Michel Barnier must be one of the busiest men in Europe right now. Everybody it seems wants to meet him, to talk to him and presumably to try and influence this always impressive, rather suave, urbane former French politician and now Brussels bureaucrat. To give you some idea of how important he has become, on 17th July an entire Lords Select Committee went to Brussels to meet him and collect "oral evidence" from him. This is the mountain going to Mohammed.
Giving evidence to a Select Committee would be a daunting experience for most people. But not for M Barnier. Looking through the transcript (HERE) he is simply repeating what he has been saying publicly for over a year. Yet, he never seems to become exasperated, he simply goes on carefully explaining the EU's position like a special needs teaching assistant to a group of particularly slow learners. I do not believe he said a single thing that was new or that came as a surprise to me.
Why they had to go to Brussels I really do not know. Perhaps it was for the chocolate.
A few extracts:
On Northern Ireland
We made a proposal exceptionally to include Northern Ireland in our customs territory to avoid a hard border and to ask, as far as necessary, for a certain amount of regulatory alignment. We are prepared to work on that backstop, to amend it. I will do everything I can with my team to take the drama out of this—you are talking about technical controls. Many of these things already exist and are implemented in Northern Ireland for products that come from the rest of the United Kingdom into
Northern Ireland. That is a practical, technical basis. It is not ideology; it should not be seen as threatening the unity of the United Kingdom or the constitutional order of your country, which we respect. That is the basis on which we are working, but it takes two to work on the subject properly; we cannot do it alone. I repeat: as negotiators for the European Union, we are very concerned.
On Aviation
You are leaving the single sky; if we want British Airways flights to be able to take off from and land in Europe, there has to be a specific agreement on aviation
On Equivalence for the financial sector
Last week, I was in the US for five days, in New York and Washington. I met many stakeholders. It is a system that works well with the US. Two hundred equivalence decisions for American, Japanese and other financial markets have been concluded. I do not see why what works very well with the Americans would not work well with the UK
On the UK becoming a Third Country
I need to flag up the guidance provided by the European Council. It is a reality: a third country will not be in a situation equivalent to or better than that of a member of the European Union. The best relationship with the European Union that can be hoped for is to be a member of the European Union. The next best is to be like Norway in the European Economic Area, which requested membership of the single market. Each and every model of co-operation has a balance of rights and obligations. We will be vigilant in protecting the integrity and indivisibility of the four freedoms of the single market. We shall have to find a way to ensure a level playing field, particularly with respect to state aid and competition.
On the EU 27 and future decision making
Something that will be very important for the 27 Heads of State and Government and the European Parliament is respecting the autonomous decision-making of the 27. We respect your right to leave the European Union and your red lines, and we ask you in turn to respect the independence of our own decision-making. We will talk in terms of partnership and co-operation, but not of co-decision, on all the economic and foreign policy-type matters.
On the Chequers white paper
The White Paper is a starting point; it is not the landing zone.
On Trade
Our President [Juncker] and President Tusk are in Japan today signing the trade agreement with Japan, a very important agreement between the 28 and Japan, an agreement that you will then leave, that you will wish to leave, in March next year. For whatever reason, you will leave that agreement as you will leave all the other EU trade agreements. To be perfectly frank, none of these agreements has ever prevented a member state developing its commercial activities. Look at Germany. Being part of the EU trade policy or the euro has not prevented it being “global Germany”
On the customs partnership
Michel Barnier: [In answer to a question from Baroness Falkner] I do not think that you have understood me correctly, Baroness. I have said that we could imagine an ambitious FTA to which one could add a customs partnership, so I have not rejected a customs partnership. But there will be conditions: in particular, the coherence of our commercial policies. So I have not rejected that. I think you are also confusing this customs union or customs partnership, on which there was a positive vote in the House of Lords, with regulatory alignment. You talk about regulatory alignment for products. I am talking about regulatory alignment in all areas, because products are to a considerable extent manufactured with services. We will not accept unfair competition in services with the European economy. That is not possible. Regulatory alignment must take place everywhere. You cannot just take part of the single market that interests you and maintain the capacity to engage in regulatory competition in other parts, which is what you read in certain parts of the White Paper and which worries us, as it says that the British Parliament will retain the freedom to modify the rules.
On Galileo
I have seen all the debate and argument about security related to Galileo, for example. I listened to it and I think it is terribly sad, because there is nothing polemic about it. By leaving the European Union you are leaving Galileo. That is a decision that your country took. We have to work hard to find a form of partnership with the United Kingdom on Galileo on a different basis, and we will find a partnership; some way to enable your country to use the signals, including the most sensitive signal, which is the defence-related PRS signal.
So, Groundhog day for Barnier goes on. The EU produce negotiating guidelines setting out their agreed position, simple graphics are produced, notices to stakeholders are released. Barnier makes speeches in public all across Europe and answers reporters questions. He meets with individuals and groups from all over the EU, diplomats, politicians, industrialists. He explains it all repeatedly.
Then a Select Committee from the UK arrives and he has to begin all over again.
