The UK Westminster Government have been in deadlock, even
stasis, for many months; a situation of its own making and repeated at various
levels. This state of affairs means that we may have participants involved who do
not know how to move forward: do not understand how deadlock works, how to analyse
it and seem unable to listen or take advice and so are caught in the headlamps of
stasis. Whatever the case, it is not good for the reputation of Parliament, the
reputation of MPs, the knowledge and experience of Government Ministers and
their advisors – both Permanent and bought in.
Problem One – Deadlock should always be under control – Your
control. It is a very useful tool or weapon depending on the nature and style
of the negotiation. Even if one has not set up the deadlock, one should see it
coming and be able to manage it.
Deadlocking is useful
because:
because:
·
The cost is cheaper than having
to negotiate.
·
The political cost is often
cheaper than moving to another tactic / strategy (e.g. General Election) – but only
if there is a way out.
·
It buys time to work out
new strategy or tactic and review objectives – after all they more no longer be
realistic or achievable.
·
It provides time to sort
out Negotiator / Negotiating Team if they are not up to the job – have personality
issues with the other side – have lost credibility.
·
It applies pressure of time
and silence on the other party which may force movement.
·
It allows one party to frustrate
and irritate the other – although this is a risky game.
·
While in deadlock one does
not have to negotiate. Remember, negotiators often will create long and varied
arguments designed not to persuade but to deadlock. These tactics keep the
other party engaged – give the appearance of a negotiation but are in reality a
means of stopping the process.
·
Threat of not negotiating
and deadlocking may not be real but is worth suffering than changing a deal and
may be rewarded by the other side backing off.
The current deadlock besetting the UK is under the control of
the EU.
Why? Because:
Why? Because:
·
They have done a deal with
the UK and to renegotiate is a precedent. To recognise a change in PM as a
reason for renegotiation is a precedent. The value of the unity of their 27 is
higher, far higher, than the UK being in a mess.
·
They do not want the UK to leave
the EU and whilst deadlock keeps UK as a member state it suits both EU and
Remainer factions.
·
Maintains a Status Quo
·
Buys time for moves by
Remain parties to frustrate, build strength, undermine Leavers.
·
Allows time to use
persuasion to rehearse arguments of the benefits of EU membership
·
Maintains the unity of the
EU amongst the 27 members.
·
Enables “Business as Usual”
during deadlock period
·
International business will
reposition their assets within the EU to avoid the uncertainty thus benefitting
EU states
·
Provides time for a change
in the Commission, EU Parliament etc.
·
Causes UK Leavers to “think
again”.
·
Keeps the strategy of “While
the UK has not left there is the chance they will remain.”
To break out from the Deadlock the costs to the other party
(EU) have to be escalated so that the advantages of negotiating or getting on
with the leaving process outweigh the costs of maintaining the status quo. The
position that the EU is blocking is to allow the UK to negotiate new
trading relationships right now which might give it an advantage and
demonstrate the value of being independent and fully sovereign outside the EU. Having been a member for so long and an architect of this rule makes the current situation very ironic.
But of course, until the EU has set up the new appointments
to the offices of the EU it will not be ready to change anything. At present it
will not want to move anyway as:
·
Precedent – Maintaining the
100% solidarity of the member states is a priority. EU will do nothing to
disturb this.
· Face – Ensuring the Union
is seen to be strong, united and the 4 pillars remain non-negotiable.
·
Concessions – Until the EU
knows exactly what the UK wants from the EU in the long term it is unable to assess
trading options. It only desires one thing (the UK to remain). Until the UK actually
leaves, the current situation suits the EU.
·
It will be happy to take on
the UK over outstanding debts, duties and contributions as the EU institutions
and advisors all benefit from legal process.
At the moment the EU has to do nothing as the UK indulges itself in this stasis; primarily because of the internal problems
besetting the Conservative Party. However, to the outside observer what has
been learned?
·
The UK does not appear to have
a clear long-term objective for itself which unites its citizens. EU membership
or isolated independence are strategies without a coherent objective.
·
In not knowing clearly what
the ultimate objective is, it is difficult to negotiate.
·
Without clarity of
objective it is not surprising that outsiders are not clear how committed the
UK is to anything.
·
There is no vested interest
helping the UK to determine the way forward or selecting the right leadership.
When there is no clear set of objectives or goals to provide
clarity of direction, then one must look at what must be avoided (the direction
from which to retreat):
·
Break-up of the United
Kingdom with Scotland leading the way for independence, followed by a “me too”
campaign to unite Ireland as a common market.
·
A breakdown of the British
economy leading to serious damage to our lead service industries and consequences
to tax raising.
·
Loss of status as a Global
Player.
It is a time for professional negotiating. The UK leaving
the EU is not the problem – It is the need for experienced leadership to
navigate the negotiating process with confidence. Far greater negotiations lie
ahead which are being damaged already by the performance of the current
players.
