What's the current state of play?
Welll.... (deeepppp breath)
We have a bit of a time problem. All these talks going on to the 11th Hour with a looming deadline causes a bit of a head ache.
For a deal to be completed we first have to agree a deal with the EU but there's also the small matter of getting it written up and ratified too. All before 1st Jan.
We've got a problem here though. We've past the point where this is possible by normal processes. By all accounts even getting a legal text written following an agreement in principle isn't possible in the time left.
And the formal process of then putting it into law on both sides of the channel is even more difficult.
In the UK parliament would still, in theory, have to scrutinise and ratify a legal document. In theory. In practice Johnson may be able find a way to bypass parliament and have government just sign it off. This might suit Johnson's interests - in the short term at least - as he doesn't get a Tory Rebellion from whichever wing of the party doesn't like the wording of an agreement. But you can see the obvious flaws in this plan...
Where it maybe more difficult is on the EU side. This has to be done by the Member States and the European Union. In theory.
If we can't get it done by 1st Jan, we have a gap period if there is no extension. Johnson has said he doesn't want an extension and has said he won't ask for one. And the mood in Europe wouldn't likely give us one anyway.
The long this drags out the more problematic this becomes because we need to find fudges to deal with it.
By all account the most difficult problem is the European Parliament as its said point blank that it will not vote on a Brexit Deal this year. Apparently MEPs are throwing a hissy fit over it and are insisting they all get time to properly scrutinise the deal rather than just rubber stamping a deal. Barnier is aware of the issue and has apparently agreed to a few weeks will be given over to debate on this in the European Parliament. A couple of weeks we don't have.
There is now a whole debate on how this is managed.
There's talk of an interim treaty as a sort of bridging treaty until the proper one is drawn up. Not a transition extension. But a transition extension. Trouble is, there's a few countries who don't want a delay/extension/call it what you will.
There's talk of a 'provisional application' of the Treaty by the EU. This would work if the European Council used its power to do this rather than going through the European Parliament. Thats basically the leaders of member states approving and then throwing it back to the European Parliament. Of course this leaves a fairly obvious big spanner that could later be thrown into the works at a date which would be pretty problematic if it were to happen... In practice this would tie the European Parliament into just rubber stamping a deal to avoid that, which is why they are throwing a bit of a hissy fit over this option.
The good news is that the deal won't need to be ratified all 27 countries internally, if they classify the deal as an 'EU-Only Deal' rather than what is called a 'Mixed Deal'. This means it escapes the risk of a rogue veto.
Of course, its never that simple - and the argument is that the European Parliament might end up being more difficult if national ratification process is bypassed... And the whole idea of a provisional treaty falls down on practical issue that there isn't time to write this necessary treaty by 1st January.
Then there is talk of a 'retroactive application'. This is essentially No Deal but with an aggreement to retrospectively apply whatever Deal is later reached.
Now imagine you are an importer / exporter who is buying and selling stuff in the interim period. Except you don't know what anything you are buying costs / or how much you have to sell it for to cover your costs.
This apparently could be dealt with if there was an agreement over this using GATT Article XXIV 5(c) - to not apply tariffs in this interim period. This would require both sides to agree to this. And whilst this might suit the UK it is a bit of a problem for the EU as it effectly gives the UK 'a cake option and not much incentive to finish a deal whilst leaving the EU with the appearance of 'blame'. (The EU ends up in the situation where they have to put a deadline on this and then be seen to be the ones being difficult if this isn't then met...)
Then there's apparently a 'standstill arrangement'. Which sounds like another form of extension option.
This does make the dynamic of the UK running down the clock into a bit of context and how if the EU want to look like they aren't to 'blame' in the eyes of UK citizens then it gets increasingly difficult. But this is at the risk of the UK triggering accidental No Deal if the EU just don't buy into the game the UK are playing over this.
My reading of this, does suggest that if Johnson is playing silly buggers and doesn't believe the EU will 'allow' the UK to no deal then this would explain the UK strategy a bit more. But it is REALLY high stakes and there is no guarentee that the EU won't just drop us in it, a deal just isn't agreed or the EU gets into a situation where they find a way to fudge the 'interim no deal period'.
It sounds like a complete and utter nightmare all round, and very much starts to look like the UK is really playing games here. It hurts my head.
See Jon Worth who did the original thread explaining all this:
twitter.com/jonworth/status/1338861719095898114