Labour exit plan brings clarity to chaos

PARLIAMENT HAS returned from the summer recess and Brexit is set to dominate the agenda as debate starts tomorrow on the EU (Withdrawal) Bill, also described as the ‘Great Repeal Bill’ by the Government.

In fact, ‘Great Repeal Bill’ is a misnomer: what the Bill will actually do is ‘download and save’ all existing EU law into UK legislature. This, in itself, is sensible: the difficulty is who gets to click the delete button. The Government has written ‘Henry VIII powers’ for ministers into the Bill. What this means in practice is that they expect MPs to hand ministers a blank cheque to rewrite laws without being scrutinised and voted on by Parliament.

It follows a summer in which the deep divisions at the heart of the Government over the handling of Brexit have spilled out in extraordinary public disputes, creating growing chaos and confusion

Brexit Secretary David Davis’s chosen euphemism for this chaos is ‘constructive ambiguity’. It would be laughable if these weren’t the most serious negotiations facing this country in decades; negotiations that will determine Britain’s position in the world and affect jobs, businesses and households throughout Yorkshire and across the country.

Just when common sense seemed to be breaking out in the Cabinet, with the Prime Minister finally accepting the need for transitional arrangements with the EU post-March 2019, an article by the Chancellor and International Trade Secretary, Philip Hammond and Liam Fox, made clear that they ruled out continued single market membership and a customs union arrangement with the EU. This is reckless and short-sighted.

It stands in stark contrast to Labour’s proposals for a transitional deal, which Labour’s Brexit Secretary, Sir Keir Starmer, recently outlined. Our proposal for a transitional deal favours clarity and certainty over ‘constructive ambiguity’, and it prioritises jobs and the economy over narrow ideological obsessions designed to satisfy hard-line Tory backbenchers.

Labour would seek a transitional deal on the same terms that we currently have with the EU: we would seek to stay in a customs union with the EU and within the single market during this period. This would maximise certainty and stability for businesses and organisations, giving them time to look forward and prepare. We have only 18 months to go in negotiations with the EU and focus should be on our future partnership without the additional burden of negotiating new transitional arrangements.

The Government’s approach expects businesses to adapt to a new temporary trade relationship with the EU by March 2019, and then adapt to yet another regime once the transitional period ends. Under Labour’s plans, businesses only have to adapt to one new regime and have more time to do it.

This is crucial for businesses in Yorkshire who need maximum certainty to plan ahead, given that almost 50 per cent of goods produced in our region in 2015 were exported to the EU. As the manufacturing industry body, the EEF, noted, a number of companies have only ever operated within our current trading arrangements. To expect them to adapt to two new regimes in quick succession is unrealistic and it is reckless.

We have been clear that we respect the outcome of the referendum and that we would pursue a new relationship with the EU that prioritises jobs and the economy.

Our transitional period would be as short as possible, but as long as necessary. It is a realistic and necessary bridge to developing our new relationship with the EU: a relationship based on common values and a progressive partnership that goes beyond trade and security. Our future relationship with the EU must incorporate education, research, science and technology, medicine and culture.

Labour is flexible and open as to how we develop the best relationship with the EU moving forward. This may entail negotiating a new single market relationship or securing a new bespoke trade deal. It could involve membership of a customs union with the rest of the EU. It is irresponsible to rule these options out.

Our approach is to prioritise the livelihoods of our constituents, their jobs and the economy over a narrow ideological agenda. In the interim, Labour’s plans for a transitional arrangement provide the clarity and certainty so desperately absent from this Government’s ‘constructive ambiguity’.