Brexit: deal, no deal, bad no deal
https://www.global-counsel.com/sites/default/files/2020-10/20201006%20Brexit%20negotiations%20by%20DD.pdf
Despite parliamentary rumbles of discontent, Mr Johnson’s stock of political capital is still considerable.
He knows the landing zone for agreement.
With the possible exception of fisheries, no opposition from within his parliamentary party, and certainly his cabinet, would stop him getting it through.
Equally, no one can stop him if he decides not to reach an agreement.
The choice is his alone.
< and the blame >
An agreement will fall short of his advisers’ ideal Brexit:
it would probably mean some small constraint on the UK’s future policy options.
He will also consider the costs of no agrrement
The important point here is that there are in fact two no agreement scenarios:
There is the simple failure to agree a free trade agreement
If the UK fulfils its legal obligations under the Withdrawal Agreement, including the Northern Ireland protocol, this could be a relatively amicable disagreement.
There should be a range of narrow bilateral agreements to allow basic co-operation, for instance on flights,
and some positive equivalence decisions would not be inconceivable.
On this basis, the economic relationship might, over time, be built back up.
The second is a disorderly breakdown in which the UK is seen by the EU to be in breach of its legal obligations.
Given the provisions breaching the Northern Ireland protocol in the Internal Market bill and the pledged measure on tariffs in the forthcoming finance bill,
this is where the UK and the EU are currently heading if there is no free trade agreement.
In this scenario there are likely to be no bilateral agreements and little cooperation for some time.