Corbyn’s Brexit plan ‘dangerous delusion’ – Fox
Chair of Wales for Europe Geraint Talfan Davies argues the British people must be given the chance to write the final chapter of the sorry story of Brexit...
SENIOR Tories have warned Labour’s plans for a customs union with the EU are a “dangerous delusion”, after Theresa May offered fresh Brexit talks with Jeremy Corbyn.
International Trade Secretary Liam Fox said Labour’s proposals were “not workable”, while Boris Johnson accused Mr Corbyn of trying to trap the Government in a “toxic” Brexit.
The comments appeared to reflect concern among Conservative Brexiteers that the Prime Minister could concede too much ground to Labour in an attempt to win cross-party backing for a deal with Brussels.
Downing Street, meanwhile, said Mrs May will make a Commons statement on the latest developments in the Brexit negotiations today – a day earlier than expected.
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said it would give MPs more time to “digest the content” ahead of a series of expected Commons votes on Thursday.
The move comes after Mrs May responded to Mr Corbyn’s letter last week setting out Labour’s terms for backing a deal, with an offer of further talks.
In her reply, released on Sunday, the Prime Minister welcomed the Labour leader’s agreement that the UK should leave the EU with a deal and his support for finding “alternative arrangements” to the Irish backstop.
However, she questioned his support for a customs union with the EU, saying it would prevent Britain from striking free trade deals with other countries around the world.
Mr Fox, in Bern for the signing of a trade agreement with Switzerland, said Labour claims they would be able to influence EU trade policy showed they did not understand how EU policy worked.
“Of course we always want to work with the opposition, but the opposition has put forward some ideas that are not workable,” he told reporters.
“The idea that you can have a customs union with the EU and at the same time, as an outside country, have an effect on EU trade policy, is to not understand the EU treaties.
“It is very clear from the European Union that non-EU members do not have a say in EU trade policy so to pretend that you could do so is a dangerous delusion.”
His intervention came after Treasury Chief Secretary Liz Truss refused to rule out resigning if Mrs May backed a customs union.
“I absolutely do not think that should be our policy,” she told Sky News on Sunday.
Mr Johnson, who led the official Vote Leave campaign in the referendum, warned the Prime Minister against trying to do a deal with Labour to get her agreement through.
“I don’t think that there is any mileage for the Prime Minister or the Government in trying to do a deal with Labour because they will just try to trap Theresa May,” he said at a launch event at Westminster. “They will just try to do a deal that is toxic.”
His comments were echoed by former Conservative chairman Grant Shapps who tweeted: “No point winning Labour MPs, by losing Tories!”
Mr Johnson said Mrs May’s priority should be to secure a time limit on the backstop – intended to prevent the return of a hard border on the island of Ireland – before the next election scheduled for June 2022.
“I think it must be pretty obvious that if you are going to have a time limit to the backstop, and I think that would be a very good thing, it’s got to fall before the next election.”
The former foreign secretary warned simply including the changes in a codicil to the Withdrawal Agreement would not be sufficient.
“I don’t think that would be good enough,” he said.
In the meantime, Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay has been meeting members of the Alternative Arrangements Working Group of Tories drawn from all sides of the party who have been seeking a compromise solution to avoid the need for the controversial backstop.
Mr Barclay will later travel to Brussels for talks over dinner with the EU’s chief negotiator Michel Barnier.
Mr Barnier’s deputy Sabine Weyand made clear that the European Commission is not pinning its hopes on the UK eventually deciding to mount a second referendum, telling a conference in Germany that the only option was a structured exit.
Warning that some on the Remain side were indulging in “cakeism” – trying to have their cake and eat it – Ms Weyand said she saw “no majority for a referendum in the House of Commons”.
Her comments come after European Council president Donald Tusk said last week that it was “unmistakable” that a second referendum was out of reach due to the “pro-Brexit” stance of both Mrs May and Mr Corbyn.
THE advice I get from many quarters these days is that the country is tired of Brexit, and for that reason – plus Parliamentary arithmetic and the Labour leadership’s collusion – some kind of deal will pass and there will be no referendum. Have crazier things happened? I doubt it.
Theresa May’s capacity for prevarication – either an expression of high cunning, a sign of weakness or a personality defect – seemingly knows no bounds, whatever the consequences for industry or the glazed electorate.
The wait for a meaningful vote goes on. The cliff edge nears.
Meantime we will have to endure a few more days of Mrs May and Jeremy Corbyn dancing around each other.
But this is no time to tread water as we wait for our Prime Minister to emerge from her fractured talks with some form of words that she believes will satisfy both the crazies of the ERG and a busload of biddable Labour MPs – few if any, I believe, in Welsh constituencies.
The cynicism of her teasing promise to “examine opportunities to provide further financial support to communities that feel left behind” is breathtaking, given it is these communities that have been hardest hit by her own government’s policies and will be the hardest hit by any Brexit.
But exasperation is rarely a prelude to a good decision.
So, if you need to fill your time productively while waiting for the promised parliamentary high noon, I have some advice.
If you are making a decision you are going to have to live with for the rest of your life, better to get out the wet towel, clean your reading glasses and read the fine print – particularly the print that the salesman or saleslady would rather you ignore before you sign on the dotted line.
In this particular case the print runs to 27 pages, catchily titled the Political Declaration.
I can guarantee that there will be very few withdrawals of this paperback from your local library – if, of course, that library still exists.
It is also rather strange to be recommending to you a slim volume where every page is filled with phrases that define the indeterminate – ell-tale vapour trails that signal whole squadrons of flying pigs.
When you are next offered a deal for a television or a washing machine, I would suggest that you do not sign if you spot any of the following: “The Parties agree to consider addressing... will explore the possibility…will explore options... should consider co-operation... should consider further arrangements... will use their best endeavours... should establish a dialogue... will consider aligning with... a spectrum of different outcomes... subject to relevant exceptions... should develop appropriate arrangements... appropriate... appropriate... appropriate.”
I confess I cannot recall the last time I bought an ‘appropriate’ television with an ‘appropriate’ number of channels. But perhaps I missed something.
The deficiencies of the Political Declaration – whose content, by the way, is not binding on the parties – are explored in rather more detail in a document, whose primary author is a former Head of the Home Civil Service, Lord Kerslake. It is titled, No Clarity, No Closure: Why this Brexit deal will settle nothing.
There will be some who will dismiss the exercise because it was done for the People’s Vote campaign, but here is a hard-headed view from someone who has operated at the highest level of government.
His concern is that “Britain is divided, directionless and hurtling towards a legal deadline, with no idea where we will end up after we cross”.”
More than that, it gives the lie to any notion that leaving on March 29 will put an end to the debate. On the contrary, it would be – if it happens but the start of a new and very long phase.
It was extraordinary that on Any Questions last week, a Brexiter politician could say that our deal with the EU is 95% done, when all the Withdrawal Agreement does is to clear the ground to allow negotiations on our future to start. It was another flying porky. More than two years on, absolutely nothing about our future relationship with the EU is resolved.
Kerslake’s report is a sad litany of the contradictory objectives, loose ends and blind spots that characterise the Political Declaration, as well as cataloguing repeated failures to assess the UK’s bargaining power objectively.
For instance, what will we do when the EU demands access to British waters for EU fishermen as the price of ending a backstop, especially when British fishermen export 80% of our fish catch to the EU? Kerslake is saying to the UK’s fishermen, be careful what you wish for.
He would warn our farmers, too, not to be surprised if, in any negotiations, the primary aim of EU farmers will be to increase their own market share.
And in the field of services, where the UK currently enjoys a comfortable surplus in trade with the EU, the EU’s service industries will have exactly the same objective as its farmers?
Meanwhile, as Lord Kerslake points out, our own service industries will be bound to seek salvation either by relocating or by creating subsidiaries abroad thus removing service exports from the UK’s balance sheet.
Likewise, we are none the wiser whether we are aiming for a deal similar to Canada or to Norway, or whether we are going to end up in a customs union or rely on some unknown technological solutions to solve the Northern Ireland border question.
As for trade with the world, keep three numbers in mind: the 27 EU countries who will hold the cards, the 65 countries with which the EU already has trade deals and the 163 members of the World Trade Organisation with which the UK would have to agree ‘schedules’ to secure independent membership.
This is one measure of the mountain of unfinished business this country faces.
On the issues that constituted Mrs May’s redlines, it is still all up for grabs – the Northern Ireland border still unresolved, a vague wish-list on immigration, vague on workers rights and, despite having a woman Prime Minister, totally silent on gender equality or discrimination.
And even if we manage to pick a few cherries, there is no hint of what we will have to pay for them. In the real world retail are prices are usually higher than wholesale.
And all this will take far more time than the current timetable allows.
A ‘transition’ period of two years, maybe three years at best, feels very optimistic when the recent deal with Japan took five years, the deal with Canada seven years, and the extradition deal with Norway and Iceland took 13 years.
This is the reality of a being a thirdparty country to the EU: an important partner maybe, but one that will nevertheless be required to sit outside the door, not around the table. It will be a long and uncomfortable sojourn on that lonely seat, as we count the cost in lost opportunities and reduced influence.
There is a better way, but it will need a hard-headed and informed decision by the British people. No Brexit is the only way to stop the pain, and move on to face our real problems.
■ Geraint Talfan Davies is chair of Wales for Europe and author of Unfinished Business: Journal of an Embattled European. Parthian Books.