way through the Commons in less than 12 hours.

The Cooper Proposition was tabled on April 3rd (3/4/19). During Parliamentary time set aside for the tabling of Indicative Votes. Therefore it can only be viewed as an Indicative Vote.

What Parliament has indicated with this particular Indicative Vote is quite clear. All they want is for Brexit to be cancelled outright.

Up until the moment the Remoaners threw their tantrum and abandoned it the Indicative Votes process had been similar to the knock-out stages of a football tournament.

The first round took place on March 27th (27/3/19). This saw eight propositions put forward. None of which received a majority. However in the process opinions were expressed and commonalities found.

The second round took place on April 1st (1/4/19). This was the Quarter-Final. Four of the eight propositions had been knocked out in the previous round. Leaving just four propositions in this round.

Of those four propositions put forward none received a majority. However that was never the point. The point is the opinions expressed and commonalities found as part of the process.

Logically it would follow that the round held on April 3rd (3/4/19) would be the Semi-Final. Two of the four propositions would have been knocked out in the previous round leaving just two in the competition.

Then there would be the Grand Final on April 8th (8/4/19).

One of the two propositions would have been knocked out at the Semi-Final stage. Leaving the final proposition to go head-to-head with the Withdrawal Agreement.

If the Remoaners had not abandoned the Indicative Votes Process I would have used the time to look, in detail, at the two propositions in the Semi-Final. Along with the Withdrawal Agreement itself.

On April 10th (10/4/19) the EU Council (EUCO) is meeting in emergency session. To discuss Britain's request for a further delay to Brexit.

As a result I now only have time to look at one of the Indicative Vote propositions. Rather than both Semi-Finalists.

In terms of which two propositions would be the Semi-Finalists I was hoping Parliament would decide. There are really two ways you can determine success.

The obvious one would be to take the two most popular propositions. The two which received the most votes in favour during the Quarter-Final. This would leave you with a Second Referendum and the EU Customs Union.

However the purpose of the Indicative Votes is really to find a compromise around which Parliament can agree.

For that you would look at the two propositions which are closest to agreement. The ones which had the smallest margin between votes in favour and votes against in the Quarter-Final.

That would leave you with the Common Market 2.0 and the EU Customs Union.

Whichever criteria you use the EU Customs Union would be one of the Semi-Finalists.

With Parliament refusing to engage with the process, let alone disagree with me, I'm also going to assume that the EU Customs Union made it through to the Grand-Final.

That is if the Grand Final were ever to take place. Rather than the Remoaners picking up the ball and storming off in a huff.

In looking at the EU Customs Union there is one thing I really need to make clear;

Britain Really Does Not Want to Join the EU Customs Union.

The Customs Union has always been a way-point on a journey to somewhere else. It has never been a destination in itself.

The Customs Union came into being in 1958. At the time it represented the highest level of economic and political integration that European nations were prepared to tolerate.

Over time European nations got used to the integration of the Customs Union and the benefits it brought. So opposition reduced and in 1993 the EU was able to introduce the Single Market. Representing a much higher level of political and economic integration.

Currently the Customs Union is used only for nations seeking to join the EU. Known as Candidate Countries.

The process of a nation joining the EU involves the opening of 35 "Chapters of Acquis." These are areas in which a Candidate Country must bring its political and economic standards up to the common standard of the EU.

Once a Candidate Country has brought its standards up to the common EU standard in a certain area that chapter is considered closed. When a nation has closed all the chapters relating to trade and economic standards it is granted access to the Customs Union.

The Customs Union gives both the Candidate Country and the EU a chance to see the common EU standards at work in practice. When both parties are satisfied the Candidate Country is granted access to the Single Market and typically full membership of the EU.

The only nation which is a member of the Customs Union but not also a member of the Single Market is Turkey.

Turkey applied to become an EU member in 1987. It was accepted as a member of the Customs Union in 1995. However since then Turkey's membership bid has stalled. Particularly in the chapters on Judiciary & Fundamental Rights and Justice, Freedom & Security.

As a result Turkey has been left languishing in the EU Customs Union unable to move forward. A situation which Turkey is really not happy about and is a frequent source of tension between Turkey and the EU.

So the EU Customs Union is not an aspiration. It is something the EU uses to punish nations it is in dispute with.

The main problem with the EU Customs Union is that it does not give members of the benefits of the EU Single Market.

At the same time the EU Customs Union prevents members from doing free trade deals with nations outside of the EU Single Market. The main benefit from being outside of the EU Single Market.

As such the EU Customs Union represents the worst of both worlds.

The EU Customs Union is particularly unsuitable for Britain because it does not solve the problem of the Ireland/Northern Ireland.

Although the EU Customs Union reduces the number of border checks required it still requires a significant number of border checks. So Britain adopting the EU Customs Union will mean a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.

In this area the EU Customs Union is actually worse than No Deal.

Cross-Border Trade is the fundamental mechanism which brought to an end the 40 years of civil war in Northern Ireland. Known as; "The Troubles."

It is the Protestant farmer in Northern Ireland selling their crops to the Catholic dairy farmer in the Republic of Ireland. The Catholic farmer who in turn sells his milk to the Protestant dairy in Northern Ireland.

This mechanism for peace is laid out in the 1998 Belfast Agreement. This has been deposited with the United Nations (UN) giving it the full status of a Peace Treaty under international law.

Any Peace Treaty obviously deals with matters of National Security. Under international law National Security always takes precedence over trade policy.

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) was founded in 1995. As a mechanism to resolve trade disputes. For the first 20 years of its life the WTO took the position that it didn't even have the authority to review trade disputes relating to matters of national security.

That changed in 2015 when Ukraine raised a dispute with Russia. Russia had blocked Ukrainian trains access to Russia's railways. Citing national security concerns due to the ongoing civil war in Ukraine.

Just on Friday, April 5th (5/4/19) the WTO issued its ruling on the matter. It found that it did have the authority to review trade disputes relating to matters of national security.

However the WTO also found that national security takes precedence over trade policy in a; "situation of armed conflict, or of latent armed conflict, or of heightened tension or crisis."

So far in 2019 there have been at least five incidents of terrorist bomb attacks relating to Northern Ireland. The January 20th (20/1/19) car bombing in Londonderry and the four letter bombs sent to various targets starting on March 5th (5/3/19).

As such it is clear that the situation in Northern Ireland remains one of latent armed conflict. It even seems to be escalating back to the point of an active armed conflict.

Therefore it would be extremely difficult to argue that either Britain or the Republic of Ireland would be able to impose a hard border on the Ireland/Northern Ireland border. Despite the need to protect the EU's Single Market.

It would be even more difficult to argue that a hard border must be put in place while work is underway to find a more durable solution.

Britain adopting the EU Customs Union would mean that it was no longer be working to find a more durable solution to the Ireland/Northern Ireland border. Making it is easier to argue that a hard border has to be imposed.

In looking at the EU Customs Union there is one other thing I really need to make clear;

The EU Customs Union is Worse Than the Withdrawal Agreement.

The Withdrawal Agreement sees Britain leave the EU. Then enter into a two year Transition Period during which it enjoys the full benefits of the EU Single Market.

From 2020 onwards Britain will enjoy the full benefits of the EU Single Market without making any contributions to the EU budget.

This is something which nations such as Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland are extremely jealous of. Not being members of the EU itself they have to pay large contributions to the EU budget in order to enjoy the full benefits of the EU Single Market.

The Transition Period can be extended by a further year. Then the Backstop Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland will come into effect.

This will see Northern Ireland enjoy the full benefits of a slightly improved version of the EU Single Market. It will be extremely easy for companies on the British mainland to also take full advantage of this slightly improved Single Market.

The main advantages of this Single Market over the EU Single Market is that Britain will still not have to pay into the EU budget. It will also not have to put up with the Free Movement of People/Human Capital.

Although it is considered a core pillar of EU membership the Free Movement of People/Human Capital is increasingly unpopular amongst EU member states. So they, along with nations such as Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland will be extremely jealous of Britain having this advantage.

Under the Backstop Protocol the British mainland will enter into a slightly improved version of the EU Customs Union. The way that this Customs Union is better than the EU Customs Union generally relates to a number of fine, technical details.

For example this Customs Union is very liberal in how it defines; "Goods in Free Circulation." Goods which are considered exempt from tariffs and checks.

Also in the EU Customs Union nations must impose tariffs along with fees for carrying out customs checks. This Customs Union allows Britain to include the fees as part of the tariff. Resulting in a lower total cost.

The big difference is that in the EU Customs Union nations have to become what is known as; "Rule Takers." Meaning that if the EU passes a new rule regarding safety or trade policy the nation has to automatically accept that new rule. Without any say in what the rule is or why it was passed.

The slightly improved Customs Union under the Backstop Protocol does not require Britain to become a rule taker. Instead it allows Britain to chose which EU rules it adopts.

It also allows Britain to repeal any existing EU law and replace it with a new British law. Providing the new British law does not reduce the level of protection of the EU law. "Backsliding" as it's known.

So the worst case scenario I can see from the Withdrawal Agreement is that Britain eventually ends up in the EU Customs Union.

It baffles me as to why any British Parliamentarian would want to adopt that worst case scenario now. Rather than allowing the good times to roll for at least another two years.

There are only two reasons I can think of why British Parliamentarians would even suggest it.

Either they're being wilfully ignorant. Or they are so unqualified to be making this decision they don't even understand the issues at play.

If it is the latter than it is clear they really need to continue with the Indicative Vote process. In order to talk it out and familiarise themselves with the subject matter.

I suspect though the Remoaners know that already.

It's why they thrown a tantrum and shut the Indicative Votes process down.

15:35 on 8/4/19 (UK date).