Brexit is one of the most significant political and economic debates in recent British history. The UK left the EU in 2020, while the discussions around how that withdrawal should occur aren’t over. One of the more controversial options was a no-deal Brexit.
What is No Deal Brexit?
No-deal Brexit is when the UK leaves the EU without any formal trade deal or formal agreement. In simpler terms, the UK would cease to be part of the EU overnight and simply trade under the World Trade Organization (WTO) rules.
But instead of a formal negotiated deal that lays down rules on trade and travel and cooperation, in a no-deal Brexit, the UK and EU would act as separate business partners. Tariffs, checks at the borders, regulations, and even rights of the citizens would be involved.
Why did No Deal Brexit get considered?
No Deal Brexit became an option because the negotiations between the UK and the EU were slow and complicated, with disagreements over various issues, including fishing rights, the Irish border, and financial services. Some conservative politicians and supporters countered that leaving without a deal would allow Britain to regain full control fast and without EU legal ties. They believed creating unilateral laws and trade policy would give the UK greater flexibility and more options. More liberal supporters challenged the conservative argument. They directly stated that a no-deal outcome would cause a lot of problems for the economy and everyday people.
Possible benefit of a no-deal Brexit
No-deal Brexit supporters were convinced that a no-deal Brexit would provide several benefits to the UK. Let’s take them one at a time.
1. Full control over trade
In the event the UK were to leave without a deal, Britain would step entirely out of the EU’s trade rules and obligations. This would allow Britain to negotiate a new tariff schedule with countries like the United States, Australia, India, Canada, etc. Proponents assumed this could open up global markets beyond the EU.
2. Independence to make laws
In the event the UK were to leave without a deal, Britain would not be bound by EU laws or regulations. So, the UK could establish rules that enabled British businesses and industries to thrive without having to factor EU membership into everything.
3. Faster Decisions Making
Leaving the EU with no deal could cut out years of negotiations. This allows the UK to move quickly with policies rather than remain stalled in EU discussions.
Would No Deal Brexit Strengthen UK’s Global Position?
The claim made by advocates was that a no-deal Brexit could put the UK in a far better position to stand strong and compete on the world stage. They suggested Britain would be more liberated to direct its position in world trade and foreign policy.
Opponents counter that going it alone could actually damage the UK’s strength. Without strong EU ties, the UK may struggle to compete with superpowers like the US, China, and the EU.
Is No-Deal Brexit Good for the UK?
That question can only be answered depending on which “side” you are standing on.
Supporters will argue that independence, control, and freedom for the UK to shape its own future were important. Critics have argued that it will damage the economy, push up prices, and weaken Britain’s global standing.
What is obvious is that a no-deal Brexit would have dramatic changes to trade, business, and people’s lives, and these changes would have been positive or negative depending on which side of the debate you sit on.
Other countries’ positions on no-deal Brexit
United States
A no-deal Brexit was strongly supported by the Trump Administration. U.S. National Security Advisor John R. Bolton told British Prime Minister Boris Johnson that President Trump wanted to see a successful British exit from the European Union. A no-deal Brexit also offered a possible switch of British alignment to US rules rather than EU rules.
However, Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi (leader of the Democratic Congressional majority) said that the House will refuse to ratify any US/UK free trade agreement if the stability of the Good Friday Agreement is imperiled.
Alexandra Hall Hall, the Brexit Counselor at the British Embassy in Washington, D.C., resigned because she felt she was asked to
“peddle half-truths on behalf of a government I do not trust.”
Hall Hall stated, “I have been increasingly dismayed by the way in which our political leaders have tried to deliver Brexit, with reluctance to address honestly, even with our own citizens, the challenges and trade-offs that Brexit involves; the use of misleading or disingenuous arguments about the implications of the various options before us; and some behavior towards our institutions, which, were it happening in another country, we would almost certainly as diplomats have received instructions to register our concern.
EU/UK
It is generally assumed that the UK and EU would have wished to negotiate a free-trade agreement. Dominic Raab, the British Foreign Secretary and First Secretary of State, believed that the UK would be better able to negotiate an FTA with the EU after a no-deal Brexit. However, the Institute for Government disagreed, pointing out that negotiations in that case would not be under Article 50 terms but under the EU’s “third countries” arrangements, which “take place on a different legal basis with a more complicated process and ratification requirements—which is likely to involve ratification in all 27 member state parliaments.”
Why a no-deal Brexit is so profoundly undemocratic
The mantra of the no-dealers, played on “bleat and repeat” in the supine mass media, is that we must “respect” the vote and leave for the sake of democracy. But it needs shouting throughout the land: There is no mandate for a no-deal Brexit.
The idea that the UK would crash out of the EU was not on the 2016 ballot paper. Johnson himself said that the chances of no deal were a “million to one.” The country was split down the middle by the vote, with two of the four nations of the UK voting to remain—Scotland and Northern Ireland. Polling now consistently puts Remain ahead of any sort of Leave, let alone its most extreme form. This is hardly surprising, as now the public are more aware of what Brexit actually means.
Since few voters wanted or want a no-deal-style Brexit, why should the suicide cult minority who do clamor to crash out of the EU dictate to the majority? Should they be able to thrust their twisted ideology down the unwilling throats of the people?
Parliament has voted consistently to block a no-deal Brexit. Consequently, Johnson has come up with a clever new wheeze—simply dissolving the legislature in advance of the Brexit deadline so Members of Parliament cannot stop it, no matter what. The last time this happened was when King Charles did it in the 1640s, which sparked the English Civil War and resulted in a beheading. It is clear that the gang who rule Britain have no real respect for democracy. It is simply nauseating that they will stop at nothing to advance their agenda.
