David Davis:
‘Inside a customs union, the UK would not be able to take action on the trade challenges we face’
both the single market and the customs union” and that retaining membership of a customs union would be “deeply unattractive”.
In policy terms, the simplicity of such a plan – just keep things the way they are – might seem enviable. But if it seems too good to be true, that’s usually because it is.
This plan would necessitate two serious breaches of Labour’s manifesto. The first is well known and has been made powerfully by my friend Liam Fox: by forcing the UK to maintain a single external tariff and common commercial policy, both of which are set in Brussels, a customs union would prevent us from signing economy-boosting, job-creating free trade deals with other countries around the world.
This is one of the central prizes of Brexit. It represents an opportunity to use our agility and commercial strength to create jobs and wealth here in Britain. The only way we can do this is if we have control over our own trade policy and are able to tailor agreements to our own needs, not those of 28 different countries. Being inside a customs union would make this impossible.
Labour are now certain to throw this opportunity away in favour of a system for which the only precedent is Turkey. This would see the EU offering access to the UK market in their third country negotiations, without reciprocal access for the UK.
Labour’s own shadow international trade secretary put it well when he said: “The EU could do a deal with another country, let’s say America, which we would be bound by in the UK. We would have to accept the liberalisation of our markets… why would America give us that access when it’s got all the liberalisation of our markets that it wants.”
But the second manifesto breach is even more important, since it is not just about the opportunities of leaving, but whether we would have left at all. The customs plan would surrender control over our trade defences.
Membership of a customs union, with a common commercial policy, gives the EU the exclusive right to put in place remedies to tackle anticompetitive practices. This means that inside a customs union the UK would not be able to take action on the trade challenges we face.
Last year, manufacturers in our country combined with the unions to call for the Government to produce “strong trade remedies as part of an industrial strategy”. Both parties put such a plan in their manifesto.
We are taking action. Today, Labour have chosen a different path.
This Conservative Government understands that the Brexit vote was a call for greater control over policies that determine people’s lives. Labour seem intent on giving that up.
They may think they have stumbled across a simple solution to Brexit, but there is a lesson they are yet to learn: if it looks like snake oil, and it smells like snake oil, don’t expect it to make you feel better. Comment By supporting a customs union, Labour are ripping up their manifesto
When Jeremy Corbyn stands up today to announce his latest policy on Brexit, he seems certain to break the commitments he made to Labour voters at the last election.
We know from Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, that the new agreement Labour will seek will “do the work of the customs union”, though we will have to wait for the Labour leader himself to discover which linguistic word game they will use to dress it up.
Either way, it is unlikely to save the blushes of the Barry Gardiner, the shadow international trade secretary who said that “in voting to leave the EU the British people voted to leave As Labour Party chases a ‘simple’ solution, it is ripping up its own manifesto pledges