The first hints are emerging this weekend that the UK government is looking to do a humiliating U-turn on Johnson’s hard Brexit. First, Alex Wickham at Bloomberg reported that: Rishi Sunak Is Privately Drafting Plans to Rebuild Britain’s Ties With the EU. Later, more details of a cross-party meeting were leaked to The Guardian. The meeting was said to include Michael Gove, Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy, Lord (Peter) Mandelson, a former EU trade commissioner and David Lidington a remainer who served in Theresa May’s cabinet as Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
Toby Helm in The Guardian reported a “secret cross-party summit held to confront failings of Brexit.” The Independent then picked up on the story.
If there is truth in these reports (and I assume there is) it is the first indication of the absolutely colossal cost of educating Michael Gove in trade and the EU. It will make Eton's extortionate fees look like a few groats. Gove, who famously dismissed experts in 2016, now seems to accept the experts were right. In a curious inversion of the classic 1985 sci-fi movie back to the future, we are now going forward to the past.
First, will be a brief stop in 2018, trying to decide what type of cake and cherries we prefer, and then back to where Edward Heath was in 1971 and perhaps then to Harold MacMillan circa 1960.
Gove is said to 'still' believe Brexit would eventually prove to be the right decision but was 'honest' about the difficulties of Britain’s first three years outside the EU. Make no mistake, if he has started to change his mind, others are not far behind. It is only a matter of time before Brexit is reversed.
The meeting was held at Ditchley Park in Oxfordshire on Thursday and Friday last week, after three terrible years of falling trade, investment and GDP. Other attendees are said to include former Tory party leader Michael Howard, Norman Lamont and Gisela Stuart of the Vote Leave campaign. From industry, John Symonds, chair of GlaxoSmithKline; Oliver Robbins, former chief Brexit negotiator; Tom Scholar, former Treasury permanent secretary; and Angus Lapsley, NATO assistant secretary general for defence policy and planning.
The report quotes a source who was present and claimed "it was a 'constructive meeting' that addressed the problems and opportunities of Brexit but which dwelt heavily on the economic downside to the UK economy at a time of global instability and rising energy prices."
“The main thrust of it was that Britain is losing out, that Brexit is not delivering, our economy is in a weak position,” said the source. “It was about moving on from leave and remain, and what are the issues we now have to face, and how can we get into the best position in order to have a conversation with the EU about changes to the UK-EU trade and cooperation agreement when that happens?”
Essentially, we are back to 2017-18, faced with the same options that we were offered in Barnier's stairway to Brexit, all of which we rejected.
There is still zero realism among any of them. What possible incentive does the EU or any member state have in finding ways to ‘make Brexit work better’? We have left the EU. They are now only interested in developing the UK as a market for their goods. Are they really expecting the EU to start making concessions in 2023 that they wouldn’t make in 2020? Do they think Brussels will be happy to help a competitor over the next few difficult years so that Britain can emerge as a low-tax, low-regulation threat to them afterward?
The sheer naïveté is stunning.
To remind us, this is the stairway:
So, what are we going to give up? Is the independent trade policy destined to be junked? An association agreement like Ukraine needs ECJ oversight, the Swiss deal required FoM and payments into the EU budget and membership of the EEA requires all of the foregoing.
What tells me the whole exercise is futile is the source who says it isn't about leave or remain, that we have 'moved on' from that. Oh no we haven't, as they will soon find out.
The Guardian has seen some papers from the meeting and they say:
"Stating that 'rejoining the EU will not be on the agenda', the summit papers nonetheless stressed that the EU and UK “have shared interests on containing Russian aggression, developing new sources of energy and building major technology companies with their capital base on our side of the Atlantic, rather than just the US”, as well as common defence interests."
"It also raised questions about forging closer links with the EU on tackling organised crime, illegal immigration and defence, and raised the possibility of a joint EU-UK policy towards China, asking: 'What are the prospects for a fully coordinated policy on dealing with China?'."
We are still talking to ourselves. And note these are not trade-related issues and will have zero impact on the man or woman in the street or on Britain's productivity or GDP. When trade is mentioned this is what is reported:
"Much of the focus of the meeting was on how a Labour or Tory government would use a scheduled review of the Brexit trade and cooperation agreement 'to reduce the some the current frictions' that have seriously damaged UK exports to the EU in particular.
"Labour, which has said it will not take the UK back into the EU, the single market or customs union, has, however, already committed to using the 2025 review of the TCA to try to reduce trade barriers.
"According to the timetable of the meeting, the opening session was headed: “How might the trade and cooperation agreement be optimised now and amended later? How might trade and services between the UK and Europe be better managed?"
Britain and its leaders are still of the mindset that thinks the EU is going to allow a lot of future cherry-picking of the single market.
The Guardian says, "The highly unusual cross-party nature of the gathering of Brexit opponents – and the seniority of those who agreed to attend – reflects a growing acceptance among politicians in the two main parties, as well as business leaders and civil servants, that Brexit in its current form is damaging the UK economy and reducing its strategic influence in the world."
The meeting heard that in Brussels there was “little interest in further wrangling over Brexit and little time being devoted to the relationship with the UK … there is also clear European as well as British strategic interest in a productive and closer relationship.”
If they think we are going to go into fresh talks with the EU on the basis of trading defence and security cooperation for greater access to the single market, I fear they will all be just as disappointed as Cameron, May and Johnson were before them.
But it's a small sign that at last a bit of realism might be coming soon. The next stage is to stop telling the EU what's good for them.
