Brexiteers backlash over transition agreement
- Credit: PA Wire/PA Images
Brexiteers are gearing up for a clash with the Government over the transition period.
Leadership hopeful Jacob Rees-Mogg has hit out at the Prime Minister warning EU plans would leave the UK a 'colony' of Brussels for two years after Brexit.
Philip Hammond said the deal sought by the Government would mean that, although 'technically' the UK would not be in the customs union or single market, it would effectively keep the same rules, including on trade and immigration, during an implementation period until the terms of a new deal can be put in place.
But Tory Eurosceptics are raging, with Jacob Rees-Mogg warning that it would reduce the country to the level of a 'vassal state'.
The EU's guidelines for the next phase of Brexit talks have been set out in Brussels after leaders of the 27 other members of the bloc agreed to move on to the second stage of the process covering a transitional period and talks on a future trade deal.
You may also want to watch:
The four-page document sets out the EU's guidelines for the next stage of negotiations, including the process for agreeing the terms of the transition period expected to last two years after the date of Brexit.
It makes clear that the EU expects the UK to observe all of its rules – including on freedom of movement – and accept the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) during this time.
- 1 Liz Truss accused of freeports 'catastrophic blunder' following Brexit deals
- 2 A view from inside the Heathrow petri dish
- 3 The truth about 'buy British'
- 4 Could Mexican Coke spark a new Coca-Cola cold war?
- 5 Downing Street announces plans to change English voting system following string of Labour victories
- 6 Britons living in Spain are being refused Covid jab 'due to Brexit', report claims
- 7 Tories could push for 2023 general election after axing key legislation
- 8 The man the Soviet Union left in space
- 9 Boris Johnson under investigation over luxurious Caribbean holiday
- 10 Why can't the English see what the Scots and Welsh can?
It also set up a potential clash with London over the Prime Minister's hopes of negotiating early trade agreements with countries outside the EU, stating firmly that the UK will stay in the single market and customs union during transition and will 'continue to comply with EU trade policy', which bars deals by individual states.
Hammond, in China on a trade mission, was asked whether firms should expect a transition deal where the UK is still participating in the single market, customs union and subject to the ECJ.
'In a word, yes,' he told Sky News. 'What they should expect as a result of the agreement we've reached this week with the European Union is a transition, or implementation period, which will start at the end of March 2019, during which we will no longer be members of the European Union, we won't technically or legally be in the customs union or in the single market, but we're committed as a result of the agreement we've made this week to creating an environment which will effectively replicate the current status quo so that businesses can carry on trading with their commercial partners across the EU as they do now, borders will operate as they do now, and financial services businesses will be able to carry on conducting their business across borders as they do now.'
But the restrictions imposed by the EU's position were rejected by Rees-Mogg, who demanded May must not agree to them.
'We cannot be a colony of the European Union for two years from 2019 to 2021, accepting new laws that are made without any say-so of the British people, Parliament or Government,' he told BBC's Newsnight.
'That is not leaving the European Union, that is being a vassal state of the European Union, and I would be very surprised if that were Government policy.'
The looming row over the terms of a transition deal comes after the Prime Minister was given a boost after agreement within the Tory ranks means she looks set to avoid a second Commons defeat.
Behind-the-scenes efforts resulted in a compromise which is acceptable to would-be rebels who were set to reject May's plan to write March 29 2019 into law as the date of the UK's departure from the bloc.
The Government is understood to be 'looking closely' at the amendment tabled by Tory MPs from both sides on the Brexit divide which would give ministers flexibility to change the departure day if Parliament agrees.
Ministers have not formally supported the move but it would appear certain the Government will back the measure if it presented a way for May to avoid another Commons reverse.
Former Cabinet minister Sir Oliver Letwin, one of the architects of the compromise, said it would provide 'exactly the same degree of flexibility in UK law' as Article 50 allows the European Union.
'I'm optimistic that we can find a sensible resolution to this particular rather small issue; we are then left with a much bigger question of negotiating a trade deal with the EU, which is a very difficult thing to do,' he told the Today programme.
There was a 'long way to go' before a final deal with Brussels could be agreed, he said.
'Some years back I described this as a game of multi-dimensional chess and I think it is like that because you have got 27 countries on the other side, you have got the Parliament, you have got the Council, you have got the Commission and then you have got all the complexities of politics in the UK.'
Cabinet ministers are due to discuss their preferred 'end state' relationship with Europe for the first time on Tuesday, and pressure from Brussels is mounting on May to deliver a detailed statement on her aims which the EU will regard as an adequate basis to enter swiftly into substantive talks.
Become a Supporter
The New European is proud of its journalism and we hope you are proud of it too. We believe our voice is important - both in representing the pro-EU perspective and also to help rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.