Brexit negotiations

[Cobby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44570931

I'm sure many of us have seen the news this morning about Airbus.

The sad thing is that one of Airbus' main factories is in Flintshire - where it employs 6000 local people - and Flintshire voted to leave:

It's worth bearing in mind that the supplier chain and other supporting and related firms puts the at-risk figure at around 100,000 jobs.

The current tally for Brexit-related job losses (albeit under some quite loose criteria) is around 80,000 so far I think.

 

[The Byre]

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44593095

This siege mentality is becoming farcical now.

Apparently, international companies at huge risk are not allowed to complain in case they undermine the government's very obvious attempt to pretend that they will happily walk away without a deal.

You know it's becoming less believable by the day when the government is terrified of anyone suggesting that they are concerned about a no deal scenario. It almost insults the intelligence of EU officials to suggest they don't know the weakness of the UK's position unless people say it out loud.

I actually feel a lot of sympathy for some big investors and employers impacted by this. They literally have no idea what's going on, or what's going to happen, with only 9 months remaining. It takes years to properly implement contingency plans on such massive scales, yet they're expected to twiddle their thumbs and do nothing until there's just a few months left - or less.

The argument between remain and leave aside, this exit strategy has been unworkable from day one.

 

[Mr D]

The big companies will have been planning contingency plans likely from before the referendum. Expanding the planning afterwards.
As you say Scott it can take years to implement so talks would have started and places looked over well before time.

I've my eye on a nice spot in Ireland. With Germany as a backup.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

The big companies will have been planning contingency plans likely from before the referendum. Expanding the planning afterwards.
As you say Scott it can take years to implement so talks would have started and places looked over well before time.

I've my eye on a nice spot in Ireland. With Germany as a backup.

Of course. That's why it's all the more absurd for the government to suggest that these companies should avoid voicing their concerns and to just wait until the last minute to see if anything can be pulled out of the bag.

That's what has made this strategy unworkable from the beginning. On one hand they're telling companies to feel confident and to avoid starting withdrawal procedures, but on the other hand they're telling the EU they will pull out and risk everything in the event of an insufficient deal. Trying to do both at the same time is impossible.

 

[Cobby]

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44593095

This siege mentality is becoming farcical now.

Apparently, international companies at huge risk are not allowed to complain in case they undermine the government's very obvious attempt to pretend that they will happily walk away without a deal.

You know it's becoming less believable by the day when the government is terrified of anyone suggesting that they are concerned about a no deal scenario. It almost insults the intelligence of EU officials to suggest they don't know the weakness of the UK's position unless people say it out loud.

I actually feel a lot of sympathy for some big investors and employers impacted by this. They literally have no idea what's going on, or what's going to happen, with only 9 months remaining. It takes years to properly implement contingency plans on such massive scales, yet they're expected to twiddle their thumbs and do nothing until there's just a few months left - or less.

The argument between remain and leave aside, this exit strategy has been unworkable from day one.

This "Don't undermine our negotiations" rhetoric is also a foundational step for the government's unavoidable post-Brexit blame game.

 

[Mr D]

Of course. That's why it's all the more absurd for the government to suggest that these companies should avoid voicing their concerns and to just wait until the last minute to see if anything can be pulled out of the bag.

That's what has made this strategy unworkable from the beginning. On one hand they're telling companies to feel confident and to avoid starting withdrawal procedures, but on the other hand they're telling the EU they will pull out and risk everything in the event of an insufficient deal. Trying to do both at the same time is impossible.

And companies have no reason to trust the promises of politicians and civil servants over matters that others are involved in.
Neither have we.

 

[Cobby]

Brexit customs plan will offer 'best of both worlds'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44671507

I'm not sure if this is something everyone has consciously noticed yet but the government has really doubled down on this "release news of a an intention to do something without any detail at all. Later on, detail can be released in smaller stories and buried in the news."

The chit-chat from those in the corridors of power seem to suggest that David Davis had no idea about this "best of both worlds" plan and was not consulted. It just looks like more government grandstanding for the UK media; without any detail we are still to assume they are trying to find a form of words that will keep the Conservative Party together, without any regard for the fact that the middle ground they are trying to find between them has already been ruled out by the EU27.

Two years on from the referendum and the government STILL HAVE NO PLAN FOR BREXIT. That this fact alone isn't causing daily outrage is absolutely incredible.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Spoke with a French professor of economics last week. She summed up the situation succinctly. "Bad for Britain, good for the EU". What was interesting is that she said that the talk in the EU is that the changes that would probably satisfy the UK will be happening anyway in the EU over the next few years.

 

[Gecko001]

Brexit customs plan will offer 'best of both worlds'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44671507

Two years on from the referendum and the government STILL HAVE NO PLAN FOR BREXIT. That this fact alone isn't causing daily outrage is absolutely incredible.

The plan probably is "no deal". When that is revealed, there will be an early General Election, Labour will get in. That government will try to negotiate with the EU. They will come up with the same EU brick wall negotiating stance that is there at present. The new government will be enthusiastic about the Brexit process for a while, but will get bored with it and give the EU what they want. Conservatives will get back into power because they stood up to the EU.

 

[The Byre]

Two years on from the referendum and the government STILL HAVE NO PLAN FOR BREXIT. That this fact alone isn't causing daily outrage is absolutely incredible.

That's because -

1. Nobody expected the result, so no great thought or plans were created in advance. We have plans on how to reach Mars, we have plans for limiting and controlling all kinds of technologies that do not yet exist (e.g. Asimov's three laws of robotics) and we have more economic models and plans than you can point a stick at, but nobody created a set of plans for Brexit.

There is no Brexit school of philosophy, merely a Brexit reaction and because each and every person's position on Brexit is different.

2. Brexit has become a totally emotional subject, divorced almost completely from rational thought. As a result, every dire warning is regarded as deliberate scare-mongering and every indication of possible advantages are shouted down as pie-in-the-sky dreaming - and all that leads to circular and nonconstructive debate. Since the referendum, there has been no major movement in attitude of government or the people.

3. The above points have lead to a totally split government, a totally split opposition and a split nation. If we keep this up, the divisions will become greater and never go away. It will become rather like Northern Ireland: a society deeply divided along lines of religion, identity and belief.

4. And like Northern Ireland, the rest of the World will not and does not care. The rest of the EU does not care. I travel around Germany, France and elsewhere and nobody has asked me about Brexit. My children all live in Berlin and not once have they spoken to me about Brexit. I attended a major meeting in Munich and we discussed all sorts of things, Donald Trump, immigration, the weather, family, the future of the car industry, AI, you name it and we discussed it.

But nobody even thought to bring up the subject of Brexit.

5. The big boys can move and they can move pretty quickly. It takes a few months to move production from one plant to another. My wife's former employer, a multi-billion US corporation, moved their entire EU production from Germany to Czechia in three months, after the German government increased payroll taxes. Just remember that most Minis are already built outside the UK.

6. Also, just like Northern Ireland, nobody can negotiate with a house divided. Just as Westminster cannot negotiate with Stormont, so the EU27 cannot negotiate with Westminster. They have their position and can only wait for the UK to come to the table with a counter-proposal. If that proposal is remotely viable, negotiations can begin. If the proposal seeks a position for the UK that gives it special privileges, or otherwise undermines the fundamentals of the EU, it will be rejected.
______________________________

So there are the points 1 to 6 and we must ask 'What happens now?'

I'll put it this way - slow changes have little or no economic effect. Emissions and safety laws for cars are tighter and will get much tighter still and that will have almost no economic down-sides, as those changes happened gradually over many decades. If they had been introduced suddenly, from one day to the next, the UK would have become a Third World country and all economic activity would have had to cease.

Brexit is the same - watch this space!

 

[Cobby]

The plan probably is "no deal". When that is revealed, there will be an early General Election, Labour will get in. That government will try to negotiate with the EU. They will come up with the same EU brick wall negotiating stance that is there at present. The new government will be enthusiastic about the Brexit process for a while, but will get bored with it and give the EU what they want. Conservatives will get back into power because they stood up to the EU.

It does feel like the Conservatives are gearing up to crash out and do untold harm to the British economy (and nation) just so they can preserve their positions of power, in government or otherwise, by blaming the EU or, well, anyone else.

It's the party level equivalent of why May won't fire Boris Johnson, no matter how bad he is at his job or how stupid his remarks; he is firmly lashed to the mast for Brexit and will take his portion of the blame.


I don't know if there'll be an election but I read a good argument for the possibility that in the "No Deal" Brexit chaos, the government will invoke special powers to postpone elections. Either way, I can't see Corbyn getting in at the moment since in essence he is fully behind the Government in their choices. Not much of an opposition.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

They will come up with the same EU brick wall negotiating stance that is there at present.

The EU so-called brick wall is entirely in the minds of Daily Mail readers. Considering how inept David Davis and May are the EU are being surprisingly patient.

 

[Jasondb]

I read recently that if the EU does not give us a decent deal the UK will unravel trillions of financial transactions like derivatives. Can't say this is true but does make me wonder as the Tories have waited so long.

 

[Cobby]

I read recently that if the EU does not give us a decent deal the UK will unravel trillions of financial transactions like derivatives.

Sorry, I'm a bit simple, what do you mean?

 

[Gecko001]

I don't know if there'll be an election but I read a good argument for the possibility that in the "No Deal" Brexit chaos, the government will invoke special powers to postpone elections. Either way, I can't see Corbyn getting in at the moment since in essence he is fully behind the Government in their choices. Not much of an opposition.

All it takes is a few Conservatives in marginal seats to resign in protest and the resulting by-elections could change the Westminster landscape so much that the Government could not hold on to power.

 

[Mr D]

All it takes is a few Conservatives in marginal seats to resign in protest and the resulting by-elections could change the Westminster landscape so much that the Government could not hold on to power.

Both major parties have MPs who have a problem with Brexit. MPs from either party could resign in protest about something and resulting new election could cause the government to be strengthened too.

Voters can choose who to vote for, by elections can surprise the parties.

Personally I'd be betting on a general election being called before March next year - if there is sufficient opposition to agreements up for voting on.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

I read recently that if the EU does not give us a decent deal the UK will unravel trillions of financial transactions like derivatives. Can't say this is true but does make me wonder as the Tories have waited so long.

There are likely to be major issues in the event of "no deal" regarding financial markets and the legal frameworks for instruments such as derivatives. But that will hurt London just as much as the EU, if not more so.

There is this bizarre theory, even touted on this forum before, that the UK might use London's financial centre as a weapon to attack the EU in the event of no deal, but that's extraordinarily unlikely. If there's one thing that could seriously harm London as a financial centre, it's the government getting involved and pulling the strings at the expense of the banks, financial institutions and clients. There's nothing that could be done without harming London as well.

But moves in the financial markets are already being made, with the ISDA adding other EU-based courts (in Ireland and France) to its dispute mechanism for the first time:

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-b...h-courts-as-brexit-future-proof-idUKKBN1JT1HS

I think Ireland in particular is going to be a big beneficiary of Brexit at the expense of the UK. They've got:

- Similar laws and frameworks
- The English language
- Same time zone
- Lower corporation tax
- Business friendly regulations

For companies and institutions wanting to hedge by remaining within the EU, it ticks a lot of boxes.

 

[HostXNow]

It will take me a while to go through this entire thread but can someone just say whether VAT MOSS has been mentioned? Governments from different countries seem to be falling out with each other more than ever at the moment. Will UK businesses still need to pay VAT for EU countries next year after Brexit? USA don't have to charge EU VAT but the UK does. Many say that is not right. Why don't EU collect VAT from their own EU individuals/businesses? SMEs have enough to do already without the hassle of charge EU VAT and reporting it too.

Edit: this is regarding SMEs under the 100k/year threshold and do not have to charge VAT to UK customers.

 

[Jasondb]

I think Ireland in particular is going to be a big beneficiary of Brexit at the expense of the UK. They've got:

- Similar laws and frameworks
- The English language
- Same time zone
- Lower corporation tax
- Business friendly regulations

For companies and institutions wanting to hedge by remaining within the EU, it ticks a lot of boxes.

I would see Ireland benefitting yet also Paris and Frankfurt.

Re Ireland about a year ago I was reading of concerns about housing shortages and property asset inflation and comments like, 'it's a joke you can't find an Irish builder in Dublin.'

Of course that may reflect a small minority or not.

 

[Jasondb]

Spoke with a French professor of economics last week. She summed up the situation succinctly. "Bad for Britain, good for the EU". What was interesting is that she said that the talk in the EU is that the changes that would probably satisfy the UK will be happening anyway in the EU over the next few years.

It would be interesting to get her view on the debt owned by countries like Italy, Spain and of course Greece. For Italy alone it is €430bn. These countries cannot live economically with a financial model just tailored for German exports. What is her view on this?

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44719656

Now we're starting to see the worry set in. It's no surprise, of course, as the deadline is fast approaching and the government keeps suggesting it will walk away without a deal to attempt to sound unpredictable.

This, and the warnings from BMW, Airbus and others, really exemplifies the weakness of the UK's position in these negotiations, and shows why its threats are not being taken seriously by the EU.

Any risk to EU market access (a market almost the same size as the United States) will result in these companies moving operations out of the UK and into the EU. It's as simple as that. Maybe not all operations, but certainly some.

The UK benefits greatly from being a gateway into the single market and over 60 free trade agreements with countries across the globe via the EU. Companies are are not going to risk sacrificing that to remain in a significantly smaller economy that may soon have heavily blunted access to the EU and no trade agreements with any other country.

The great irony of all this is when the economic impacts are felt by ordinary voters, there won't be anywhere near enough of them saying "Don't worry Tory government, we don't blame you for this. We knew it was a price we'd have to pay". They'll be blamed anyway and then Corbyn will be in power faster than they can blink.

The particular problem that the Conservatives are facing here is their core support, and whole ideology, stems from:

• Economic competence
• Fiscal conservatism
• Low taxes
• Pro-business (and by extension, pro employment)

Now leaving the EU without any deal goes against the grain of all of these quite heavily. We're already seeing elements of it appearing, such as the upcoming "NHS tax" (which is really a Brexit tax), the willingness to put the economy at risk, and Boris' "f**k business" comment to EU diplomats.

Anti-EU sentiment within the Conservative party will only get them so far. And amazingly enough, we may soon see Labour suggesting (in at least some respects) a more business-friendly path than the Conservatives.

Imagine that.

 

[tparnell]

Brexit is going to be a disaster for business!

 

[The Byre]

Brexit is going to be a disaster for business!

Realistically speaking, there are three options - (1) Stay in, (2) Norway, (3) Crash out without a deal.

Only one of those options would be a disaster - and not just for business either!

 

[tparnell]

We have less than 6 months to go and nothing has been agreed. But yes a no deal would be a disaster.. hopefully we can stay in the customs union at least. Even turkey are part of this! Its just frustrating we are throwing away our influence over policies in Europe and successful trade with Europe and for what.. just some crazy independence ideology.

 

[tparnell]

we just need to find some middle ground and be sensible Like you say even a Norway style agreement would be great at this point.

 

[Cobby]

These countries cannot live economically with a financial model just tailored for German exports.

Just as well then. Because it's not.

 

[Cobby]

Realistically speaking, there are three options - (1) Stay in, (2) Norway, (3) Crash out without a deal.

Only one of those options would be a disaster - and not just for business either!

Option 3 would be a disaster, yes, but even the cautious reports from the OBR show option 2 to be pretty harmful.

 

[The Byre]

As I have repeatedly pointed out in this endless thread, the Rest-EU is really not that interested. Here in the UK, people are close to obsessed with Brexit. When I last spoke to our accountant, it was the first thing out of his mouth! But on my recent trips to France and Germany, nobody even mentioned Brexit.

Outside of the UK, Brexit is just not an important topic. Within the various large manufacturers, they are fairly certain that if the UK crashes out, they can switch production from the UK to Eastern Europe (where labour costs and workers' rights are even lower than here) very rapidly.

All larger internationals have learnt how to switch production within a few months. Heavy engineering can take many months, light engineering is easier and most services are easier still.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44707253

The merits of remaining and leaving aside, we couldn't have picked a worse time to do this.

We're giving up the highly lucrative single market to expand into a world where free trade is regressing as we speak. We now have to try to work something better out when 70% of the global economy is in a tit-for-tat trade dispute where no side wants to lose face by undermining their position.

We need some big trade deals here, and we need them fast. Canada, Australia and the like wouldn't be anywhere near enough. We must get something good from the big three (EU, US and China) which I fear will be very difficult to do.

 

[Cobby]

It's coming down to the wire.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44728807

The BBC has been leaning very heavily into pro-Brexit language and reporting, but what it's failing to communicate is:

The Brexiteers' favoured option is access to SM & CU but no payments or FoM.
The Brexiteers' hated option is the UK not leaving.

The UK's best option is not leaving.
The UK's worst option is no deal.

The EU27's best option is us not leaving.
The EU27's worst option isn't no deal, as Leavers like to suggest, it's a deal that undermines the foundations of the EU itself.

The worst outcome for the EU, and a line it absolutely will not cross, is what Brexiteers consider their best outcome. Brexiteers will accept nothing less from Theresa May.

 

[Cobby]

The merits of remaining and leaving aside, we couldn't have picked a worse time to do this.

We're giving up the highly lucrative single market to expand into a world where free trade is regressing as we speak. We now have to try to work something better out when 70% of the global economy is in a tit-for-tat trade dispute where no side wants to lose face by undermining their position.

We need some big trade deals here, and we need them fast. Canada, Australia and the like wouldn't be anywhere near enough. We must get something good from the big three (EU, US and China) which I fear will be very difficult to do.

It's also worth considering that when we've experienced the big recessions it's been because of global difficulties. Everyone's is a similar position so our economic depression wasn't something others could take financial advantage of to any great degree.

Brexit will be different. We're deliberately sabotaging our own economy in a (relative) global upturn and there will be plenty of people waiting to take advantage of our weakened position to strip us of our assets. No amount of faux-patriotism will stop them.

Of course, the Rees-Moggs, Farages, Johnsons, et al will all profit from it too, it'll just be us ordinary folk who suffer.

 

[Mr D]

It's also worth considering that when we've experienced the big recessions it's been because of global difficulties. Everyone's is a similar position so our economic depression wasn't something others could take financial advantage of to any great degree.

Brexit will be different. We're deliberately sabotaging our own economy in a (relative) global upturn and there will be plenty of people waiting to take advantage of our weakened position to strip us of our assets. No amount of faux-patriotism will stop them.

Of course, the Rees-Moggs, Farages, Johnsons, et al will all profit from it too, it'll just be us ordinary folk who suffer.

Of course the other countries will take advantage of our position. They'd be incredibly stupid not to.

They don't work for our citizens, they don't have to think of our economy, our jobs, our standard of living. We have a government of our own for that, idiotic as they may be acting.

Voters chose one option of the two available. Government then delayed the matter months then delayed getting firm agreement on their own position, Lord knows why. Then plenty of disagreement within parties.
With say 20 years notice maybe the governments could sort this all out. We know the current government can't do it in 2 years by their performance to date.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44728807

I think the public has become a bit desensitised to all this, including myself. But when you think about it, it's utterly crazy that it's been two years since the referendum, with only months left before we leave, and those in charge still haven't decided on what Brexit should be.

We had almost a year between the referendum and the start of negotiations to get everything in place, and in that time, we didn't think of creating a plan B or C.

I'm not sure if it was arrogance or naivety or what, but we're only now figuring out what to do next after our original ideas were thrown back in our faces.

It's been terribly managed, which started when May appointed that cabinet of hers. At first thought it seemed sensible to choose a cabinet that's balanced between remain and leave, until you realise that any form of compromise between the sides seems to be out of the equation.

I suspect a compromise of some kind will be found eventually, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are a few resignations along the way.

 

[Newchodge]

It is actually dead simple. There is no possible deal with the EU that would be better than we currently have. There is no way of solving the N Ireland issue that is acceptable to everyone. No one has even mentioned the Goibraltar issue which again cannot be resolved on a way that is acceptable to everyone.

Choices are:

• Leave with no deal about anything. Completge catastrophe for most of the British people but a good deal for those who want to avoid the tax avoidance regulations of the EU and have got financial interests that the average citizen does not have.
• Find a compromise that leaves us drastically worse off than we are now with regard to the EU, risks peace in N ireland but may allow us some minor advantage with the rest of the world.
• Give up and stay in

ANyone got any other alternative

 

[Deleted member 59730]

ANyone got any other alternative

Start employing professionals in the subject.

Instead we get a failed Home Secretary, who could not control immigration, deciding she is the perfect candidate to organise a trade deal. Its a bit like taking a failed carpenter and giving them a go at brain surgery.

We also have a major problem with our journalists. None of them are young enough to have worked, lived or traded in multiple countries before we joined the EU. None of them have knowledge of how bad it was back then.

 

[Mr D]

Start employing professionals in the subject.

Instead we get a failed Home Secretary, who could not control immigration, deciding she is the perfect candidate to organise a trade deal. Its a bit like taking a failed carpenter and giving them a go at brain surgery.

We also have a major problem with our journalists. None of them are young enough to have worked, lived or traded in multiple countries before we joined the EU. None of them have knowledge of how bad it was back then.

Professional what?

We have professional politicians. They are the ones messing up. Or not as the case may be, depending on which side of the moat you are on.

We always have politicians who are not qualified in their field overseeing departments and voting in laws relevant to other people. We don't require politicians to have experience at the level they are at before taking a position.
Then again we don't require people to have experience of being a director before becoming a director of their own business.

 

[Mr D]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44747444

Getting the cabinet to agree is one thing. The other side can say no.
As they have done multiple times to 'cake and eat it' ideas.

Got to hand it to the PM, can annoy the people and annoy the other side both at the same time.

 

[The Byre]

Laura Kuensberg (BBC politics editor) summed up the White Paper statement as follows (With my summation in blue and in brackets behind each one of her points.)

• The UK would accept continuing "harmonisation" with EU rules on the trade in goods, covering only those necessary to ensure frictionless trade (The UK will continue to incorporate EU rules for goods, unless it does not.)
• Parliament would have the final say over how these rules are incorporated into UK law, retaining the right to refuse to do so (Those rules will be incorporated into UK law, unless they are not incorporated into UK law.)
• There will be different arrangements for trade in services, including financial products, with greater "regulatory flexibility" and "strong reciprocal arrangements" (Some services may or may not be subject to reciprocal arrangements.)
• Freedom of movement as it stands will come to an end but a "mobility framework" will ensure UK and EU citizens can continue to travel to each other's territories and apply for study and work (Freedom of movement of labour is to be replaced by the ability of labour to move to and from the UK.)
• A new customs arrangement will be phased in, with the goal of "a combined customs territory" (The Customs Union is to be replaced by a Customs Territory.)
• The UK will be able to control its own tariffs and develop an independent trade policy (The UK is to be able to apply tariffs to those goods not subject to the tariffs of the EU.)
• The jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice will end but the UK will pay regard to its decisions in areas where common rules were in force. (The UK is no longer to be subject to the jurisdiction of the ECJ, except in those cases in which the UK is subject to the jurisdiction of the ECJ.)

I hope my explanations make this new and unified stance by our government clear to everybody. If there is any ambiguity or doubt, may I suggest the following explanation -

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44747444

Getting the cabinet to agree is one thing. The other side can say no.
As they have done multiple times to 'cake and eat it' ideas.

Got to hand it to the PM, can annoy the people and annoy the other side both at the same time.

It's the smartest move, considering the circumstances.

Economic damage will still occur, but that's just part and parcel of leaving the EU. Yes, we'd be better off if we stayed, but we want to leave, so that's that.

I think May is beginning to realise that "delivering the will of the people" is not going to be a sufficient excuse in the event of an economic downturn. There aren't enough ardent brexiteers who are willing to accept a clean break at any cost.

The worry now is what happens if we do leave with a softer brexit, the economy still takes a dive, and then people blame the soft approach instead of brexit itself. This leaves yet another opportunity for an excuse. "Well, we would have been better off after Brexit if we had cut all ties".

That may result in someone getting into power who distances the country from that deal, thereby causing even more economic hardship, until the penny finally drops that there's no way to do brexit that makes us better off compared to staying put.

This assumes, of course, that the deal agreed yesterday will be accepted. It's stuck between a rock and a hard place at the moment. Ardent brexiteers will reject it because they want a hard brexit, and many remainers will reject it because they want the UK to stay inside the single market and customs union.

Then we have the question of what the EU thinks. Time will tell.