For checking the decline of his popularity, the Prime Minister Boris Johnson was desperate to have the Brexit deal. The intensity of his desperation could gauged out from the simple fact that he was not at all bothered of its fallout on the economy, trade and social life of the country. Whether a common Brit would gain out of it was never under consideration. What mattered for him was a Brexit deal, even if it was shabby.

No-deal would have resulted in short-term disruption having major economic and political consequences, but a deal will also not push the country towards a rosy future. Lots of uncertainties continue to haunt the country and its people. The nature of the relationship between the Northern Ireland and Great Britain are yet to be defined. What impact it would have on Scotland is yet to be spelt out.

In the ‘deal’ scenario, there would be no tariffs on UK-EU trade and no customs-related border procedures. Goods trade would still be subject to new regulatory requirements and checks due to the UK’s departure from the single market. It is expected that deal on offer and the WTO scenario would reduce UK living standards compared to staying in the EU.

The Political Declaration states clearly that the UK will end free movement of people. It also refers to short term business visits and visas, though both the UK (in the Chequers white paper) and the EU27 have previously referred to ‘ambitious provisions’ on labour mobility, there is no reason at this stage to think this means anything more ambitious than those contained in the Canada-EU deal, which have little or no impact on immigration policy, will be implemented. The broader economic impacts of Brexit are likely to be by far the most important determinant of Brexit’s impact on the UK’s public finances.

The European Union future relationship bill implementing the trade deal has won the approval of MPs including Labour – but a significant number of Labour rebels have broken the whip set by Keir Starmer. The bill passed the Commons by a majority of 448 votes on Wednesday following a four-and-a-half hour debate. While Labour MPs were whipped to vote in favour, 37 chose to defy the leadership’s instructions. The Labour rebels included frontbenchers who quit their posts to abstain on the controversial bill facilitating the implementation of the post-Brexitdeal. The rebels were from across Labour’s factional spectrum, from Starmer supporters to Corbyn’s sympathisers. Those opting to go against the Labour whip abstained on the bill rather than opposing it.

Starmer’s support is being interpreted in the political circle as a part of his political deal with Boris. The party insiders maintained that by resorting to this, Starmer has destroyed the hard earned credibility of the party. The Labour leaders also deplore his statement in the parliament. Opening the Brexit debate Starmer had described the decision as a “simple vote with a simple choice” – deal or no deal. He said Labour would vote in favour to avoid the outcome of no deal. What was really interesting was that at no stage he sought a clear undertaking from Boris that the interest of the country and its people would not be compromised. His effort and offer was one sided.

The Labour leader was challenged over whether the deal meets the six tests he set out in in 2017 and over Scottish Labour appearing to take a different view on Johnson’s deal, to which he replied that the Holyrood vote was different. Starmer was also criticised by Theresa May” He said he wanted a better deal. He had the opportunity in early 2019 when there was the opportunity of better deal on the table and he voted against it.”

Within hours of the agreement being clinched on Christmas Eve, Starmer announced he would whip his party to support it, despite criticising the substance of the deal as “thin”. Around 36 Labour MPs abstained in the vote, including staunch campaigners against Brexit such as Stella Creasy and Neil Coyle, and leftwingers such as Rebecca Long-Bailey and Diane Abbott. Just one Labour MP, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, the MP for Streatham, went further and voted against the deal.

After the deal question is being asked how prepared are UK businesses for the significant changes that will come into force on 1 January? The government appears to be evasive on this count. Nevertheless experts and industry leaders are warning of “invisible chaos” in the coming weeks as businesses grapple with new trading rules and software systems required from day one for exports to the EU.

When Boris Johnson became prime minister in 2019, he gave himself the title of “minister for the union”. There has been zero evidence in his handling of Brexit Instead Johnson’s unionism has proved more centralist and less pragmatic than the unionism of his two Tory predecessors, David Cameron and Mrs May. Apprehensions are being expressed that Boris’s approach is creating a crash waiting to happen.

The early months of 2021 will continue to be dominated by Covid. This has already exposed his administrative abilities. Four and a half years after the EU referendum, he clinched an agreement with the EU but there are many issues unsettled. Under the terms of the newly signed agreement, moves by the UK to cut regulatory standards could be met by almost immediate retaliation in the form of new tariffs, losing the prime minister’s central (some would argue, sole) achievement in his trade agreement. The Chancellor Rishi Sunak reassured that dialogue was continuing with the EU over equivalence decisions. These will determine how easily financial services firms can trade with the EU. For past four years the UK government has been refusing to openly discuss the nature of the deal. Now once the deal has been struck the government cannot hide from Brexit reality for long.

Advertisements on Christmas TV, followed by Gove’s media round, were designed to ram home a very different message: businesses needed to be ready to deal with an obstacle course of new barriers to trade from 1 January. It implied that that the deal will depress UK growth – shaving about 6.4% off UK GDP per person over the next 10 years, according to forecasts by thinktank, UK in a Changing Europe.

It is sad that words “weak”, “confused”, “out of his depth” are being used for Johnson. Voters, especially those in the so-called “red wall”, describe the prime minister as a “puppet”, controlled by his advisers. Getting a Brexit deal may have given him a boost, but it is unlikely to change the public’s view of him. He is no longer world king, but seen to be a lost man. (IPA Service)