Newington's Managing Director, Naomi Harris, considers the political implications of the phrase "no deal for Britain is better than a bad deal".

‘No deal is better than a bad deal’. Eight words which are now looping on the airwaves like Ed Sheeran's latest single. But like any refrain that gets stuck in the collective brain, once you start thinking about it you realise it didn’t quite mean what you thought it did.

The line hit the headlines in early January when Prime Minister Theresa May said during her Lancaster House speech that a ‘punitive’ Brexit deal would be ‘an act of calamitous self-harm’ for Europe, before adding that ‘no deal for Britain is better than a bad deal’.

In this context the phrase feels more balanced and could even be read as ‘a good deal for Britain is good for the EU,’ which many have said but isn’t quite as catchy to the ear. 

Added to this challenge of nuance, the line hasn’t stayed in the context in which it was first said.  Instead, it has been taken up by others and chorused repeatedly to suggest that the UK would quite happily walk away if a deal did not live up to our expectations. A show of strength and all that. 

Fair enough. Except that political posturing and trade diplomacy don't tend to go together, and it is not all that clear what the UK would consider a good deal to look like.  Article 50 has been triggered and in her letter to European Council President Donald Tusk, the Prime Minister set out the ‘principles’ to secure a ‘comprehensive agreement’ that ‘minimises disruption’.

Behind this, however, is an ongoing debate in the UK about access vs membership of the Single Market.  Although it is clear that the UK will no longer be a member of the Single Market, the level of access that the Government will seek for various sectors is still up in the air for the simple reason that this will undoubtedly involve ‘giving back control’. 

The result is that many in the European capitals have taken the political earworm of ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’ in one of two ways. 

Either it is seen it as an empty threat. Whilst ministers argue against the folly of underestimating British resolve – look what happened on 23 June when the EU did not give Cameron enough to take home – they appear to forget that the country will not be voting on the deal as a second referendum has been ruled out.  The EU knows that May will not have to ‘sell’ the deal in the same way.

Or it is seen as the consequence of the UK having not conducted trade negotiations for several decades.  This hasn’t been helped by the bass-heavy remix version of ‘no deal for Britain is better than a bad deal’, featuring Gibraltar and Michael Howard, that has followed in the last few days.  The Prime Minister has sought to calm matters but these kinds of phrases, whilst catchy and music to the ears of the 52 percent, will begin to jar with those we want to do a deal with if they are not played a little less frequently.

Ministers could do well to play something a little more appealing to their counterparts when negotiations begin.  More Ode to Joy.