There is a bigger Brexit issue than the backstop
The difficulties over the Irish border derive from a broader uncertainty
David Allen Green
If there is no relationship agreement by 2022, then all the horrors associated with a no-deal Brexit will simply re-emerge. The position of the Irish border will be just one of many problems © Reuters
The current political discussion about the merits of the draft Brexit withdrawal agreement is focusing on a provision that may never take effect. The backstop in respect of the Irish border is an insurance provision. It is an agreement between the parties on what the state of affairs should be in the event of something else not happening.
That something is a full relationship agreement between an independent UK and the EU. This needs to be in place by the end of 2022 at the latest, as that is the last possible date the transition period can be extended to under the draft exit agreement. Only if there is no relationship agreement by then does the Irish backstop provision apply.
So the controversy over whether the UK can accept such a provision is predicated on one simple assumption: that the UK and EU will not be ready to enter a relationship agreement by the end of the transition period under the exit agreement.
If that is the case, then a no-deal Brexit is not avoided with the exit agreement but merely postponed. The famous “cliff-edge” would still very much be there, waiting for the UK to topple over in due course, just a little further along.
The EU27, and Ireland in particular, are sensible in making this assumption. Nothing that has happened to date on Brexit provides any evidence, let alone comfort, that the parties will be in a position to sign a relationship agreement in the time available.
If there is no relationship agreement by 2022, then all the horrors associated with a no-deal Brexit will simply re-emerge, from customs blockages to food and medicine shortages. The position of the Irish border, though of the upmost importance, will be one of many problems. And no sensible person believes the UK will be in a position to deal with these by 2022, just as it has signally failed to get ready over the past two years or so.
So every expression of concern about the Irish backstop is an implicit admission that the UK is unlikely to have a relationship agreement to enter into by 2022 — indeed, it may not be ready for some years after that. Therefore, the supposed distinction between no-deal Brexit and the deal is to a large extent artificial: the real choice is between no deal now and no deal in 2022.
If politicians were confident that a relationship deal would be in place by 2022, the backstop issue would lose a great deal of potency. But it appears they are in denial about the improbability of reaching a relationship agreement by 2022 and are instead focusing on the logical consequence of this, the backstop, almost as a form of proxy.
One would hope, if not expect, that the likelihood or otherwise of there being such an agreement in place at the end of the transition period would be the basis on which Britain’s politicians were forming their views on the merits of the Brexits on offer. There not being such a deal likely to be ready by 2022 is a good reason for a responsible and rational politician, acting in the national interest, to seek a revocation of the Article 50 notification.
But they are closing their eyes to this looming problem, just as they did with the consequences of making a premature and ill-prepared Article 50 notification. The EU27 are not so dumb as to make the same mistake; that is why they are protecting their interests and those of Ireland in the event of there being no relationship agreement.
It is unfortunate that UK politicians are preoccupied only with the manifestation of this dreadful eventuality, rather than the eventuality itself.
The writer is a contributing editor of the FT
0 comments:
Publicar un comentario