FILE BREXIT
On 29 March 2017 the United Kingdom was the first member state ever to request an exit from the European Union. This request followed a referendum in June 2016 in which the British population narrowly chose in favour of an exit from the EU. The negotiations and their results are therefore unknown territory to all those involved. How did we get here? And where are we heading? Read all about it in this Brexit file. (Latest update: November 2019)
Photo: the meeting between British prime minister Boris Johnson (right) and president of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker (left) in September 2019. ©European Union 2019
In this file: 1. A challenging marriage 1.1. A difficult entry 1.2. Tensions 2. The referendum “We zijn met Europa, maar geen deel van Europa.” zei Brits premier Churchill. Hij was voorstander van een
2.1. And then Cameron promised a referendum 2.2. The campaign 2.3. The results: The Dis-United Kingdom 2.4. Immediate political results 3. ‘Leave’, but how? 3.1. The launch 3.2. The negotiations 3.3. The parties involved and their attitude 3.4. The breaking points 4. Preparing for a separation 5. Conclusion
File Brexit
-1-
Europe House Ryckevelde
1. A challenging marriage The fact that the United Kingdom happens to be the first country to withdraw from the EU ever, is not surprising when you consider the history between both parties.
1.1. A difficult entry In 1951 the wheels of European cooperation were set in motion with the European Coal and Steel Community (the ECSC). Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, West Germany and Italy took part in the cooperation from the start. At the time, the United Kingdom decided not to join because it believed the cooperation went too far. The member states had to delegate decision-making power to the European Community. For the British, this principle of ‘supranationality’ was a hindrance: they wanted to keep making their own decisions. On top of that, they were not convinced the cooperation would last. “We are with Europe, but not of it.” said British prime minister Winston Churchill. He supported the idea of European cooperation, but making all decisions as a group went too far. The UK was used to playing a leading role in world politics, but as a member of the ECSC it would have to cooperate with countries as equals.
To everyone’s surprise, the United Kingdom applied for membership to the European cooperation in 1961. With this membership they wanted to fortify their position in the world and encourage economic growth. Because, at the time, the British empire was crumbling and the British wanted to stay in the loop of any further European plans. The 6 founding countries of the ECSC
The most difficult EU enlargement of all was the one with the United Kingdom”, said Etienne Davignon, former EU commissioner in 2004 in response to the EU enlargement to Central– and Eastern-Europe.
The negotiations for accession were difficult. The biggest issues for the British were the favourable trading relationships with countries from the British Commonwealth and the annual financial contribution. After the British House of Commons narrowly voted in favour of membership with 301 votes in favour and 284 against, the UK became a member of the European Community in 1973.
1.2. Tensions 1. The United Kingdom slows down further integration Throughout the years, the UK continued to consider the European cooperation mainly as an economic partnership. Every time efforts were made for more political or social integration, the British would hit the brakes. They continued to struggle with the idea of delegating their decision-making power to a ‘higher’ European institution.
File Brexit
-2-
Europe House Ryckevelde
2. Europe à la carte To avoid further European cooperation from being blocked, the United Kingdom sometimes received an exception or opt-out. That is why the UK does not use the euro, it still performs border controls (as it is not a member of the Schengen agreement) and it has received an exception on its immigration policy and social legislation from the EU.
3. A discount on its annual financial contribution The UK has always struggled with its annual financial contribution to the European cooperation ever since its negotiations for accession. In 1984 British prime minister Margaret Thatcher was fed up and demanded her ‘money back’. She got her way: the British received a serious discount on their annual contribution to the European budget. As a consequence, the UK pays the EU less than countries with an equally strong economy, such as France or Germany. At the moment the UK’s annual nett contribution comes up to about 12 billion euro. The EU is already working on a solution as to how it will deal with this loss of income in its next long-term budget 2021-2027. According to the British press, the EU has forbidden the word ‘yoghurt’. Instead people should use the term ‘milk fermented with heat‘. The EU also allegedly determined how many cups of coffee Europeans are allowed to drink daily. Click here for a list of all made-up stories, or ‘euromyths’, that appeared in the British press from 1992 to 2017.
4. The eurosceptical British press At the time of the UK’s accession in 1973 the British press was mostly positive about European cooperation. But that changed drastically during the late ‘80ies when British prime minister Margaret Thatcher became more critical of the EU. Especially the EU’s ‘legislitis’ and the fact the UK had to delegate its decisionmaking power to the EU were the centre of criticism. The press was not afraid to bend the truth or to print outright lies, and often openly attacked the EU. Boris Johnson, the current prime minister of the UK, helped lay the foundations of this way of EU reporting during the ‘90ies, when he was an EU correspondent in Brussels and published one made-up story about the EU after the other.
It is safe to call the British (tabloid) press biased. Above you can see how the press supported an obvious point of view during the time running up to the Brexit referendum. To do so, French president Macron and European president Tusk are even represented as gangsters. File Brexit
-3-
Europe House Ryckevelde
2. The referendum 2.1. And then Cameron promised a referendum In 2005 David Cameron became the president of the Conservative Party, the Tories. He won the hearts of the British conservatives with his Eurosceptic attitude. In 2010 Cameron became prime minister. Polls at the time showed that over half of the British population was in favour of a Brexit. This was mostly due to the long-running anti-EU campaign set up by the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and its flamboyant leader, Nigel Farage. Consequently, the UK’s EU membership was a hot topic during the British elections of 2015. Prime minister Cameron, who felt the hot breath of the anti-EU parties down his neck, promised to organise a referendum about the British membership to the EU if he was re-elected. In May 2015 David Cameron’s Conservatives won the elections by a land-slide and obtained an absolute majority in the British House of Commons. Cameron kept his word and announced a referendum. In the meantime, he negotiated a ‘new deal’ with the EU and campaigned to stay in the European cooperation. However, not all member of the Conservative Party agreed with Cameron, so the UK’s EU membership became a divisive issue for the Tories.
2.2. The campaign The campaigns set up for the Brexit referendum can be characterised by their cynicism, bitterness and as a lowpoint in political credibility. It reached an all-time low when British MP (Member of Parliament) Jo Cox was murdered.
The arguments While the Leave campaign tried to convince the British population by appealing to their emotions, the Remain side focused mostly on how much the UK could suffer from a Brexit. The Leave campaign The EU imposes too many rules on the UK. The EU costs too much money, for which we do not get enough in return. The UK is flooded by migrants from both outside and inside the EU (free movement of persons), who steal British jobs and receive social welfare. The UK has to take back control over its own country, and make its own decisions about its future.
File Brexit
The Remain campaign The UK is stronger, both economically as politically, as a member of the EU. Thanks to EU membership we have free access to the entire EU. On a worldwide scale we can be more forceful as part of a bigger block. If you want to sell your products on the European market, you have to respect EU rules. It is better to stay in the EU, so you can determine those rules. A Brexit will damage the City (in London), the most important financial centre of the EU. EU citizens living in the UK, contribute to our country’s economic growth.
-4-
Europe House Ryckevelde
One of the most prominent faces of the Leave campaign was Nigel Farage (photo). You can still find more information about the Leave campaign and on: Vote Leave, Leave.EU and Grassroots out.
The Remain side was supported mostly by CEO’s, like Ryan Air executive Michael O’Leary (photo). For more information about the pro-Europe campaign, go to: Britain Stronger in Europe. © Tjeerd Royaards
Fake news, disinformation and Russian interference The run towards the Brexit referendum, was often particularly harsh. Both sides tried to influence the voters not only with correct information, but also with false promises, at times with flagrant lies and disinformation.* Especially the Leave campaign got exposed: For example: Reinvesting in the national healthcare system (NHS) On the Leave side’s campaign bus the following statement was posted: “We send the EU £350 million pounds a week, let’s fund our NHS instead.” Shortly after the referendum, Farage confessed that they never had the intention of refunding any amount of money in the NHS and admitted that the bus was a mistake (see: interview in the British morning show Good Morning Britain).
The British tabloid press did not stay neutral either and used several techniques to influence its audience.* This headline in The Sun, for example, suggests that the Queen would be in favour of Britain leaving the EU. The headline was condemned as ‘significantly misleading’ by the IPSO, the watchdog for British press.
In the meantime evidence has been found that Russia has also meddled in the Brexit debate. In and attempt to influence the results of the referendum, incorrect information about the European Union was spread from Russia (through hundreds of false accounts). There is also an ongoing investigation about whether or not Russian money was used to sponsor the Leave campaign. Numbers and infographic from EU vs Disinfo * Disinformation techniques and other nonsense can seriously harm democracy.
File Brexit
-5-
Europe House Ryckevelde
2.3. The results: The DIS-United Kingdom On 23 June 2016 voters in the United Kingdom answered the following question: “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?” The Leave side barely won with 51,89% of the votes cast. A thorough investigation of the results shows signs a deeply divided country.
Discord between the regions Scotland (62%), London and Northern Ireland (58%) clearly voted ‘Remain’. In Gibraltar a whopping 96% voted in favour of EU membership.
Other fractures in voting behaviour:
Employed (Remain) versus unemployed (Leave)
Highly educated (Remain) versus lower educated (Leave)
Immigrants (Remain) versus natives (Leave)
Young (Remain) versus old (Leave) - see numbers on the left
2.4. Immediate political consequences The day after the Brexit referendum, British prime minister Cameron resigned. He was replaced by former minister of Domestic Affairs Theresa May.
Out: David Cameron
In: Theresa May
The results were a slap in the face for the European Union. To make matters worse, it helped revitalise Eurosceptic parties in other European member states to push for their own exit, e.g. a ’Nexit’ in the Netherlands, or a ’Frexit’ in France. However, in the meantime, elections have been held in many of the member states and the call for an exit has died down again.
File Brexit
-6-
Europe House Ryckevelde
3. ‘Leave’, but how? 3.1. The launch If a member state wants to leave the European Union, it has to activate article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. What is in this article? A member state can decide for itself if it wants to withdraw from the EU. The member state has to inform the European Council, the heads of state and government of the other EU member states, of its decision. After negotiations, the Council decides on the requirements for withdrawal. The moment an agreement on the withdrawal is reached, or 2 years after it was requested, the EU treaties no longer apply to this country. The withdrawal is complete. The member state that wants to withdraw from the EU does not have a say in decisions made within the EU on the withdrawal. If the country wants to join the EU again, the standard enlargement process starts. Following on Leave’s close victory, the EU asked the UK to activate article 50 as quickly as possible. In the end, the EU had to wait for almost a year, until 29 March 2017, before the British government activated the article of the Lisbon Treaty and launched the withdrawal process.
3.2. The negotiations 1. Theresa May negotiates 29 March 2017: Official start of the withdrawal procedure On 29 March 2017 the British government activated article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which launched the withdrawal procedure and opened negotiations. As was determined beforehand, this started a period of 2 years during which the terms for withdrawal would be negotiated. By 29 March 2019 at 23h00 British time, an agreement on the Brexit had to be reached.
Michel Barnier during the press conference. In the background the temporary agreement is visible.
29 January 2018: There will be a transition period On 29 January 2018, the EU and the UK reached a first agreement. Because the negotiators realised they would be unable to discuss everything in time, they decided to introduce a transition period until the end of 2020. Concretely, this meant that, if an agreement was reached on the withdrawal, the UK would remain a member of the EU’s Single Market until the end of December 2020. (In the meantime, this transition period has also been extended until the end of 2022, see further in this file.)
14 November 2018: From a political impasse to a withdrawal agreement On 12 November 2018 the UK and the EU reached a technical withdrawal agreement. Two days later, on 14 November, the UK and the EU also reached a political agreement about how to determine their new relationship after the UK’s withdrawal from the Union. The problem is, however, that the British Parliament, and afterwards the national Parliaments of the EU member states, have to approve this agreement or it cannot be executed. File Brexit
-7-
Europe House Ryckevelde
Start of 2019: British House of Commons says no May was unable to convince the British Parliament of her Brexit deal. On 15 January 2019 the British House of Commons voted against the agreement. A series of votes followed: Against the agreement between the UK and the EU, including all binding and non-binding guarantees on the backstop (12 March) Against leaving the EU without a deal (no-deal Brexit) (13 March) Against organising a new referendum (but in favour of a Brexit extension until 30 June 2019) (14 March) Against eight proposals for an alternative approach to Brexit (27 March) The headlines were clear: May suffered a (Again) against May’s Brexit deal (29 March) historic defeat.
The European Council approved a Brexit extension twice: first until 22 May (just before the European elections) and, after the final vote in the House of Commons, until 1 November 2019. Shortly after, Theresa May resigned as party leader and as prime minister. On 7 June she left office. Her successor, Boris Johnson, was elected as new party leader and prime minister by the party members on 23 July. 23 May 2019: Elections for the European Parliament in the United Kingdom As the British were still a member of the EU at the time of the European elections, they also had to elect their new representatives for the European Parliament; 73 to be precise. The results show once again how divided the British population is about Brexit: With 31% Nigel Farage’s “Brexit Party” received the most votes. In total, the anti-Brexit parties received about 40% of the votes cast. At the same time, the Lib.Dems, who take on a very pro-EU points of view, were the second biggest party in the UK. The two traditional parties, the Conservatives (May and Jonhson’s party) and Labour, lost a lot of support. Only 37% of the British population voted in the European elections.
3. Enter Boris Johnson 24 July 2019: Boris Johnson becomes prime minister When Boris Johnson took office as the new prime minister of the UK, there was a clear change of style in the British Brexit strategy. While Theresa May believed making a deal with the EU and having it approved by the British Parliament was paramount, Johnson saw things differently: 1 November 2019 is the day the UK leaves the EU, with or without a deal. Asking for another extension was out of the question. This change in attitude put the pressure back on all past agreements between the UK and the EU (e.g. the transition period, the backstop). This then put a strain on the economies of both parties, who would suffer greatly from a no-deal Brexit, according to predictions.
File Brexit
-8-
Europe House Ryckevelde
28 August 2019: Queen approves proroguing British Parliament Johnson’s goal is obvious: on 1 November the UK leaves the EU. however, a large part of the British Parliament does not agree with his views. They only wish to leave the EU with a deal, which keeps the door open for a possible new extension. If Johnson wanted to achieve his goal, he needed to work around the Parliament. To do so, Johnson called on the Queen: According to tradition, the British Parliament is suspended each year during the second half of September, the so-called prorogation. At the start of October, the new Parliamentary year kicks off with the Queen’s speech. In the weeks between the start of the prorogation and the Queen’s speech, the Parliament does not meet and the political parties hold their annual party congresses. Protocol dictates that the new Parliamentary year can only start after the Queen’s speech.
It is no surprise that the Queen followed Johnson’s advice to extend the prorogation. The Queen must remain politically neutral at all times. In practice, this means she must always follow the advice of the government. If the Queen had refused Johnson’s advice, this would have been equal to taking on a position in the debate. And that would violate protocol.
On 28 August Johnson advises the Queen to move the Queen’s Speech to a later date, to 14 October. This way, the Parliament is put on the sideline up until a few weeks before the Brexit date. The Queen approved his request: the extended prorogation of the British Parliament is done. 9 September 2019: British Parliament approves the Benn-Bill The extended prorogation was a cause for commotion, both within the Parliament, as with the British population. To prevent Johnson from winning the battle, members of the Parliament (or MPs) immediately approved the Benn-Bill (following a first approval by the House of Commons on 4 September and by the House of Lords on 6 September). The law proposal, named after Hillary Benn, the MP who proposed it, entered into force on 9 September and states that Johnson either has to cut a new deal with the EU and have the deal approved by Parliament by 19 October, or has to convince Parliament of the benefits of a no-deal scenario. If he does not succeed, Johnson is obligated by law to ask the EU for an extension. This way the British Parliament appropriated power to itself, because the prime minister cannot do anything without its permission. Johnson and his followers within the Conservative party tried to influence the Benn-Bill vote by enforcing party loyalty. This is a common practice within British party politics, called “whips”. This system entails that MP are supposed to vote according to the party leaders’ instructions. However, not everyone followed suit. When Philip Lee switched over to the opposition in the middle of a parliamentary session, Johnson lost his fragile majority. On top of that, several other Conservatives voted in favour of the BennBill, and therefore against the will of the party leaders. For this, 21 Conservative MPs (amongst whom several well established party members, such as Nicholas Soames (photo), Winston Churchill’s grandson ) were sanctioned. They will not be on the ballot in the next elections. If they wish to be re-elected they will have to enter the elections independently.
9 September 2019: Parliament is prorogued A few hours after the Benn-bill took effect, the British Parliament was prorogued until 14 October, like Boris Johnson requested. However, opponents considered the prorogation unlawful. They believe Johnson abused his role as prime minister to silence the Parliament with the prorogation. Two lawsuits were filed in order to reverse it.
File Brexit
-9-
The prorogation led to several notable scenes. You can have a closer look here.
Europe House Ryckevelde
The two –lower- courts in charge of the lawsuits came to opposing verdicts: a court in London deemed it a “merely political issue”, and therefore not an issue for the courts. A Scottish court, however, called the prorogation unlawful and believed Johnson mislead the Queen when he advised her to approve it. Eventually the final decision was up to the Supreme Court, which combined the appeals to these verdicts. 24 September 2019: Supreme Court declares the prorogation unlawful On 24 September the Supreme Court decided the extended prorogation was unlawful: “This case deals with the limits of the prorogation”, said Supreme Court Judge Lady Hale. “Any decision to suspend the Parliament is unlawful if this decision limits the Parliament’s abilities to execute its constitutional duties. This was not a normal prorogation. It prevented the Parliament from exercising its powers for five of the eight remaining weeks before the end of October.” When the verdict became public, the then president of the House of Commons, Jon Bercow, immediately recalled the Parliament on Wednesday 25 September.
4. Boris Johnson’s withdrawal agreement with the EU 17 October 2019: a new withdrawal agreement After intense negotiations the EU and the UK reached a new withdrawal agreement. This was a surprise because for a long time the British were unable to present feasible alternatives to Theresa May’s deal with the EU. On 17 October the EU member states unanimously approved the agreement, placing the ball once again in the court of the British House of Commons. On 19 October the House of Commons gathered to vote on the deal. What is in the agreement? The deal Boris Johnson made with the EU is for more than 90 percent the same as the deal his predecessor made. However, the sore point of May’s deal, the backstop, has been lifted from it: To prevent a resurrection of the Northern Irish conflict, and to not have to install a backstop, Johnson went back to an old proposition of the EU that the British rejected earlier in the negotiations. In this solution the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland is moved to the sea. You can find more info on this part of the deal on p. 13 “3.1. The breaking points”. The future trade relationship between the UK and the EU will only be negotiated during the transition period. The transition period is extended and will be in place from the moment the UK leaves the EU until 31 December 2022. 19 October 2019: British House of Commons postpones voting on the withdrawal agreement During the debate on Johnson’s withdrawal agreement, an amendment was immediately presented and approved. This amendment entailed that a decision can only be made about Johnson’s deal after a separate bill is passed that explains how the agreement should be executed. This does not mean that Johnson’s Brexit deal is rejected. This amendment only entails that the deal is postponed until all legislation enabling the Brexit is approved by the Parliament. As this new legislation needs to go through the entire legislative process, the House of Commons postponed the final vote over the withdrawal agreement. This postponement, combined with the Benn-bill, made a Brexit on 31 October impossible. Consequently, Boris Johnson sent a letter to the EU requesting another extension for the Brexit deadline. As Johnson did not support an extension, he did not sign it.
File Brexit
-10-
A photo of the unsigned letter in which Johnson requests an extension.
Europe House Ryckevelde
23 October 2019: The Withdrawal Agreement Bill is approved On 23 October the British House of Commons approved the Withdrawal Agreement Bill. This is the legislation that has to frame Boris Johnson’s withdrawal agreement. Even though this agreement was an important first step in favour of Johnson’s withdrawal agreement, the House of Commons refused to approve a three-day-period to rush through all of the legislation. Consequently Boris Johnson ‘paused’ the decision-making procedure on this withdrawal agreement.
28 October 2019: The EU grants an extension until 31 January 2020 The EU gave the green light to a third extension, until 31 January 2020, under the name “flextension”. This means that if an agreement is approved earlier, the British can leave the EU before the deadline (on 30 November or on 31 December 2019). On top of that, the 27 remaining member states state that this extension serves the sole purpose of allowing Brussels and London to approve the process. There will be no more negotiations. This also means the member states preapprove a withdrawal agreement.
5. Towards early elections in the UK on 12 December As the British government does not hold a majority in the House of Commons, it is not easy for Johnson to have his agreement approved. Both for him and the other political parties new elections seem to be an opportunity to steer the Brexit in their direction. Therefore the House of Commons approved new elections on 12 December 2019. At the moment, the election campaign is in full swing. The British voters will have to face the following choices: Incumbent prime minister Boris Johnson hopes his party, the Conservatives, will be able to take back a majority in the House of Commons. Then it can approve his withdrawal agreement. This way he wants to leave the EU on 31 December. The leader of the socialist party ‘Labour’, Jeremy Corbyn, wants to renegotiate the deal with Brussels. Then he wants to present this renegotiated deal in a referendum. Staying in the EU would also be one of the options in the referendum. Three smaller parties, the Liberal-Democrats (’LibDems’), thee Green Party and the Welsh nationalists have made an “anti-Brexit alliance”. They address the voters with collectively chosen candidates. According to LibDems president, Jo Swinson, the parties put the “national interests above” the interests of the parties. In an earlier statement, Swinson declared she would end Brexit if she came into power. Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party also approached the elections tactically and does not present any candidates in the constituencies the Conservatives won in 2017. This way Farage wants to avoid the so-called leave-votes from being divided, and prevent Labour or the LibDems from winning those seats.
Extension gets the new European Commission in trouble On 1 December 2019 the new Commission-Von der Leyen takes office. EU rules determine that each EU member states has to provide a commissioner. A Commission consisting of only 27 members could later be considered illegal and its decisions cancelled. Boris Johnson informed the EU that—with the elections approaching—the UK would not deliver a candidate to the Commission. In the meantime, the Commission-Von de Leyen has started a legal procedure, so it can later prove it did everything in its power to assemble a complete Commission. However, it is uncertain if that will suffice. Ursula von der Leyen Source: De Tijd File Brexit
-11-
Europe House Ryckevelde
3.3. The parties involved and their attitudes 1. The British political field The British negotiating team Since the very start of the Brexit negotiations it has been clear that the British politicians do not have one clear vision on how they wish to leave the EU. On top of that, more and more people want to reverse Brexit.
The fact that the disagreements run across party lines makes things even more complicated. Both within the Conservative party (Conservatives, aka the ‘Tories’, David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson’s party) as within Labour (Jeremy Corbyn’s party) there are supporters and opponents of Brexit. As the elections in the UK are approaching, the political parties will find a line in how and whether they want to leave the EU (see previous page).
There have been many changes within the British negotiating team. These are the current negotiators: Dominic Raab minister of Foreign Affairs Boris Jonhson, prime minister Steve Barclay, state secretary for Brexit and head of the newly created British department ’Exit from the EU’. David Frost: head negotiator and Europe advisor of the prime minister
2. The British population When the results of the referendum were made public, it became clear, and it has continued to be clear during the course of the withdrawal procedure, that Brexit divides the British population. Families and friends have fallen apart due to discussion about whether the UK should stay in or leave the EU. The ‘Brexit-fatigue’ is also on the rise: people are tired of talking about it.
3. The EU While Brexit increasingly divides the United Kingdom, the remaining 27 member states agree very strongly in the Brexit issue. Moreover, Brexit actually increases the unity between the member states. The EU’s absolute priority is to make a good deal that limits the effects on trade to a minimum. Click here if you want to know more about how the EU deals with the negotiations.
File Brexit
-12-
Europe House Ryckevelde
3.4. The breaking points 1. The Irish borders Nobody is in favour of a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland. A possible border between Northern Ireland and Ireland endangers the recent fragile peace of the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. Theresa May’s proposal consisted of a ‘backstop’ that had to prevent this: Northern Ireland would remain a member of the Single Market, until the EU and the UK reached a new trade agreement. This backstop would also come into effect in case of a ‘no-deal’. This particular ‘backstop’, however, proved a major breaking point, because, once approved, British politicians would not be able to cancel it unilaterally. According to them, this placed too much power in the hands of the EU. What is Johnson’s solution? Johnson proposed to move the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland to the sea. This means that, on paper, Northern Ireland is subject to the British custom regulations, but in practice it follows EU rules. All products entering Northern Ireland from third countries, must comply with EU rules. If these products travel on to the European Single Market by way of Northern Ireland, the EU’s custom tariffs are imposed. If these products are meant for the United Kingdom, however, British custom tariffs apply.
2. The Single Market One of the most difficult Brexit issues is how the EU and the UK will trade in the future. This is due to the fact the British cannot agree on how they want to trade with the EU: either they stay in the entire Single Market, either they stay in the Customs Union, or they make a trade agreement with the EU. In Boris Johnson’s deal both parties agreed to negotiate a ’Free Trade Agreement’ during the transition period, which lasts until December 2022 (but can be extended for another two years). Until then, the UK remains a member of the Single Market and it participates in the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital.
3. The withdrawal bill and other delicate issues For a long time, the withdrawal bill, the money the UK has to pay the EU for its withdrawal, was a hot potato. The agreement was that the British would fulfil their financial engagements with the EU. As the Brexit deadline was moved, this mostly entails the regular contributions of the UK for its membership in 2019, and in 2020. Most of this has to be paid by the end of the transition period. By 2060 the last bit (e.g. pensions of British EU officials) needs to be paid. However, British politicians remain divided about whether or not they should pay. Other delicate issues are: Gibraltar, in which both Spain and the UK will negotiate with the EU about the future. Whether the UK and the EU will continue to cooperate in defense and security. Whether the UK falls under the jurisdictions of the European Court of Justice (e.g. in case of a trade agreement, it needs to be determined which court can make decisions).
File Brexit
-13-
Europe House Ryckevelde
4. Preparing for a separation In the EU Early 2019, the European Commission published the so-called “preparedness notices”. In these papers, the Commission maps out the possible consequences of Brexit per policy. For important parts of EU legislation there is a detailed description of what exactly will change when the UK leaves the EU. Several European agencies have made similar documents. . Here you can find more information about these preparations . On 4 September 2019 the European Commission published a checklist for companies that trade with the UK, to help them prepare for a no-deal Brexit. The checklist is an aid to offer companies more insight into the possible issues that could arise when trading with the UK.
In the United Kingdom The British government’s decision to leave the EU, supposedly has cost London about 158 millon euro per week already. The Centre for European Reform announced this at the end of March 2019. It is therefore of the utmost importance for the UK to have a thorough plan for the future. In August 2019 ‘Operation Yellowhammer’ was leaked to the press. This official document of the British government lists out the worst-case scenario’s of a no-deal Brexit and explains how the British government intends to deal with these issues. For example, the document deals with problems in the transport of food and medicine, the supply of energy, transport to and from the EU, the Irish border and maintaining the public order. The plan sets out a budget of about 1,7 billion euro. Since the Brexit referendum over 3.454 British citizens have taken on the Belgian nationality, and the amount of applications continues to rise as the Brexit deadline draws closer.
6. Conclusion There has already been much ado about Brexit and the negotiations. Day after day, week after week, we encounter twists and turns in the road towards Brexit. Let’s hope the elections of 12 December 2019 will shed a light on what is to follow. One thing is certain, however: in the short-term there will be no positive consequences of an exit form the EU; not for the UK, not for the EU, and not for the member states.