Latest updates: Von der Leyen says two sides remain apart and UK must accept fair competition as pre-condition for access to single market
- No-deal Brexit is now likeliest, Ursula von der Leyen tells EU leaders
- Boris Johnson warned over ‘Australia-style’ Brexit trade deal
- No-deal would make Britons less safe, ex-national security adviser says
- Follow all our Brexit coverage
Yesterday, according to Boris Johnson, there was a “strong possibility” of the UK and the EU failing to agree a trade deal. Just in case anyone failed to get the message, now Johnson is saying this scenario is “very, very likely”.
Speaking to reporters on a visit to Blyth in Northumberland, Johnson said:
We are always hopeful, and as you know the negotiations are continuing and we’ve got our teams still out there in Brussels.
And if there is a big offer, a big change in what they are saying, then I must say that I’ve yet to see it.
In his column in the Times (paywall) this morning James Forsyth suggests that a solution is possible to the level playing field dispute in the UK-EU trade talks. He writes:
The same problem can be seen in the biggest sticking point in the talks, the so-called ratchet clause. This is meant to address what happens if the EU tightens its regulations in one area and the UK does not follow suit. The EU wants the right to unilaterally impose tariffs in these circumstances. There would be no obligation to show that Britain’s different standards were distorting trade. The EU would simply be able to act. But Britain would not be able to hit back. The text proposed by the EU would block us from responding to measures that they thought were unfair or disproportionate with their tariffs.
It is not sustainable to have a system where Brussels can act as judge and jury and then unilaterally disarm the UK to prevent it from taking countermeasures. There is, however, a potential solution to this problem. The EU could still have the right to respond if it increased regulations and Britain didn’t follow. It would, though, not be able to do this automatically. Rather, it would have to go to arbitration and show that the different standards were having a material effect. This would deal with the EU’s medium-term concern about Britain trying to undercut it while maintaining zero-tariff, zero-quota access to its market. It would also reassure the British side that it could not be subject to capricious actions by Brussels every time the EU introduced a relatively minor change.
Typically astute piece by @JGForsyth. And the solution he lights upon on sounds very much like where the EU proposal has landed – although everything is currently shrouded in fog. Perhaps, tellingly.
The big question for me tonight is whether @JGForsyth’s column on the government’s reservations about the EU’s free trade negotiating position characterises @BorisJohnson’s thinking, or someone else at the top of government, such as @michaelgove. The reason this matters is…
that much of what Forsyth describes as obstacles to a deal has already been removed by the EU, or (the EU has told @DavidGHFrost) will be sorted. So these are either not the roadblocks @BorisJohnson is actually worried about, or they are paper tigers, that will be vanquished…
before Sunday, to allow the PM to announce victory and a deal. So Forsyth’s column is either the PM preparing the ground to declare victory and a deal, or a desperately anxious colleague of his trying to show the PM how to avoid no deal and claim victory. I can’t judge which…
