,
14 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
The Art XXIV issue (that is 24 - I use the actual GATT numbering) and the one-page no-deal deal. A thread.1/
Let’s assume the EU would be willing to consider this, to turn away from the cliff or to clamber back up. I focus merely on substance, not process. 2/
One blank page, two options: a continuation of the customs union or an FTA. Customs union first. 3/
A customs union maintains frictionless trade, but only in customs matters: no tariffs. Regulatory restrictions and inspections are not covered, nor are services. Still means crashing out of the internal market. 4/
Further issues. The EU customs union is made effective through EU law: legislation and ECJ case law. But the UK will be out. How will this work? Page is getting fuller. 5/
Plus the UK could not have its own independent trade policy. And it would not automatically get the benefits of the EU's existing FTAs with third countries. 6/
There seems to be a bit of a further issue. Article XXIV allows for an interim agreement, but that presupposes that such an agreement prepares for the end state. But surely the Brexiteers will not accept a customs union as the final destination? 7/
So what about a one-page FTA. Well, for a start, it needs rules of origin - normally dozens if not hundreds of pages. But I suppose an existing set of rules could be referenced in the one page.8/
There is a bigger issue here of course. Rules of origin destroy frictionless trade in customs terms, just as much as no-deal does - perhaps even more. All UK-EU trade would need to be checked on origin. Imagine the hassle. 9/
This means an Irish border. It means Dover-Calais choking. It means huge bureaucracy imposed on all UK-EU trade. All of it. 10/
An FTA under Art XXIV covers tariffs only. Again all regulatory restrictions and inspections apply. The UK crashes out of the internal market. Services are not covered at all. 11/
Perhaps the idea is that the one-page is just part of a transition deal, such as the one which is in the current Withdrawal Agreement. That means the continued, full effect of EU law. But why would the EU accept this cherry-picking? 12/
Why would the EU accept that the Withdrawal Agreement, a carefully constructed edifice, with protection of citizens rights and a financial settlement at the heart, be partitioned and part demolished? 13/
Plus this simply cannot be done, in legal terms, five minutes past midnight, when the UK is out. Can only be done under Art 50, which expires at that point. A one page no-deal deal? Forget it. END
