,
9 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
1/ Quick and I hope final thread on backstops, Interim Agreements under Article XXIV and why the later doesn't address the former.
2/ Quick refresher 1:
The backstop is a clause in the Withdrawal Agreement that says that if at the end of the transition period there's no trade agreement in place which respects the GFA, the UK will remain in a customs union with the EU until such an agreement is reached.
The backstop is a clause in the Withdrawal Agreement that says that if at the end of the transition period there's no trade agreement in place which respects the GFA, the UK will remain in a customs union with the EU until such an agreement is reached.
3/ Quick refresher 2:
Article XXIV of the GATT has a never used clause which theoretically and with input from the entire WTO Membership, allows Members to implement parts of an almost (but not quite) completed FTA before it's done.
Article XXIV of the GATT has a never used clause which theoretically and with input from the entire WTO Membership, allows Members to implement parts of an almost (but not quite) completed FTA before it's done.
4/ The most common objection to the backstop isn't that it exists, but that it's permanent.
If no satisfactory agreement is reached, the UK, it is argued, could be in a permanent customs union with the EU.
If no satisfactory agreement is reached, the UK, it is argued, could be in a permanent customs union with the EU.
5/ The EU, for its part, has said it needs a permanent backstop because a time limited one essentially means the GFA could be violated a fixed number of years from now.
It's an impasse to be sure. Unfortunately, Article XXIV does nothing to help.
It's an impasse to be sure. Unfortunately, Article XXIV does nothing to help.
6/ The situation envisaged in the Malthouse proposal is thus:
The transition period ends without a completed FTA which respects the GFA, but with one within striking distance of completion. Instead of a backstop, the EU and UK jointly notify this almost completed FTA.
The transition period ends without a completed FTA which respects the GFA, but with one within striking distance of completion. Instead of a backstop, the EU and UK jointly notify this almost completed FTA.
7/ Except... why?
If at the end of a transition period an FTA is nearly done then surely the backstop is fine? After all, the objection was to its permanency, not its existence.
If at the end of a transition period an FTA is nearly done then surely the backstop is fine? After all, the objection was to its permanency, not its existence.
8/ However,
If at the end of a transition period the FTA is nowhere near finished, then you can't notify it under Article XXIV anyway. You need a near completed product, not a draft document full of square brackets and opposing red lines.
If at the end of a transition period the FTA is nowhere near finished, then you can't notify it under Article XXIV anyway. You need a near completed product, not a draft document full of square brackets and opposing red lines.
9/ A backstop means the Interim Article XXIV route is redundant if an FTA is close, and if one isn't, then Article XXIV interim arrangements can't be used anyway and in any case don't provide anywhere near the guarantees the EU say they need.
/End
/End
