After a lack of transparency about its plans, this week the government agreed a deal with the EU. I can almost hear the collective groan about reopening discussions about Brexit and I have no intention of going over old ground. Instead, given these new developments we need to look at what has been secured and what has been conceded.
Removing red tape to make trade easier is an ambition we all share. One of the frustrations when we left the EU, was their insistence on imposing unnecessary checks and paperwork that cost businesses and consumers here and across the EU. Perhaps that attitude was understandable as part of a mindset that wanted to punish the UK for voting to leave but it did not benefit anyone. In that context, cutting the bureaucracy on firms is welcome. But the key question is, at what cost did the Prime Minister achieve that?
The UK already shares many rules with the EU in terms of food and plant safety standards. But instead of agreeing a deal based on mutual recognition of our high standards the Prime Minister did what the last government refused but what the EU always wanted – he signed up to follow EU rules now and those imposed in the future on the UK with no ability to block them.
Far from the negotiating win he seemed to boast about in Parliament, he has restricted the freedom of our agri-tech tech sector to innovate and agreed to follow someone else’s rules when a tougher negotiator would not have needed to.
Of course, it is on fishing rights that the Prime Minister conceded the most. Apparently in response to last minute pressure from France, he signed up to a 12 year deal which will prevent UK fishermen from benefiting from more of our fish stocks. Again, the easing of unnecessary rules for exports will, I know, benefit local firms who I’ve assisted in the past but surely a better deal was achievable. It seems the government did not try.
We know France wanted to link access to UK fishing waters to access to a new EU defence rearmament fund. Yet, while we have signed away our rights there is no guarantee UK defence firms will actually be able to participate in the new £150 billion fund. Instead, there are promises of more talks – and the UK having to pay to participate even if that is agreed.
There’s also a gap between what the Prime Minister claimed and reality in other areas. Anyone expecting to be able to use e-gates this summer on their holidays to EU destinations as the government said will be disappointed – there’s no agreement and no timetable for there being one. The UK took the grown-up approach when we left the EU and permitted EU citizens to use e-gates here – sadly that reasonable approach has not been reciprocated.
A pattern is emerging of how the government approaches trade deals. It wants to rush to sign them seemingly at any cost. Look at the US deal, locking in higher tariffs, not fully protecting our car industry, and potentially severely damaging ethanol producers and farmers supplying them.
When President Trump negotiates he say “aims very high, and I then just keep pushing and pushing to get what I want.” It doesn’t seem that Sir Keir Starmer takes a similar approach for the UK.
