We never negotiated properly with the EU in the first place - so how will we negotiate a deal for Brexit?

Look closely at the quality of the people we sent to the European Parliament - were they as good as the people the French, Spanish and Germans sent? Could it be that, in the day to day negotiations that shaped the EU over the last 40 years, our representatives were not up to the job of negotiating our interests?

Nigel Farage in the European Parliament (AFP)

As the dust settles on the Brexit referendum last week, one thing seems clear: the UK government is going to have to deploy some serious negotiation skills to get the country moving forward. But if we’d been good at negotiations with the EU in the first place, we never would have found ourselves in this mess.

If anyone seriously believes that other countries were doing better out of the EU, does it occur to them that those countries were trying harder? Not paying more: negotiating better.

The EU is a democratic institution, just not a very efficient one. To get the best from it, you have to work really hard for it. To the people who complained about the EU’s inefficiency: did you ever consider complaining to your MEP? Did you know who they were? Did you even bother to vote?

Look closely at the quality of the people we sent to the European Parliament - were they as good as the people the French, Spanish and Germans sent? Could it be that, in the day to day negotiations that shaped the EU over the last 40 years, our representatives were not up to the job of negotiating our interests? Would you vote for an MP who promised to go to Westminster and not take part? Every vote for a Ukip MEP was a vote for someone who was explicitly promising to make no effort to make things better. That worked out badly for us.

Simply exercising a right to veto is not negotiating. To negotiate effectively, you need first to know what you're seeking to achieve, and it seems like too often our representatives’ goal in EU negotiations was to let them happen and opt out if they didn't like the outcome. Once you have an objective, recognise that one country's MEPs can no more shape the agenda in Brussels than one county's MPs can shape the agenda in Westminster. So it's important to build and understand your leverage, create coalitions to multiply the leverage you have, understand what you need from the counterparty, what they need from you and what you can do for them. Making unilateral demands (or reluctant unilateral concessions) is not effective negotiation. To achieve your goals, you must recognise and plan for the process of trading that makes negotiation such a powerful tool for problem-solving.

Once you know what you want to achieve, what the other party can do and what the trading process is going to look like, you can plan your negotiation so that you proactively put balanced proposals on the table, assertively managing the agenda and making sure to incentivise the counter party to do what you need them to do. Do not attempt to wing it.

We have seriously limited leverage as things stand at present. We need the trading status that comes with being in the European Economic Area, and precedent shows that you don’t get that without accepting free movement of labour and much of the regulation. So our best outcome is looking like a broadly similar relationship with the EU, other than the loss of our ability to influence at the top table. This would be an insane capitulation and leave us materially worse off.

As we prepare for Brexit negotiations, we need to start indicating that nothing is off the table (including staying in). If we commit to Article 50, the last of our leverage is spent. As long as we remain in limbo we have many options available to us and a key lever in the negotiation. As long as we’re negotiating, the other countries in the EU can manage their own populist and far right elements by saying, “Wait and see what happens to the UK.”

Once we’re out, regardless of the outcome, the Leavers in those other countries will something to shout about. If we sink into irrelevance and stagnation, the likes of Geert Wilders and Marine le Pen will hold us up as martyrs (“Look what the wicked EU did to plucky Britain”). If we’re successful, they’ll hold us up as an example. However, if we renegotiate our position and step back from the brink, we can be an example of another kind.

So if a climb-down on the part of the UK could be positioned as a desirable outcome for the rest of the EU, what’s in it for us? Well, how about a leadership position in a European Union that we want to be a part of?

We know now, more clearly than ever, that the unionist, federalist agenda that has driven the development of the EU since Maastricht is thoroughly discredited. Other than a small number of EU mandarins, no-one wants it. Not the Germans, not the French, no-one. So, now that we’ve said the unsayable, how about we start making some proposals and see what kind of reception they get? Build coalitions, take charge. Negotiate assertively and creatively, to create value for ourselves and everybody else.

This episode has brought the need for change into stark relief for the leaders of all the major EU economies. They must change. They may even get it right. The fact that we probably won’t be around to benefit from the change that we precipitated, much less shape that change, is a tragedy for the UK.

With the negotiations to come, we have a choice. We can choose to negotiate a rearguard action, a managed capitulation that will destroy value for everyone and leave no-one satisfied, or we can make proactive effort at changing things for the better. To achieve the latter, we’ll need a negotiation strategy and the capability to deliver it. Neither of those seem to have been in place in the past – let’s hope we can pull it together enough to deliver them in the present.