Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Do you believe this was an independent action of the British press, one that bore no relationship to their estimates of the concerns and interests of the British public who bought and read their papers?

That is unlikely.

The government is making a concerted attempt to take the European battle to its opponents in the Tory party and the press, who ministers accuse of peddling myths to scare voters away from Europe.

"Euromyths provide great fun for journalists. The media has a mission to entertain, and some of them rise magnificently to that goal,'' Mr Cook said.

"But they are failing in their other mission - to inform. From now on, the Government will be rebutting all such stories vigorously and promptly. You will be hearing the catchphrase 'facts, not myths' until that is the way the EU is reported."

Mr Cook dismissed as "the biggest Euromyth of all" claims that Europe was developing into a superstate, insisting that the public in EU member states would not allow it.

It appears to me that a general resentment of the intrusive rule imposed by the administrative EU government was the central driver for those among the UK public who favored Brexit.

Prime minister’s vision on future trading relationship will clash with that of EU leaders

Boris Johnson will issue a direct warning on Monday that the UK will refuse close alignment of rules and reject the jurisdiction of the European courts in any trade deal as EU leaders prepare to give his plans a frosty reception.

In a bullish speech setting out the government’s negotiating position, the prime minister will set out his vision for future relations with the trading bloc and reject accepting similar rules over competition, welfare spending and environmental standards.

“There is no need for a free trade agreement to involve accepting EU rules on competition policy, subsidies, social protection, the environment, or anything similar any more than the EU should be obliged to accept UK rules,” he will say.

His vision clashes with the mandate of EU leaders, which is due to be set out on the same day and is expected to aim at maintaining a level playing field.

Labour has accused the government of indulging in “sabre-rattling” as both sides set out their initial negotiating positions and embark upon 11 months of intense talks.

In the speech, to be delivered to ambassadors and businesspeople on Monday morning, Johnson will argue in favour of either a Canada-style or Australia-style agreement that will respect the autonomy of the UK courts.

“The choice is emphatically not ‘deal or no deal’. The question is whether we agree a trading relationship with the EU comparable to Canada’s – or more like Australia’s. In either case, I have no doubt that Britain will prosper. And of course our new relationship with our closest neighbours will range far beyond trade.

“We will seek a pragmatic agreement on security, protecting our citizens without trespassing on the autonomy of our respective legal systems,” he will say.

Senior government sources concede that the stakes are high if they fail. If there is no deal by 31 December, the UK will face a “cliff-edge” no-deal Brexit.

References by Johnson’s government to “the Australian model” in briefings to journalists have bemused EU officials because no deal has yet been agreed with the Canberra government.

An EU source said the government appeared to have decided that Australia “sounds much more popular than the WTO”, but “there is no such thing as an Australia-style agreement”.

Earlier, Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, had said that following EU rules after 2021 “just ain’t happening” and insisted that it was wrong for the EU’s senior negotiator to claim that goods entering Northern Ireland and Great Britain would be subject to extra paperwork once Britain leaves the post-Brexit transition period.

Asked on Sky News on Sunday whether Michel Barnier was wrong to say there would be border checks on goods moving between the EU and the UK, the foreign secretary said this was up to the EU.

“Yes, he is wrong if the EU lives up to its commitments on its side both in the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration.

“We are entering into these negotiations with a spirit of goodwill. But we are just not doing that other stuff. The legislative alignment, it just ain’t happening,” he said.

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, said Raab’s words were part of a showy and childish attempt to set out the government’s position in the trade negotiations. “It is ‘sabre-rattling’ … It is a bit puerile,” he told the Andrew Marr Show.

EU figures have expressed concern at the position of the Johnson government.

Dacian Ciolos, a former prime minister of Romania who leads the Renew group in the European parliament which includes Emmanuel Macron’s party, warned against an outbreak of aggressive posturing ahead of the negotiation.

“We are now at a low moment in this relationship and, unfortunately, Brexit puts barriers between us.

“The extent to which the EU can be open and make concessions will depend strongly on the extent to which the British government will be willing to cooperate. But, obviously, a deal can never be as good as EU membership,” he said.

The Irish prime minister, Leo Varadkar, said the EU could reach a sector by sector deal with the UK if a comprehensive Brexit agreement was not reached by Johnson’s December deadline.

But he told the BBC it would be a “second-class outcome” and mean that negotiations could drag on for years.

“If it isn’t possible to have a comprehensive deal then the back-up plan would be sectoral agreement or some temporary agreements that would buy us more time while we negotiate the comprehensive agreement, but that to me is an inferior outcome,” he told Marr. “And imposition of bureaucracy, checks, tariffs and quotas, that is not good for anyone.”

EU officials are expected to insist on protecting their companies from a race to the bottom on workers’ rights and environmental standards. “The EU understands the UK is not wanting to be a rule taker. But that works both ways, we also have a demanding public,” an EU source said.

Brussels has asked the UK to sign up to EU standards on workers’ rights, environmental protection and state aid in order to get zero-tariffs, zero-quotas on trade in goods.

Last October, Johnson agreed that the future relationship with the EU “must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field”.

In a further development, Northern Ireland’s first minister, Arlene Foster, expressed concern that a refusal to consider alignment could cause a border down the Irish Sea.

As part of the withdrawal agreement, Johnson agreed that the six counties would continue to follow single market rules to avoid border checks along the border with Ireland.

It means, if Britain has rules that differ from Brussels post-2021, then cargo travelling into Northern Ireland from Great Britain could face inspections.

In comments made to Sky News’s Sophy Ridge On Sunday programme, the DUP leader Foster said it was “difficult to see” how checks could be avoided since ministers intended to “diverge away from single market regulations, whilst Northern Ireland remains within the single market”.

Hedgehogs, dragonflies and bees are among wildlife at risk due to big gaps in environmental protections following the UK’s departure from the EU, according to a new report.

Commissioned by The Wildlife Trusts, The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and WWF, the study claims the UK faces losing regulations preventing hedgerows being cut during the nesting season and vital buffer strips from being ploughed or sprayed with pesticides.

Other regulations currently based in EU law, which safeguard ponds and protect carbon-locking bare soils from draining or blowing away, could also be lost, according to the report by the Institute of European Environmental Policy (IEEP).

The agriculture bill, set to be debated in the House of Commons on Monday, will see payment for the amount of land farmed replaced by a “public money for public goods” system whereby land managers are paid to protect wildlife, the environment and carbon storage.

While broadly welcomed by campaigners, they fear the new bill does not go far enough. As farmers lose direct payments under the common agricultural policy, critics say some EU regulations could also fall away.

These include specific protections for hedgerows, not cutting them during the breeding seasons and maintaining a buffer strip at their base to protect plants and safeguard species including yellowhammers, small mammals, pollinator insects and pond-dwelling amphibians.

The national parliaments of EU member states may not be given a vote to approve the EU's Brexit trade deal with the UK, Brussels has indicated.

EU officials said they are "confident" that the scope of the agreement with Britain will be narrow enough that parliaments do not have to be given a vote – but said it might be decided to give them one anyway.

Under EU law, there are two types of trade agreements: "EU-only" deals and "mixed" deals. A deal is "EU-only" if it only covers policy areas that are the responsibility of the EU, while the latter cross into the prerogatives of member states.

EU-only deals only have to be approved by the EU collectively – meaning member state governments, the Commission, and European Parliament.

But the so-called "mixed deals" have to be ratified individually by member states according to their own constitutional requirements. In all cases this means the deal has to be put to their national parliament; in some states like Belgium, regions also get a say.

Mixed deals are politically much trickier to pass because different interests within member states can block them. For instance, the Belgian region of Wallonia famously held up a deal with Canada in 2016 over the lifting of agricultural tariffs and dispute resolution.

They also take a lot longer to fully implement – a crucial detail given the UK only has 11 months to get an agreement in place.

One senior EU official said: "We are confident that the mandate that we have proposed today will bring us to an agreement that can be concluded as an EU-only one.

"Of course, we will have to decide at the end of the process, and sometimes these things are not so much legal as political, whether we want to have the national parliaments ratifying.

Article 217

(ex Article 310 TEC)

The Union may conclude with one or more third countries or international organisations agreements establishing an association involving reciprocal rights and obligations, common action and special procedure.

This statement sets out the Government’s proposed approach to the negotiations with the EU about our future relationship. Further details on this and other trade negotiations will be made available to Parliament as the process develops.

The Government wishes to see a future relationship based on friendly cooperation between sovereign equals for the benefit of all our peoples. There is complete certainty that at the end of 2020 the process of transition to that relationship will be complete and that the UK will have recovered in full its economic and political independence. The Government remains committed in all circumstances to securing all those benefits for the whole of the UK and to strengthening our Union.

The question for the rest of 2020 is whether the UK and the EU can agree a deeper trading relationship on the lines of the free trade agreement the EU has with Canada, or whether the relationship will be based simply on the Withdrawal Agreement deal agreed in October 2019, including the Protocol on Ireland / Northern Ireland. In either event the UK will be leaving the single market and the customs union at the end of this year and stakeholders should prepare for that reality.

The Government will work hard to achieve a balanced agreement that is in the interests of both sides, reflecting the wide range of shared interests. Any agreement must respect the sovereignty of both parties and the autonomy of our legal orders. It cannot therefore include any regulatory alignment, any jurisdiction for the CJEU over the UK’s laws, or any supranational control in any area, including the UK’s borders and immigration policy.

This points to a suite of agreements of which the main elements would be a comprehensive free trade agreement covering substantially all trade, an agreement on fisheries, and an agreement to cooperate in the area of internal security, together with a number of more technical agreements covering areas such as aviation or civil nuclear cooperation. These should all have governance and dispute settlement arrangements appropriate to a relationship of sovereign equals.

Future cooperation in other areas does not need to be managed through an international Treaty, still less through shared institutions. The UK will in future develop separate and independent policies in areas such as (but not limited to) the points-based immigration system, competition and subsidy policy, the environment, social policy, procurement, and data protection, maintaining high standards as we do so. Cooperation on foreign affairs and related issues is of course likely to be substantial, but does not in itself require a joint institutional framework.

In its negotiations with the EU, the Government will be acting on behalf of the UK Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories: the whole UK family.

The UK proposes to agree similar arrangements with the EFTA states.

Further information is set out below. Unless otherwise stated, it should be assumed that the UK’s aspiration and level of ambition is to reach agreement on provisions which are at least as good as those in the EU’s recent trade agreements, such as those with Canada or Japan.

Free Trade Agreement
A free trade agreement between the UK and EU should reflect, and develop where necessary, existing international best practice as set out, inter alia, in FTAs already agreed by the EU.

It should cover the following areas:

National Treatment and Market Access for Goods

There should be no tariffs, fees, charges or quantitative restrictions between the UK and the EU. There should be a protocol setting out appropriate and modern rules of origin, in order to facilitate trade between the parties to the greatest extent possible.

Trade Remedies

The agreement should enable the UK to protect its industry from harm caused by unexpected surges in imports of goods or by unfair trading practices, while making the appropriate commitments to transparency, due process and proportionate use of trade remedies.

Technical Barriers to Trade

There should be provisions to address regulatory barriers to trade in goods, providing for cooperation on technical regulation, standards, conformity assessment procedures and market surveillance, building on the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement. Annexes to the agreement could include provisions facilitating trade in specific sectors, such as organic products, motor vehicles, chemicals and pharmaceuticals, as well as mutual recognition agreements focusing on conformity assessment, with full coverage of the relevant sectors.

Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures

The UK will maintain its own autonomous sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) regime to protect human, animal and plant life and health and the environment, reflecting its existing high standards. In certain areas it may be possible to agree equivalence provisions to reduce practical barriers to trade at the border.

Customs and Trade Facilitation

Facilitative customs arrangements, covering all trade in goods, should be put in place in order to smooth trade between the UK and the EU. These should ensure that both customs authorities are able to protect their regulatory, security and financial interests.

Cross-Border Trade in Services and Investment

Significant provisions on trade in services are an essential component of a comprehensive FTA. Accordingly, the Agreement should include measures to minimise barriers to the cross-border supply of services and investment, on the basis of each side’s commitments in existing FTAs. In areas of key interest, such as professional and business services, there may be scope to go beyond these commitments.

There should be measures to support digital trade, building on the most recent precedents.

Temporary Entry for Business Purposes (Mode 4)

As is normal in a Free Trade Agreement, the agreement should include significant reciprocal commitments on the temporary entry and stay of individuals, so that both EU and UK nationals can undertake short-term business trips to supply services. This is of course without prejudice to the future points-based immigration system.

Regulatory Framework

There should be measures that reduce unnecessary barriers to trade in services, streamlining practical processes and providing for appropriate regulatory cooperation.

Mutual Recognition of Professional Qualifications

The Agreement should provide a pathway for the mutual recognition of UK and EU qualifications, underpinned by regulatory cooperation, so that qualification requirements do not become an unnecessary barrier to trade.

Financial Services

The Agreement should require both sides to provide a predictable, transparent, and business-friendly environment for financial services firms, ensuring financial stability and providing certainty for both business and regulatory authorities, and with obligations on market access and fair competition. Given the depth of the relationship in this area, there should also be enhanced provision for regulatory and supervisory cooperation arrangements with the EU, and for the structured withdrawal of equivalence findings.

Road Transport

There should be reciprocal commitments to allow EU and UK road transport operators to provide services to, from and through each other's territories, with associated rights, underpinned by relevant international agreements and commitments, and ensuring the necessary cooperation on monitoring and enforcement.

Competition Policy, Subsidies, Environment and Climate, Labour, Tax

The Government will not agree to measures in these areas which go beyond those typically included in a comprehensive free trade agreement. The Government believes therefore that both Parties should recognise their respective commitments to maintaining high standards in these areas; confirm that they will uphold their international obligations; and agree to avoid using measures in these areas to distort trade.

Agreement on Fisheries
The UK will become an independent coastal state at the end of 2020 and any agreement must reflect this reality. The UK will, like Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islands, have annual negotiations with the EU on access to waters and fishing opportunities, and will consider a mechanism for cooperation on fisheries matters.

Agreement on Internal Security Cooperation
Protection of citizens is the highest duty of any Government. The UK believes it is in the UK’s and EU’s mutual interest to reach a pragmatic agreement to provide a framework for law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters between the UK and the EU, delivering strong operational capabilities that help protect the public. The detail of such an agreement must be consistent with the Government’s position that the CJEU and the EU legal order must not constrain the autonomy of the UK's legal system in any way.

Other Areas of Cooperation
The Government believes there is mutual benefit in an air transport agreement covering market access for air services, aviation safety and security, and collaboration on air traffic management.

The UK is ready to work to establish practical provisions to facilitate smooth border crossing arrangements, as part of independent border and immigration systems, and on social security coordination. All such arrangements should be reciprocal and of mutual benefit. The UK is ready to discuss cooperation on asylum, including family reunion, and illegal migration.

The UK is ready to consider participation in certain EU programmes, once the EU has agreed the baseline in its 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework, and taking into account the overall value to the UK of doing so.

Finally, there are certain areas where the UK considers agreement is self-evidently in the interest of both sides, and where early progress is a test of the constructive nature of the negotiating process. For example, there should be rapid agreement that the UK and the EU would list each other for trade in live animals, animal products, seeds and other plant-propagating material. There should be rapid progress towards a Civil Nuclear Agreement, given the implications for both sides of not doing so and the clear benefits of cooperation. Similarly, the UK would see the EU’s assessment processes on financial services equivalence and data adequacy as technical and confirmatory of the reality that the UK will be operating exactly the same regulatory frameworks as the EU at the point of exit. The UK intends to approach its own technical assessment processes in this spirit.

A copy of this statement will be placed in the Library.

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Access to the European Union market for Britain-based financial firms will be linked to the overall results of trade talks with London, EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier said on Monday.

Britain and the EU will lose privileged access to their respective financial markets when the Brexit transitional period ends next year.

But in some sectors financial firms could remain able to operate across borders if rules are deemed to be equivalent.

But even when equivalence does exist, the EU will remain free to grant access or not to specific sectors.

“The EU will consider whether our economic partnership will be accompanied by equivalences,” Barnier told a news conference in Brussels.

Equivalences “are relevant for the overall future relationship and need to be considered in that light,” Barnier said, noting that those decisions were not part of his draft negotiating mandate for a trade deal with London, which he unveiled on Monday.

He said the assessment of sectors that might be considered equivalent will begin “immediately” and underlined equivalence decisions will be made “unilaterally”.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson called for purely “technical” assessments on equivalence regimes and urged a mechanism to discuss equivalence decisions with the EU.

“Given the depth of the relationship in this area, there should also be enhanced provision for regulatory and supervisory cooperation arrangements with the EU, and for the structured withdrawal of equivalence findings,” Johnson said in a written statement on Monday.

Barnier also urged cooperation with Britain on financial services but stressed that would need to preserve the EU’s “autonomy”.

The EU permits the use of equivalence regimes for some 40 financial sectors, but only foreign investment banks, clearing houses and stock exchanges can have full access to the EU market, while other firms face different levels of limitations, EU officials said.

Retail banking is not covered by equivalence.

Faced with a huge, rival financial center on its doorstep, the EU began toughening up equivalence conditions ahead of Brexit specifically for foreign clearing houses and foreign investment banks that want to offer investment services to EU customers.

Political journalists walked out of No 10 Downing Street this afternoon in protest at the government planning to give a briefing on the EU only to selected reporters – banning The Mirror, i, Huffington Post, PoliticsHome, Independent and others from attending.

Reporters on the invited list were asked to stand on one side of a rug in the foyer of No 10, while those not allowed in were asked by security to stand on the other side.

After one of Boris Johnson’s most senior advisers, Lee Cain, told the banned reporters they must leave the building, the rest of the journalists decided to walk out rather than allow Downing Street to choose who scrutinises and reports on the government.

Among those who refused the briefing and walked out included the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, ITV’s Robert Peston and political journalists from the Daily Mail, Telegraph, the Sun, Financial Times, and Guardian.