Changing up

Changing up

A nasty little piece by Mujtaba Rahman which contains the unstated assumption that the UK’s political direction and relations with the EU, are fixed and desirable. The other side of the coin is that the EU is about to change up; missing the boat would leave the UK isolated and poorer. The UK shouldn’t  apply to rejoin until its ready to be a good citizen and sees the EU as more than a trade club.

Rahman says,

The EU of 2026 is an organisation built increasingly on common borrowing, an assertive joint industrial policy and a growing role in security and defence

I ask who wouldn’t want that. The changing nature of the world’s international relations means we need reliable friends.

Let’s see what changes Burnham makes to the Labour Party, or what space he gives to its eu-phile majority. …

There’s no useful half way house

Earlier this month, Michel Barnier made a speech in which he suggested that the European Union would welcome the United Kingdom rejoining the EU even with some of the opt-outs previously negotiated. Barnier is very clear that he is only talking about Schengen and the Euro. The huge problem with the speech and the suggestion that opt-outs remain on the table is this will be interpreted by lukewarm supporters and political weathercocks as permission to haggle on the terms of re-entry.  

Michel Barnier – European Parliament cc 2019 BY

The unacceptability of UK opt-outs within the EU, specifically, staying out of Schengen and the Euro, is illustrated in a recent You Gov poll. Unfortunately, for rejoiners, the French and Germans will only accept a UK application if it includes Schengen and the Euro, while support in the UK falls if we do not rejoin on the terms we had. It would be interesting to note what people believe those terms to be, as apart from Schengen and the Euro, they include a partial opt-out from the justice pillar, together with the famous rebate.  

I am concerned that while a number of campaigners have been trying to prove their cleverness by suggesting there’s ways to rejoin without agreeing to the Copenhagen Criteria, others have been encouraged to consider EU membership as an a-la-carte process. It is not.

On the question of opt-outs, we, i.e. rejoiners need to show some leadership. Schengen comes with the right to freedom of movement. This is a popular and positive benefit of full membership of the European Union. Politicians, particularly Labour politicians should be showing some leadership.  The opt-outs are gone; there may be some technical reasons why Schengen and the Euro will take some time but being a net contributor is one reason why we’re wanted and full membership of the justice pillar gives each citizen access to the Court of Justice of the European Union acting as a backstop against the authoritarian instincts of the British State with judges appointed by the children of opponents of fascism and Stalinism. Being members of the Digital Single Market would have the benefit of defending our democracy against US Oligarchs and Putin.

I want my European citizenship back, I want to vote for MEPs and a Parliament that appoints a Commissioner and Judge, and has a seat on the European Council. And since this is a metaphor in common use, I want it in my lifetime. I also want to participate in improving the democracy of the EU to make it accountable to the views of citizens and residents.

Another reason for pace, is that the EU is about to move on in a big way. Many argue that its changed too much to rejoin anyway; it’s not yet true and just something that Brexiters say but if the industrial policy takes off, it will damage the UK’s ability to export and further damage supply chains. …

The “Reset”, progress over Xmas?

The “Reset”, progress over Xmas?

I did some searching to see if anything had developed from the EU/UK meetings in December. It seems that there have been a couple of inter-governmental meetings. Is progress being made, in the famous words, of Captain Rum, opinion be divided. I made a note on my wiki, called, Brexit reset winter 2025-26 which you might like to check out. For more, check out the wiki article, or use the "Read More" button ...

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”.

 …

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 ...