Anthony Hilton: We think the EU will be hit by Brexit — but we don’t get it

UptOn Sinclair, the American writer, said it was difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depended on his not understanding it.

The trouble is people see what they want to see. They hope it will be all right on the night, but if it is not all right, they move to an alternative reality. Then this unravels. That is where Britain is at the moment. Britain does not understand the European Union.

Article 50 is concerned with the divorce, the separation of the UK from the bloc. Only when we have separated can we begin to embark on the future relationship.

So it is the money, the position of the EU nationals in the UK, and the vexed position of the Irish border which concern the EU in these negotiations. Everything else is for the future.

That means the EU and the UK can nod to the preferred direction of travel for an economic agreement. But it is not binding. The political declaration cannot legally commit parties to a particular outcome. The details of the future relationship will be negotiated under a different legal basis and only once the UK has left the EU. The British even now do not understand this. Theresa May, the Conservative party, the Brexiteers, and even Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party think they should be discussing the future relationship. They keep trying to make it part of the discussion about leaving. The EU firmly says no.

So what could the political declaration look like? Well, according to the Centre for European Reform think-tank, chief negotiator Michel Barnier says that it could include “points of convergence” such as foreign policy, military cooperation, and UK participation in research programmes after 2020. But there will be no clarity on the future UK/EU economic partnership.

It might express a shared ambition for tariff and quota-free trade in goods and agriculture, but in reality the declaration will leave a range of potential trade agreements on the table. It might even talk about one overarching agreement which might take years to negotiate, or a series of sectoral agreements which would be less problematic and time consuming.

But it will be couched in warm words designed to make it palatable so that May can sell it to her MPs. It is like a Twix bar: the solid commitments are the biscuit base, the economic partnership is the fudge, and the whole lot is covered in chocolate. Whether the Commons will endorse it is another matter.

What happens if there is no deal, which means no agreement with the EU on Article 50 and potentially no money, no security for EU citizens, nor for the British in the EU— and no agreement on the Irish border? The outline of the Article 50 deal will fall away, as will the transition agreement which was meant to follow on.

If the EU were not minded to co- operate then it would cause major disruption in ports, airports, medicines, supply chains — the whole economy — for at least three years.