The news early this morning that the EU has agreed that “sufficient
progress” has been made following the first phase of Brexit negotiations was
initially met with a positive market response. But with sterling eventually
weakening in the course of the day it is evidently not being seen as a panacea
for all Brexit ills. Whilst there was compromise on both sides, the UK has
moved far closer to the EU’s initial position, particularly on the question of
the exit bill, which is pretty much what we thought would happen all along.
Meanwhile, the Irish border question has been kicked down the road for now.
With regard to the bill, the official document released
today did not attempt to put a figure on the final cost but it is estimated
that the UK will pay a net amount between €40-60bn over a multi-year horizon
(we assume €50bn for the sake of argument). It will also continue to pay into
the EU budget in 2019 and 2020 as if it were still a full EU member. On the
basis that the annual net cost of membership is around €8bn per year, this
implies that around one-third of the net exit bill will be paid by 2020. But
this still means that the UK will have to find an amount equivalent to €35bn
after 2020 – the equivalent of 4-5 years of full membership. In practice, it
will have to pay a lot more up front. Some of the reimbursements, such as the
share of European Investment Bank assets, will only be repaid over a twelve
year period beginning in 2019.
The fact that the UK will continue paying into the budget
until 2020 resolves a major headache for the EU, since this allows it to meet
all obligations in the current budget cycle which would otherwise have been
interrupted had the UK ceased to pay in 2019. But it is bad news for the UK,
which will become a rule taker whilst still continuing to pay full membership
fees. The UK is thus moving towards the Norwegian option – at least in the
short-term – which I pointed out in the immediate aftermath of the referendum was the worst
option because it imposes all the same costs without the benefit of being able
to influence the rules.
It is unlikely to be a long-term solution, however, with the
EU increasingly of the view that a Canadian style free trade agreement is the
most plausible option. Whilst such an outcome will offer largely tariff-free trade
in manufactures, replication of the Canadian option implies some tariffs would
remain on agriculture and it would permit no access to EU FTAs with only a
partial liberalisation of services. Moreover, there would be no financial
services passporting. But it will take many years to hammer out such a final
deal – do not be surprised if the EU and UK seek to extend the Norway option
for another two years to 2023 whilst they continue to work on the details of
the final arrangement.
Earlier this week, the Irish border question threatened to
derail any prospect of reaching a deal today. No resolution was offered this
morning. The issue has merely been kicked down the road. Indeed, the problem of
avoiding a hard border remains incompatible with leaving the customs union and
single market, and the best that the two parties could come up with was that if
they fail to resolve the terms of their future relationship, the UK will
maintain “full alignment” with the EU
internal market and customs union rules which “now or in the future” are important for preserving north-south
trade. Despite the DUP’s recent objections to treating Northern Ireland
differently to the rest of the UK, that in effect appears to be what is being
proposed in the absence of an alternative.
What to make of it all? Firstly, we should welcome today’s
events as a first sign that progress towards a trade deal – and ultimately a
softer Brexit – has been made. But it comes at a price: the UK has capitulated
in the face of the EU’s demands, thus rendering irrelevant the six months of
bluff and bluster by Brexit supporters. In no sense has the UK taken back
control: Indeed, quite the opposite since the Norwegian solution implies giving
up lots of control. Nor has it freed up the additional funds that were promised
to the NHS (£18bn per year if you recall).
But it could have been worse. The Brexit Secretary finally
admitted this week that “no economic impact study had been undertaken before the cabinet decision to leave the customs union and no assessment had been made of the possible economic effect of a no-deal Brexit”.
At least they now have the time to do some impact analysis to assess the costs
of Brexit. One of the arguments often used by Greek and Italian citizens for
remaining in the EU is that it forces their politicians to act responsibly.
Today’s deal may have given UK politicians a lifeline they were too
disorganised to find for themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment