Read on Twitter
So here it is. After the euphoria, the @FinancialTimes @FTMag long read of how @BorisJohnson did his Trade deal with the EU. Tl:dr...not so much “build back better”, more “build back the borders” - stay with me/1. https://on.ft.com/3c0vhPX
The really under-appreciated part of this story is the extent to which the Johnson government, having won its 80 seat majority promising to "Get Brexit Done" then explicitly and actively chose the hardest possible version of #brexit in defiance of commercial interests /2
Our story begins in January last year when David Frost commenced what Whitehall insiders call a "Star Chamber" process to strip away anything that might be considered more than a "Canada-style" deal - regardless of the fact that UK doesn't trade with EU like Canada! /3
So what did that mean in practice?
Well, for example leaving EU aviation safety agency (EASA); Chemicals agency (ECHA), not getting a waiver of 'safety and security' declarations for hauliers, not seeking special arrangements for animal products...on and on it goes /4
Well, for example leaving EU aviation safety agency (EASA); Chemicals agency (ECHA), not getting a waiver of 'safety and security' declarations for hauliers, not seeking special arrangements for animal products...on and on it goes /4
Didn't industry object? Well yes it did - but those who yelled too hard found themselves shut out of the door.
Did Whitehall object? Yes it did - Defra and Beis and Treasury all tried at some level to temper the revolutionary fury. But mostly failed. /5
Did Whitehall object? Yes it did - Defra and Beis and Treasury all tried at some level to temper the revolutionary fury. But mostly failed. /5
I recall reporting at the time that the haulage industry just couldn't believe, given 10,000 trucks a day crossed the Channel, that the UK gov wouldn't want a waiver on Safety & Security decs....a waiver Norway and Switzerland have. But no. Only Canada./6
Some did belly-ache. I recall this amazing letter from @PauleverittADS about the government's promise to consult over EASA membership...and then announcing it had decided anyway. Objections were just batted away.... /7 https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1237329313244098560?s=20
As @GeorgeWParker - brilliant steward of this piece - reported back in January 2020, industries were told they were in "secular decline" - and who could forget @afneil telling @MakeUK_ conference that No.10 thought 3D printing was the answer /8 https://twitter.com/Joe_Mayes/status/1232253794597163008?s=20
To be fair, no secret was made of this - @DavidGHFrost went to Brussels and gave a speech in which he said industry was exaggerating...the next few years will show whether he was right. Doesn't feel that way to fishermen like Ian Perkes./9
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/full-text-top-uk-brexit-negotiator-david-frost-on-his-plans-for-an-eu-trade-deal
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/full-text-top-uk-brexit-negotiator-david-frost-on-his-plans-for-an-eu-trade-deal
I should add a side-note here on services, which where already pretty much forsaken because of ending free movement - but the City knew that battle was lost. One exec observes Tory party is "controlled by ideologues" that put sovereignty over the economy. /10
The brutal paring back of ambition created an unprecedented inversion of what trade talks are about - growing trade.
So that 'success' defined by @BorisJohnson's own terms - landing a Canada-style deal - meant the constriction of trade. We slipped through the looking glass./11
So that 'success' defined by @BorisJohnson's own terms - landing a Canada-style deal - meant the constriction of trade. We slipped through the looking glass./11
It is true that the 'deal' is better than a 'no deal' would have been, but this was a barebones deal that was done with heads deliberately stuck in the sand. Damage assessments were not done. “Someone would occasionally proposedoing the work and everyone would say: ‘No.’”
Wow/12
Wow/12
I wonder if any company CEO, or headteacher, or hospital administrator or bus driver or cafe owner proceeded on this basis...how long would they keep their job before being struck off, or suffering a shareholder revolt, or going bust? Could you do it in a normal walk of life? /13
The negotiation itself was successful on its own terms - the UK did indeed get a skinny deal, walking into the 'elephant trap' that Sir Ivan Rogers had set out in Christmas 2019 - and neatly summarised here by @AntonSpisak
https://institute.global/policy/uk-falls-elephant-trap-its-own-making-brexit
https://institute.global/policy/uk-falls-elephant-trap-its-own-making-brexit
When the endgame came - wonderfully reported by my Brussels colleagues @jimbrunsden @Sam1Fleming - the UK gave up even on the 'extras' it had asked for on professional services and 'cross-cumulation of rules of origin' for carmakers.../14 https://www.ft.com/content/4fa4732b-877b-4994-bfc4-c8ae1cd80a78
As time wore on, the UK deployed its 'madman' strategy - not even @BorisJohnson knew if he'd go for deal or no deal - and there were times when there was so little strategy you wondered if that was actually true. I never spoke to EU folk who believed he'd do no deal fwiw /15
There was that small matter of the threat to break international law...which UK negotiators believed shook things up, but on EU side, only seemed to push Berlin behind Paris in demanding tough 'ratchet clauses' etc. And damaged our world standing /16 https://www.ft.com/content/a20e7822-468f-4671-8e82-9dc5b5f353d8
But @BorisJohnson got his deal, barebones as intended - and then told everyone that it contained no "no non-tariff barriers to trade" - and that wasn't an off-the-cuff remark. Watch the tape at 7m.29s, he's reading a text /17 https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/prime-ministers-statement-on-eu-negotiations-24-december-2020
That means that someone in No.10 actually wrote that down. They put it into an approved text when they must have known it not to be true. Perhaps @BorisJohnson wrote it himself, but that really is an alternative fact.
Odd to be so proud of a Canada deal, then disown it. /18
Odd to be so proud of a Canada deal, then disown it. /18
And so what about the future? Yes, we'll suffer some frictions burns at the border now, but that will open the door to a sea of opportunity etc... @ColdChainShane says trade will be "slower, more expensive and
less flexible"...but the upside seems less clear. /19
less flexible"...but the upside seems less clear. /19
Still. What's done is done...what it will mean for the future - politically and economically - is still very unclear. At some level, the architects of this deal must know - amongst all the cries of freedom etc - they've created a lot of burdens for a lot of people. Now what? ENDS
