Endings for Beginnings: Reaching a Brexit Deal
It was a hurried dash and came just before the end of the transition period. The UK and the European Union have reached an agreement on the torturously long road of Brexit. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson can take the deal back to his constituents and Parliament, claiming he achieved something less horrendous than a no-deal Brexit. EU diplomats can claim to have also chalked up some vital concessions.
Johnson’s lectern mood was stubbornly confident. On December 24, he reiterated the reclaiming of British sovereignty, making the dubious assertion that “we left on Jan 31 with that oven-ready deal.” (The ingredients for the meal still had yet to be gathered.) Now, he could boast that, “we have completed the biggest trade deal yet, worth £660 billion,” likening it to a “Canada style free trade deal between the UK and the EU” that would preserve jobs in the country.
UK goods and components could continue being sold without tariffs and quotas within the EU market. There would “be no palisade of tariffs on Jan 1. And there will be no non-tariff barriers to trade.” But even better, praised Johnson, the deal “should allow our companies and our exporters to do even more business with our European friends.” Keeping in mind his Brexit audience, he insisted that Britain had “taken back control of laws” and “of every jot and tittle of our regulation.” British laws would not be subjected to EU scrutiny; the European Court of Justice would no longer be an irritating final arbiter of UK cases. British standards – from the biosciences to financial services – would be British and British alone.
From the start, the negotiating strategy of the Johnson team was askew. Spanish Foreign Minister Arancha González Laya underlined the point in an interview with Politico earlier this month. At its heart, Brexit had revealed “the illusion of independence and the need to manage interdependence.” Trade agreements, to that end, were designed to shore up the latter, not assert the former.
The concept of interdependence, that great evil of the harder Brexiter line, survives. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen emphasised the point in her remarks on the deal. While the debate had “always been about sovereignty,” the substantive question to ask was what sovereignty meant in the twenty-first century. Little Englander types would have found her thoughts on this disconcerting, even menacing. “For me, [sovereignty] is about being able to seamlessly do work, travel, study and do business in 27 countries.” It entailed a collective voice and “pulling each other up – instead of trying to get back to your feet alone.” The deal had not altered that reality. “We are one of the giants.”
When it comes to the level playing field argument, the European Commission could also claim that fair competition would endure, and that “effective tools” were on hand to deal with market distortions. Cooperation with the UK would continue “in the fields of climate change, energy, security and transport.” But the equivalence arrangement will be problematic for that most vital of UK exports, the financial services industry. Matters of data protection and other financial standards will have to fall into line with the EU. On such matters, the UK can hardly claim to have embraced total, unadulterated freedom.
The same goes for the European Court of Justice, which will continue to retain a small foothold in the UK. The ECJ will be the highest tribunal of appeal for Northern Ireland, which has been given special status in the agreement. That trouble plagued province will also continue to be subject to EU single market and customs union rules.
In cases where the EU and the UK have disagreements – for instance, on the issue of harmful divergence from common standards as they stand on December 31, 2020 – a dispute resolution mechanism will be triggered. A binding arbitration system will come into play. This dampens the sovereign mad enthusiasts in Britain. Yes, the agreement speaks against tariffs, but they can still be used and will link the EU and Britain for years to come.
On the nagging point of fishing rights, UK negotiators had to relent. The value of fish caught by EU vessels in UK waters will be reduced by a more modest 25%. Von der Leyen expressed satisfaction, as well she might: “We have secured a five and a half years of full predictability for our fishing communities and strong tools to incentivise it to remain so.” Johnson could only call the period “a reasonable transition period,” and assure “great fish fanatics in this country that we will as a result of this deal be able to catch and eat quite prodigious quantities of extra fish.”
In reality, this means that the spirited message of taking back control of the seas has failed, at least for the period when adjustments will have to be made. This caused considerable displeasure to Nigel Farage, leader of the Brexit Party, who accused British diplomats of dropping “the ball before the line” in a “fisheries sell-out.”
While the deal is unlikely to be sabotaged when Parliament is reconvened, members will only have the shortest of time to consider a bulky document. As one MP told Fraser Nelson of The Spectator, the UK’s chief negotiator David Frost “might have missed something. He’s a good negotiator but he’s not Einstein.” The EU also had the better legal eagles; those from the UK had never wanted Britain to leave the EU in the first place.
Staunch remainers such as Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon see little to merit the arrangements, positioning her nation for the spring. “Before the spin starts, it’s worth remembering that Brexit is happening against Scotland’s will.” No deal would be able to “ever make up for what Brexit takes away from us. It’s time to chart our own future as an independent, European nation.”
Before the spin starts, it’s worth remembering that Brexit is happening against Scotland’s will. And there is no deal that will ever make up for what Brexit takes away from us. It’s time to chart our own future as an independent, European nation.
— Nicola Sturgeon (@NicolaSturgeon) December 24, 2020
In concluding her statement, von der Leyen drew upon T.S. Eliot: “What we call the beginning is often the end. And to make an end is to make a beginning.” Johnson preferred a rather less profound formulation. “That’s the good news from Brussels, now for the sprouts.”
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
762 total views, 2 views today
8 commentsLogin here Register here
” … Britain had “taken back control of laws” and “of every jot and tittle of our regulation.” British laws would not be subjected to EU scrutiny; the European Court of Justice would no longer be an irritating final arbiter of UK cases.”
Oh yes, all those annoying EU regulations like working conditions and minimum wage rates and environmental standards … when will the working class Brexiteers wake up and realise just what they have given up in the empty name of “sovereignty”.
Scottish independence. Let’s do it! 🏴
I haven’t really followed the debate closely but
I imagine the UK will still play loose with the tax laws and maybe that was reason enough for some.
I dont believe the EU is the best model and there are good reasons to want out.
Getting out with bad leadership can go really bad.
Yes, Michael, you are right an independent Scotland would be much better off if freed from the constraints and regulations of a self-serving London based plutocracy.
In fact, if we could separate the rest of Britain from London and let the other regions form a cooperative government free from the corrupting influences of “The City” then a more humanitarian approach to governing might just be possible.
one of the greatest problems which the European Union had to contend with was the inclusion of the UK and its fundamentally corrupt SouthEastern-centric government.
There’ll be no more Murdoch family intrusions into the EU via the London ‘establishment’ now that the break is made.
Hope for many endings and for some far better new beginnings. President D. Schitt-Skull is going, whining like a cross between a doomed baby and Al Capone. Joris Bonkpole, The clumsy cartoonish crazy joke, has got a little from the Europeans who wish a short term avoidance of inconvenience and shortages. Here, Scott Bowell-Brain, the chronic lazy liar and serial failure at his career of propaganda exploitation, is a horror of theft, betrayal, coverups, denials, avoidances, sheer emptiness. Captain of the crappiest cruddy cooked team of filth, larceny, onthetake egofixated empty conservative crooks, he roots the whole nation with Joyceish Viagaranity. If only the “western” hunnish, savage, regressive nations could avoid the doom and destruction of backward, swollen egotistical no hopers, we’d have a little chance. May 2021 be a little better, but who would have confidence??
Season’s Greetings PP ….. nice to see that the Christmas prawns have not stifled you enthusiasm. Just a small demurrer ….. Scummo is ensuring that there is an adequate photographic record of his actions in misgovernment and following the Goebbels model continues to tell BIG LIES that are more acceptable to the proletariat that little lies.
You might know, Cocky, that Hollywood, Advertising, T V, fantasy and super heroes are all a “dream factory” effect, a concept of dominating the deeper needs, dreams, worries, fears of the ordinary Joe or Joan. Get the suckers to believe in this extreme shit and they start to believe in you, the messenger, deliverer, saviour, disciple, prophet. It was always evil, the big lie… Enjoy your personal way of facing today and next year, for it may not be satisfying, decent…and best “wishes” (hah) to all once again.