BREAKING: The EU’s chief negotiator has told MEPs that negotiations on a post-Brexit deal could continue until Wednesday but no further.

Here is the rough transcript and story of @realDonaldTrump's NI envoy, his meeting with @simoncoveney and the alleged threat of the EU using aviation as leverage over the UK if the Internal Market Bill led to a hard border on the island of Ireland.

2/ Mr Mulvaney was talking to the @iiea via video link.

Asked about the concerns in the US over the IMB, which breaches the NI Protocol, Mr Mulvaney said that in his meetings with all sides his worry was that the Bill could result in a border “by accident”.

3/ He told the presentation: “The best response I got on the matter was from Simon Coveney when I met with him in Dublin.

4/ “I said to him..., look, Simon, my fear is this: there’s a no deal Brexit. The IMB kicks in, the Brits don’t want to put up a border on the island, because they know what that means, the Irish don’t want to put up a border across the island because they know what that means.

5/ “The Europeans come in and say, well, if you’re not going to control the flow of goods from outside of the [European] Union [to] inside the Union, from Belfast to Dublin, for the sake of this discussion, we’re going to force you to ring the whole island of Ireland

Amid the hail of accusations that the EU wanted to put a hard border on the island of Ireland last Friday, it's worth pointing out what the ill-fated resort to Article 16 was about:

2/ Under the Commission's trade mechanism, any Covid vaccines leaving the EU for third countries would need export authorisations, ie to ensure vaccines were not being exported which were actually part of an avanced purchase agreement between member states + pharma companies

3/ Any movements of exports from one member state to another would NOT have required such an export authorisation

4/ Because of the NI Protocol, Northern Ireland would typically have availed of NOT having to had export authorisations for any vaccines being sent there from Belgium (or wherever)

5/ However, someone in the Commission spotted the fact that, also under the Protocol, there was unfettered movement of goods between NI and GB

Breaking: The DUP and Sinn Fein leaders have sent a joint letter to the European Commission describing as “unacceptable” the alleged threat to the continuity of existing food supplies to Northern supermarkets once the Northern Ireland Protocol takes effect.

2/ The letter, seen by @rtenews, and signed by @DUPleader and @moneillsf, highlights the problem of the need for checks and controls on food products entering Northern Ireland from Great Britain from January 1 and how that might impact on the supply of food to supermarket chains.

3/ The First/Dep First Ministers write: “It is hard to imagine a more fundamental aspect of everyday life than the purchase of daily food supplies...

4/ "Hence we would ask you to recognise how important it is that the current consideration of the detail of how the Protocol will be applied takes our unique context into account.”

5/ Under the Protocol, food and animal derived products entering NI from Great Britain will be subject to the EU’s food safety regime, meaning that so-called sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) checks will be required on a range of products destined for supermarket shelves.

NEW: Michel Barnier has told EU member states there has been some movement on the level playing field, and on dispute resolution, but that fisheries talks remain "very difficult" @rtenews understands. Sources say this could go through this week and beyond...

2/ Acc to one senior source, Barnier said there was acceptance that the EU could take retaliatory measures against the UK if it diverged from EU standards but that it would not be "autonomous", in other words, before taking action there wd need to be some dialogue with the UK

3/ "It's the operationalisation of that principle that is now under discussion," acc to source. The EU see this is progress as for a long time the UK refused to accept that if they diverged the EU had a right to do something, says the source

4/ "That principle has now been accepted, but how it is implemented is the nub of the dicussion."

5/ From the EU perspective the concern is the UK might change its rules to make it more competitive, says the source. "Barnier seemed positive that the principle of couter-measures had been agreed."

NEW: European Commission president @vonderleyen: As things stand I cannot tell you whether there will be a deal or not, but I can tell you there is a path to an agreement now. The path may be very narrow but it is there.

2/ VDL - it is therefore our responsibility to continue trying.

3/ Commission president says the "good news" is we have found a way forward on most issues, but this is now a case of being "so close and yet being so far away from each other."

4/ VDL - level playing field: our aim is simply fair competition on our own market.

Says the "architecture" of a level playing field provision rests on two pillars: state aid and standards

5/ On state aid we have made progress based on common princples, guarantees of domestic enforcement, the possibility to autonomously remedy the situation where needed [ie, either side can take action if distortions of trade etc]

Today's UK-EU trade deal reflection - what is rarely stated in discussions about the deal's shortcomings is that they reflect UK government policy choices - in particular that control of immigration and a US trade deal are a higher priority than an EU deal.

Thus, why was it not a UK government priority to secure for UK musicians the rights to tour the EU? Because that would probably have required a reciprocal right to be given to those in the EU, which we didn't want to give. Choice.

Meanwhile why did the UK government not seek or secure a reduction in food inspections for GB products going to the EU? Because that would probably have required fixing food regulations in a way that might have been an obstacle to a US trade deal.

Works the other way as well. Why did the EU refuse UK requests on mutual recognition of industrial testing? In part at least because of UK lack of commitment on maintaining the previous EU system of standards and conformity assessment which might be a problem in a US deal.

One of the strangest opinions in the London politics bubble is that the UK government isn't that bothered about a US trade deal, as it so obviously goes against the evidence. There might be domestic opposition, but this was to be Brexit Dividend Number 1.

I really can’t see how, after the last four and half years, the breakup of the UK can be avoided. What a historical irony that a Brexit intended to make Britain ‘great again’ actually brings about the demise of ‘Great’ Britain.

I actually don’t see this as a bad thing. After all, the aggressive chauvinistic nationalism, hubris, and exceptionalism that made Brexit possible is predominantly an English phenomenon. Part of the historical paradox whereby Englishness expresses itself through Britishness,

without explicitly recognising that this nationalism is primarily embedded in England rather than the Celtic periphery. A United Ireland is long overdue. Scotland - regardless of the debates about the economic viability of independence- has reached the point when a decisive

breach now seems inevitable. If this happens, Wales may well follow. Then, finally, England will have to decide what it wants to be, and look at the flaws and failings - political, economic, and constitutional - that it has put off dealing with, or blamed on others

Not arguing that Brexit was therefore a progressive development btw - far from it - but a country that was willing to do something so fundamentally harmful, and so stupid, and which allowed itself to be taken over by political forces of the kind we’ve seen, is an ill country

I am in the market for positive, optimistic articles about Brexit - it may not be how I’m feeling but I’m sure I’ve missed things + want to avoid confirmation bias so I’m opening my mind, + this seemed like a good place to

Elliott argues that ‘the UK has deep, structural economic problems’ - true, but correlation is not causation: we look in vain for an argument that these problems are caused by EU membership and/or that membership is preventing them being tackled

The argument would be stronger if Elliott could show that other countries in the EU faced similar structural problems, but he doesn’t + I don’t think he could - the EU manages to incorporate a wide range of economic models, + regional inequalities vary hugely between EU countries

He does not attempt to acknowledge + explain the boom in inward investment in UK manufacturing in the last few decades, one of the few economic positives for ‘left behind areas’, though that may have been hard without referring to single market membership + European supply chains

‘Brexit means that those farmers who want their fruit harvested will now have to...pay higher wages or invest in new machinery.’ Maybe they will (but I’m not convinced) but this would have unintended consequences eg higher prices for healthy food

The risks that arise from Merkel's departure this year aren't really linked to her succession, but rather the vacuum she leaves behind in Europe. For Brexit/UK watchers, this is an important transitional year for the EU - & one worth paying attention to
Thread 1/

The outcome of Ger elections in Sept is highly likely to be a Black/Green coalition. Positive for Ger & EU. All the contenders to replace Merkel are also mainstream, some just more conservative than others. See @NazMasraff & @COdendahl very good analysis & threads for more 2/

Yet despite this constructive outcome, in short & medium term, Merkel’s departure will leave a large gap in EU no leader can credibly fill. @EmmanuelMacron will try, but without Merkel or strong partnership in Berlin, his more disruptive, abrasive style won't succeed 3/

Merkel's presidency last year is a class example of her deft political skills. Landing deals with UK & China (whose real value is framework & basis for broader political co-operation they provide); on €750bn Recovery Fund & rule of law; & climate 4/

Of course there's a lot of criticism about compromises she brokered. There is some truth to them. But very often these critiques pay little serious attention to the counterfactual, for eg, of leaving Pol & Hu behind. I think the price would have been too high to pay 5/