Single market, customs union and a poison pill.

Single market, customs union and a poison pill.

In an article, Starmer prepares for parliamentary battles over imminent EU ‘reset’ bill, jessicaelgot suggested that there is movement on the “red lines”. It is clearer on reading that this is an attempt to accelerate UK agreement to the currently on-going trade negotiations by increasing the powers of the relevant ministers.

The article uses the phrase swiss-style agreement which is highly unlikely to succeed and at the best is tone deaf as to the EU’s needs and wants.  

UK in a changing Europe, document what they see as the timetable and goals of the current reset negotiations.I see them as optimistic, and everyone seems to forget that the EU’s starting point is full implementation of the withdrawal agreement and Windsor framework; there remain, even 18 months after the general election, eight infringement proceedings unresolved.

It’s sort of interesting that they think they need new language, but to me, they have not yet changed their mind.

I also see this as a means by which the Government deflects the internal Labour Party pressure towards joining the Customs Union by posing, parts of, the single market as an alternative. It is disappointing to see so many seeing the Customs Union as sufficient advance, but the UK economy and people need and want membership of both, including, reciprocal, free movement of  people.

Labour should join the customs union and single market now and promise to rejoin the EU in its next election manifesto.

Various news sources, including the Brussels Times, report that EU is demanding a “poison pill” clause in further agreements, to make the cost of revoking the new treaties exorbitant. This should have been proposed by the UK side, and without it negotiations would stop.

I predict they won’t until they abandon the strategy of triangulating against reform and that will take significant personnel changes in the Government.

Image: from PIxabay, their licence …

Starmer, Labour and the Redlines

Sir Keir Starmer at the Rivoli

Starmer on an interview on the BBC, reported in the Guardian, said he wanted closer alignment with the EU and its single market but no return to freedom of movement nor the customs union. In fact the reports suggest that he is presenting a new language for the current policy to try and stop the momentum towards the customs union. I don’t think this is an advance although he may change his mind; he often does, usually after some poor front bencher has just defended the policy. It’s all very, “The thick of it”.

This story was also reported in the FT, BBC & Independent. The BBC report is much clearer that there has been no change to the “Red Lines”.

 …

UK–EU Defence: Stronger Together

nato warships

How damaging is the European union’s rejection of the UK’s attempts to join its SAFE programme; SAFE Is the European Union’s new defence funding programme.

The most succinct report that I can find is on Euroweekly News in an article, entitled, “UK excluded from €150bn EU defence deal” which states that,

On November 28, the UK government announced that negotiations to join the EU’s €150 billion Security Action for Europe (SAFE) defence fund had failed, marking a significant blow to what had been billed as a “reset” of UK‑EU post‑Brexit relations.

However, Euroweekly News, also states that SAFE has a 35% access to 3rd party countries, which some might consider generous given that the programme is to be funded by ECB bond issue of €150bn. The cap is however per contract which would, almost certainly, for instance, make selling warships ineligible for SAFE funding, not to mention the fact that numerous EU countries can build both warships and warplanes. The EU were asking for a UK contribution, some might say, a large contribution, to the fund, before lifting the cap to 50%. It also interests me that the whole argument is about selling to the EU, and not the UK buying European weapons, although the Euro benefit to this is massively undermined by the UK decision to buy US warplanes and more US nukes.

The UK proving once again that it is “a nation of shopkeepers” walked away from this deal.

Defence co-operation was meant to be the most advanced topic of the EU-UK May reset agreement. Even with defence on the table, cherry-picking is unacceptable to the European Union as is the UK’s insistence that every deal must benefit the UK.

Image Credit: NATO …

On the autumn statement 2026

Rachel Reeves in front of No 10/1 with a red box

A quick note on the budget, remembering I wasn’t as critical of last year’s as some, at least not on macro-economic grounds. I was obviously against the failure to abolish the two child cap, but also against the failure to properly fund universities, students, and local government.

So this budget is, to me, a bit meh and I agree with Fisher, why wait for a year? Still nothing on HE or Local Government finance, and the wealth taxation is very weak and poorly focused. No capital gains tax equalisation, no financial transaction tax.

The freezing of tax free allowance amounts is probably more damaging to those on the margin of the upper rate tax band but as I read it, it’s a piece of accounting magic. There were no plans to change it for the next two tax years anyway, and they can change their minds, although some of the impact will occur after the next election.

Also the FT reports that leading business people consider it insufficiently stimulating of growth, which in their case is probably not code for, “We need to rejoin the single market and customs union.”, although there are many, including me and Liz Webster, that are saying so; our macro-economic arguments recently augmented by a report from the US non-partisan National Bureau of Economic Research and by Ryan Bourne’s recanting of his pro-Brexit position.

Image Credit: from freemalaysiatoday cc 2024 by …

How much has Brexit cost us?

Reuters Square, if its still called that in black and white.

While posting my notes on my reference back for Labour Conference I fell back on the OBR statistic that Brexit had cost the UK 4% of GDP. I thought a chart would have been helpful and so went looking for one.

The NIESR published an article, Revisiting the effects of Brexit, which now they’ve archived it, no longer has the chart they made from the model, but google search can still find it today.

Their model tries to disentangle the effects of the COVID slump, and the article, dated 2023, says,

These estimates suggest that Brexit had already reduced UK real GDP relative to the baseline by just under one per cent in 2020 as consumers and businesses adapted their expectations even before the TCA came into force. Our estimates further suggest that three years after the transition period, UK real GDP is some 2-3 per cent lower due to Brexit, compared to a scenario where the United Kingdom retained EU membership.

 …

#Lab25 will get to debate rejoining the EU

Labour Conference 2019 from the balcony

At the General Committee of Lewisham North last night we agreed to send a motion calling for the abolition of the two child benefit cap, and also proposed a reference back of the NPF report. I intiallly proposed the words in a blog article posted last week. This article repeats some of the text of the reference back and my notes for my moving speech, and right of reply, as it was opposed by both those who think that being outside the EU is a good thing, and those who fear Farage and think the time is wrong. For those details, read overleaf ...

Brexit, reset or stall?

the staircase at Lancaster House

Last week, the UK and the EU met at the most senior levels in what the labour government has described as a reset of EU relations. As usual, the conclusions are best documented on the EU website where they published a joint communique. Certainly the results of the negotiations have changed few minds. While I consider that the best result would be if both sides walked out thinking they’d won, my feeling is that this was a draw, although no major breakthroughs occurred and a huge opportunity wasted, primarily due to the lack of vision and ambition on the part of the Labour government. The rest of the article can be read over leaf ...

Labour’s new deal for Europe

ec-london

This is a comment on A new deal with the EU is exactly what Britain needs. Here’s how Labour will achieve it | Nick Thomas-Symonds | The Guardian  – www.theguardian.com, I have made it with the help of diigo, where the headline comment on my bookmark, part generated and part selected from the article says, ‘via Comment is free | guardian.co.uk, subtitled, nonsensically, “This isn’t about politics – it’s about pragmatism. Working with our allies will make British people safer, more secure and more prosperous.”‘.

The article says nothing new and repeats the isolationist nonsense fantasies of Labour’s triangulators that Brexit can be fixed. It includes the phrase “honour the referendum” despite the fact that it was nearly nine years ago, and we’ve had three general elections since then.

Quotes and comments

We are equally confident in what the UK can offer in return. It is a politically stable country, and the government has a huge mandate, with more than four years left to deliver our policies. This stability has already inspired the confidence of businesses across the world, unlocking tens of billions of pounds of long-term investment.

  • The statistics aren’t in yet to substantiate investment numbers,

Labour is rising to meet the challenges in this new era of global instability.

This is not about ideology or returning to the divisions of the past, but about ruthless pragmatism and what works in the national interest.

When it comes to security, Nato is the cornerstone of our defence.

  • Really? A fantasy of the Labour Right, NATO’s gone, for at least four years, but Trump’s isolationism has not come out of the blue.

All of this will be framed by the very clear red lines we set out at the election. We won’t return to the arguments of the past: there will be no return to the single market, the customs union or freedom of movement.

  • Well, it won’t work then. There isn’t a deal in which the UK wins at the expense of the EU. If only because, the queue of member states asking for their own opt-outs would be 25 long.

We will only agree an EU deal that meets the needs of the British people and respects the 2016 referendum result.

You can’t do both if you believe honouring the referendum means staying out of the EU but the referendum mandate was dishonestly won and is now nearly nine years old; I estimate that about 4½ million voters have died since then. …

The pan-European Mediterranean convention and EU/UK relations

The pan-European Mediterranean convention and EU/UK relations

This blog article comments on the reactions to Marco Sefcovic's suggestion that the UK as part of the negotiations to improve relations between the UK and the EU should consider joining the pan European Mediterranean convention (PEM); . Sefcovic is the commissioner responsible for trade. The rest of the article looks at HMG's lukewarm response and looks to explain what the PEM is. For more, press the button ...