Before I discussed the fact that the lack of border be default allows free movement of people, which crosses one of the red lines for Brexit.
Okay, here's some more.
Over at ConHome in the comments I've been challenged but not one person has been able to counter my argument. I was even thrown a handy link that one chap thought disprove my assumptions, until I plucked the paragraph out that confirmed my statements. Love it when that happens.
Anyway, the second problem with the Chequers proposal is the Primacy of EU regulation. In effect ALL goods bought and sold within the UK will have to comply with EU regulations, whether they are being sold on to the EU or not. By extension that means ALL goods imported into the UK have to comply with EU regs.
That last point effectively kills any independent trade agreements, because we will not have the ability to diverge from EU regs in areas that don't involve trade with the EU. Might as well stay in and let the EU do the negotiating on our behalf. At least that way we have some form of voice in the process.
But we can't for instance do a deal with the USA to allow importation of FCC certified radios under some mutual regulatory framework. Nope, it's EU standards or nothing.
No freedom to negotiate trade agreements. Isn't that a red line?
The next problem is that fact that only 15% of our economy is earned by trade with the EU. But that 15% determines the rules and regulations for the other 85%. It's like the tail wagging the dog.
All our local shopkeeprs that have never and will never trade with the EU will be subject to EU rules and regulations. It's effectively the EU imposing a cost (a tariff) on trade within the UK.
All the products sold within the UK will have to conform to EU standards and will be able to be sold legally even if they are inferior to the applicable British Standard, thanks to the continuing primacy of EU law and adherence to EU standards.
Why should Becky at the hardressers be forced to use EU standard goods, when she is not trading with the EU? Why should she be forced to use EU-compliant goods when other goods may be cheaper? Why should her business be forced to pay over the odds (effectively a tariff imposed by the EU) to trade within the UK?
Why should taxpayers pay a tariff to access the EU at all? Why can't businesses that trade directly with the EU finance their own compliance verification process and leave the 85% of the country out of it?
Why should the old lady that bakes cakes to be sold at the church fete have to be inspected for compliance to EU food hygiene regulations?
Are our own regulatory bodies like British Standards not able to create decent standards?
Primacy of EU laws and regulations over UK ones. Isn'ty that another red line?
No divergence from EU standards possible. Isn't that a third red line?
Tariffs imposed on trading within the UK by the EU, surely another red line?
I should read the rest of the Chequers proposal, but really aren't there enough red lines to reject it already?
The serious prospect of Reform as viable opposition?
-
… and as such … govt.
Two ex-Tories discussing Reform, Miriam Cates current Tory … to be expected
… however … that does not negate the clear issues with...
15 hours ago
No comments:
Post a Comment