BORIS Johnson could walk away from trade talks with the European Union in June unless there is the “broad outline” of a deal.
The UK’s guidelines for the negotiations, which cover trade and other aspects of the future relationship with Brussels, sets the deadline for progress against a backdrop of deep divisions between the two sides over issues including fish, state subsidies and standards.
The Government has set out its plans for the talks ahead of the first round of negotiations on Monday, making clear that it “will not negotiate any arrangements in which the UK does not have control of its own laws and political life”.
It clearly states the UK’s intention to rely on World Trade Organisation terms under an arrangement with the EU similar to Australia’s if progress on a comprehensive deal cannot be made.
Whatever the outcome of the talks, businesses have been warned to expect friction at the border from January 1, because the UK will not extend the transition period and will therefore be leaving the EU’s single market and customs union.
READ MORE: Michael Russell accuses Tories of setting EU trade deal bar low
A high-level meeting to take stock of progress is scheduled for June, by which time it should be clear whether the Canada-style comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA) sought by Johnson is possible by the end of the year.
The negotiation guidelines envisaged the “broad outline of an agreement” by the June meeting, which would be “rapidly finalised” by September.
They read: “If that does not seem to be the case at the June meeting, the Government will need to decide whether the UK’s attention should move away from negotiations and focus solely on continuing domestic preparations to exit the transition period in an orderly fashion.”
In the political declaration, agreed by the Prime Minister and EU last year, the two sides agreed to work towards a deal “encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field”.
The EU’s mandate called for any agreement to use Brussels’ standards as “a reference point” over time – indicating that the UK could be expected to keep aligned with changes to the rules covering state subsidies, environmental standards and workers’ rights in future, something that would breach Johnson’s red lines.
READ MORE: Report reveals impact of Tory Innovator visa on Scots firms
Downing Street insiders indicated Johnson believes the mandate he won at the General Election trumps the declaration, which does not have the status of a binding international treaty. And they said Brussels had also moved away from the political declaration, pointing to the EU’s mandate, published on Tuesday, going far beyond the agreed terms on the “level playing field”.
Senior Cabinet minister Michael Gove told MPs: “The UK Government seeks a FTA with robust protections for the environment and labour standards.
“But we do not see why the test of suitability in these areas should be adherence to EU law and submission to EU models of governance.
“The EU does not apply those principles to FTAs with other sovereign nations and they should not apply to a sovereign UK.”
He dismissed Brussels’ arguments that stricter measures are necessary because the UK is closer to the EU than countries such as Canada.
“Geography is no reason to undermine democracy,” Gove said.
In its document, the Government promises to carry out a consultation exercise on the “economic impact of the future relationship”.
But officials acknowledged that whatever the outcome of the talks, there would be friction in trade between the UK and EU.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel