The term ‘deal’ is used constantly in respect to Brexit but for most of the time in inappropriate ways.
Its definition is ‘an agreement entered into by two parties for their mutual benefit’.
But in my view this is not what Prime Minister Theresa May is proposing, as all the benefits appertain to the European Union (EU).
Whilst Theresa May claims that the UK will enjoy all of the aims of Brexit, it appears we will enjoy none at all.
The UK will not be able to sign free trade agreements with other countries and is unlikely to get back its sovereign right to the fish that are defined by international law to be ours.
During the transition period, we will have to abide by all the EU laws, without any control over them, and pay subscriptions.
This period is not yet decided but has been written in as ‘31st December 20XX’.
In addition, we will not be able to leave without the EU’s permission.
Such an agreement is unheard of in international law!
The EU mantra has always been “nothing is agreed until all is agreed”, but this arrangement for a transition period is to allow time for a final trading agreement to be determined after we leave the EU. This is nonsensical, as a trade policy is a major requirement for a leaving agreement.
In my view the EU sets out to make the process of deciding our leaving terms as time consuming as possible and thus push us into making hasty decisions.
They have succeeded beyond belief and I suspect they are feeling delighted with themselves.
There is only one way out of this mess and that is to walk away and make a clean break from this unscrupulous organisation, even if it means a period of disruption.
In this way we would take back control of all the things we set out to, we would regain our sovereignty and be able to hold our heads high in the International community.
The proposal on offer is not a deal, it is not even a compromise it is a complete surrender by the UK..