A smooth Brexit

Latest figures show retail sales up, average earnings up, employment up  and continued economic growth. The fear of Brexit or the run up to the vote did not depress the economy in the way forecast. It is good news that bonds are so strong, and shares have rallied after an initial relapse. Government needs to instil  confidence and work as it used to promote investment, job creation and economic progress.

I have been in discussion with the government about how we can best ensure a smooth and early Brexit. Most people want a speedy move. Those who want out do not wish to wait for long until the result of their vote is achieved. Many people who voted Remain did so from their professional and business backgrounds, as they worried about what the uncertainty might do to confidence and activity. Some also worried about what terms we will secure for continued trade and investment. We need to move in a purposeful and friendly way to achieve an early settlement which deals with the worries and fears of those who voted Remain.

The aim should be to secure the main point of the campaign, taking back control, as soon as possible. We have only achieved this aim when we have repealed the European Communities Act. We can also reassure and make it easier to achieve exit by taking over all the current EU laws and rules and incorporating them en bloc into UK law, so nothing else changes other than control. This should reassure our former EU partners and assist the negotiation over trade and other matters.

Once we have taken control we will need to legislate urgently to put in place the points system promised to control migration from the rest of the EU. This matter is not negotiable. We will also need to take back our contributions, so we can get on with the spending and tax plans set out in the Leave campaign.

The negotiations with the rest of the EU will centre over how many other changes they might like in our current business regulation and trading arrangements. These for choice will be agreed. The UK need not seek any changes to the current arrangements to  minimise disruption. The other 27 will need to decide amongst themselves what additional barriers if any they want to place on their trade with us, and then negotiate them with us bilaterally. I would be surprised if they wanted to impose much by way of impediments to their trade. So far they have not suggested any I have seen, other than trying to cancel the financial sector passports. I have written at length on possible  responses to this. Under World Trade organisation rules there are strict limits on tariffs on most items anyway which would keep them to low levels, well below the recent fall in the value of the pound which has improved our competitiveness.

The situation is very different from trying to negotiate a free trade agreement with a foreign country that has high tariff and non tariff barriers at the moment. There it takes time as each side weighs up the advantage of surrendering a protection it think matters, even if the protection  is in fact self defeating. This negotiation starts from free trade and common rules for some services between us and them.  The only question is therefore why change anything? What do they want to change as punishment, and is it legal to do so under global rules? Won’t it do them more damage than us? As it is more imports than exports for us there are plenty of other places around the world who would like to sell to us if the EU decides to become dearer or more difficult. Once anger has been calmed and business has lobbied them not to do damage, it should prove easier to achieve a decent answer for  both sides.

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

88 Comments

  1. The Prangwizard
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

    Where does Article 50 come into this and when is it triggered?
    Is it part of your proposal which seem eminently sensible insofar as they are described that it is not?

  2. eeyore
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

    Mr Redwood, it’s enormously encouraging to have you in there batting for Brexit. A cool head, a subtle intellect, a brave heart, high honour, stainless patriotism with no whiff of narrow nationalism, a vast knowledge of the issues – what better adviser could Britain hope for?

    A new Conservative leader and PM should be in place by September. For myself, I’d like to see this new order cemented in place by an election thereafter, because nothing would serve better to lay the angry ghosts of this deeply divisive referendum.

    If Mrs May were that person I doubt she would have sufficient appeal in the country to deliver the Tories a majority; they would then be in hock to a triumphant and aggressive UKIP with possibly 150-180 former Labour seats under their belt. Boris, on the other hand, would I believe deliver a Tory majority of 40-60, especially if Mr Gove were deputed actually to handle the Brexit negotiations as Deputy PM with his own new department.

    I understand the repugnance felt for Boris in some quarters. But he is a huge character; he contains multitudes. The buffoon, the egotist and the trickster are certainly there, but they make up only a small part of that extraordinary man.

    I humbly hope MPs will weigh matters in this light when they cast their votes for leader.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:22 am | Permalink

      Boris is has to be, he is a proven election winner and he will be more statesmanlike as PM than perhaps he was as Mayor. The idea that the boring, bossy, tedious, cowardly, (we control our borders through Schengen liar), remainer Theresa May should become leader is very worrying indeed.

      • Richard1
        Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:16 am | Permalink

        Not sure about this, is he really up to it? Those who know Boris say he is as chaotic as his image (but not as nice). I don’t mind if he’s not nice, you probably need to be ruthless to be a good PM. But we do need a real detail-oriented hard worker to get a good result from this negotiation. Of course we also want an intellectually rigorous free market Conservative. I will be interested to see who gets JR’s backing!

        • Richard1
          Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:22 am | Permalink

          I would be very happy to be disenfranchised if Conservative MPs were to decide that such is the situation now that MPs, who really know the candidates, should decide – rather than chancing the choice of PM to 150,000 people who happen to be members of the Conservative Party (average age 68?). At least it’s only the last 2 that go to the members – look at what’s happened to the Labour Party now Corbyn has turned it into a far left sect, succeeding where the Militant Tendancy failed in the 1980s!

      • Richard1
        Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:56 am | Permalink

        Gove’s the man for the hour

    • alan jutson
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:27 am | Permalink

      eeyor

      Surely we do not want a general el;action until we are well and truly out, with new terms settled.

      Why take even the smallest of a risk.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:03 am | Permalink

      I hope the new Tory leader will recognise that Leave means Leave, not find excuses to stay in the EU despite the people having voted to Leave. But I have no confidence that this will actually be the case whether it is Johnson or May or Gove or any of the other declared candidates who stand much chance of winning. The final stage will be for the members to choose between two candidates shortlisted by MPs, and very likely both of them will want to ignore the referendum result.

  3. Ken Moore
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

    Please please please please please pleeeeeeeeeeeeease don’t let another Conservative ‘moderniser’ get the top job.
    To get this chance and then for another Blair/Cameron/Osbrown clone to be leader will be too much…
    Let it be a ‘traditional’ Conservative !!

    • Ken Moore
      Posted June 29, 2016 at 11:08 pm | Permalink

      James Delingpole ‘It would be a monstrous injustice – not to mention an insult to the electorate – if, having backed the wrong horse for the most cynical of reasons, May went on to be rewarded with the highest office in the land’.

      The next leader MUST come from the Leave side.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:18 am | Permalink

        Indeed. Fortune favours the brave and then I will win my second bet too. Boris is the way to go, we need a sound, solid winner. Even if we do get an airport in the wrong place. Heathwick is the best option.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:23 am | Permalink

      Indeed we want a proper Tory not more daft Libdims like Cameron and Osborne.

  4. MikeP
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:48 pm | Permalink

    Excellent points John. I hope those ‘perhaps politicised’ Civil Servants (headed by one who was sent packing by the Home Affairs Select Committee for obfuscating), will take account of your input in preparing for our negotiation. As far as I can see they’re locked away somewhere cracking on without any MPs’ input so far?

  5. Kenneth
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    I suspect we will see a divide between the unelected eu commission which will want to risk jobs in order to preserve itself and the elected European governments who need to look after the livelihoods of their citizens.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:10 am | Permalink

      Already evident

  6. Mark
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

    Here’s some common sense from Henry Kissinger writing in the Wall Street Journal:

    http://www.wsj.com/article_email/out-of-the-brexit-turmoil-opportunity-1467151419-lMyQjAxMTE2MTI0OTQyODk0Wj

    The Brexit vote has unleashed the anxieties of two continents and of all those who rely upon the stability that their union of purpose provides. The needed restoration of faith will not come through recriminations. To inspire the confidence of the world, Europe and America must demonstrate confidence in themselves.

    I would add that it is in the interests of the EU Commission to frustrate a deal to maintain its power, but it in the interests of all EU countries to secure a deal. This will provoke tensions.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:11 am | Permalink

      Yes hopefully the European country leaders will be so frustrated that they row back from faux federalism

  7. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

    Whilst you have busy JR, there have been undemocratic pronouncements from MPs. The argument continues for them in and outside Parliament. They do not accept the result of the referendum.

    1.” They voted Remain in my Constituency so how is the referendum result valid? ”
    2. I paraphrase: ” The voters were tricked, why should we as MPs accept the result?”
    3. “Young people did not vote for Leave” I paraphrase : ” Why should we leave the EU on this basis? ”
    4. “Millions of people have since voting changed their minds. I’ve had emails sent to me by my constituents? ”

    Also a whole set of MPs who by elliptical or esoteric speeches intimated they disapproved of basic and rudimentary democracy and urged others in Parliament through committees to thwart at each and every level the decision to Leave the EU in real terms.

    One can find no equivalent anti-democratic language and intent in the most extreme left-wing and right-wing or anarchist UK literature that I have come across. Amazing.

    The Remainers, particularly those now in the Labour Party 172 against Mr Corbyn, have gone off the scales in regard to anti-democratic extremism. (Words let out ed)
    In the Labour Party, according to long-standing rules and procedure. and indeed the essence of their very British democratic Socialism it is not a case of 172 versus 40 but 172 versus 250,000+40 Labour Party members for Corbyn.

    It is to be hoped that this rather ugly and unwholesome un-British 172 are out of influence of any kind soon. We should pray Labour Party members do the right thing, not for electoral advantage necessarily, but for British democracy and Labour Party democracy and vote for Mr Corbyn in their thousands.
    I beleive Ms Eagle has already been written to by her Labour Party branch expressing disapproval of her behaviour.

    • eeyore
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:36 am | Permalink

      1.” They voted Remain in my Constituency so how is the referendum result valid? ” I’ve read that if the vote had been taken by constituencies on a FPTP basis, as though it were an election, the Leave majority would have been 68%-32%, or 442 seats to 208.

      With regard to your points about Labour, I see it not as 250,000 members + 40 MPs but as 9.5m voters + 172 MPs. The party exists to serve the MPs, who exist to serve the voters and the country. Mr Corbyn and his rabble have things the wrong way round. Clearly they’re no longer an effective Opposition so their Short money should be withdrawn.

    • Juno
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

      Today I had “The referendum shouldn’t count. Most Leave voters didn’t know anything about the EU.” and Remain voters did ???

      Also “I will re-unite the country.” from Theresa May. That sounds ominous to a Leaver like me. Let’s remember. It’s the EU that has split Britain – not Brexit.

      • CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 2:24 am | Permalink

        Juno:
        Ms May cannot “re-unite” the country. She has knocked over the Tory Chief Voice love or hate him Boris. The House of Commons has too few Tory MPs now. Many Tory voters do not like her Remain ideas. Obviously Tories in the North are going to think of more right-wing parties or not vote at all.
        Actually, Mr Corbyn has been doing very well in by-elections and local elections elections in the Labour heartlands.
        Unlikely Ms May will do well. Mr Gove is likely to remove her somehow if she looks like succeeding.

  8. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

    I have here our copy of the official government booklet delivered to every household and near the end it says in black and white:

    “This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide.”

    Well, last Thursday we decided that we wanted to Leave the EU, so why nearly a week later is the Government still holding back from taking the first step of formally notifying the EU and its member states that we intend to withdraw?

    And why are some leaders of the Leave campaign going along with that?

    • matthu
      Posted June 29, 2016 at 9:48 pm | Permalink

      Typo?

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:40 am | Permalink

        More like yet another lie from a government which specialises in lies.

    • Richard1
      Posted June 29, 2016 at 10:12 pm | Permalink

      Because both Remain and Leave cover a range of opinion. Most people who voted Leave want a friendly relationship with the EU and free access to the single market. Therefore we need to negotiate the best deal.

      • David Price
        Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:14 am | Permalink

        What is your basis for the claim that most people want free access to the single market? Is that before or after it is explained they cannot have it without freedom of movement and freedom of welfare. The market isn’t “Free” anyway, we have to pay them to allow them to set up stalls in our market to sell to us.

        • Richard1
          Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

          Well 48% voted to remain anyway and surely you’d accept some of the 52% would have Dan Hannan type views? Nor was anyone on the Leave side arguing that we don’t want access to the single market.

          • David Price
            Posted July 1, 2016 at 3:58 am | Permalink

            You claimed to speak for the majority but the only evidence is that 52% want to leave the EU.

            From blogs and commentary there are people who believe WTO is preferable to the entanglements of non-free access to the EU brand of single market. But there is not enough information to assess one way or the other.

            We got in to this pickle because politicians and pundits kept assuming what people felt instead of asking and listening. When they did ask they got a big surprise.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:40 am | Permalink

        We voted to leave the EU so we should leave the EU and the government should tell the EU that we are leaving, NOW.

        If you want to know the real reason it may be here:

        https://euobserver.com/uk-referendum/134119

        “Is the EU trying to scare the UK into staying in?”

    • Mark B
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:48 am | Permalink

      No plan. No road map. Not clue.

    • CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 2:33 am | Permalink

      Denis Cooper:
      Correct.
      Ms May says Article 50 is “not this year”
      Mr Gove says “no time limit” and “It is my MISSION to reduce immigration. Compare with Cameron’s change from “no ifs, no buts” to “It’s my AMBITION to reduce immigration.”
      It’s my ambition and mission to be a multi-billionaire. I’ve already got two pence stuffed into my money box. This should qualify me to be Leader of the Tory Party if I watch for Goves at my back

  9. Bert Young
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

    Red lines have been drawn by the EU and stated today following the Brussels summit . It was made clear that they will not do a deal with us on a a la carte basis and they will only go ahead if we agree to include “free movement of people”.

    They are clearly going to be “tough” and will make it costly . I fully concur with Johns’ negotiating points but there is now an impasse at the very start of our exiting . Germany has most to lose with its trading relation with us , however , they do face an election in the near future . Merkel confirmed her agreement with the EU’s stated position so it will be interesting to see who gives way first .

  10. Margaret
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

    GB and Germany are doing well working together and that is the way we want it. We need to replicate Germany’s financial success here , thus proving our desirability and success. We will be 2 separate forces in the world for good and when the rest of the EU are in the black ,an amalgamation of that power. I believe in scattered power to fight disseminated attempts at destruction. The world trade centres may have been blown at of existence but not world trade.

  11. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

    The EU has put its initial negotiating position ( the public one ). As you might expect, free-movement of workers as “non-negotiable.”

    Of course only Germany, until its next national election, actually believes in the free movement of workers.

    Smaller EU nations: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic now have the UK as an ally if they ever care to leave the EU. This strengthens their own positions within the EU and ours outside the EU.

    Things should work out wonderfully and can only be enhanced by a Republican win in the USA national elections in November.

  12. Newmania
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:15 pm | Permalink

    Prior to the vote is was the general, betting that we would not leave the EU and thestrong performance of the UK economy reflects its solidity overs achieved within theEuropean union. We shall see if the next round of results look so good which Iseriously doubt . This is a bit like putting an old picture up on Face book isn`t it .

    It has always been crystal clear that we shall not be able to pull the drawbridge up and be in the single market so Mr Redwood is recommending that we leave the single market
    The plan the idea , the whimsy for today, for there is no plan , that JR is suggesting is that we shroud mimic Switzerland refuse to deal with the EU and try to mimic it with bilateral treaties .
    This has come with Freedom of Movement and does not work for access to services of USB would not be in London . Without membership of the single market we will be heading for an apocalypse and I find it especially galling to see Mr Redwood abandon any pretence at fiscal responsibility such is his enthusiasm to mortgage the countries young to pay for his white elephant . All the time Baking Insurance and much much more and wondering whether to up sticks and the future is uncertain there will be no investment .

    The word “Regret-xit” is fast gaining currency as the many who were lied to so blatantly begin to realise what has been done.

    On top pof all that we have to endure hate crimes escalating and the vile Farrage embarrassing us . I have never felt so ashamed of this country and we aren`t even any good at football( its a game John).

    • alan jutson
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:38 am | Permalink

      Newmania

      Afraid many of us do not accept your view as outlined.

      Its, not yet a week since we had a referendum, All the predictions of disaster are still predictions, other than I accept the pound has lessened in value because it had been pushed too high by the city boys who expected a remain, and gambled on that result.

      The fact that the Government until six days ago had refused to accept any sort of notion of planning (alternative plan) for a leave result means we are where we are now. so don’t blame those who fought for Brexit.
      Blame the Government who were blind to the possibility they may lose.

      Pleased it turns out the Bank of England says it had made alternative plans, I hope they had, and are not just trying to cover up any lack of preparation.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:18 am | Permalink

      Newmania – We’re not talking kristallnacht exactly.

      I find your language totally hysterical – in both senses.

      Despite many warning shots – via patient, peaceful and democratic means – about uncontrolled immigration the people were ignored again and again.

      Were there to be no consequences ?

    • Mr Chips
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:12 am | Permalink

      Please spare us these Remoaners !

    • Juno
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:27 am | Permalink

      One thing I have noticed (or not, as the case may be) is the complete absence of jingoism after this referendum result.

      Very few England flags, bearing in mind there is a football tournament going on. This before England was knocked out of the competition.

      I do believe this to be an effort on our people’s part to be low key and careful towards the sensitivities of minorities.

      Yes. I am proud of our nation. We have been brave in the face of bullying and Project Fear.

      Much of the market turmoil is being affected by negative talk. And when the markets turn down the talk becomes more negative. One feeds the other.

      Please stop it.

  13. fedupsoutherner
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:18 pm | Permalink

    It all sounds really simple John but I heard tonight on the news that it looks as though the EU is going to insist on keeping free movement of people in exchange for staying in the single market and having trade with the EU.

    They are not going to make our life easy because of the risk of other countries seeing what a good deal we have got and then wanting it themselves. We will need some very strong leadership. I just don’t trust a Remainer to lead us out of the EU without the conditions we don’t want. Out is the only way. If we accept free movement then we are still under their thumbs and we want to be able to go our own way with no restrictions from anyone else.

    Great news that the money markets are behaving themselves again.

  14. Bob
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:23 pm | Permalink

    C4 News just reported that the EU holds all the cards.
    With nay sayers running the broadcast media it’s no surprise that market volatility has increased.

    I’d like to hear more about how the EU intends to retain tariff free access to the UK market.
    The rest of the world beckons, third world farmers and Japanese car manufacturers must be rubbing their hands with glee.

    • MickN
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 12:25 am | Permalink

      They held all the cards earlier in the financial crisis with Greece too. I have forgotten how many last chances Greece had when they stood firm. We just need people of substance doing the negotiating.

  15. John Robertson
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

    Great they are using your expertise.

    Like what you wrote the other day about setting up Trade negotiation team in government asap.

    As Mr Rees-Mogg said, Taiwan will be first.

    If I was a semi conductor supplier to the UK from California I’d be on to Arnold Schwarzenegger to put a rocket up the Oval Office to get a move on a trade deal with the UK.
    We can’t delay

    • John Robertson
      Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:34 pm | Permalink

      “Get started on a trade deal with the UK or its hasta la vista, baby!”

  16. Ian George
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

    If we repeal the EC Act of 1972 then we do not need to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Am I reading that correct?

    If this is the case then it would help to explain why Juncker et. al. as so keen to see Article 50 activated as soon as possible – because it would act as a kind of deterrent to other countries leaving if we agreed to use it.

    Surely, then, this could be used as a bargaining chip in our negotiations with the EU – all us access to the European market or other agreement to ease worries in the City and in the minds of existing expats both in the UK and on the continent, with some relaxation on their free movement of people demand and we’ll do it. Otherwise we’ll just cross Article 50 out and go our own way.

    I think this is the EU’s big fear, that Article 50 really isn’t worth the paper it’s written on and they don’t want the UK to send the wrong signal to other countries who may wish to terminate their membership.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:13 am | Permalink

      No, that is not correct. There is no action which can be taken on the national or domestic plane which cancels our obligations on the international plane, that requires action on the international plane itself. There is no possibility of getting a majority of members in either of the Houses of Parliament to vote for a Bill to repeal ECA72, but even if that was done it would still leave us bound by the EU treaties by virtue of our previous ratifications of those treaties.

      • Ian George
        Posted June 30, 2016 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

        Thanks Denis. It was just what I was reading into JR’s “Getting on with Brexit” post which made me wonder.

        I’ll put that idea to bed!

  17. graham1946
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:47 pm | Permalink

    Glad to hear that you are making the immigration points system a ‘red line’ issue. Hammond was on the radio today again saying he has been speaking to his counterparts in the EU and says we can’t have free trade without freedom of movement. I do wish these people would just shut up and accept the situation as is and stop trying to undermine the negotiations. Too much has been said already. Shades of CMD’s farcical renegotiation where he gave away all his power before he even started.

    I wish there could be an early leadership election (but we know that’s not happening, taking a ludicrous 2 months) and I hope that the new leader clears out these EU fanatics to the back benches if they want to undermine the will of the people. Whilst they are in government they have credibility abroad. They say they accept the referendum result, then set about trying to undermine it in any way they can. Obviously we can’t rely on Cameron to put them back in their box as he has shown no sign of doing so and no doubt supports their action.

    Further regarding tariffs, we must be prepared to walk away from the talks if they ,make freedom of movement a red line on their side. We should revert to WTO conditions if necessary, which will be a better arrangement than we currently have. Any duties will go into our Treasury and if the pound stays low, this will make up for it. What with losing our membership fee and with the risk of damaging their exports to our market, I can’t see Merekel lasting long. They are just blowing smoke.

  18. Dioclese
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

    I am irritated about the fuss over access to the single market.

    Nobody said ‘free’ access to the single market but let’s be honest – if the pound drops 10% and they impose a 10% tariff for our exports then they cost the same to the average Euro holder. On the other hand if we retaliate with the same tariff on their goods then the German car industry is on trouble and, (this could be a good thing), we might actually be more inclined to buy own own goods.

    The UK is swamped with Chinese goods and China isn’t in the EU or the single market. They swallow the import tariffs and we still buy their stuff. Why wouldn’t Europe want to do the same with our goods?

    Let’s forget this idea of a ‘tariff free’ access to the single market because with a lower pound, we can cope with it and they can’t. Win/win as far as I can see?

  19. Mark B
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 6:54 pm | Permalink

    Good evening.

    Once again you fail to acknowledge or accept, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, that Article 50 is the ONLY route by which the UK can legally leave the EU.

    The PM has said it, The President of the Commission has said it. The Presidents’ of both the EU Parliament and Council of Minister have said it. Even top lawyers and Nigel Farage has said it. But you, you do not even get it. How long have I and just about everyone on this blog / diary of yours, over many years now been telling you ? You can only leave the EU by invoking Article 50. Are you seriously trying to wind me up ?

    If we want to be seen to take back control, it would be good to amend the ECA 1975 so that all laws that come from the EU instead of being passed as SI’s have to come before the House. Yes I know we cannot change or reject them but, we will at least know the volume of the laws the EU is passing and, we can slow their implementation. It also shows that we are now starting to take responsibility.

    We also need a plan. FLEXCIT is a good start. EEA Membership, although not idea for many reasons, would do for a short period of time. Remember, we have to reopen many embassies that we closed prior to becoming independent. We also have to discuss the Rep. Ireland’s position regarding Schengen. If they join, what do we do between them and the border ?

    There are so many things ‘we’ need to discuss before we do anything, and that inclides invoking Article 50.

    Can we please therefore, and it would be nice to hear our kind hosts views on this and other matters relating to our forthcoming independence, so that we can have a more rounded view and better understanding of matters that will come before the government and the nation.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:27 am | Permalink

      Agreed.

      Article 50 TEU was a new treaty provision brought in through the Lisbon Treaty, which the UK formally ratified on July 16th 2008:

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7511281.stm

      “UK ratifies the EU Lisbon Treaty”

      The process, goatskin and Great Seal and all, is described more fully here:

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7465665.stm

      But in essence through that ratification the UK officially announced to the world that it consented to be bound by the terms of the Lisbon Treaty, and as part of that the UK agreed that if it ever wanted to leave the EU then it would use the procedure laid down in the new Article 50 TEU.

      It would not be a good start to the next stage of our history to break our solemn word on that without very good cause, for example that we had tried to use that procedure but were finding it unworkable.

  20. M Holmes
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 7:22 pm | Permalink

    Yes but what about the European insistence that access to free trade is conditional on the free movement principle
    How do you see this being resolved

    • MickN
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 12:27 am | Permalink

      We tell them where they can stick their free movement principal and keep telling them until they get the message.

      • alan jutson
        Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:39 am | Permalink

        Mick N

        The perfect response.

        The two issues are not linked anywhere else in the World.

  21. oldtimer
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 7:22 pm | Permalink

    Thank you for that helpful appraisal. I suspect that when the business lobby in the EU makes its views known it will have a moderating influence on the views expressed so far by the politicians.

    German industry is especially interested in the continuation of present tariff free arrangements. If the EU wants trade in goods to be favoured at the expense of services then it should be reminded of Angela Merkel’s comment to the Bundestag that there should be no cherry picking. In the worst case scenario reversion to WTO tariffs would hit the car industry hardest (10% tariff). It should be noted that the German car industry is very widely dispersed throughout Germany. There must be scarcely a significant town or city that does not provide a home to the operations of one or other of the major car makers or their suppliers with all the employment implications. This industry is a powerful lobby. Perhaps the Cabinet Office should doing some homework on this and other industries as it prepares it’s negotiating strategy.

  22. agricola
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

    In the process of negotiating a new relationship with the EU, I suspect that on the subject of trade there will be differing priorities between the bureaucracy of the EU and the interests of the nation states.

    With the aid of HMRC, we should produce a very detailed document itemising by category and value precisely what our major trading partners in the EU sell to us. The key question to them is , do you wish to get hung up on the details of free movement of people beyond those, we deem on an annual basis, we can welcome, as a requisite of continuing to sell us your goods. Alternatively can you agree to a more controlled influx to the UK from the EU that will allow you to continue selling to us unimpeded. If you remain hung on this free movement mantra then we can quite quickly find alternative sources for most of which we buy from the EU, and possibly from more competitive suppliers world wide. I spent most of my working life searching out more competitive sources world wide on behalf of UK and US industry..

    Perhaps you could explain what financial passports are, and whether in a free market , the City of London could be prevented from dealing in financial product related to the Euro and EU area. How much power do the EU have in this area.

    • David Price
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:20 am | Permalink

      Are passports needed for other markets where our finacial sector operates?

  23. Caterpillar
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 7:31 pm | Permalink

    Cross-party agreement on the minimum for points for EU migrants to UK should be rapidly agreed. At an absolute minimum, for those entering after June 23rd 2016, I would say must have employment for more at least 9 months in any continuous 12 month period, and salary must be a multiplier of minimum wage to avoid continued impact on the UK’s lower quartile earners.

    Dr Redwood, you mention bilateral talks – what are countries within the EU permitted to negotiate bilaterally?

    Reply bilateral between UK and EU

  24. Shieldsman
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 7:35 pm | Permalink

    Can you please get on with electing a new leader and MP who will activate Article 50.
    I am sick to death of remainder whingers trying to make out they are superior beings because the failed pollsters say so.

    No Freedom of Movement, EFTA and WTO only if necessary.
    Market fall, it has been a buying bonanza.

  25. alan jutson
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

    Thank goodness someone is working on a sensible plan to move forward.

    Pleased you are involved in some way John, your commercial, business and banking experience should prove invaluable in any negotiation or plan.

    I really do hope the next leader will take advantage of your talents and that of others, to work out the best plan and eventual deal, so that we can move forward as quickly as possible.

    Shame we still have some of the media and some MP’s trying to hold things back, in what seems like some vain attempt to undermine the leave procedures, our democracy, and our eventual deal.
    They should be ashamed of themselves, and certainly should form no part of a new Government team.

  26. Leslie Singleton
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

    Just as with the use of “net inward migration” for immigration, we could just as well say that on a net basis the EU has the luxury of exporting to us so, given likely continuing intransigence on their part over the free movement nonsense (BTW Why no free movement within NAFTA or ASEAN?), maybe we should just set up our own tariff wall against those imports. From what I have seen, it is unfortunately no good trying to be over friendly towards the Brussels maniacs–they don’t make any sense. That apart, we seem to need clarification on what “access” to the trouble-causing single market means. Do not, say, New Zealand or Bolivia or best I can tell any other country have “access”, OK very likely subject to a small tariff, against which there is the more than offsetting credit from our no longer having to contribute, so what’s the problem?

  27. Gary C
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 7:57 pm | Permalink

    I’ve been listening to Irish radio today, many times they have reported the EU despots are threatening us with having to continue to pay into the EU and also accept free movement of people if we want a free trade agreement.

    They still do not understand why we voted to leave, they continue with their threats and bullying ways, they have no intention of any reform, they certainly do not learn from their mistakes.

    We voted leave to free ourselves from the EU puppet masters, we must refuse their demands.

  28. P Rogers
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 8:10 pm | Permalink

    A beautiful solution, but one which – as you say – requires bilateral agreements (even if it is to maintain the status quo) with the other 27. Being members of the EU, are they able to do this though? One of the reasons we left was because, in the EU, we could not negotiate bilateral trade agreements: the EU did it for us by proxy. Surely the same would apply to, say, Germany agreeing a trade deal with the UK post Brexit?

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:32 am | Permalink

      Yes, the EU runs their trade policy and that will include policy vis-a-vis the UK.

      • Mark
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:18 am | Permalink

        While that is true, an exit treaty following Article 50 requires a QMV in Council, which is a vote from the governments, not the Commission. Under 218 (3), it is also up to the Council to nominate a lead negotiator.

  29. Lifelogic
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 8:10 pm | Permalink

    Indeed.

    The UK can always switch its production and exports to other markets or to the home market (to replace EU imports) if the EU really wants to play silly & shoot themselves in the foot with a trade war.

    I see that Osborne has actually said:- “It was not the responsibility of those who wanted to remain in the EU to explain what plan they would follow if we voted to leave.”

    Of course it is the responsibility of the Government and Chancellor to have have plans to cover all likely eventualities they called the referendum after all.

    That is his job and what he is paid and pensioned for by tax payers.

    The man is a blockhead he must go now. A shame he cannot take all his government borrowing, his absurd tax complexity, his over taxation, huge huge trade deficit, his pension robbing, tenant robbing, stamp duty at 15%, IPT duty increases 10%, IHT ratting and his endless waste with him.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 29, 2016 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

      And his sugar tax, the non dom changes, central wage controls and the rest of his lunacies.

  30. Hope
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    We read Tusk says freedom of movement is not negotiable if the UK wants access to the single market. Interesting this is not on the table for the US!

    I think an early notification followed by a prolonged negotiation and awkwardness/dissent over every issue they need our consent, not forgetting our intelligence and military might be negotiating issues in themselves.

    Cancellation of HS2 might help the finances, cancelation of regionalisation and mayors, walong with drastically cutting overseas aid and cutting our EU contributions. We could of course now have the bonfire of quangos promised by Cameron, as they will not be needed to implement EU directives and regulations by the back door instead of primary legislation. After all this was a deceitful method by govt to introduce EU rules while avoiding it being called EU law.

    • Bob
      Posted June 29, 2016 at 10:12 pm | Permalink

      @Hope

      “drastically cutting overseas aid”

      Parliament passed a law making it a legal requirement for UK to donate 0.70% of GDP to foreign aid, even if they have no identifiable objective for the money.

  31. Hope
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 8:46 pm | Permalink

    Not sure what you mean the govt does not have authority to trigger article 50. Cameron stated he would do this before the referendum.

    Nb this might help Osborne, instead of tax rises he can now reduce spending! Even he should be capable of working this out.

  32. Horatio
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

    What does the creation of a ‘brexit unit’ made up of civil servants and Oliver letwin, reporting to a cabinet dominated by those who wished to remain, mean for Brexiteers?

    Have any steps been made to consult key thinkers/planners and long term advocates of brexit, such as your August self?

    Are the thinkers that framed the issue and led the campaign being swept aside by the establishment? It looks very much like it from the outside and it is very worrying.

  33. miami.mode
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

    …….Once we have taken control we will need to legislate urgently to put in place the points system promised to control migration from the rest of the EU. This matter is not negotiable……..

    Noticeable how the other 4 of the 5 Eyes security arrangement have fairly strict rules on entry to their countries. US with ESTA and fingerprints, Australia with visas, Canada introducing an ETA system and very strict rules in New Zealand. Something to take on board as we don’t want to be the only Eye half awake.

  34. Richard1
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 10:30 pm | Permalink

    It is clear that the thing that went wrong in the Cameron & Osborne renegotiation was that the EU clearly saw Mr C wanted a quick deal and was prepared to accept whatever the best deal he could get. Not good tactics as anyone who’s done a commercial negotiation knows, but there we are.

    I hope the government will look rigorously and dispassionately at the ‘walk-away’ option of leaving and trading under WTO rules. What will that mean, not only for trade, but also for freedom of movement etc. Will we need visas to go to France eg (not popular). We can only have a successful negotiation if the government know when they are prepared to walk away and what that option entails.

  35. Chris S
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 10:45 pm | Permalink

    Another absolutely disgraceful interview by Evan Davies on Newsnight this evening (Wednesday). He was supposed to be discussing the future of our relationship with the EU with Crispin Blunt.

    Instead, Davies seemed determined to hector his victim, unleashing all his obvious anger over the outcome of the referendum. He constantly interupted Mr Blunt, ranting on about the difficulties of negotiating with the EU and his perception of the failings of the Brexit campaign. Davies must have spent 75% of the “interview” talking.

    If I had been Mr Blunt, I would just have sat there and let Davies rant on. When he eventually stopped, I would have told Davies that either he listened or I would terminate the interview.

    Later in the program Davies seemed absolutely ecstatic to point out that some group of economists have suggested that growth would be down by 0.5% this year and 1.7% next.

    Those producing Newsnight have clearly decided that they can drop any pretence of objective reporting. No wonder Jeremy Paxman walked away !

  36. Janet
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 10:47 pm | Permalink

    Please can we just leave.

    Did Johnson, Gove and Cameron meet up on the morning of the 24th and plot how to sabotage the unwelcome Brexit? Starting with David Cameron’s half-resignation that leaves him still speaking in parliament (and twisting the agenda)? And an absolute vacuum when it comes to direction and leadership. Brexit has been subverted into, or replaced by, merely a Remain-oriented leadership campaign. We will end up with a choice between Remain and/or Remain. The media full of pointless pre-analysis of negotiation points for non-existent negotiations with Brussels. A smoke and mirrors exercise, to brain-wash us into forgetting the outcome of the referendum. The Establishment/Remain/vested interests crowding out the interests of the people who voted to leave the EU. The old switcheroo. I voted Leave for reasons of democracy. Some hope. (No chance.) Just right back to mindless, disgusting, self-interested, Orwellian party politics.

  37. Richard1
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

    Isn’t the course of action you recommend a breach of our treaty obligations with EU members? Eg just implementing the points based system before we have actually left the EU? I would have thought we need a course of action in which the UK plays by the rules we have agreed to.

    I note that in the last few days, since the referendum, the following policy proposals have been made by EU persons in authority: a European military force (by the Italian top EU diplomat); a common EU tax (by the French and German foreign ministers); English to be dropped as an official EU language and French again to become the official language. The first two of these were expressly denied during the campaign by the Remain side, so it seems there were ‘lies’ on both sides of the gruesome ‘debate’ from which we have just emerged.

    • Chris
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

      Don’t forget speeding up Turkey’s membership application, and more.

  38. Mark
    Posted June 29, 2016 at 11:53 pm | Permalink

    Is Oliver Robbins going to get an early appearance before the Commons, having been appointed to head the Brexit unit for the Civil Service? We need to know that he supports Brexit as a policy. In similar vein, are there yet any signs of suitable replacements at UKREP? We can hardly have that unit run by Europhiles.

    • zorro
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:52 am | Permalink

      OMG ?

      zorro

  39. rick hamilton
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 1:38 am | Permalink

    After a 24 hour transit to the the side of the world I turned on BBC World TV and was subjected to hours and hours of utterly biased Brexophobic propaganda, including endless interviews with the usual suspects, including of all people Nick Clegg”s wife masquerading under her maiden name. Even the local English language press is reporting the imminent collapse of the UK economy, no doubt influenced by the BBC. To be fair – although it is hard to see why one should be – CNN is almost as bad. There is such hysteria. Collapse means Zimbabwe, not short-term investor caution while terms are being worked out.

    Markets being moved largely by groupthink and sentiment, can”t these ignoramuses see that they themselves are a cause of the lack of confidence? Obviously the myriad of fatcat organisations living on the public purse will be terrified of losing their gravy trains but for heaven”s sake this is supposed to be the BRITISH national broadcaster. As an expat friend said in desperation “What”s wrong with these people?” More than half the electorate voted Leave but apart from the usual sneering coverage of Nigel Farage and the odd clip of an unknown MP there was nothing but relentless Remainism from all their presenters.

    The BBC have got to start understanding that they are not the news themselves but merely observers and commentators. They have to be made to understand that “impartiality” means both sides of the story always, with Brexit supporters given equal air time. I know there is nothing new in BBC World”s anti-British mindset on so many issues but something really does need to be done about it as it is actually damaging to our business prospects.

    They seem to have already made up their minds that regardless of the outcome of the referendum, the UK will still be under EU control if we want to trade with them at all. Anybody who has actually managed international trade knows this is scaremongering tosh, as you have so clearly described.

  40. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 1:47 am | Permalink

    I agree with your proposals for a smooth and rapid Brexit. Full control of immigration and restoration of our Supreme Court as the highest court in our land are top priorities.

    Brexit could be achieved in much less than 2 years if the EC accepted that we repeal our Act of Accession to the Lisbon Treaty, thus cancelling Artile 50. Why not ask? If you don’t ask you don’t get.

    The EU will seek to punish us because they are about to lose £14 billion per annum as our net cash contribution and because they will lose control over us.

    A deal could be struck in which we imposed no tariffs on imports from EU-27 countries and they imposed no more that £3 billion of tariff and non-tariff costs on our exports of goods and services to EU-27. That’s not fair to us but so what? £3 billion is a lot less than £14 billion and it’s much better than a trade war.

    That £3 billion is roughly what implementing a Canada style deal would cost, given the magnitude of our exports of goods and services to EU-27.

    The one thing we don’t want to do is to apply to join the European Economic Area like Norway. Immigration to Norway is totally out of control and they have to make payments to Brussels.

    • ChrisS
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

      Can anyone answer this question :

      Would it actually be legal for the EU to insist that all Euro exchange trading can only take place within the territory of the EU ?

      After all, every other major currency is traded in more than one financial centre, most of which are not the home State of the currency concerned.

      • Chris S
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 7:57 am | Permalink

        Could someone answer this please ?

        It’s a very important issue and it’s also been asked above by Agricola.

      • Mark
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:32 am | Permalink

        No, it would not. The City enjoyed spectacular growth through developing the Eurodollar market, which is an offshore market in US denominated assets. The EU could only insist on internal transactions within its own borders. However, EU banks and the ECB are not strong, and need diversification away from the internal risks of the EU. Cutting off access to foreign banks would in fact tend to hurt their own, and also their own trade with the rest of the world. You can look at other countries which have limited access to international banks to see the effect – e.g. USSR, Iran, Venezuela.

        • Chris S
          Posted July 2, 2016 at 7:38 am | Permalink

          Thanks. I would imagine that most lucrative Euro FOREX transactions are between a Eurozone Country and one outside the EZ so they would not be able to grab those transactions from London.

          Is this just more bluff and bluster from Hollande ?

          I see several banks have said they don’t plan to move large numbers of staff including HSBC.

          The whole issue seems to be yet another element of Project Fear that’s unraveling.

      • Lindsay McDougall
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

        By what mechanism could the EU prevent small businesses exchanging currencies? The EU might be able to inhibit the big banks but punters get better rates from street kiosks any way.

  41. Nig l
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:20 am | Permalink

    There is talk of Teresa May becoming PM, how can a person who thought that leaving would be a catastrophe, head up a government that is seeking to do precisely that. We will end up with the same useless negotiations similar to Cameron’s. Jeremy Hunt has indicated we should negotiate and then have another Referndum and Osborne is rumoured to be ‘against’. Do some of your party not get that w voted to leave not ‘pretend to’.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page