The 23 June 2016 EU membership referendum in the UK was followed by the emergence of two large tribal groupings of British people: triumphant Brexiters, some of who now claim to have made the wrong call, and dejected Remainers, many of whom have since become Rejoiners. Subsequent events and disclosures of background activity suggest that a deficit of thoughtful planning and a lack of attention to detail may have bedevilled the Brexit project from its very outset. In the run-up to implementation, on 17 January 2017, PM Theresa May set out twelve priorities for Brexit in a speech at Lancaster House, informing her audience that “no deal is better than a bad deal”, although some now appear to be subscribing to the view that the latter is what we might have actually ended up with. But we live in eternal hope, leaving it to a recently appointed Minister for Brexit Opportunities to reassure the British public as he diligently searches for the “green shoots” of post-Brexit reconstruction.
The UK, a ‘Reluctant European’ nation, voluntarily left the “biggest player on the global trading scene” to regain its national sovereignty, thereby asserting control of its borders and its finances, enforcing its own laws and regulations, recouping £350 million a week for the NHS, and to forestalling an expected massive influx of immigrants from Turkiye (aka Turkey) if it was ever admitted to the EU. The UK’s preferential treatment as an EU member, in terms of opt-outs (monetary union, Schengen Accord on free movement, Social Chapter of Charter of Fundamental Rights), rebates, exceptions, and veto rights, was not enough inducement to keep it within the union.
To best judge the effect of Brexit, it is useful, wherever possible, to unpick those processes which are primarily related to withdrawal from the EU from those that are related to the COVID-19 pandemic. First and foremost, departure from the European single market has abolished the freedom of movement of goods, capital, services, and people between the UK and EU. The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement 2020 is a zero-tariff and zero-quota trade deal, but non-tariff barriers have restricted frictionless trade in goods between the UK and its erstwhile European partners, reducing both exports and imports and inflicting an “economic shock”. A system of licences and certificates on exported goods, which are expected to comply with rules of origin and EU product standards, has introduced bureaucratic hurdles in the path of UK-EU trade. Businesses trading with the EU face extra paperwork and administrative costs in the form of export declarations, security declarations, VAT requirements, rules of origin and other regulatory checks, such as health certificates, which has affected small- and medium-sized businesses the most. Some businesses have opted out of trade with the EU to reduce their operating costs. EU regulations on sanitary and phytosanitary products (SPS controls) of animal and plant origin have particularly affected exports of meat and meat products, dairy products (milk, cheese), and perishable products with a short-shelf life, such as fresh fish and shellfish. Supply chain problems have even extended to healthcare products, including medicines (human and animal), medical devices, and medical isotopes.
Problems with the Northern Ireland Protocol have led to British attempts to unilaterally redraft sections of the protocol to remove barriers to trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland has been aligned with EU single market regulations covering agricultural products, food, and manufactured goods until 2025, thereby avoiding customs checks and a physical border infrastructure along the land border within the island of Ireland. This has added to the cost of trading goods from Great Britain to Northern Ireland. The UK government has most recently responded with the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, which seeks to create a “green channel” for exports destined to remain in Northern Ireland and a “red channel” for products heading for Republic of Ireland and also offers Northern Irish businesses the option of selling goods that comply with either UK or EU rules. It is not surprising that the European Commission initiated legal action against the UK government on 15 June 2022 for an alleged breach of international law. Damage to the UK’s reputation seems inevitable and trade wars with the EU likely if the bill ever becomes law.
Trade with a protectionist EU also comes with strings attached, which the UK is seeking to untie as it develops and enforce its own laws and regulations. The EU demands regulatory alignment and a level playing field, with EU laws overriding UK laws on matters of environmental protection, food safety, competition policy, state aid for industries (subsidies), workers’ rights, and copyright and patent law, among others.
The loss of the automatic right of EU citizens to live and work in the UK has depleted the supply of labour in some sectors of the British economy, exposing its reliance on EU workers in the agricultural, construction, retail, hospitality, transportation, professional, and financial services sectors. National ID cards are no longer valid for travel into the UK, affecting inbound tourism and discouraging certain categories of students, including those studying the English language, for whom Ireland is a suitable option. The points-based immigration system extends to all EU citizens, except those from the Republic of Ireland, and disadvantages much needed but low-skilled workers, while increasing numbers of study and work visas have been granted to people from outside the EU.
The UK has lost its access to several European institutions, including the European Medicines Agency (EMA), European Banking Authority (EBA), European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), and the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA). The EMA has since relocated to Amsterdam and the EBA has found a new home in Paris. The UK has also forfeited its membership of Europol, Eurojust, the European Arrest Warrant, and real-time sensitive data-sharing agreements such as the Schengen Information System (SIS2), an EU-wide security database covering criminal records of wanted persons, as well as DNA, fingerprint, and vehicle registration data. On the other hand, many welcome the fact that the UK is no longer subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, except in certain matters related to the Northern Ireland Protocol.
Collaborative medical and scientific projects have suffered. The Erasmus + programme, which enabled student exchanges, school links, work experience, and apprenticeships, has been replaced by the Turing Scheme from September 2021. The UK’s continued participation in three major research programmes- Horizon Europe scientific research programme (associate membership-not ratified), Copernicus Earth observation programme, and Euratom- is also under threat.
Plans for “Singapore-on-Thames” have had to be put on hold. A Memorandum of Understanding between the EU and UK, allowing unfettered access to financial markets in the EU has yet to materialise, requiring as it does the equivalence of regulated services, such as insurance, auditing, exchanges, investment. Financial services relocated jobs to mainland Europe to ensure access to the EU single market.
Depending on your perspective, Brexit is either a qualified success, with work in progress, or an unmitigated disaster, that needs to be undone. As the latest chapter in this saga plays out, it is increasingly clear that this is process is likely to be drawn out for the foreseeable future, and that some economic pain may be a justifiable cost for those who remain committed to a life outside the EU.
Ashis Banerjee