A couple of reflections on @mattwridley opinion piece in today’s @thetimes – particularly given he points out (and rejects) @nfutweets view that a no-deal, or WTO default Brexit, could lead to damaging delays at the border. 1/
thetimes.co.uk/edition/commen…
thetimes.co.uk/edition/commen…
Indeed we do believe no deal could be very damaging in terms of border delays. But I accept that there is a debate to be had whether or not there would, in reality, be calamitous blockages at the border in a no-deal scenario. 2/
There is an argument that (put crudely), under WTO rules the EU cannot erect unreasonable barriers and border checks to UK goods on SPS/TBT grounds (e.g safeguards on plant, animal and human health). 3/
To do so, the argument goes, would be discriminatory when the EU knows our goods would still be compliant. How could there possibly have been time for any divergence in standards in the days immediately following Brexit that would justify such checks? 4/
This is a fair point, as far as it goes. However, this “smooth border” WTO default scenario makes some assumptions that I think undermine completely Ridley's argument... 5/
Firstly, it gives WTO rules a force and supremacy that simply doesn’t exist in practice. The EU (and by extension the UK) have behaved on a number of fronts in breach of WTO rules for many years (e.g. chlorinated chicken). 6/
There is no magic WTO policeman who comes knocking, even if a breach of rules was clear (which it isn’t in this case – see @GeorgePeretzQC for more ). Basically, how much can we rely on "WTO rules" as a restriction on EU behaviour. Not much... 7/
Just saying the EU isn’t allowed to erect checks at the border on day one of Brexit doesn’t mean they won’t. 8/
Secondly, it says nothing of EU tariff collection on our exports to the EU (indeed the Ridley piece explicitly skirts around it). This (and VAT) will cause delays at the border on exports, not to say adding big costs to sectors such as lamb which rely heavily on EU markets. 9/
What of avoiding delays on imports by unilaterally eliminating checks? Well, this would mean (a) reducing/eliminating tariffs across the board to all importers (not just EU) with obvious implications for British farming. 10/
(On which point, was the post-Brexit vision set out at the referendum one which involved the decimation of our British rural economies?!) 11/
…and (b) we would need to reduce or even just scrap safety checks on food coming into the UK. I don’t even know where to go with that as a bad idea…. 12/
However, we might reasonably ask whether, in reality, the EU would erect unnecessary barriers at the border with the mayhem that would follow if it doesn’t have to…? 13/
@hhesterm makes a very good point here on this: … – what will the customs officer on the ground do? Are we really confident that he or she doesn’t take the safe option and follow the letter of the law and treat the UK as a 3rd country like any other… 14/
Perhaps they will see sense. But it seems this is relying on both EU governments and EU bureaucrats to take a flexible and common-sense approach – precisely the sorts of characteristics that have formed a key criticism of the EU and an argument for leaving 15/
So, to finish, it is difficult to predict what will happen at the border the day after a no-deal Brexit, but it would be foolish to assume that trade will all flow smoothly just because WTO says it will. 15/
Finally, as a rule one should treat anything in the media which approvingly references Economists for Free Trade at the expense of any other experts with huge suspicion. Read this for why on this occasion from @marcusleroux : 16/
And finally, for a much more expert view than mine on this whole issue, tthen check this out from @CoppetainPU :
ends 17/17
ends 17/17
