Professor Steve Peers
Tomorrow sees another general
election in the UK, just two years after the last one. Since this is (according
to the Prime Minister) an election on Brexit, it seems appropriate to review
the parties’ views on this issue, including future UK/EU relations. I will
examine the parties’ views in turn – focussing on larger UK-wide parties plus
(due to its political importance) the Scottish National Party. The final
section is an overview and comparison.
Conservatives
The Tory manifesto position on
Brexit is largely a summary of the position set out in the Brexit White Paper
(discussed here),
and the planned Great Repeal Bill (discussed here),
which would keep EU law as part of ‘UK law’ for the time being. Essentially,
the Tories believe that the future UK/EU relationship should be based on a free
trade deal without ‘vast’ payments into the EU budget or free movement of
persons. Participation in the customs union and internal market would end, and
there are some details about the transition to full separate UK participation
in the World Trade Organisation. There’s an objective of continuing security cooperation
with the EU, but the details are not spelled out.
Some fair settlement of UK
accounts would be made upon departure from the EU, but the Tory policy is ‘no
deal is better than a bad deal’ – without spelling that position out further.
Fortunately, the UKIP manifesto (discussed below) addresses this point. Unlike
UKIP, the Tories do not attempt to ‘sell’ the no-deal scenario – which is just
as well considering the concerns about its potential economic
damage. Rather there is much discussion of what the positive outcomes of a deal would be.
Future immigration policy would
retain an objective of net immigration below 100,000 – which would entail
reducing non-EU migration (an issue largely outside the scope of EU law for the
UK) as well. This would include further restricting the number of foreign students
and family members, despite promises from the Leave side made during the
referendum campaign to make it easier to admit UK citizens’ non-EU family
members.
Labour
Labour accepts the result of the
referendum but sets out in more detail than the Conservatives what the future
UK/EU relationship would look like. It
supports continued relations with Euratom and the single energy market, plus
wants to maintain the ‘benefits’ of the single market and customs union without
explaining how. Other
remarks from the party suggest that it opposes continued participation as
such in the single market and customs union, and opposes free movement of
persons continuing.
Labour reject the ‘no-deal’
option, support a transitional deal, and list a number of areas where they
still wish to cooperate with the EU: research programmes, Erasmus, Europol,
Eurojust, the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), climate and anti-terrorism
cooperation. They have a different
policy from the Tories on future family migration, as they would waive the
strict income requirements for family members rather than tighten them. (There
would still be a requirement not to use public funds). They would ‘guarantee
existing rights’ of EU citizens in the UK. They set out in detail their future
trade policy, insisting on links between trade and other concerns like the
environment and human and labour rights.
Liberal Democrats
The LibDems aim for a referendum
on the final Brexit deal, and support continued membership of the EU single
market (including free movement of people) and customs union. They make
specific reference to staying in Erasmus, preserving social and environmental
rights, and participating in Europol, the EAW, EU databases, EU research funds,
the European health card, abolition of roaming fees, and pat passports. Like
Labour, they suggest links in between human rights and the environment in
future trade deals. LibDems also give some detail on the position of EU
citizens in the UK:
Greens
Similar to the LibDems, Greens
propose a referendum on the final Brexit deal, and seek to continue with free
movement and the single market. They also wish to guarantee EU citizens’
rights, retain social and environmental safeguards, and link trade deals to
other standards.
Scottish National Party
The SNP manifesto views on Brexit
reiterate its two key positions: Scotland, or the UK as a whole, to stay in the
single market (previously discussed here),
and a Scottish independence referendum when the terms of Brexit are known (previously
discussed here).
They also repeat their support for guaranteeing EU citizens’ rights.
UKIP
Finally, that brings us to the
UKIP manifesto. This manifesto gives us an indication of how the ‘no-deal’
scenario hinted at in the Conservative manifesto might play out. UKIP opposes
the use of the Article 50 procedure to negotiate with the EU, focussing instead
on the purely domestic law change of repealing the European Communities Act. They still aspire to a free trade deal
with the EU, however, although they are indifferent to whether they get one –
since they also promise to spend the £11 billion “windfall” from tariffs on EU
goods. There’s no acknowledgement of the effects on the UK economy of this
scenario: indeed, they argue that talk of a “cliff
edge” from leaving the EU without a trade deal is “hyperbole”, since trade will
still continue. This ignores the obvious prospect that the level of trade will decrease if tariffs and non-tariff barriers are
imposed. While they reject the single market and customs union, they want EU/UK
trade to continue “on the same basis as present”.
In any event, UKIP not only
refuse to make any payment upon departure, they expect the UK to receive a sum from the EU as it leaves.
Moreover, they pledge to oppose the existence of customs unions like the EU in
the World Trade Organisations – even though the WTO expressly provides for the
existence of customs unions, and (as UKIP even acknowledge) the EU is a WTO
member in its own right.
Overall then, UKIP expects to
receive all the current trade benefits of EU membership, with none of the
perceived drawbacks, plus a payment on the way out. All of this while refusing
to use the official departure route and campaigning to end the EU’s existence
as a customs union and WTO member. If you seek a visual metaphor for how UKIP
sees the world, imagine their leader Paul Nuttall – a star football player in
his own mind - repeatedly scoring penalties over the heads of 27 massed
goalkeepers.
UKIP’s rage against the dying of their
light deserves one final paragraph. Their immigration policy includes not just
an unreal zero migration target, but also a demand that new immigrants observe
UK “values” to be admitted. This from a party who have continually disregarded
the basic British values of tolerance, equality and fair play: members have referred
to gays
causing floods, and repeatedly insulted minorities.
Indeed, after the last European Parliament election, to receive EU money UKIP did
a deal with a party whose leader denies the Holocaust, and claims that women
are inferior and obtain their political beliefs via biological transmission
from the men they have sexual intercourse with. Clearly, politics’ loss is gynaecology’s
gain.
Overview
There are two broad categories of
opinion on the EU in this election, but also important differences within each
group. The Liberal Democrats, Greens and SNP want to continue participation in
the single market as well as a number of other EU policies. Moreover, all three
parties want to offer the option of continued EU membership – the LibDems and
Greens by means of a UK-wide referendum on the final deal, and the SNP by means
of a referendum on Scottish independence.
The Conservatives, Labour and
UKIP all favour departure from the UK without the single market, the customs
union and free movement of persons, and aim instead for a free trade deal with
the EU. However, these similarities soon end. Like the first group of parties, Labour would
guarantee EU citizens’ rights (in fact, it supports guaranteeing their existing rights, an important nuance),
and would seek participation in a number of specific EU measures. The Tories
are considerably cooler and less detailed on these issues, and are willing to
contemplate a ‘no-deal’ scenario, although they cannot bring themselves to ‘sell’
it. Labour would welcome foreign families and students; the Tories see them as
numbers to be reduced.
UKIP offers voters not just one
fantasy, but a choice of two fantasies: either a problem-free ‘no-deal’
scenario, or a deal with all of the benefits and none of the supposed drawbacks
of EU membership, with a gold watch for UK service to the EU thrown in for good
measure. Of course, some would argue that UKIP’s fantasies are simply more
explicit than Labour’s or the Conservatives’ – since the EU has made clear in
its negotiating position that it is not possible to retain all benefits of the
single market for a former Member State which leaves it.
Voters may not wish to make
Brexit the main reason for their vote, or may in any event choose to cast a
tactical vote against a party they dislike, rather than vote for a party which
they most agree with but which has no chance of winning their seat. But it can
hardly be said that all parties take the same view on Brexit issues, and the
summary above makes clear that for those whose concern is Brexit first and
foremost, there is a lot at stake in this election.
Barnard & Peers: chapter 27
Photo credit: BBC
No comments:
Post a Comment