,
16 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Brexit wouldn't be Brexit if a letter to the PM from her MPs about trade policy was fully accurate and this one on being in a Customs Union certainly isn't - as well as deepening the no compromise hole which we're in... 1/
"we would have neither an independent trade policy nor any significant say in the trade policy of a wider entity" is to set an impossibly purist and unrealistic definition of independent trade policy as having no constraints from other agreements whether regulatory or tariff 2/
In reality trade agreements set constraints, whether that would be following EU or US regulations, having less power over tariffs, or having to match best offers in services. A Customs Union would be a constraint, it would not stop an independent trade policy, WTO seat etc 3/
"when it comes to trade agreements we would be traded". Incorrect. The EU does not negotiate on behalf of Turkey and probably wouldn't on behalf of the UK in a Customs Union. Up to us to get what we want (which is what by the way?) 4/
"Countries that are unable to negotiate on goods and agriculture at all will not secure the services concessions they need". Dubious. Major services concessions are rarely obtained in FTAs. We can offer services like on visas (!). Trading farmers for finance won't be popular 5/
Turkey must open up its market as the EU has done [to FTA partners]. Actually Turkey can put temporary levies on goods from third countries if they don't have a parallel trade agreement (though that means a border - more on that later) 6/
"we would lose substantial foreign policy influence by not having any trade policy" - we'd still need our own developing country unilateral preferences, and the trade / foreign policy relationship is complex, but this is straightforward defeatism (the big boys stopped us...) 7/
"the EU would also most likely run our trade defences" - they don't in the case of Turkey. But perhaps this is yet another matter which could be the subject of negotiation instead of this kind of false machismo letter 8/
I've been to Turkey and spoke to their businesses and officials, and they have problems with the Customs Union. There are many frustrations. But they would rather have it than not, because of the trade boost it gives them. 9/
The real problems of the letter are as ever from the Conservative side - implicit exaggeration of the power of trade policy, belief in fantasy Northern Ireland solutions, and failure to grasp that negotiations are about detail so we need to lay this down 10/
UK trade agreements could add 0.2 - 0.4% to GDP according to Government forecasts. Not exactly a game-changer set against a larger decline from EU trade. And that's if we get them, the problems with a US trade deal are already obvious 11/
Fantasy Northern Ireland solutions we have talked about ad nauseam, for now let's just say that unless the EU agrees to them, a Customs Union plus regulatory alignment is required, and it may well be the backstop is gradually implemented even in a no-deal Brexit 12/
As for negotiations are detail, any FTA or Customs Union with the EU will be a negotiation. What do we actually want? Of course you can choose to burn your negotiating capital on futile stuff, but if you don't, how do we make an arrangement that works? 13/
Of course there will be issues with the UK not having fully independent trade policy in a Customs Union, but we have them in the EU, and we'd have them if we signed a US FTA. But we have such a juvenile debate over Brexit that we don't do detail, only no-deal v remain tedium 14/
At some point, barring a party split that looks increasingly possible, Conservative leaders are going to have to compromise with their business supporters, and also cast off the wilder fantasies of no-dealism. Sadly probably not soon judging by this letter 15/ end
PS The letter has an impact on the Number 10 bunker. But they are increasingly the past. The question for the future of the Conservative Party is no-deal v business...
