One Endgame or Many?

With the politics of the process changing almost by the minute, Richard Parry assesses the ‘stable text’ of the Brexit agreement. 
 
The final phase of negotiating action in recent days was when the EU27 started to push back against some aspects of the UK-wide solution on Ireland upon realising that the backstop might be turning into a back door for long-term UK access to the single market. It was always an impossible conundrum to solve when the only land border between the EU and a departing member had to be invisible for political reasons.  Both London and Brussels continue to perpetuate the line that the Irish backstop is a redundant failsafe mechanism that will never be needed and would be superseded by something better before it came into effect. But if the backstop was so difficult to negotiate, so detailed in content, and delineates the minimum necessary to prevent a visible border, how could anything better be agreed? The mechanism in the Withdrawal Agreement is a negotiated reality, requiring mutual consent to drop, and the best template we have on future UK-EU relations. 
 
Last December’s joint report was a victory for the EU as the UK chipped in 21 further months of normal financial contributions and free EU citizen access after 29 March 2019. The new text moves in a direction more favourable to the UK. The delineation of Northern Ireland as separate from the UK is partly attenuated. The UK as a whole gains a route to a soft Brexit free customs access from January 2021. Wary of special statuses and still scarred by their relations with Switzerland – where adjustment to changing EU rules is not automatic and dynamic – the EU27 has now conceded in the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland something that looks new, a 175-page template including non-regression on environmental and social standards and 90 pages listing EU regulations that would apply to the ‘United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland’ (annexes 5-8), the price-tag for the invisible border.
 
The piece of substance that has suffered in the endgame is the Future Framework of UK-EU relations. As recently as July the UK was seeing detail as close as possible to its Chequers plan as a prerequisite for the Withdrawal Agreement. Although more work is planned before the special European Council on 25 November, at the moment it is a shockingly brief seven pages of aspirational bullet points identifying areas for negotiation and choices that will have to be made (including fishing). There is a new time constraint, a deadline of 1 July 2020 for deciding (by consensus) whether to extend the transition period. Precision on the framework would have required negotiating capacity that is not there at the moment, but leaves the UK vulnerable to post-Brexit EU27 demands. Moreover, with the backstop in place, there is a default status available that only dreamers of global trade deals would put their all into overturning. ‘Temporary’ could prove just as temporary as the border between Northern Ireland and the 26 counties set in 1921.
 
Will this deal obtain political consent? As with all deals, its effectiveness may reside in its being not inherently a sell-out and equally liable to rejection by both sides. UK politics apart, the need for European Parliament and EU27 ratification has always been a vulnerable and neglected link in both timing and content – there are just too many opportunities for delay and veto.  But in terms of the UK as a negotiating party, events changing by the hour include the scenario of Conservative meltdown and second referendum, the last hope that the UK will not leave the EU on 29 March 2019. 
 

Comments policy

All comments posted on the site via Disqus are automatically published. Additionally comments are sent to moderators for checking and removal if necessary. We encourage open debate and real time commenting on the website. The Centre on Constitutional Change cannot be held responsible for any content posted by users. Any complaints about comments on the site should be sent to info@centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk

Richard Parry's picture
post by Richard Parry
University of Edinburgh
15th November 2018
Filed under:

Latest blogs

  • 22nd January 2019

    The UK is increasingly polarised by Brexit identities and they seem to have become stronger than party identities, a new academic report finds. Only one in 16 people did not have a Brexit identity, while more than one in five said they had no party identity. Sir John Curtice’s latest analysis of public opinion on a further referendum finds there has been no decisive shift in favour of another referendum. The report, Brexit and public opinion 2019, by The UK in a Changing Europe, provides an authoritative, comprehensive and up-to-date guide to public opinion on each of the key issues around Brexit. CCC Fellow, Dr Coree Brown Swan contributed a chapter on "the SNP, Brexit and the politics of independence"

  • 22nd January 2019

    In the papers accompanying the draft Environment (Principles and Governance) Bill published at the end of 2018, the UK Government says that it is “exploring opportunities to co-design the final proposals with the devolved administrations.” There are clear benefits in having strong co-operation and collaboration across the UK in the oversight of our environmental law and performance. Yet the challenge of finding a way forward in terms of working together is substantial since each part of the UK is in a different position at present. Given where things stand today, it may be better to accept that a good resolution is not possible immediately and to revisit the issue at a later stage - so long as there is a strong commitment to return and not allow interim arrangements to become fixed. Colin Reid, Professor of Environmental Law at the University of Dundee examines the issues.

  • 17th January 2019

    Richard Parry assesses a memorable day in UK parliamentary history as the Commons splits 432-202 on 15 January 2019 against the Government's recommended Brexit route. It was the most dramatic night at Westminster since the Labour government’s defeat on a confidence motion in 1979.

  • 17th January 2019

    What is the Irish government’s Brexit wish-list? The suggestion that Irish unity, as opposed to safeguarding political and economic stability, is the foremost concern of the Irish government is to misunderstand and misrepresent the motivations of this key Brexit stakeholder, writes Mary C. Murphy (University College Cork).

  • 17th January 2019

    Brexit is in trouble but not because of the Irish backstop, argues the CCC's Michael Keating.

Read More Posts