Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by hayd 2000 days ago
Well, also the UK had to keep paying in during the transition period.

> negotiations on this agreement didn't start (and couldn't legally begin)

This could have easily been worked around had there been any (good) will in Brussels (or more importantly in the washing machine!)... but there wasn't. Certainly the UK government at the time were desperate to negotiate everything in one go since, as the saying goes, "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed".

If the withdrawal agreement had been 2 years we can be sure it would have taken precisely 2 years to compile the agreement.

1 comments

I'm afraid you have it backwards if you think the UK government were "desperate to negotiate everything in one go". "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" was a core principle of the EU negotiating guidelines[1] on the withdrawal agreement and was precisely what the UK were trying to avoid. The UK strategy was to try and cherry pick, or in the words of Boris, have our cake and eat it. This tendency was so strong among the British negotiators that "cakeism" is now a genuine term used across the continent to describe the tactics of an unreasonable negotiating partner who doesn't understand the need to make trade offs. I'd say it was amusing watching the Rupert's and their admirers screw up so badly and then pretend they've won a glorious victory except I actually have to live in this country.

[1]https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017...