The new Brexit proposal

On Wednesday, November 14, Theresa May emerged from 10 Downing Street after an “impassioned” five-hour cabinet meeting to announce the final decision to approve a draft of a potential Brexit deal. Throughout this entire strenuous process, May has stated that “no deal would be better than a bad deal.” However, after finalizing the proposed Brexit plan, May has said that it was “the best that could be negotiated” and that the only other viable opportunities available to Great Britain were “no deal” or “no Brexit.”
Despite this collaborative deal, British Parliament is quite upset about most of the elements that are outlined in the proposal. As many as eleven cabinet ministers were reported, unofficially, to have dissented during the talks. Moreover, many critics of May have stated that the draft she has crafted is far from what the British people wanted. Furthermore, two cabinet ministers have already resigned in response to the deal. Included in the two is the Brexit secretary, Dominic Raab. Raab stated that he could not support the proposed exit strategy in his resignation statements: “The terms of the backstop amount to a hybrid of the EU customs union and single market obligations that no democratic nation has ever signed up to be bound by such an extensive regime, imposed externally without any democratic control over the laws to be applied, nor the ability to decide the exit arrangement… it will severely prejudice the second phase of negotiations against the UK.” Primarily, there are four groups assembled in British Parliament who dissent. First, from the Brexiteers, Jacob Rees- Mogg wrote a letter to his fellow members of Parliament, stating that the proposal will “see the UK hand over 39 billion to the EU for little or nothing in return” and would “lock us into an EU customs union and EU laws.”

The second group, the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist party, seems to have noticed that the deal indicates a closer relationship between Northern Ireland and the EU. This would result in immense issues and, as one leader of the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist party states, would be “unacceptable.” The third faction emanates from the Scottish Tories, who have massive concerns regarding the regulation of the fishing industry. They will not vote favorably unless the automatic fishing rights are granted. Finally, the fourth schism is depicted by the Labour members of Parliament, who demand a revote to serve as a final decision on Brexit.

May seems to have underplayed her hand. She slow-walked talks and decided to negotiate from a position of appeasement toward EU officials. As a result, this combination does not bode well for the future of Brexit.