Now that a little time has been allowed to digest what Keir Starmer’s EU ‘reset’ actually means, it has to be said it is looking far less impressive than when it was first being spun – and far more costly than the Government’s supporters care to admit.
What are we meant to be getting from it? The claim about making EU e-gates available for travel to the continent unravelled within a day when it was found that this is not decided by the EU, but at the national level (and even then, mostly by the airports themselves). The EU e-gate system changes in October anyway when fingerprint and face recognition will be introduced – who knows which lanes will be quickest in the end?
The possible benefit of ending EU mobile phone roaming charges never surfaced because it was held back by the Commission after Italy and Spain rather conveniently objected.
The European Food Safety Agreement that is intended to apply to UK food and agriculture alongside acceptance of the EU’s veterinary standards is meant to make movement of foods easier – but this has still to be negotiated and may yet take years. Cheers from the large supermarkets and seed potato suppliers now look premature – while it is obvious that some of the UK’s higher animal welfare standards intended to prevent the importation of diseases such as bluetongue and foot and mouth will be weakened.
Likewise, the ban on export of animals for slaughter will have to be dropped, as will restrictions on animal by-products going into animal feed and any proposed ban on foie gras – unless exemptions not yet conceded are granted. Nothing yet has been pinned down. The likelihood of EU inspectors calling on UK farms and the British taxpayer paying for the privilege is also a genuine prospect – but again we are yet to be told. Last week, we had the absurd scene of Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn celebrating in Brussels the ‘benefits’ of a Sanitary and Phytosanitary veterinary agreement that has not yet been seen, never mind introduced.
The same goes for the whole reset. No formally lodged legal texts are available to analyse. Starmer and Ursula von der Leyen have simply shaken hands around slogans and soundbites without explaining in any detail what they have agreed to. The truth is the UK has conceded £1 billion of fish annually (until 2038) and the principle of payments to EU budgets simply to talk about the details of the benefits the UK will gain.
Changes that will happen in principle include the UK joining the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) – but this will immediately raise prices in the UK. There will be increased energy prices for business and purchasers of our own goods – and new tariffs on imports from countries such as India, which were about to be brought down at least in the mainland due to the UK-India trade deal. This type of inconsistency across UK Government policy is a common feature of the undefined ‘reset’.
A Youth Exchange Scheme was supported by both the UK Government and EU Commission, but again the detail has yet to be worked out and the EU’s ‘ask’ keeps getting bigger.
The ‘youth’ age range originally suggested was 18-35, but the EU is pressing for an upper limit of 40 – opening up immigration for over 100m EU applicants – creating massive unfunded demands on housing, schools and the NHS. With a minimum wage of under £3 in Bulgaria and just over £12 in the UK, the prospect of the take-up being mostly one-way from the EU is real. As most young Britons want to go to English-speaking countries such as the US, Canada and Australia, the question is why should we agree to it at all?
The EU wants no access fee for using the NHS, as is charged to Australians (£776-£1,035) and easy access to UK higher education at domestic not international tuition fee levels (meaning it would be subsidised by UK taxpayers).
Even the possibility of a defence agreement has not been worked out in detail and remains highly contentious, as it requires the UK to underwrite 15% of the €150m budget but claims above that are prevented. Participating in the Security Action for Europe scheme would forbid US/Anglosphere procurement, forcing the UK to purchase French/EU weapons but limiting the UK participation to no more than 35% of value (creating a market of 65% value for EU arms manufacturers).
Having teased the British people with quick-fire trade deals with the US and then India that lowered tariffs and offered lower consumer prices, Starmer has accepted ‘dynamic alignment’ that will introduce new EU non-tariff barriers to trading with those countries. It makes no sense to do both and must inevitably mean a falling out with the US and the likelihood of higher tariffs being reintroduced.
The incoherence of Starmer’s approach is best illustrated by him continuing with Wes Streeting’s Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which is currently winding its way through Westminster. The Bill will not apply in Northern Ireland, despite ministerial assurances to the contrary when pressed by Jim Allister MP. As several Lords pointed out in the Bill’s Second Reading, it is the EU’s Tobacco Products Directive that applies in Northern Ireland (as it does in the Republic of Ireland).
Interestingly, the view of the Irish Government is the Bill’s generational ban on tobacco sales is incompatible with EU law, so that provision cannot apply in the province. Why then continue with the Bill rather than drop it and apply dynamic alignment with the EU directive? Only last month, Labour paused the application of legislation introducing a 9pm watershed and online advertising ban for foods with high fat, sugar and salt content, so why not pause the Bill?
The case for pausing is even stronger in Northern Ireland, given that the UK land border with the Republic provides a ready-made smuggling route for organised crime and paramilitary groups to exploit. With Ireland looking to introduce its own ban on people under 21 smoking tobacco, the potential for additional problems around border policing arises.
Looking at Keir Starmer’s undefined reset in the round, it is hard to see anything substantial that will definitively remove the difficulties created by the Windsor Agreement. Claims about easier movement of goods or foods appear premature.
With further negotiations likely to result in more concessions by Starmer, the slow immersion of the UK into the EU by the hostage taking of Northern Ireland is set to continue.
Click here to subscribe to our daily briefing – the best pieces from CapX and across the web.
CapX depends on the generosity of its readers. If you value what we do, please consider making a donation.
