As the law stands, the UK leaves the EU on 29 March, deal or no deal. If parliament wants to prevent a no deal Brexit MPs must vote for this. Should the prime minister lose another meaningful vote, as is looking increasingly likely, MPs will be given the opportunity to take ‘no deal’ off the table this coming Wednesday.
But why do so many MPs oppose no deal when there are many things to commend about it, not least that it avoids a delay to Brexit and delivers on the result of the referendum? A no deal Brexit would also be a ‘clean Brexit’, no need to fulfil those obligations the EU will impose on the UK which are within the withdrawal agreement.
A no deal Brexit means no Irish backstop. Both sides have said they don’t want a hard border anyway, so that’s taken care of without the need for an agreement. No deal means no transition period during which the UK becomes a ‘rule taker’ and abides by EU rules but has no representation in the EU institutions.
Without a deal, new trade agreements that symbolise ‘Global Britain’ become a reality sooner. Missing tariff-free access to our market, German car manufacturers will put pressure on the Commission to quickly agree a UK-EU free trade deal to help fend off the impending economic downturn facing the Eurozone.
Looked at this way, no deal sounds appealing and delivers exactly what has been promised, a Brexit on time that gives the UK everything and without the continuing regulatory shackles of a withdrawal agreement.