What's happening in Europe

 

Eng

繁體

简体

Brexit state of play: Problems in getting Britain out of the European Union

The British have never felt European, except in the sense that they are mostly white and Christian. Even the UK's official religion, the Church of England, is less Protestant than it is simply un-Catholic, sharing virtually the same liturgy and ceremonies except that allegiance to Rome.

Britain only joined Europe in 1973 when it was called it’s the European Economic Community (EEC). It was accepted as a customs union - that's all. Only hotheads said it was really a scheme to create a new country and turn Britain into a province.

To be fair, there were anti-monarchists, disloyalists, who favoured such outcomes as a societal direction. A growing number of state-paid people from top civil servants to welfare recipients liked the idea too. In the short term at least it meant easy money. Big business, having become more institutional than entrepreneurial, was fearful of poor returns any disruption might cause - so preferred the devil they knew and not the Brexit devil about which they knew nothing.

Powerful as these constituencies were and are, they did not constitute a majority. As the European Commission, the unelected cabinet of the European Union, discovered in their "Eurobarometer" opinion poll, a full 64 per cent of British respondents did not see themselves as European at all, but exclusively British. Only 31 per cent saw themselves as primarily British and secondarily European.

What's more the British were only ones in the pan-EU survey - and by a two third's majority - to self-identify exclusively as their own nationality with little if any affinity for Europe.

Cypriots and Greeks were the only ones to be exclusively nationally-minded by a bare majority. At the other end of the spectrum, only 25 per cent of Germans would chiefly self-identify as German, far preferring to be considered European - trailed only by Luxembourgers at 17 per cent, Spaniards at 28 per cent, Belgians at 31 per cent, French by 36 per cent, Poles by 42 per cent, Austrian by 43 per cent and the Irish by 43 per cent.

When it came to voting to leave the EU on June 23 last year that majority narrowed to 52-48 per cent to leave the European Union, immediatedly after which, the anti-Brexit Prime Minister David Cameron resigned and Prime Minister Theresa May took over, vowing to move briskly to divorce Britain from Europe.

But it's been far from brisk. The first round of Article 50 negotiations, which trigger departure under EU rules, took place on June 19 this year. Both parties agreed to create working groups on citizens' rights, the financial settlement and other separation issues.

Months of acrimonious Brexit talks followed, and to leave the EU in April 2019. There is much emphasis on a hard versus soft divorce outcomes in public prints, with some arguing disingenuously for a soft outcome, but really seeking reconcilliation. Cosmopolitan Londoners voted to remain, guided by business interests, whose view of the future is largely concerned with the fate of the next few quarters, pointing to jittery markets as evidence of Brexit's folly. Sparsely populated Scotland and Northern Ireland, where a disproportionate numbers of state paid people live, were also pro-EU whence easy money comes.

But more densely populated and entrepreneurial England and Wales were for leaving the EU, fearing the influx of Muslims, the lack of control over the laws that their elected government has in the European system.

Two obstacles are in the way of a quick departure: First, there is a matter of settling the exit bill to be paid to Europe and, second, defining future trade relations.

European negotiators, knowing how close the Brexit vote was, have made it as difficult as possible to leave in the hope that opinion will change, and the desire to leave the EU will fade.

The size of the bill is uncertain. A year ago, London's Financial Times said European Commission was seeking EUR60 billion (US$72 billion), based on comments by Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator. In February, the Centre for European Reform (CER) said the bill would come to EUR25.3 billion. Most recently, the Financial Times, put the net bill at EUR55.5 billion, based on a EUR91 billion to EUR113 billion gross figure.

Calculations are based on what Britain owes, and what can be offset. The lower EUR25 billion sum represents minimal obligations to the EU and maximum UK receipts, while the top-end EUR75 billion comes from maximising the UK's obligations and minimising its receipts.

British obligations can be put under various headings: Outstanding budget commitments, pensions, contingent liabilities and other costs.

Also there is another point of dispute, that is the current EU budget period runs from 2014-20, finishing a year after the UK's exit. The UK is willing to fund budget commitments up until April 2019, but the commission insists on full budget term payment.

Then there is the pension issue. The UK seeks to pay the pension of each Briton employed, substantially lowering the bill due to the under-representation of British officials. But the commission opposes this.

Then there are contingent liabilities, such as payments that would be triggered in specific circumstances like the Ukraine defaulting on an EU loan. The EU's latest approach calls for a lump-sum payment to cover this - EUR9.2 billion.

Ever fearful of change, British shipping and port executives warn the government that a two-year transition period after Brexit will not be long enough to ensure "frictionless" trade with the Continent.

David Dingle, the chairman of Maritime UK, which represents marine and shipping industries, said he was "very nervous" about the future and concerned the government was putting EUR6 billion worth of business in jeopardy with threats of no Brexit deal.

His concerns stemmed, he said, from the reality of developing new customs declarations systems in time to prevent gridlock at ports and their approach roads.

At a briefing Mr Dingle said it had taken HM Revenue and Customs 10 years to put its latest customs declaration system in place. It is due to go live in October, suggesting a Brexit system will take many years to put in place.

What has the British freight sector quailing is the loss of the business-as-usual-life of which the shipping community has become accustomed for more than four decades. If you are not in your 60s, you have known of no other world, and tend to fear an international trading environment that looks like the law of the jungle governed by the increasingly flouted rules of a weakening World Trade Organisation (WTO), itself resisting growing protectionism.

Former WTO chief Pascal Lamy divided the Brexit problem into three categories: things that will be simple, things that will be more complex and things that will be really complex.

He said the creation of a free trade deal would be simple, a "no brainer" in which there would be zero tariffs so that integrated supply chains did not suffer.

But negotiations between Washington and Brussels for a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) ran aground on the shoals of differing technical standards. These have largely replaced tariffs as trade barriers. Trade talks today are dominated by such things.

Difficulties are enormous, but the will to escape the clutches of the European Union is strong. Even into today's badly educated Englishman with little sense of his own history and traditions, has a residual sense of not being part Europe as EU opinion polls show.

There is a pride in British liberties, and a distrust of Europe, and knowing that habeas corpus, trial by jury and the presumption of innocence are English legal concepts, enshrined in custom even before Magna Carta received Royal Assent in 1215. And thus there is a profound distrust of a Europe that can replace these rights and liberties by a few highly rescindable EU Directives.

Thus, it may be expected that most Englishmen will seek to preserve their "sceptred isle set in the silver sea as a moat defensive to a house against the envy of less happier lands" and stay the difficult course to a new life among the free and independent nations of the world.

And in case this sounds dreamy, it is good to remember that Norway and Switzerland refused to join the European Union and are no worse off for their decision.

Norway and Switzerland are both in the top 10 per capita income earners. Only Luxembourg, San Marino and oil-rich states such as Qatar, Brunei and Kuwait top them - compared to Britain which ranks 25th worldwide and 13th in Europe.

And despite UK unemployment being at its lowest rate in a decade - well below the EU average - unemployment is lower still in Norway and Switzerland.

* - Indicate required field(s).
Knowing what you do, and feeling the way you do, what do you think will happen to the United Kingdom in the next three years?

* Message :

* Email :  

 

Europe Trade Specialists

Globelink Int'l Freight Forwarding (HK) Ltd.
In Unity, We Link The Globe!
More....
Greencarrier Asia Ltd.
Yes, it's possible!
More....
AEL-Berkman Forwarding (HK) Ltd.
Global Logistics, Personal Support
More....
MBS Logistics (Shanghai) Limited
Your World's Local Forwarder
More....
Worldex Logistics Qingdao Co., Ltd.
Logistics Service Provider
More....
Panda Logistics Co., Ltd. Qingdao Branch
Ever-lasting operation & profit sharing
More....