Michel Barnier has been addressing a conference in Brussels at the Centre for European Reform, and making it clear that the question of how close we intend to remain to European practice will determine the kind of deal the EU is prepared to offer. You can read the entire speech (HERE). It's the old divergence thing again. The Guardian report it HERE and the Telegraph HERE.
The speech contains a lot of home truths for Brexiteers and I would encourage everyone to read it. If only we had politicians who think as clearly. But back to divergence, this will be absolutely central to the trade talks and will have to result in a clear, written agreement setting out how far the UK will be allowed to diverge from EU norms and standards. Barnier himself says, "For the first time ever in trade talks, the challenge will be to limit divergence of rules rather than maximise convergence". In other words we will be attempting something never tried before in a very limited time. Convergence is a known destination but divergence is infinite - how much divergence do you want? It will be a minor miracle if this is concluded by 2021.
It is blindingly obvious that Europe will never tolerate a low regulation, low tax economy on its doorstep. I seriously question if a majority, or anything like a majority, in this country would support it either. But in spite of all this, and knowing that EU diplomats read our press avidly, Owen Paterson has an article in The Telegraph (HERE) extolling the "advantages" of the Singapore model and this is directly in response to Barnier's speech. This can only create more problems and is a complete waste of time. No serious political party would propose it and the British people would never accept it if they did. It would be political suicide.
But we are already starting to diverge. Last week the House of Commons voted that animals were not capable of feeling pain or emotions, that they were not "sentient beings" (HERE) The majority of animal welfare legislation comes from the EU. The UK Government is supposed to be adopting EU laws directly after March 2019 but has dismissed animal sentience saying this clause is covered by the Animal Welfare Act 2006 although the RSPCA disputed the Government’s claim.
Now the question of incorporating The Charter of Fundamental Rights is coming up for debate today with the government wanting to exclude it from being embedded in UK law (HERE). There is substantial opposition from those who want to keep it but no guarantee it will be retained. We shall see later.
However, what is clear is the direction of travel. The government is already trying to water down EU law. What the EU will make of it? I can't see this helping any future trade bill.
