Brexit Day: What happens now?
● A huge to-do list, an impossible timetable, and another constitutional battle – plenty can go wrong in the coming year
It all nearly ended in tears.
In October 2016, as the UK was just beginning to contemplate what its new relationship with Europe would look like, Canada’s international trade minister Chrystia Freeland was in Belgium, trying to seal agreement on her government’s historic deal with the EU.
But after seven years of negotiations, Freeland emerged from last-ditch talks to tell banks of journalists that she was walking away.
Her voice choked with emotion, Freeland said the EU was “not capable” of striking a deal, even with “polite and patient” Canada.
The stumbling block? A possible veto from the regional government of Wallonia over protections for its farmers. It took another week to grind out a compromise and save the deal.
With Boris Johnson’s governmentusing canada’ s free trade deal with the EU as a template for its own preferred relationship with Brussels, the incident is a helpful reminder of just how many obstacles the UK faces on the journey that starts tomorrow.
As with Canada, talks with the UK might be polite – but London can’t afford to be patient. The Prime Minister has committed to reaching a comprehensive deal covering not just trade, but crucial issues like security co-operation and aviation, by the end of this year.
So what can we expect over a rollercoaster 11 months, and where will the major flashpoints be?
Negotiations aren’t going to begin as quickly as the UK would like. The EU will publish its draft negotiating objectives on Monday, but they won’t be signed off until 24 February. Work won’t begin in earnest until March.
While the objective exists in the public imagination as “a deal”, it is expected to be swiftly carved up into several deals.
“It seems increasingly likely that they will have to be hiving off certain parts of it, just because of the short time frame,” says Maddy Thimont Jack, a senior researcher on the Brexit team at the Institute for Government think tank.
Breaking up the deal will also make it easier to ratify, as a comprehensive agreement on the full range of issues is more likely to be designated as “mixed” – touching on the responsibilities of Brussels and individual member states, and requiring approval from each individual government.
The next big moment will be the end of June, the deadline for a decision on extending the transition period. That is also the point at which the
UK government is committed, according to the text of the political declaration agreed with the EU, to having reached agreement on fisheries and equivalence in financial services – something Ms Thimont Jack says is “unlikely”.
“The UK has been very firm, saying that it does not want to extend and will not ask to extend,” she says.
“I think it’s unlikely for the UK government to row back from that… It’s going to be a big moment because after that point it’s much harder for the UK or the EU to buy more time if negotiations start stalling.”
Unpacking the issue of how closely the UK stays aligned to EU regulations could reveal some unexpected problems. Kirsty Hughes, the director of the Scottish Centre on European Relations, highlights EU demands for environmental protections: “The climate and the green European deal are at the heart of the new Commission’s strategy for the next five years. There’s going to be more emphasis on climate and environment in the level playing field debate – so that could get tricky.”
No agreement and no extension means that a trade deal “cliff edge” remains a strong possibility in December 2020, leaving in place the Brexit divorce agreement but forcing UK exporters to operate under damaging w to trading terms.
Preparations for such a “no deal” will continue throughout 2020, meaning an alreadystretched civil service can expect another busy summer.
Where Scotland is concerned, while the high-level political battle over a second independence referendum continues, a more subtle constitutional row is set to be fought behind the scenes.
The UK government is understood to be happy for Scottish ministers and officials to take part in negotiations – provided that the SNP administration accepts a UK negotiating mandate.
The conflict will come over how that mandate is consulted on and reached. “There’s not ever going to be a situation where the government gives the devolved nations a veto over its trade policy,” says Sam Lowe, a senior fellow at the Centre for European Reform.
“The government isn’t going to give the Westminster Parliament the chance to vote down trade agreements. It’s even less likely that it’s going to give devolved governments that power.”