Brian Monteith: Being in the single market does not benefit the UK

The single market is not good for Scotland, so neither is Chequers nor Theresa May, writes Brian Monteith

Well, that was some week. First, a ruse about an unsustainable and unsupportable double backstop to deflect attention away from the Prime Minister’s selfinflicted weak bargaining position. It never had a serious possibility of being accepted but it gives Theresa May the opportunity for another Dunkirk speech wrapped in an imaginary Union Flag swatting the EU negotiators. If only...

All the while the civil servant leading our negotiations was apparently making promises for the UK to remain in the customs union without approval from the Cabinet. This, and the disastrous Chequers plan he personally concocted, could not be bettered if May had subcontracted her negotiating to Nicola Sturgeon.

Chequers means the adoption of a “common rule book” to ensure the UK remains in the single market for goods and most foods, while the fresh attempt to keep us in the EU’S customs union would solve the inflated problem of a border with Ireland. Neither of these outcomes is necessary; nor are they what May promised repeatedly last year. It is not even what Jeremy Corbyn promised in his manifesto.

A report published today that I helped write, using official UK and Eurostat numbers, demonstrates that, rather than be vital to the UK’S export trade, the EU’S single market is undeniably disadvantageous. Gleaning similar Scottish Government statistics suggests it is the same for Scotland too. This runs counter to common consensus, but the economic data do not lie.

The UK trades with the whole world and is the fifth largest economy as a result. Despite being a member of the single market and customs union it suffers a massive £96 billion trade deficit with the EU. By contrast it achieves a broadly neutral position with the rest of the world and enjoys a surplus with the US, arguably the world’s most competitive market – despite having no trade deal.

Why is it that the UK can be successful in trading with the US – where we trade under WTO rules – yet have such a consistently large deficit with the EU where we have the equivalent of a trade deal through membership of the single market and the customs union?

Likewise, Scottish exports to the EU single market – where we automatically meet EU regulations and face no tariffs – grew by 10.4 per cent in 2002-16, but by comparison over the same period exports to the rest of the world – under WTO rules and often in the face of tariffs – grew by nine times as much, at 90 per cent.

The reason is simple: the single market is intentionally skewed in favour of goods to the detriment of services – the latter being the area of expertise where both the UK and Scotland’s economies excel.

Unfortunately the PM’S Chequers plan does not solve this bias but compounds it by allowing future regulations to be introduced that the UK would have no say in. This is worse than Norway’s arrangement (where it has the right to be heard but has no vote) and even worse than the UK’S current full membership (where it has only 8.6 per cent of council votes and has been defeated on every occasion it has objected to a new law).

This is why a Canada-style deal is so attractive – an agreement that gives Canada access to the EU’S single market and practically tariff-free trade without tying all its businesses into EU laws that it has no say in – nor does it have to accept EU laws on taxes and unmanaged migration – or pay an annual member-