Daily Telegraph  17th October 2018

Another round of Brexit negotiation and there’s deadlock.  As Mr Corbyn and others have said:  “It’s groundhog day”.

Over the weekend, there had been whispers that a deal had finally been agreed between the UK and EU.

Despite campaigning for Brexit from the very beginning, I can see the EU’s point of view.

But these hopes were swiftly dashed, however, when Michel Barnier announced on Sunday evening that despite “intense efforts”, key issues remain, particularly with regards to the Northern Ireland border and the Customs Union.

Should we be surprised?  Was it not obvious from the start that the EU would never go for the Chequers Agreement?  Is the EU being unreasonable?

Dominic Raab and Michel Barnier CREDIT: JOHN THYS /AFP/TELEGRAPH

Despite campaigning for Brexit from the very beginning, I can see the EU’s point of view.

From the Treaties of Rome and Maastricht through to Amsterdam and Lisbon, the EU has aimed remorselessly towards “ever closer union”.  They have never made any secret about it.

For this grand European project to succeed, member states must continue to integrate their laws, political systems and arguably most importantly of all, their economies.

After decades of integration moving almost entirely in one direction, a compromise on something as fundamental as the Single Market or the Customs Union could set in motion a series of events which unravels the entire bloc.

But it is not just the UK locked in disagreement with Brussels; other countries too have their own points of contention.

If the EU can survive the loss of its second-largest economy without compromising its own internal markets, it can survive anything.

Hungary was recently censured by the European Parliament for its hard-line stance on asylum seekers. Hungarian PM Viktor Orban labelled threats of EU sanctions as “blackmail”.

A similar situation has played out in Poland over the country’s judicial reforms, with the European Commission launching disciplinary measures on the basis that such reforms are “incompatible” with EU law.  And the EU have a point.

While these disputes concern entirely different matters, the EU’s approach and its rationale remains the same: to preserve uniformity across member states.

With the whole of Europe watching, our Brexit negotiations are likely to serve as a litmus test for how the EU deals with internal dissent for many years to come.

Should Brussels come out on top in its standoff with the UK, as it has done with so many other EU member states in the past when they don’t vote the “right” way in referendums, the message will be clear: Resistance is futile!

If the EU can survive the loss of its second-largest economy without compromising its own internal markets, it can survive anything.

However, if the EU capitulates and makes a special exception for the UK, it could well open Pandora’s Box, and lead to an escalation of dissent within the EU, with all and sundry demanding their own special deals.

From Italy and Greece to Poland and Hungary, any member with a bone of contention with the EU will be emboldened that they too can pick from the cherry tree of EU responsibilities.

Within this context, it becomes clear that the EU is not acting out of spite or pettiness – to them it is a matter of sheer survival.

EU leaders need to ask themselves this: are their lofty ideals really worth the price that will be paid in European jobs if Britain were to leave without any deal?

Michel Barnier touched on this back in June when rejecting the government’s Chequers proposal. “There will be no unravelling of what we’ve achieved” he said with conviction.

As a Leaver, I may not be happy with the EU’s rigidity, but having a sense of history, I can at least understand why they act in such a manner.

Of course, this then inevitably leads to questions about whether a project which requires deep integration across such a broad variety of areas is even worth pursuing, but that debate has already been had.  And the UK answered ‘No’.

One thing is clear: if the EU lets us have our own way on Brexit, the very future of the European dream (or nightmare) could be doomed.

So whether Chequers in its present form will survive or whether a free trade deal will emerge – which must apply not only to Great Britain but also to Northern Ireland, only time will tell. Neither are on offer from the EU at present.

But EU leaders also need to ask themselves this: are their lofty ideals really worth the price that will be paid in European jobs if Britain were to leave without any deal?

Over to you, Mr Barnier.