EU Referendum


Brexit: Barnier the torch bearer


10/01/2018




Up in Scotland, I'm sitting in as an expert in Hamilton Sheriff Court each day, on the Errington Cheese food safety case. I look like doing this for the next three weeks, during which period (towards the end) I will be called upon to give my own views on the proceedings.

This is not something I wanted to do and I'm acting in a pro bono capacity so it's detracting substantially from my main activity – maintaining this blog – to absolutely no personal advantage.

Thankfully Peter has was able to take up the slack yesterday, and you'll be seeing more of him in the next weeks. I'm also hoping that Boiling Frog may do the occasional post, and there's always the possibility of falling back on the time-honoured device of the open thread.

One thing that does strike me is that, with just a few days away from the coal face, Brexit begins to look like another country. Getting back into the swing of things is extraordinarily difficult as the subject seems so unreal. One begins to understand how people outside the loop, in what is whimsically called the "real world", feel about the issue.

Easing me back into the unreal world of Brexit, however, is Michel Barnier who has offered yet another speech dealing with aspects of our preoccupation, this one to the Trends Manager of the Year 2017 event in Brussels.

Barnier started off by saying that 2018 will be a decisive year for the negotiations, even if I somehow doubt that. But then, who am I to argue with the EU's chief negotiator. How could he possibly be wrong?

Doffing his cap to the historical association between the UK and Belgium, he told us that there was a time when England's prosperity depended on the wool trade, particularly with Flanders. A reduction in the supply of English or Scottish wool yarn could threaten the jobs of thousands of Flemish artisans.

Some centuries later, he said, it was an Englishman, William Cockerill, who imported the first machines for spinning wool to Verviers, in 1799, and then the steam engine to Seraing, making Liège the starting point for the industrial revolution on the Continent.

Today, he said, the UK is still an important partner in Belgium, representing seven percent of the trade in goods. But, in a very obvious barb, he noted that 68 percent of Belgian trade was with other Member States - almost 10 times more.

To Barnier, intent on promoting the EU myths, what makes our European economies strong is the Single Market. The British know this well, he said, since it was the main reason why they joined the EEC in 1972.

That's actually a bit of a stretch as it was the Common Market we joined, and that was not very much more than the Customs Union. It took until 1992 before the Single Market really got cracking, by which time we were dealing with Maastricht and looking for a way out or what was more obviously becoming a political union.

Nevertheless, for good or bad, the Single Market will still have 440 million consumers and 22 million businesses after the UK's departure. Beyond facilitating trade between members, it also helps EU-based businesses succeed in international competition, thanks to the collective negotiating power and EU rules and standards, which are often adopted worldwide.

This, of course, is why we need to be careful leaving the Single Market. Eventually, we must – but it's a matter of how and when, rather than whether. That, though, is obviously too subtle for the Muppet Tories and our own government.

Predictably, though, Barnier is all about preserving the integrity of the Single Market, which is not negotiable. But he does admit that the UK will remain an important market for the EU, and he acknowledges (something we've not heard so much about) the concern expressed by EU businesses about Brexit.

Since day one, Barnier said, he has asked himself three questions. Interestingly, these are questions which our own idiot politicians could ask, but never will. And it is the first which sets the scene: "Does the UK want an orderly withdrawal or a disorderly withdrawal and is it ready to assume the immediate consequences of its decision to leave the European Union?"

The man sort of answers that question and we can infer from it that the UK's response to the new guidelines on the transition period is part of it, as well as the Irish border and the financial settlement.

The second question is just as pointed, as he is asking what kind of future relationship the UK want with the European Union, noting That this question hasn't yet been answered. However, he says, "we can proceed by deduction, based on the Union's legal system and the UK's red lines. By officially drawing these red lines, the UK is itself closing the doors, one by one".

The British government, he notes, wants to end the free movement of persons, and has therefore indicated its intention of leaving the Single Market. It wants to recover its independence to negotiate international agreements and has therefore confirmed its intention of leaving the Customs Union. And it has said it no longer wishes to recognise the jurisdiction of the ECJ, which guarantees the application of our common rules.

Here, there is quite obviously an element of special pleading, but it allows Barnier to say that the only model possible for a long-term relationship is a free trade agreement. And, with brutal frankness, he reminds us that, however ambitious, it "cannot include all the benefits of the Customs Union and the Single Market".

That we will not get the market access we want is not a question of punishment or revenge, he says. "We simply want to remain in charge of our own rules and the way in which they are applied. As it seeks to regain its decision-making autonomy, the United Kingdom must respect ours", Barnier says.

Then, whatever the exact framework of the future relationship between the EU and the UK, businesses and public administrations must be allowed the time to prepare themselves for it. That is the purpose of the 21-month transition period although, in reality, the real transition period has already started.

The truth in that context, says Barnier, is that a trading relationship with a country that does not belong to the European Union will never be frictionless, whether VAT statements, and imports of live animals and products of animal origin, "which are subject to systematic checks at the border of the EU when they arrive from third countries".

Barnier keeps telling us this – only for it to be ignored by UK politicians and media alike. I will get some savage pleasure when this smacks them in the face and they start whingeing about it, because it's been on the cards all along.

That then leaves the third question, as to whether the UK wants to stay close to the European regulatory model or to distance itself from it. And the importance of this is that there can be no ambitious partnership without common ground on fair competition, state aid, guarantees against tax dumping and social and environmental standards.

For the first time in the history of the EU's trade relations, it is not a question of encouraging regulatory convergence but of managing divergence. And then, because future agreements with the United Kingdom will most likely be mixed agreements, in addition to the approval of the European Parliament, will require ratification by the 27 national parliaments and doubtless some regional parliaments too.

Much of that, of course, we've heard before, but each time he speaks, Barnier seems to have the knack of adding a little more. And as well as this, he injects the barb that it is the time for a new political resolve in Europe, "and this new resolve is more important than Brexit".

At the UK end of the pipeline, though, we have nothing but lack of resolve from the UK government. A May-style unshuffle and another "ultra" fanatic joining the government, leave Barnier as the bearer of the flame of rationality – even with his occasional flights of fantasy.

But not many in the UK are listening, which means that flame will have to burn brighter and longer. And then, still, most of our establishment don't get it. We're going to need a lot more Barnier speeches before we even begin to get there.