Although Anatole Kaletsky supports Philip Hammond's proposal of a transitional deal with the EU, to avoid risks of disruption that could pose a threat to financial stability after Brexit, he fears this "interim period" could last longer than "two years after March 2019" - the official departure from the EU. It's true that the UK would be able to "retain the commercial rights of EU membership, while still contributing to the EU budget, observing EU regulations and legal judgments, and allowing the free movement of people." Theoretically the UK could remain in the EU until 2021, albeit "without any voting rights."

The author says, despite Theresa May's promise to keep a “deep and special” relationship, and effort to negotiate a new “treaty-based arrangement” with the EU, Britain wouldn't be able to forge a new deal with Europe ahead of the 2022 general election. "A full break from Europe, with no alternative arrangement in place to cushion the blow" would enrage many Britons, ushering in an end of the Tory government. If May is still around by then she could "try to extend the transition period beyond 2022" to avert an electoral disaster. "And as past experience tells us, once an extension is granted, it may never end."

May's judiciousness has been widely criticised since her White Paper in February offered no scrutiny, no mechanisms to hold ministers to account and no ways of influencing the process to leave the EU. Nevertheless she triggered Article 50 in March - the formal divorce process from the EU. And she called for a snap election in April - in a bid to secure her mandate to negotiate Brexit - only to find herself losing the majority she sought to win.

Now May is under pressure from her opponents to pursue the Norway-option of negotiation - Britain's membership of the European Economic Area (EEA), which would transform Brexit into a gradual process of trial and error. It also mitigates the risks of economic damage created by a re-imposition of regulatory barriers to business at the end of the two-year negotiating period. But she took the Norway option off the table a long time ago because it would require the U.K. to acquiesce to free movement of people from the EU.

Formed in 1994 the EEA was a "temporary framework for various countries preparing to join the EU." Norway rejected a EU membership in a referendum in November 1994, and has been a EEA member ever since. The author says a EEA membership could offer Britain breathing space to join a new EU, which "may already be moving slowly toward a two-track structure. " It would allow countries that aren't in the eurozone to form "an outer ring of economic cooperation" - to gain access to the single market, while staying out of the "monetary or political union." In order "to prosper, the eurozone will need to establish a political union. " A two-track Europe is different from a “two-speed” model which enables every country to move toward “ever-closer union,” just at different rates.

The author thinks the EU and Britons would reject a "transition arrangement" for the UK. EU diehard federalists " want Britain out as quickly as possible," because they see Britain as a spoiler, that has long supported Denmark, Poland, and Sweden etc. "to resist deeper integration." They "hate the idea of a two-track Europe," and they want a politically closer union with a single currency for every member-state

British voters don't fancy the idea of being "stuck in limbo." Many say the “Norway model” would turn Britain into a “vassal state” - contributing huge sums to the EU budget and sticking to EU laws, while having "no say over how that money is spent or how those laws are made." The author says the model "will satisfy neither Britain’s elderly, provincial Europhobes, nor the young, urban voters who want to preserve the rights of EU citizenship that they have taken for granted all their lives."

Meanwhile the economic reality sets in - businesses are leaving the UK, due to uncertainties ahead. Besides a "long transition could delay the shift in public opinion needed to reverse Brexit before it is too late." The author believes Britons may need to feel the pain strong enough "to shake public opinion out of its fatalistic complacency." They leave the EU at a time when "economic growth has already started to overtake that of Britain." The fear is that, "if it ever wants to be readmitted, it will have to settle for far less attractive terms than what it enjoys today. Not only would it no longer receive budget rebates or special treatment on social regulations; it might even be forced to join the euro."

For this reason, many Britons either emigrate or try to put on a brave face - “Keep calm and carry on," while bracing themselves for "a political or economic crisis."

