The Exiting the EU Select Committee heard compelling evidence yesterday from Mr Christophe Bondy. He is Canada's legal counsel on the CETA trade deal and he didn't mince his words. The committee was told we were attempting something never tried before, that is to negotiate an FTA which will reduce trade. He described it as trying to blow up part of the bridge (HERE) that has been built between the UK and the EU over the last 45 years, but without bankrupting ourselves. See the whole session HERE - I recommend it.
He also said that in March 2019 we would lose access to more FTAs than any nation in history when we leave the EU's existing trade agreements with about 40 countries. His colleague Dr Lorand Bartels, said technically we will retain the FTAs we are joint signatories to, but in practice the treaties will just be blank sheets of paper for the UK.
Mr Bondy also said we were leaving the world's richest trading block and once again told MPs that most trade in the world is done with countries closest to each other. The gravity model is still king, something that Patrick Minford of Economists for Brexit, almost uniquely among economists, does not accept at all.
And he said even if we have an FTA there will have to be borders. This came on the same day that the Irish PM, addressing the European parliament (HERE), said Britain cannot backslide on having no hard border in Ireland. This is the irresistible force meeting the immovable object but no one questioned it.
As for regulatory alignment and mutual recognition agreements, he told the committee this was only a very small part of trade agreements and it wasn't the answer that some people (i.e. Brexiteers) think it is.
Listening to the evidence to these committees one is struck by the naive ignorance of most MPs. Rees-Mogg in particular ignores all warnings and just offers warm words. These were the men blindly urging everybody on to something they themselves had no idea about - and still don't.
Bondy doesn't think two years is anywhere near long enough to negotiate a trade deal. The process of "legal scrubbing" of CETA took a year and ratification the same. And, as he pointed out, negotiations started with both sides wanting the same thing. With Brexit he said he wasn't sure what the UK government wanted even now. He also expected the UK EU talks to breakdown in political acrimony.
It was a tour de force of the difficulties of Brexit but the Brexiteers were unmoved and just ignored what they didn't like.
One asked about the benefits of Brexit but Dr Bartels said they were hard to see. One might be that we could cut tariffs for citrus fruits because these were intended to protect growers in southern Europe and we would then be able to import lower priced oranges and lemons after Brexit. Jacob Rees-Mogg picked up on this at the end and seemed to think this was a good reason to leave the EU. So, that's it. Brexit is a lemon.
When looking at the value of the cost of losing some EU exports to the UK, Mr Bondy said we should also consider the cost to the EU of a break up of the bloc if they offered terms that were too generous.
Finally, he confirmed there is a Most Favoured Nation (MFN) clause in CETA which obliges the EU to offer any improved terms that we may negotiated (financial services access or reduced border checks for example) to Canada - and other countries. But tellingly, he pointed out that this did not apply to any country joining the EEA.
He was a masterful witness. His evidence was delivered in a quiet but firm way and he was clearly extremely knowledgeable, an expert in other words. Hence, the Brexiteers ignored him.
