The EU says no single market without freedom of movement

If the EU sticks to its view that it cannot allow the UK to have any control over migration, the negotiations will be very short. The UK must refuse to continue with freedom of movement, so there will be no basis to reach a new agreement.

This means the Uk will simply need to withdraw from the EU and  rely for our trade with the EU on most favoured nation status under World Trade Organisation rules. Average tariffs are very low, though they can be higher against German cars and French agricultural produce. The UK does not want to impose tariffs, but if the rest of the EU does impose tariffs up to WTO limits the UK will obviously retaliate.

The UK could make a good living under WTO rules. The UK will still benefit from the main advantage of the single market, the fact that you can produce a product to the same standard to sell anywhere in the EU. The recent fall in the pound is bigger than the extra costs WTO tariffs and ruled could impose, so our competitiveness will still be better.

 

In some ways this makes it so much easier. If The EU does not want to listen to the UKs needs then they have to accept we can just leave and they may end up imposing obstacles to their very successful exports at a time when the fall in the pound has just made them dearer.

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

188 Comments

  1. Ian Wragg
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:14 am | Permalink

    Some of your colleagues are willing to compromise by suggesting we take the Norway option.
    This is totally unacceptable as it is just a backdoor way of staying in the EU.
    The 3 basic principles must be met as outlined by Jacob Rees Mogg.
    Borders, Laws and Money. No half measures.

  2. Mick
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:34 am | Permalink

    As long as who ever is doing the negotiations for our great country they don’t forget that the outers won the vote on immigration, and not be swayed by all these liberal lefty students or Scottish Parliament who don’t believe in democracy well as far as the result of the referendum is concerned

  3. Ian B
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:49 am | Permalink

    So far as I can ascertain, Single Market subscription fees would cost more than the WTO tariffs anyway. There simply doesn’t seem to be much of a case for being in it. Certainly no way if being in involves continued policy entanglement with the EU. However much or little borders swung the referendum, the fact is that the people voted to leave the EU, not leave a bit and stay in a bit.

    Also, two words: Andrea Leadsom.

    • Juno
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:29 am | Permalink

      Yes.

      Andrea Leadsom

      She was utterly brilliant throughout the campaign and on BBC Women’s Hour the other day she was outnumbered 3:1 (incl presenter) and made them all sound like shrill little children.

      • Richard1
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 10:49 am | Permalink

        I caught a bit of that programme. the presenter whoever she is is appallingly partisan -she should not be presenting on the BBC. Let her start Guardian TV if she wants to host programmes like that.

    • Richard1
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:06 am | Permalink

      It’s more than just tariffs it’s regulatory access also, eg the financial passport.

      There is a danger corporate decision making will not wait for the result of this negotiation game. That is what the EU will be counting on – the longer it’s unclear the more companies, banks etc will get nervous, perhaps start moving employees and stalling investment. The flow of negative news then increases the pressure on the UK govt. we will need a very tough guy or woman at the top and some very clear messages. Only radical policies such as tax cuts, kick starting Heathrow will counter the effect of the EUs threats. The new PM needs to be able to deal with this. Doesn’t sound like Boris to me.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 8:31 am | Permalink

        It appears that Tony Blair is offering his services.

        But I’m not clear which side he hopes to be on.

        • Liz
          Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:15 am | Permalink

          Surely Tony Blair runs on the side of himself and his interests alone?

        • alan jutson
          Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:52 am | Permalink

          Dennis

          “..which side…”

          His own !!!

        • Richard1
          Posted July 1, 2016 at 10:50 am | Permalink

          He is probably flexible after all he entered Parliament in 1983 on a manifesto of leaving the EU

        • Richard1
          Posted July 1, 2016 at 11:12 am | Permalink

          So long as he is remunerated on the basis of a large success fee it may not be a bad idea.

    • LondonBob
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:24 am | Permalink

      Heard many positive comments about Andrea Leadsom during the Leave campaign. Michael Gove just doesn’t have the electability.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

      @Ian B; “the fact is that the people voted to leave the EU, not leave a bit and stay in a bit.”

      Indeed, that is why I have keep saying that Brexit should mean exit, not an about turn in the doorway we have been occupying since 1989.

      “Also, two words: Andrea Leadsom.”

      Who?…

      Probably less known, away from her constituency and the PCP, than the party whips.

      I won’t say anything else about the Tory party events this morning -I’ve mislaid by flame proof overalls!

    • Hope
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

      Unfortunately JR, your party and the nation will be shafted if May gets anywhere near PM. What a dire state of affairs when her name can even be on a ballot paper. Let us remnd ourselves who the minister was in control of immigration, asylum seekers, illegal immigrants, failed deportations of terrorists, lost hundreds of thousands to the system for the last six years when numbers reached epic new heights? Ah, Mrs Useless May.

      • Jerry
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

        @Hope; If Mrs May becomes PM, especially if the Labour Party do not sort themselves out, the next election will likely be a 1983 Tory landslide all over again – with UKIP, or what ever they are calling themselves by then, taking the place of the thern SDP in terms of votes obtained.

    • libertarian
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:01 pm | Permalink

      Ian B

      Agree

      Specially taken with Andrea Leadsom, best candidate by a mile.

      • Jerry
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 7:45 am | Permalink

        @libertarian et al; Sorry but I disagree, Andrea Leadsom might well be the “best candidate by a mile” were she becoming just the leader of the Tory party and of HM opposition but as PM, no, she has held no high government or opposition office. Do we want a leader in Downing Street or someone or someone being lead by the civil service?

        Being a cheerleader for Brexit is not the only bullet-point on the job description, nor should it be, although accepting the democratic will for Brexit is a pre-requisite, we need a eurorealist, not a eurosceptic nor a europhobe in the months and perhaps years to come.

        • Mark
          Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:39 am | Permalink

          My chief worry about Leadsom is that she has been brainwashed into supporting expensive energy and energy rationing in her job at DECC. It is essential that the UK aims to restore a competitive low cost energy supply if it is to prosper outside the EU. However, I am encouraged that she has hinted she would ditch HS2.

        • graham1946
          Posted July 1, 2016 at 10:03 am | Permalink

          At least Andrea Leadsom believes in what she is saying re Brexit and that is the biggest political job of the next few years. Mother Theresa, I fear will try to water down the referendum. Please don’t bother saying she promised she won’t. A politicians promise is one of the three most useless things in the world. Experience of politics is not a blessing, experience of life outside is.

          • Jerry
            Posted July 1, 2016 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

            @graham1946; “Please don’t bother saying she promised she won’t. A politicians promise is one of the three most useless things in the world.”

            Who were you talking about there, Theresa May, Andrea Leadsom, or indeed any of the other candidates?

            Talk about double standards, of course the one you support won’t break their promises, but the ones you do not are certain to…

            “Experience of politics is not a blessing, experience of life outside is.”

            Indeed, and as I said, that is why Mrs May is the better choice! Always read their (independently authored and cited) bios before trying to argue the “experience of life” outside politics card! 😉

        • libertarian
          Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

          Jerry

          Oh dear Oh dear oh dear , you think that being an appointed minister in a brief you’ve no expertise in is better than having been a senior figure in business? Oh OK Jerry

          Leadsom worked in the financial sector for BZW, Barclays Bank – where she was Financial Institutions Director from 1993 to 1997 – and was Managing Director of De Putron Fund Management (DPFM) between 1997 and 1999. She was Head of Corporate Governance and Senior Investment Officer at Invesco Perpetual from 1999 to 2009

          You dont think that might come in handy persuading the City to stay put and negotiating Brexit then?

          Our two previous PM’s were

          Briefly a PR consultant

          A lecturer in a college

          They were /are both appalling leaders.

          • Jerry
            Posted July 2, 2016 at 7:29 am | Permalink

            @libertarian; Then, by your own rational, there are better people than Andrea Leadsom – including Mrs May!

            As for our previous PM’s (and not just the last two), you make my point about needing experience in high political office…

          • a-tracy
            Posted July 2, 2016 at 7:53 am | Permalink

            Libertarian, You know if Jerry is supporting May it’s never right in a month of Sundays.

          • Edward2
            Posted July 2, 2016 at 8:16 am | Permalink

            Totally agree Libertarian
            I suspect Jerry really wants Nick Clegg as PM

          • Jerry
            Posted July 2, 2016 at 9:38 am | Permalink

            @a-tracy; I’m not supporting Mrs May, I’m not supporting anyone just yet, all five have their good and bad point, and they all have the same bad point – they are wedded to post Keynesian economics.

            @Edward2; No, most certainly not, but if there was a reincarnated Harold Macmillan in the house you might have a point!…

      • Chris S
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

        From a personal point of view, I would prefer Andrea. She was the star of the campaign from day one. So was Gisela Stuart in her own understated way.

        However, while Andrea has a background in finance and banking, she has little political experience ( although more than Cameron when he was elected). She is a committed Brexiter which would give us considerable reassurance that she will not allow any backsliding. Assuming that the membership of the party are predominantly Brexiteers, they would probably prefer her to Teresa May.

        Teresa may have been a luke warm remainer but she has survived at the Home Office longer than anyone else in 100 years. That is some feat. I suspect that, as long as she is surrounded by a ring of Brexiteers we might be OK. In all other respects she would be a safe pair of hands.

        I don’t believe the story that Michael Gove engineered the downfall of CMD and Boris all along. I really think he is a reluctant candidate but, it would only be natural that, having made the decision, he has become obsessed with the thought of winning.

        I have no idea what will happen.

        However, if Teresa May gets an overwhelming number of votes in round 1. it will then be impossible for any of the others to continue. They would be seen as putting personal ambition ahead of the interest of party and country.

        A deal could easily be done with Michael and Andrea getting two of the biggest jobs : Chancellor and Chair of the Brexit Negotiating committee for Gove ?

        Not sure if Andrea is ready for Foreign Secretary but she could be Chief Secretary and Chief Brexit negotiator.

        Fox and Crabbe could be offered Defense and maybe Health. They will then all pull out and we will have a coronation. I suspect that the May team are already working on a cabinet built around these people.

        The Brexit steering group needs to have an all party element ( well not the SNP or Libdems, obviously ).

        I would certainly give Gisela Stuart an important role and she has invaluable experience of dealing with Brussels. Frank Field and Kate Hoey should also have roles.

        We could know who the new PM is going to be by Wednesday with a new cabinet in place by Thursday.

        Then the certainty of Brexit with Article 50 declared on Friday !

        • stred
          Posted July 2, 2016 at 9:27 am | Permalink

          Mrs May said in her bid that she would delay Article 50 until next year. She would set up a ministry for Brexit to start detailed negotiations. The civil servant put in charge was working in the Home Office under May and was chucked out of the Parliamentary Committee for obfuscating about cuts to the Border Force, which has no proper boats and search facilities, while never sending illegals back. In an ex-minister’s book he says she and the Home Office do not want a proper counting system at ports which would show the true numbers. She forced the EAW warrant through the HoC without proper debate. She had to be constrained from a Big Brother email watching system by legal challenge.(re Freedom Assn.) She supports the ‘the victim must be believed’ legal changes which resulted in the MacAlpine, Brittan, Ted Heath, and other celebrity withdrawn smears.

          Not to be trusted. Most MPs support her in order to keep government jobs. Most are Europhiles. The constituency voters chose Cameron for his speech making and appearance. They may do the same this time. Insteadof ‘I knew Kennedy and you are no Kennedy’ it will be ‘I knew Cameron and you are a real Cameron’.

    • Juno
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:08 pm | Permalink

      Andrea Leadsom please. (I’m hearing it all over the web too.)

  4. Roy Grainger
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:52 am | Permalink

    I wonder which of the Tory leadership contenders agree with you – none of them ? Michael Gove needs to be careful who he supports.

    The EU are better negotiators than us, witness Cameron’s pathetic renegotiation. One thing is sure, their starting position will not be their finishing position if we are firm with them now. A good guide to negotiating tactics was written by Donald Trump (The Art of the Deal) , it is worth reading because it also explains his campaigning strategy to some extent, one hint from that is that to start with you ask for massively more than you would secretly be prepared to settle for. The EU are doing that, so should we.

  5. Antisthenes
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:55 am | Permalink

    The referendum and the aftermath has brought out the worst in people. Labour and many in Brussels are acting like rabid dogs (authoritarians have this propensity to act like that when they do not get their own way). How do we conduct business sensibly with such people? It appears to me that unless sanity is restored Labour is going to destroy itself and the EU may in the end cut off it’s nose to spite it’s face. The Conservative party is acting some what better although a few individuals are being childish. In fact the Conservatives can now unite after 40 years of disunity over the EU as the issue is settled. There is nothing to fight over other than perhaps the detail of Brexit but that is minor in comparison.

  6. Gary
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:55 am | Permalink

    in a free market you must have free movement of labour. Not refugees, but labour.

    without free movement of labour and the ability to have purchasing power in bulk with the backing of the richest market in the world, you’re hamstrung.

    Brexit was a vote against economies of scale and for economic insularity. A fatal mistake.IMO

    • Juno
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:31 am | Permalink

      Brexit was a vote against unfree government.

      The EU is insular.

    • MARTIN C
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:34 am | Permalink

      Free movement of labour I would be happy with, and this was the status quo pre-Maastricht. The EU today is insisting on free movement of people. Not the same thing.
      Secondly, NAFTA has a GDP about 20% greater than the EU28, and that is before we have left it taking our GDP with us.

      • stred
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 11:14 am | Permalink

        Switzerland has free movement of labour. Free to take a job then if it finishes you go home. Fine.

    • Mike Wilson
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

      in a free market you must have free movement of labour.

      Can’t see that myself. Labour will just move to where pay and conditions are better – putting pressure on infrastructure and public services. If you take that to its logical conclusion – everyone in the world lives in one country.

      You wouldn’t do a free market deal with China or India on that basis.

    • BobE
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

      If you follow that path it will lead to a common country called USE. Better normal trade than slavery.
      Bob

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:04 pm | Permalink

      Fine have some free movement of labour but this does not have mean they can then stay on for evermore, have rights to benefits they have not contributed to and can bring their elderly relatives and extended family over.

      We can have some quality controls and take those who can cover their costs in full.

      You say “Brexit was a vote against economies of scale and for economic insularity” This is completely the opposite of reality. It was a vote for UK based democracy, free trade with the World and the complete opposite of insularity.

      So Boris has been stabbed in the back by Gove and it looks like we will end up with the dire tedious, elderly, boring, remain supporter (and with serious heath issues) Theresa May. A woman who lied to the nation that “we have border control within the EU through Schengen” and failed completely to control immigration as she promised to the tens of thosands. I think I would prefer even the dire Cameron to her. How has she even got the chutzpa to stand?

      Boris would have been far superior to her at the ballet box (and indeed far superior to Gove). It is hugely depressing.

      Why on earth has the dire failure (I will mug you in a budget if you dare to vote out) Osborne not resigned yet? The man has zero credibility. The same applies to Carney (still talking things down) and Sir Jeremy Heywood. All should go and go in very short order.

      Why do you stand in all this depressing leadership pantomime JR?

    • Gareth
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

      The free movement of labour is not an essential part of a free market, countries already do everything they can to attract in demand labour and I expect we will do the same.
      But an open door to low skilled labour is a cost we cannot afford, both in the costs today to the welfare state, and the liabilities we pass onto the next generation with pensions and healthcare costs as they age.
      There is also no economy of scale advantage, more often than not it is the smaller country that enjoyed the higher living standards. And definitely not “purchasing in bulk”, private companies in this country do not club together to buy in bulk, they buy from whoever offers the best price.
      We are a trading nation, and we will prosper best when given the widest possible market, that is why in the long run leaving the protectionist EU will allow us to prosper.

    • graham1946
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:06 pm | Permalink

      In that case, why is the rest of the world not in? Why does the rest of the world conduct its business without free movement of labour? Never heard anyone explain it, just stating economic theory does not make it so. Anyway, most of that ‘richest market in the world’ is collapsing in a heap, dragged down by inefficient freeloaders. If they were all like Germany, you might have a point, but our main point is that we don’t have the facilities and with unlimited immigration the whole edifice will collapse.

      Even if it were economically efficient for the corporations, what price the standard of living of the ordinary people. The richest time was during the Industrial Revolution when all the great houses etc were built, but the people lived in abject poverty. Not for me thanks, I’d rather a bit lower GDP but a decent standard of life.

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 6:59 am | Permalink

        @graham your last paragraph is hugely pertinent at this time.

        Trickle down economics is discredited and anecdotally at least does not work.

        The country needs policies aimed at the middle and the majority not benefiting the fringes at each end.

        I am convinced that standards of living can be secured without the blinkered pursuit of GDP growth.

        • graham1946
          Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:56 am | Permalink

          Yes, GDP is a meaningless measure anyway. It may tell you how fast the wheels are spinning but does not tell you if we are going anywhere.
          GDP per capita might be a different matter, but they won’t use that, as each now member of our society waters it down.

    • getahead
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:14 pm | Permalink

      Gary, the EU is not about trade, it is about political control. Sovereignty not trade.
      Trade with the EU is not about to suddenly cease.
      You are right that the EU is about free movement of labour but the fear is that the EU is going to dole out passes to all recent immigrants which will allow them unwanted free access to the UK. Britain is already overcrowded.

    • keith sidwell
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

      there is on e reason and one reason alone that merkel said she would accept 500,000 to 1.000,000 refugees and that is she knows damn well as soon as these refugees are given a german passport and german citizenship they would for the most part gravitate to britain with its easy benefits system where they know they can claim not only for family in brtiain but non existant children and family back in their home countries free healthcare free schools easy access to accommodation it is the german hierarchy who have never forgiven britain for two world war defeats with its allies of course but they know with patience and through the eventual european superstate they can reduce britains influence by financial means they have already got greece in their pockets

  7. Antisthenes
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:00 am | Permalink

    Given the current attitude of Brussels a clean break is the wisest Brexit choice or a credible threat of one. We do not need the EU. The EU has many reason to need the UK and they deep down know that and will given the choice of a complete break or a decent deal will go for the latter. That is if the UK does not blink first and stick to it’s guns.

  8. Mark B
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:05 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/news/efta-countries-show-theres-another-way-uk

    EFTA / EEA Agreement is the only sensible, short term, option. Not perfect but, it gets us out of the EU and the Commission of our backs. It removes the UK’s commitment to, EVER CLOSER UNION.

    Immigration from non-EU countries into the UK is far higher than those from the EU. This despite the fact that the UK Government can actually impose restrictions without sanction from the EU. So one can safely assume that, even if we did have control over ALL immigration, it is the UK governments wish to allow such large immigration flows into this country. Again, we see a UK government using the EU as cover for unpopular policies that it wants but the UK electorate do not want. No wonder you are all a bit miffed at last Thursday’s / Friday’s result.

    Once out of the EU, the UK can pursue her, “Global ambitions” (copyright Nigel Farage) and, rebuild her trade links and position in the world.

    The EU is releasing 3-5 reports on the future of the EU in October this year. They cover a range of things including, an EU Army and political union. Clearly the UK cannot stay in the EU with this on the agenda. Is this the reason why we had to have the referendum now ???

    Once we have all that we need from the EEA agreement, we can demand a bi-lateral trade deal. By then the EU would have either morphed into the federal superstate it clearly wishes to be or, denigrated like the former Soviet Union or Yugoslavia. Either way we will be in a strong position to get a better deal.

    Once again, we need a plan. The best plan I have seen to date, is FLEXCIT. And the sooner we see one the better.

    • Mark B
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:08 am | Permalink

      denigrated = disintegrated

  9. Richard1
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:06 am | Permalink

    We need the consequences of this course of action – a walk-away from negotiation – setting out very clearly. I suggest this be the priority of the cabinet office group working on options. Unless and until the UK public, businesses and the market are more or less comfortable with the walk-away /WTO option, the EU will continue to play hardball. It’s not just about tariffs, that’s a small part of it. It’s about all the non-tariff barriers that affect services, particularly the financial passport. It’s also about travel and other rights and restrictions, including for those UK citizens living in the EU, who don’t trust the government to look after them, many of them not now having a vote.

  10. Tony Hart
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    Elegantly explained; it is that simple. The sooner we leave, the better.

  11. APL
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:14 am | Permalink

    JR: “If the EU sticks to its view that it cannot allow the UK to have any control over migration,”

    Liechtenstein is in the Single Market and has control over migration and immigration. There would be no exception for the UK, we would just adopt the same deal in this respect as Liechtenstein.

    Naturally, the EU doesn’t want it widely known that this is possible, because; well, everyone would want the same terms.

    But the precedent exists, we should use it to our advantage.

    • Daisy
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:46 am | Permalink

      Lichtenstein has EEA membership with an Emergency Brake on freedom of movement . It sounds appealing up to a point, but if I understand it correctly the Brake is for the Other members to grant or reject and not sure that what they agree for a very small country would be available to a large, developed state like the UK.

      • keith sidwell
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 10:26 pm | Permalink

        this is one of the deals that were granted to cameron when he was running round europe trying to get a new deal he came back claiming this was a great breakthrough along with some other nonsensical deals this shows the contempt that the eu has for britain and cameron and cameron being the eu poodle tried to tell us he had won major concessions but in truth he had gained NOTHING

    • peter davies
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:29 am | Permalink

      interesting – did not know that

    • libertarian
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:06 pm | Permalink

      APL

      Liechtenstein is in Schengen

  12. David Hope
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:15 am | Permalink

    Agreed. And in negotiations we must emphasise that we can live with this. We can’t make Cameron’s mistake of basically begging for anything and saying we shall take whatever they offer. If we negotiate hard we can get a good result

    We should also point out that we can potentially use our eu budget savings to offer reduced taxes for firms hit by tariffs

  13. Howdmc
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:21 am | Permalink

    Morning John – where would that leave us as regards the EU passport for Financial Services?

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

      Equivalence in Jan 2018 so we would be able to participate still….

      zorro

    • Juno
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:37 am | Permalink

      re passporting, the EU has given similar rights to US and HK firms because their regulations are deemed effective enough. Unless we are about to tear ours up then we should be OK.

  14. alan jutson
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:24 am | Permalink

    I can only hope that all of the other Brexiteers agree with your comments John, as we seem to have had a rather less clear image of that position from some of the original promises made of late.

    Just because we are going to leave the EU area and move on, does not mean we should be prepared to be the whipping boy for those who we have left behind, we will now become a Sovereign Nation once again, so what we accept is up to us.

    If they want to put obstacles in the way of our trade then they should expect likewise treatment.

    Freedom of movement of people in any form or way is not adoption.

    Under a points system the EU citizens will be given equal status to the rest of the World, no more no less.

    So very simple.

  15. Jerry
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:26 am | Permalink

    “[The UK will] trade with the EU on most favoured nation status under World Trade Organisation rules.”

    Who is saying that, the UK, Brexiters, the WTO or the EU? In other words how is “most favoured nation” status decided, I might have missed it but, you seem to have glossed over why you say this or it is an assertion and not a fact.

    “[the EU27] may end up imposing obstacles to their very successful exports at a time when the fall in the pound has just made them dearer.”

    You seem to be suggesting that we buy from the EU27 as some kind of charitable act! Also, if tariffs are imposed why would any EU27 based or controlled company carry on making their products in the UK for sale in the EU and thus be affected by those (import) tariffs, in fact why would any non EU based or controlled company do so either – such companies might not be able to ‘repatriate’ the physical buildings, UK law might even stop them from removing the physical production line infrastructure but that doesn’t stop them closing their UK factories and taking their IP to another country and building/starting production in that other country.

    Yes Brexit will be quick (if the UK doesn’t budge on the freedom of movement, migration in other words, and other “Four Freedoms” that are at the heart of the EUs single market), indeed I have said so myself and advocated such a exit, I just hope that the UK can knuckle down to the job at hand, the job of re-industrialising the country will be on a par with our post war recovery.

    Reply Both the UK and the EU are members of WTO and compliant so they will trade under mfn

  16. Pete
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:27 am | Permalink

    Just as Nigel Farage said, “No deal is better than a bad deal.”
    This is, in fact, better than any deal. Months or years of negotiation would allow the Remainers to rig any agreement to amount to staying in the EU. The WTO are entirely sufficient as you point out. Leave immediately. Watch our economy outperform the entire Euro zone and see how many other states want to leave the EU in a year or two. Out NOW.

  17. David Roberts
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:30 am | Permalink

    Unfortunately Mr Redwood this stance will rely on having a leader who has the backbone to stand up to the bullying tactics of Juncker and Merkel, a leader that I can’t see in the whole of the House of Commons. I’m still convinced that, in the end, the government (of whichever colour) will simply kick the referendum result into the long grass in the next few months, hence the continuing propaganda from the Remainers trying to guide the people who voted Leave to realise that we’re better within the EU than without (a view that I do not share).

  18. agricola
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:44 am | Permalink

    I covered this yesterday in “A Smooth Brexit”.

    I would advise all those currently importing from the EU to research alternative sources in the World to those in the EU. We could just as easily purchase our fridges, freezers, dishwashers, and washing machines from many alternative sources around the World. Two years gives these sources the time to cater for our specific needs.

    I’m sure that the Japanese, Chinese, South Koreans, Indians, and the USA would be happy to oblige. In the process do not overlook Israel and South Africa. Check out US retail prices via amazon.com, indications are that they can compete with the likes of Bosch, Siemens, and AEG. Just get organised, and cease fretting about it. If the EU wishes to commit further financial suicide, so be it. It is such an opportunity I feel inclined to come out of retirement.

  19. eeyore
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:44 am | Permalink

    Couldn’t agree with you more, Mr Redwood. Another triumph for clarity of mind over hysteria and panic.

    And another call today from another “leading European” for the UK to get a move on, pack its bags and go. How much better if these angry people remembered the advice of an even more “leading European”, the Prince de Talleyrand. Old Talley used to tell his young clerks, “Pas de zele, mon ami. Pas de zele.” Quite right. No zeal!

  20. Ian Wragg
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:50 am | Permalink

    What advantages do we actually get from the single market. Our contribution equates to a 7% tax on all our EU exports. In exchange we have to bow to the ECJ and provide work, benefits and accommodation to all the EU unemployed.
    There’s not much in it for 95% of the population.
    In fact it’s a bit of a con trick by politicians making out we benefit from something which in fact we don’t.
    The public aren’t easily fooled these days.

  21. oldtimer
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:52 am | Permalink

    Agreed. The “negotiations” need not take long at all.

  22. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:06 am | Permalink

    Personally my negotiating stance would be UK has tariff free access to each European country and that access is reciprocal. This would be a take it or leave it option. Divide and conquer.

    Should each European country not wish this we should revert to WTO rules. The duties levied on our £85 billion trade deficit can then be used to subsidise goods and services that would now be subject to duties on export to Europe. UK companies would therefore have no resulting competitive disadvantage and UK companies selling within the UK would have price advantage over goods from Europe subject to new duties.

    Free movement of people is not up for negotiation, fast track work permits will ensure companies can employ the best from abroad while training our own baristas. Any company newly employing a foreign national who claims any in work benefits can fund those benefits themselves. This will encourage training our own to fill jobs that attract those in work benefits, these employees will then progress from their entry roles.

    Any European national already here under freedom of movement rules who can show steady employment prior to 23 June can stay on existing terms and benefits. Legislation can not be applied retrospectively and many are already part of our communities.

    Time to play hardball while talking to the rest of the world.

  23. David Murfin
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:07 am | Permalink

    Things could indeed be very swift.
    Article 50.2 says: “the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union”
    That places the onus on the EU to reach an agreement. The agreement is about ‘the arrangements for withdrawal’ (eg when payments in both directions should stop).
    It is not about our future relationship with the EU, though it must ‘take account of the framework’ for that.
    We should prepare and present a very simple framework which we should like to see: eg tariff -free trade; entry into UK set by UK to meet future circumstances; co-operation on police and defence matters as close as possible; final decisions on laws in UK to be made by UK parliament, and adjudicated by UK Supreme Court with no appeal to European courts.
    Then ask EU to agree, or say what they find difficult about that.
    Detailed discussions to follow after withdrawal.

  24. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:09 am | Permalink

    I’ve listened to very well connected fund managers abroad, online, who are confident the UK will not actually leave the EU. Also business pundits who believe we’ll still be in the EU but with the veneer of Brexit to assuage Leave voters.
    And this morning I listened to one major US Investment Bank representative speak assuredly that another referendum would take place to confirm the renegotiation/ Brexit on terms or perhaps a general election to authorise such a negotiation result.
    Therefore, few it seems including the MPs I saw on BBC Parliament throughout yesterday appear to have faith that the Referendum Leave result was worth the electorate bothering to get out of bed and vote one way or another.
    A Mock Turtle Parliament. A Mock Referendum.

    • alan jutson
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:23 pm | Permalink

      Christopher

      Were these the same people and experts who thought we would vote remain !

      Who talked sterling up on the above basis.

      Some of our politicians are learning a huge lesson with this result, afraid many others are still in denial.

    • Chris
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:32 pm | Permalink

      From a newsletter that I receive: something in this or nothing?
      “…Yesterday’s Times carries the following diary piece: “Does the Electoral Commission know something that we don’t? On leaving the referendum count in Kettering, Jonathan Bullock, a UKIP official, asked if he could keep his security pass as a souvenir. He was refused. ‘We might need them for the next referendum’ they said”.”

      I fear that if Theresa May wins then we will have a second referendum. She has worked in, and supported, a Remain government all along so her new credentials do not convince me one bit.

  25. Gary C
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:10 am | Permalink

    Indeed, tell them we are not interested and move forward to a brighter future.

  26. Anonymous
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:10 am | Permalink

    The Remainers must stop dragging.

    The decision was made on the 23rd. We must stick with it.

    It is the Remainer’s dragging which is doing us great harm now.

  27. agricola
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:12 am | Permalink

    An afterthought on my first contribution.

    Realise that there is a big difference between the EU and individual EU nations. The EU does not suffer the inconvenience of having to be elected, nor does it have to create wealth. Sovereign nations are the opposite. They are less likely to get hung up on the free movement principal.

    The dairy industry in the UK could benefit on the back of a tariff ridden relationship with the EU. Particularly if government lent on UK supermarkets. Additionally there is a vast range of superb home made cheese available in the UK, no need to worry about the loss of Camembert or Brie. Equally the Commonwealth and the rest of the World can surpass French wine on quality and price.

    I suspect that before it all turns nasty at the behest of the EU in Brussels the sovereign nations of Europe will realise where their interest lie.

  28. turboterrier
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:13 am | Permalink

    Good entry John.

    Hopefully they (EU) will insist on the free movement as I feel it makes the divorce less complicated. There will be no mileage in beating your head against a brick wall. If they don’t want to listen just save your breath and walk away.

    It will be the German car industry, French wine growers and all other big exporters to the UK that might just have a big say on what they want and ultimately they have to be listened to as they all have a vote and a number of members are due elections in the near future.

    I really do believe that he animal we are about to enter into negotiations with could be very different one in the next 12-18 months.

    Scotland could do well to sit back and watch the events unfurl. Their export figures make interesting reading:

    Rest of the UK: 48.5 bn
    Rest of the world: 15.2 bn
    EU 11.6 bn

    Regarding the rest of the world the biggest country accepting their exports is the USA.

    It does seem rather strange that Scotland’s First Minister is upsetting her two biggest exporters and sucking up to their smallest. Funny old world!!

  29. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:15 am | Permalink

    Immediate implementation of Article 50 which includes OUT of the Free Market as stated categorically by Mr Cameron in Parliament prior to the Referendum “OUT means OUT” would inspire the EU to get on with negotiations at break-neck speed. Also as a timely message to the Market that the UK is most certainly OUT of the EU as the Market are very much uncertain about it. In fact, doubts it to the last penny of its cash-stash.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:44 am | Permalink

      I’m now almost resigned to another 18 years of efforts to try to get us out of the EU, because winning a referendum is obviously not enough to do that.

      There will just be one excuse after another and very likely it will never happen.

      I have done the “expletives deleted” job myself to save JR the trouble.

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:34 pm | Permalink

        Denis Cooper – Then the best thing we can do is try to leave the referendum result intact. Under no circumstances allow another to overturn it.

        At least then – for posterity – there is no mandate to do what they do and the people are not obliged to obey.

      • a-tracy
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:49 am | Permalink

        It would end the Conservative Party as you know it if they did this treacherous move Denis. Perhaps that’s a price to pay for the higher ups, but it would take the Labour party with it too.

        I don’t think Jeremy got the message that he was only the caretaker.

      • Mark B
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 12:42 pm | Permalink

        I have always argued against a referendum. The reason is simple. They are not legally binding like they are in Switzerland.

        Well, we have held one, and even to my pleasant surprise, we won it. But the problem with our membership of the EU was very little to do with the EU itself. The problem is both our system of so called democracy and, the MP’s that do not fulfill the role adequately of representing the people. It seems to me, that the MP’s see their role in supporting their continued political party dominance and promotion of their ideas. At no time are the people to be consulted ever again once the dirty deed of electing MP’s and a government is over.

        To this end, I will always vote against the main political parties. Why ? Because lets face it, if the Scots can vote for the SNP and get all the goodies they want paid for by the English, then the English should vote for political parties that can deliver goodies to them.

        When the main political parties are facing Armageddon at the ballot box, they will promise to sacrifice their first born to try and convince you not to.

        A lesson that is not as well headed as it should.

  30. bratwurst
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:29 am | Permalink

    This ignores the Technical Barriers to Trade issue, which is far more significant than tariffs, especially regulatory compliance. Better get used to the idea that as an intermediate step we will stay in the EEA (via EFTA) and keep freedom of movement. However, don’t forget Article 112 (the Lichtenstein option).

  31. Nick
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:32 am | Permalink

    No deal is better than a bad deal.

    Plus the delight of watching Junker’s and Tusk’s face as they realise that the consequences are that the EU has to pay the UK for trade with the UK

  32. Alan
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:36 am | Permalink

    Mr Redwood refers to “freedom of movement” in his headline, but “control of migration” in his article.

    I think we should draw a distinction: the referendum was in my view saying that people did not want uncontrolled immigration into the UK. I do not think that people want to restrict freedom of movement for the purposes of tourism, visiting friends, or short business trips.

    I think it ought to be relatively straightforward to negotiate visa free tourist travel between the UK and the EU because the EU gets many more tourists than we get from the EU, and will probably see it as to their advantage.

    Personally I would like to see an end to passport controls and would dislike the reintroduction of customs checks, but I suspect that is unlikely since many people, to my puzzlement, seem to like having controls at the borders.

  33. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:37 am | Permalink

    JR I have not mentioned names in my last two comments sent today as you seldom publish them. These are just two persons of very many in the Market who doubt Brexite as the electorate understands it:-

    1.Norman Levene of Portfolio Management Corporation, Toronto. I believe it was yesterday or the day before on BNN that he raised severe doubts about an actual Brexit

    2.Karri Vuori of Head of M&A at Panmure Gordon interviewed on CNBC Europe this morning.

    It seems the uptick in the Stock Market in the last few days is not a realisation that the UK will be OK on Brexit but a belief that Brexit is a con. That it is not going to take place. Only Parliamentarians could have conveyed this notion to the Market. The smug faces in Parliament yesterday should have been glum and, their anti-democratic talk tends to support this idea of non-Brexit.

    Even if, Brexit is going to be a reality, the market-shock has not yet taken place so we can expect a massive downturn when they realise the truth.

    reply 2names don’t dominate the market. what damage could Brexit do that could bash the markets? Most people do think the UK will leave the EU and the markets have risen on that news. That’s an inconvenient truth.

  34. Ken Moore
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    Indeed freedom of movement is too high a price to pay for the current terms of trade.
    The politicians such as Mrs May that caused the problem in the first place by sitting on their hands should not have the opportunity to continue to block reform.

    If Mrs May had done her job properly and focused on controlling non EU migration and opposed free movement within the Eurozone more strongly the result of the referendum could have been different.
    She no doubt views immigration control as the politics of ‘the nasty party’. JR how could any right thinking Conservative MP possibly think May could be the right leader?
    The ‘modernisers’ need to accept they lost the argument. What part of what happened to Labour do Mrs May’s backers not understand? – when the leadership of a party disagrees with the majority rank and file party members and becomes aloof it is not a sustainable situation….

  35. acorn
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:51 am | Permalink

    “The UK does not want to impose tariffs”. The Brits love their imports, Brexit has just made them dearer. A UK government that added tariffs to the FX increased price of those loved imports, would soon be an ex UK government!

    “The recent fall in the pound is bigger than the extra costs WTO tariffs and ruled could impose, so our competitiveness will still be better.” There was no evidence of a quantum increase in exports when the Pound dived 30% in 2008. There was a little bit of inventory clearing for a couple of quarters, after which exports were back to where they were before the dive.

    UK exports have flat-lined at £43 billion a month since Osborne arrived. I don’t think there is any unused export capacity left in the UK economy, to take advantage of the current terms of trade. Don’t be surprised if the Germans tell the ECB to start buying Pounds Sterling to keep its value up, so we keep buying them BMWs; and, one in ten of every Audi made.

  36. Mike Stallard
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:04 am | Permalink

    If you are humble enough, please go to the EUReferendum blog and read about the Liechtenstein solution. Today there is a useful post, too, about the flexibility of the EU Regulations.
    What we need above all is some gutsy, courageous and clued up negotiators. Are there any left? People who will not sell our country down the river for a good dinner (or breakfast).

  37. Lifelogic
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:14 am | Permalink

    Indeed.

    So runway decisions delayed yet again for party political reasons Cameron was (quite rightly) going to rat again on Heathrow had he won it seems.

    Why is T May even bothering to stand? She is hugely inferior to Boris and cowardly and was dishonest with it. Get a leader (it has to be Boris) get rid of the even more dire Osborne and get some sensible government in place and some runways built.

    Charles moore in spectator today has it right on Osborne, he should have gone already. He is still pedaling racist slurs against leavers.

  38. Bob
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:15 am | Permalink

    The EU know very well that their very existence is at stake. They think that tub thumping will scare the useful idiots and bedwetters in the UK establishment.

    Contrary to the daily dose of propaganda from our main broadcasters, the UK is in a strong negotiating position, and if the EU wants to survive in its new diminished condition they will need to stop painting themselves into a corner and start behaving more rationally.

    As for the whining “liberals” in the UK, they need to understand that:
    1) there is no such thing as “EU funding”. It’s just a loaded term to describe a “cashback” arrangement.
    2) nobody except themselves are suggesting that the UK will close its borders. Managed immigration is what is being proposed in order to protect our public services and standard of lliving, which cannot survive in an environment of unrestricted population growth.

    Calm heads is what we need during this transitional period.

  39. Bert Young
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:17 am | Permalink

    I agree that we are in a strong position negotiating a trade deal with the EU ; any fool looking at the balances can see who has the most to lose . Manufacturers should find easy outlets for their price attractive quality products – just look at the progress China made offering low cost items . Service providers are in a similar position – I had no difficulty spreading the consultancy skills of my organisation around N.America and the Far East over many years – overseas clients wanted the expertise and background we had on offer.

    The City faces the biggest challenge if the International Operators here start to switch staff to other European centres ; there are many obstacles to them if they do because it would also mean disturbing family lives . Above all there is the unique talent base of City skills here who can and will switch to alternative organisations ; it’s the bottom line that counts that Banks cannot ignore . The scenario of a declining EU economy is another important factor plus the risk of it falling apart altogether .

    Making our case does all depend on who leads it and who is advising him/her . I believe the race is between Boris and Theresa ; both of them have the skill and persona required . There is an advantage of a “Brexiter” fronting up but , there is the need of a cohesive Conservative Party ; in the first scenario Boris wins the day , in the second Theresa has the edge . I have no doubt that no-one is more ably suited to the role of Chancellor than our host .

  40. f
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:18 am | Permalink

    Your post today John is music to my ears. The fact that Liam Fox is also standing for PM is also great. He instils a great deal of calm and professionalism. Really don’t want Theresa May unless we can be sure she will get the deal we all voted for. No ifs or buts. As you say, we don’t want freedom of movement. As Liam Fox stated, we also DO NOT NEED a general election. We would take the chance that if Labour got itself together they would abandon the referendum result and get us to stay in the EU. Angela Eagle wants that more than anything as we saw on the TV debates.

    • f
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:19 am | Permalink

      Sorry, my post should be from Fedupsoutherner and not f as I mistakenly put.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:11 pm | Permalink

      Liam Fox is sound, but he has virtually no chance at all of winning. The pathetic & cowardly, Theresa May would be an dreadful choice if the party actually wants to win elections.

      Michael Gove will not be a patch on Boris at getting votes in the ballet box.

      My goodness, BBC favourite Michael Heseltine is a very bitter, twisted, foolish & misguided old man isn’t he? Yet another person we have all seen rather too much of.

  41. forthurst
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:18 am | Permalink

    Clearly it is essential that the next leader of the Conservative Party is a Brexiter in tooth and claw, not one who is willing to steer our country to a position of subservience like Norway to those unelected bureaucrats and despised politicians who have not yet been trained to stop ordering us about.

    Daniel Hannan suggests in the DT that people voted to retrieve our sovereignty not keep foreigners out as that we be racist and we’ere not racist. I have news for Hannan, whilst he was bloviating form a platform, I was talking to ordinary people and the issue of sovereignty was hardly ever raised because many people had not understood that our parliament and supreme court are not sovereign and that the EU parliament is not a proper parliament. Of course it is true that reclamation of our sovereignty is essential to achieve border control, but sovereignty is the sine qua non of being a proper nation state, not a satellite of a later day Bolshevik Empire whose unelected rulers can order populations and borders to move at their behest. Only a minority of Remainers, usually intemperate nutters on bicycles, believed that wanting to be a free nation was ‘racist’; young people were concerned about having to have visas to travel to Europe or a belief that borders were obsolescent in the modern world; some on the left held that rule by anyone but a Bullingdon boy was preferable, and of course, those who were ‘informed’, were certain that we could not survive economically outside the Brussels straightjacket.

    The people voted for us to become a free nation once again that controls its borders for its own benefit and nobody else’s. Despite the full resources of the state including the broadcasting media being mobilised against a change in the status quo, a clear majority still voted for freedom.

  42. A different Simon
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:20 am | Permalink

    Good observation John .

    If we were to strike a special deal with the EU , it would give them leverage over us for the foreseeable future as there would always be a dark cloud of the threat of revocation .

    By relying on W.T.O. rules , we have much less to lose and the EU’s negotiating position going forward is diminished .

    I get the impression that some supposed leavers , including Boris , don’t see it the way you explained it .

    Are you having any success converting them ?

  43. JM
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:29 am | Permalink

    I don’t know why we don’t simply say to the EU WTO it is and get on with it. Then everyone will know where they stand; there will be the much craved certainty. Meanwhile we can get on with negotiating bilateral deals where we can. Anyone with a job offer is welcome to come here. Anyone with a job is welcome to stay here. The fact is that most migrants come to do work that those who are already here, for whatever reason, do not want to do, e.g. picking vegetables in the fields of Lincolnshire – Boston take note. They are not taking “our jobs”. Why would any employer go to the trouble of overseas recruitment if there was a ready, willing and able pool of local labour on which to draw?

  44. Chris
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:29 am | Permalink

    There is a useful article this morning on Richard North’s website on the single market. It responds to the D Tel article about the Tusk meeting and the declaration that the UK won’t have access to the single market without freedom of movement. Basically North claims that the meeting yesterday was “informal” so held no legal weight. Also he looks into the issue of flexibility with the “access” to the single market, and demonstrates that there is such flexibility. See extracts below.

    http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86125
    Brexit: letting off steam
    “………..What this means, though, is that the much-touted “decision” that the UK “will not be given access to Europe’s single market without accepting freedom of movement rules”, has no legal force – and probably no practical effect.

    Even the choice of terminology is a bit odd, with President Tusk, speaking in English, saying that: “Leaders made it crystal clear that access to the Single Market requires acceptance of all four freedoms, including the freedom of movement. There will be no single market à la carte”.

    One is never really sure in these circumstances what is meant by “access” to the Single Market. Properly defined, the Single Market is a common regulatory area. A country is either part of it, or it is not. If it is not, then it can trade with the countries forming the Single Market, on defined terms. But for the most part those countries which have trading privileges are not required to accept the full freedoms.

    The more one explores this subject, though, the more anomalies are thrown up……The point that emerges from this is that the Single Market is actually quite flexible. It can be modified according to circumstances, and different versions of it exist, in different areas. There is no reason in principle, therefore, why the UK should not negotiate its own specific version of the supposedly Single (but actually “variable”) Market.

    And that very much appears to be the case with freedom of movement. It actually matters not what the HSGs say in an informal meeting because – as we saw with Leichtenstein – the provision for exemption is built into the EEA agreement.

    The important thing here is that invoking Article 112 is not bending or twisting the law. Nor is the Article a “loophole” – it is a fundamental part of the Agreement. Thus, to use it to cap immigration is to use it precisely for one of the purposes for which it was intended. And, given that – for Efta states – its application is unilateral, there is no mechanism for over-riding it……”
    It could of course, come to pass in the Article 50 negotiations, that the remaining EU members refuse to allow the UK to stay in the EEA, or seek to modify the Agreement….”.

    • Mark
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

      There is no mechanism for the ejection of a state from the EEA agreement. A state can resign by giving 12 months written notice to all the other states (Article 127). The UK is an EEA signatory in its own right.

  45. Vanessa
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:32 am | Permalink

    If you read the piece on EUReferendum dot com the “single Market” is quite flexible.

    “One is never really sure in these circumstances what is meant by “access” to the Single Market. Properly defined, the Single Market is a common regulatory area. A country is either part of it, or it is not. If it is not, then it can trade with the countries forming the Single Market, on defined terms. But for the most part those countries which have trading privileges are not required to accept the full freedoms.

    The more one explores this subject, though, the more anomalies are thrown up. For instance, it is common to talk of the Single Market acquis as if it was a monolithic block, common to the entire area. Yet, that is not the case. There is unrestricted trade in agricultural products between the EU-28 but not within the EEA. The Efta states are not part of that market.

    Hence, which supposedly all Single Market legislation has the description, “EEA Relevance” appended to it, this is not the case with laws governing agricultural products, as can be seen from this example. Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein do not apply them.

    The point that emerges from this is that the Single Market is actually quite flexible. It can be modified according to circumstances, and different versions of it exist, in different areas. There is no reason in principle, therefore, why the UK should not negotiate its own specific version of the supposedly Single (but actually “variable”) Market. ”

    We need to be round the table and negotiating now; it is not acceptable that this seems to be going on, on an ad hoc basic and without any representative from Britain.

  46. Robert Eve
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    Spot on John.

    It won’t take 2 years either.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:36 am | Permalink

      Once it’s been started, but unless we get our fingers out it will never be started.

  47. Mike Wilson
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    I see the BBC is still as biased as it can be. Every time I look at the BBC web site I see prominence given to negative views. Right now it shows:

    ‘Horrible’ UK Current account deficit (although it does admit we’ve had a deficit every year since 1983)

    and they keep giving prominence to the views of one Joe Rundle, head of trading at ETX Capital (whoever they are) who comes out with comments such as …

    “If Britain cannot secure enough access to markets to remain attractive as a place for big global firms to headquarter, we all suffer.”

    I get the sense the BBC are telling their minions to trawl the world looking for negative comments they can give prominence to.

    I read yesterday something about ‘analysts are surprised at the speed of the FTSE 100 recovery’. Ahh, don’t you just love ‘experts’.

  48. Mike Wilson
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:55 am | Permalink

    I’d like us to develop an economy where we are not reliant on big global firms to headquarter here.

    We need a complete back-to-basics rethink. We need to think about the basics – food, energy and housing. And start to work out how we stop having an economy built on ever increasing consumer debt. Surely we can do better than our current situation of endless consumption to keep people in work.

    I think we ought to start working out how we can all start working a much shorter week – with wealth much more evenly shared. But, of course, that requires intelligent, capable people in government. Oh boy.

  49. Leslie Singleton
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:55 am | Permalink

    Why isn’t it obvious that we would gain more from no longer having to contribute than we would lose from having to pay tariffs? If, nevertheless, the EU somehow persuade themselves (large) tariffs are WTG, given that the EU net exports to us we can retaliate till they realise where they are going wrong in their thinking. We should explain to them in words of one syllable that it is one of our founding fundamental inviolate and very non-negotiable principles that we and we alone control who can and cannot just stroll in to the UK.

  50. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:57 am | Permalink

    Theresa May minutes ago has outlined her pitch for leadership. According to expectations. Notable emphasis: “Having MORE control over free-movement”
    Of course MORE control is not control in the absolute. Don’t want her as leader. Watered down before it even gets to bottling stage.

    • Ken Moore
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 2:30 pm | Permalink

      Ofcourse some in the Conservative party do not want an end to free movement as it fits in with their radical cultural revolution agenda.
      Mrs May with her ‘nasty party’ politics is one such dangerous individual.

      She is widely described as a ‘euro sceptic’..well didn’t people say that about Cameron once…

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

      She would be a disaster electorally, a remain supporter, lacking any courage, a liar (we have control over our borders in the EU my a***) and a person with the charisma of a damp rag. She sounds like a bossy, dim, pedestrian, primary school teacher. She almost makes John Major seem charismatic.

      Her speech today was appalling, compared to that of Boris’s saying he was not standing.

      Why are there are so many appalling, second rate Libdems in the Tory party?

  51. Matt
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:59 am | Permalink

    It’s not for me to say, but if you’re not standing for the leadership yourself, I would hope that you could work with Mr Gove. Throughout the referendum campaign and before, Mr Gove has always been most impressive. He strikes me as a principled statesman in the same way that you yourself always have. I’ve had my fingers crossed that he could be persuaded to stand for the leadership ever since he took a leading role in the referendum campaign.

    • Peter Stroud
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

      Agreed. Mr Gove is, by far, the most suitable candidate. Hopefully he will get into the last two, so that rank and file members have a chance to vote for him.

  52. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:03 am | Permalink

    Heard Mr Hannon MEP talking on CNBC. Asked about free-movement he stated one could google to ones hearts content but he has never stated he was against free-movement. Another Brexiteer, post referendum who it turns out was wearing an unseen prophylactic on his tongue

    • CdBrux
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

      He, and Boris were quite clear in the campaign. Not too loudly of course as they knew that message would not play so well. Do not forget that people voted for Brexit for a variety of reasons, not just your own view.

      Maybe this is one reason Boris is stepping away (apart from severe doubts over abilities to organize things seriously)?

      Good to hear the whole economic picture set out. Do EU have to play by WTO rules or is there a risk still of a trade war developing?

      As for leader, well they have to do two things:
      1. Clear and level headed negotiations with EU: need a grasp of details and ability not to annoy others. I think Gove lacks in this second part – too confrontational.
      2. Appeal significantly beyond the Tory vote at last GE. I.e hold vs Lib Dems in SW and gain vs labour in Midlands and North. All whilst reversing the drift to UKIP. So must not be London & SE centric.

    • getahead
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

      But then Christopher, we didn’t vote for Daniel Hannan so he can go whistle.

      • CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 12:11 am | Permalink

        getahead:
        His present expressed view fits in well with Ms May should he desire a proper MP’s job in future.

    • libertarian
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:32 pm | Permalink

      Christopher Houston

      The fact that you can’t be bothered to listen to what people say is hardly their fault.

      Hannan has been consistent with this. I chaired an EU radio debate back in early April in which Hannan expressly made it clear he was NOT against the movement of people.

      • CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
        Posted July 1, 2016 at 12:09 am | Permalink

        libertarian:

        Re-read what I wrote. One is not in a rhetorical Brussel’s shouting chamber.I indicated , really, in all the times I have listened to Mr Hannan which are many,that on the subject of free movement of workers he was not forthcoming.

    • Chris
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:33 pm | Permalink

      I am afraid I never trusted him.

  53. ian
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    If you just get on with what you want to do with the paperwork and have no contract nearly everything will be ok. you have a quota for unskilled workers from Europe agriculture workers so on which you will have give handout to, when you do not want the workers you cut off the benefits, so you have people hear when you need them.
    This all comes about by having proper files and checks and board controls and not giving out NI cards to anyone who wants one plus your have take a lot back.

  54. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    None of this is even worth discussing while the government refuses to keep the clear promise it made in the official booklet it had delivered to every household:

    https://www.eureferendum.gov.uk/why-the-government-believes-we-should-remain/eu-referendum-leaflet/

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

    A week after we decided that we want to Leave the EU the government is still holding back from starting the implementation of our decision by formally notifying the EU that we intend to withdraw; and some of the leaders of the official Leave campaign are going along with that duplicity, calling into question whether they ever really wanted to get us out of the EU or were just playing internal party politics.

    And now there is this:

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

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

    “One source suggests that the plan in EU circles could be to avoid Brexit entirely by showing “Brexiteers” the full consequences of their vote.

    “From what I see and hear, I think the plan is to wait for the notification of Article 50,” a source from a member state told EUobserver.

    “The plan is to help the pro-EU in the next [British] government so they don’t take that step.”

    The EU could also wait and hope for a snap election in the autumn where a leader would get a mandate not to implement the referendum outcome – because the vote is not legally binding – or even to organise a second referendum.”

    Before the referendum there were some people commenting here that even if we won the referendum we would not be allowed to leave the EU; with every day which passes our referendum victory slips further from our grasp with the leaders of the official Leave campaign doing nothing about that; increasingly it seems those pessimists may have been right, however many referendums we may win and however many promises may be made by the government we will never leave the EU.

  55. ian
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:33 am | Permalink

    People are seeing and hearing things that are not there, of cos if you mess the paperwork up that will be your own fault not theirs, the big factor is now bad depression will be in Europe late on if it comes to that.

  56. stred
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    Mrs May has made her opening speech of her bid and it has been received well She said A50 should not be implemented until next year and then she would set up a ministry which would negotiate all the many details of withdrawal, which would include a stop to free movement. It appears she envisages the process taking years.

    During this time any person in the EU thinking of coming to the UK would have the incentive to arrive before the drawbridge was lifted. Her ministry’s failed efforts to reduce the numbers of non-EU migrants would be dwarfed by the increased numbers of EU migrants still with free movement. The latest net figure is about the same as the population of Iceland with EU providing about half.

    But she is high in the polls and is very presentable while derogatory remark about Boris and Gove’s appearance are over the media. The pong of an Establishment stitch up is in the air.

    • stred
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:47 am | Permalink

      The BBC have found some business people who say that it will be a problem complying with EU regulations and specifications and that we will no longer have any say in how they are made. As you say, we already have to comply and therefore no change will be necessary. Also these regulations are made with the influence of large multi-national companies using lobbying and so SMEshaveno influence and nothing changes here.

      Then there are some who say that now the simple export application to the whole EU will no longer be available and that they will have to make separate applications to 27 different countries. Surely they will still make the same application as at present with one form applying to the whole EU or USE as it will be soon.Could you please clarify?

  57. Chris S
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    At one point in the campaign, someone who should know the rules, can’t remember who, suggested that there was some limited scope for EU states to make individual trade arrangements with non-member states.

    Can anyone throw some light on this ?

    I can see a situation where Germany would want to have a free trade deal with us without tariffs but that could be vetoed by Hollande, at least before he’s ejected from office in May.

    Could Germany make a bilateral deal on cars, for example without tariffs ?
    Not sure that would be in our interest, though, as Merkel will be under immense pressure to ensure that there are no tariff barriers for their cars. As we have seen in EU matters, what Merkel wants, Merkel usually gets.

  58. Graham
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    Please John ensure you get a position on the ‘leaving team’ – it’s vital that we have someone with the rights skills and desire to move this along. There will be threats and intimidation along the way and we must (as your article shows) counter these strongly based on fact and market reality.

    Ideally there should be no Remainers within a 100 miles of this process.

  59. The PrangWizard
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:47 am | Permalink

    The impression given here is that Article 50 will be used; however it is based upon an assumption of total intransigence by the EU. But there is the serious risk of a negotiations fudge and thus the selling to us of a pup.

    Yesterdays piece has the hallmarks of the fiasco over the English parliament issue, which is was to start from a position of compromise. We were told that all had to be done was to amend parliament’s standing orders, it would be as simple as that. We didn’t need a true English parliament. All would be well and conflict could be avoided. Many said that this was weak and EVEL would be walked over and ignored by the SNP and others, and so it proved.

    It seems we are seeing a re-run with the EU. Just repeal this and that and all will be well, and A50 will not be necessary – we will have got we wanted, without conflict. This seems to be an over-riding requirement. Peace at all costs. Half-hearted and half-baked.

    But if A50 is not triggered it follows that we remain in the EU, and no doubt will be subject to its edicts, directives, orders and threats. We will be told this won’t happen, it won’t be possible etc.., that all will be well, but don’t you believe it.

    It does us no good to start from a position of weakness. We can all see the attempt of the Remainers and its media supporters and many others on the losing side to undermine the UK’s resolve, to diminish the vote, to persuade the people that we made a mistake, and that we should reconsider. They would just love it if the Leavers side were to be seen as weak, they would exploit it with the greatest aggression.

    We need strength from leaders to protect our revolution. Why are they not speaking out more? Leave must mean Leave, not a few more parts of it, but all of it.

  60. Christopher Hudson
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    If Labour were to elect somebody at least ‘normal’, an Alan Johnson or a David Milliband don’t expect a Conservative majority come 2020. Theresa May? She gives new meaning to the term ‘remote’. You think she’d appeal to ordinary voters? Not on your life. This morning she’s saying Brexit means Brexit I mean why does she even feel the need to say that? Oh dear…guess that’s democracy…

    • CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 12:35 am | Permalink

      Christopher Hudson;
      A similar name to my own and this time a similar view . When the Labour Party rids itself of its 172 undemocratic right-winger pro-EU MPs and then and only then elects an average sort of guy or gal, it will be very easy to beat the Tory Party, other things being equal , as it is merely facing the however worthy but decidedly uncharismatic Theresa May, Michael Gove and the others.
      Yes they may have an exceptionally well-united Conservative Party and stick together like chocolate to a blanket, but they’ll not get a following in the ballot to get them into power. If in fact many of them are still willing to subject themselves to democratic ballot again. ( where non-party members are allowed to vote ) It makes their eyes red and watery. Heavens, they could lose!

  61. Peter Jones
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    The question therefore should be “What do the EU have to agree to to have tariff free access to our country?”

    • Know-dice
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 6:15 am | Permalink

      Yes, absolutely…

      They [the EU] seem to be willing to sacrifice the jobs and economy of many in the the mainland EU for the sake of some dogma.

  62. bluedog
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    An explosive report from the IMF, Dr JR.

    Deutsche Bank is branded as the world’s riskiest bank, quite an accolade. We must of course hope that the IMF report doesn’t trigger a run on DB, the resulting economic melt-down in the Eurozone would not be an economic positive. However, this announcement does highlight the risks of staying in the EU and of possibly being asked to give generously to support DB. The British electorate are to be congratulated on their astute decision to mitigate the risks of the Eurozone by voting to get out.

    For the Remainians, the plight of Deutsche Bank offers a splendid opportunity for some fraternal pan-EU crowd-funding. All contributions gratefully received, dig deep.

  63. zorro
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    Exactly and this should be our position, unless they are prepared to see sense and trade freely without freedom of movement. Their supposed ‘free trade’ club (in reality a protectionist customs union) imposes too high costs on the UK in terms of an entry fee, free movement, and strictures on our ability to negotiate our own trade deals. This is clearly unacceptable to the UK, and the politicians need to get it, and sooner the better….

    Interesting to see that Mrs May has surfaced after her seeming retreat whilst on the Remain campaign….. She has also come up with a ‘continuity Cameron’ approach it seems. Her ‘ambition’ (heard that before?) is to try and get immigration down (ahem – last six years?)….. She also had the rather bizarre stance of wanting to stay in the EU but leave the ECHR??….. However, when questioned today, she made a seeming joke about Boris, and then stated that she would not pursue leaving the ECHR as there was no parliamentary majority just like that….. Is there currently one for leaving the EU?…. And you are not wanting an election either until 2020 either? Is she for real? Her supposed tactical stance re EU/ECHR was merely a poor balancing ploy. I also do not think that she comes over well when questioned. How can the Tory party plump for her? Anyway Andrea Leadsom has now declared and she is far more impressive on public display that Mrs May ever could be…. And Andrea had the courage of her convictions to stand openly and honestly for LEAVE. We need someone in charge who will carefully protect our government information…..

    zorro

  64. Entrepreneur1973
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:08 am | Permalink

    Spot on and the same thing that John Mills, founder of JML and a Labour Leave man, was saying on yesterday’s Today programme.

  65. a-tracy
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:08 am | Permalink

    Yes but who in the Conservative team has the bottle and gumption to fight this best. May is just a bottler. Crabb (you can’t be serious). Boris for all of his detractors in the press, has never been someone against immigration and labour movements, he just always wanted us to have the control and limit benefit and housing benefits so they didn’t jump the queue.

    (A case history left out ed)

    If we keep importing children from low income countries with Mums not working why are we beating ourselves up about child poverty rising – the two correlate and we shouldn’t be Europe’s welfare state.

    The first thing I would do as new PM is say right we can produce bills now whilst we’re in the EU for our NHS services. Appoint agents to do the billing for every NHS service back to the originating Country, as we are billed by them, and offset the bills, pay the agency a commission from what they collect, don’t hire one more NHS worker over this contract it out.

    Then I would say, until we leave we will not be left out of meetings, the other 27 cannot meet without a representative from the UK. We maintain our 18 places in the Council of Ministers, our European Commissioner needs replacement today. Why Junker thinks our MEPs aren’t entitled to be in the Parliament is a joke too.

    We are simply like the employee you find out has gone for an interview and been offered another job. You have to keep them on until they give you notice, then they can serve their notice or you pay them off plus holiday pay.

  66. James Matthews
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 10:39 am | Permalink

    Entirely agree. The most important thing now is not to let the Remainders, including the BBC, who continue to campaign as if the referendum was yet to be held, to bog the process down for so long that they feel they can get away with calling a second referendum after a relentless effort to scare the bejabbers out of any waverers.

    We need to get on with it.

  67. Caterpillar
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:08 am | Permalink

    Are the parliamentary party going to simply offer two remain supporters to the members?

    • CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 12:47 am | Permalink

      Caterpillar:
      Yes just two. But neither will become PM after a General Election. They’re all looking much like something out of the movie Caligula just now. The more sincere they look and sound: the more one disbelieves them.
      Article 50 was scheduled to be started immediately, “the next day” after the referendum result. That was the promise of the present Tory Prime Minister which he has yet to deliver. His would-be successors are unwilling to do the right thing and honour democracy.

  68. LondonBob
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:28 am | Permalink

    We will have different Presidents in France and the US shortly. Especially if Trump and Sarkozy then I think if we push hard enough we can get what we want.

  69. a-tracy
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:28 am | Permalink

    Just heard the news about Boris and Gove. I wonder who our toxic Chancellor will get behind, then we know who the Europeans and high ups want in order to get the best deal for them.

  70. a-tracy
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    I’ve just read ‘Its not too late’ on the Guardian – this is why people don’t want to pay for Guardian news, its out of date, their figures and dismal information in this article points to information from 3 days ago. Surely they have to report up to date information in an article published at 7am this morning.

    Keep Calm and Make a Cup of Tea people, we don’t have leaver remorse. As much as these papers are whipping up every racial story they can find, the rest of us say, throw the book at those boys, prosecute with a meaningful sentence and tell British citizens what the repercussions are if they do similar. The same with anti-English racism.

  71. G
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    I love this guy – please John Redwood for chief advisor and chief negotiations strategist!

  72. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    http://openeurope.org.uk/daily-shakeup/gove-and-leadsom-declare-tory-leadership-bids/

    “… she [Theresa May] also argued that there should be no early general election and that Article 50 mechanism for leaving would not be triggered until next year.”

    In other words, it will NEVER be triggered and we will NEVER leave the EU.

    Can’t you see that, JR? Can’t you see what these (people ed) are up to?

    Originally it was going to be immediately after a vote to leave, Cameron repeatedly said; then he belatedly realised that he would not be the right person to do it, that should be whoever took over as Prime Minister in October; and now according to one of the leading candidates for that position it will be “next year”, which could mean December next year; long before then it will have been put off, and it will end up as NEVER,

    Let’s be honest about this and admit that winning the referendum was a total waste of time and effort, because the scum which has floated to the top of our political system love us being in the EU and will NEVER allow us to leave.

  73. Mick
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

    I see Mr Johnson is not standing as a candidate for PM, what should happen is Mrs May should do a deal with Mr Gove by putting him in charge of a team of getting out of the dreaded eu

  74. a-tracy
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Andrea Ledsom is she our next female PM? https://www.thesun.co.uk/video/news/boris-johnson-rules-himself-out-of-race-to-be-new-tory-leader-and-prim/
    How long are we going to wait to find out who you’re backing John?

  75. Antisthenes
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 1:14 pm | Permalink

    Boris not standing. I think good news for Brexit. Michael Gove or Andrea Leadsom(if not next chancellor) would be my choice. Theresa May does not strike me as being of the right calibre. Your choice Mr Redwood you know the candidates far better than us?

  76. stred
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

    I forgot the other young bloke with half a beard. Apparently, he has put himself forward because he spent some time in a council house and was not very rich. I just heard he had some questions over his new MP house and switching. JR, you spent some time in a council house didn’t you? Is it too late to put yourself forward on this ticket? I started life in a one bedroom privtately rented flat by the way, so I’m not being snobby.

  77. Don Bennett
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    There should be no free movement at all in our negotiations, that is paramount part of Brexit. If they want that then we walk away and I’m sure there are lots of countries like Korean and Asian countries that will sell us whatever we want and the ones who will suffer are the manufacturers and workers in Europe if they put tariffs on us.

    Do not Theresa May thank you

  78. ian
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

    Markets a round the world will be going down soon and it not because of brexit, it because the world economy is slowing, central bankers will do more later this year and usa markets will be at a all time high by end of the year.
    Hear we will have to move away from central bank intervention and to government leading way instead of sitting back and doing nothing and leaving all the work to bank intervention.

    New tax system, new transport system for lorries to get rid of the pollution with are own lorries made hear which run on electric the latest coal fire power station with latest tec , battery power station so that the windmill and solar we already have go to them so there is no waste of power and power is stored, small nuclear units, new wind power ships for transporting goods at less cost, if business cannot get their pollution and costs down the government must take the lead with new ideas on new tec and factories and lorry network, most of this tec is already available but costs a lot because it has no economy of scale, battery for houses, fill your car from home with electric or gas, thousands of opportunity out there for new jobs and for new companies also small business, must not let the big boys get in the way kill everything off.

  79. Atlas
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 2:23 pm | Permalink

    John,

    Perhaps you’ll let us know your take on the declared leadership contenders’ positions on negotiations with the EU. Your analysis is awaited with great interest.

  80. Christopher Hudson
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Way to go, getting rid of the number one election winning machine, Labour back in play for 2020. Winning the war losing the peace. Oddball Gove v. Remote May. Yikes! Come back Cameron all is forgiven…

    • Mark
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:49 am | Permalink

      Labour is imploding. The inevitable consequence is they will now split into two unelectable factions – the Momentum Marxist wing, and the Blairite “we ignore working class people” wing. Neither will do well in the next election.

  81. DaveK
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 2:49 pm | Permalink

    Any thoughts on the the Liechtenstein solution?

  82. Brummiephil
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

    Looks like the EU Referendum Part 2 (150,000 participants) is on the way then… With both Houses being pro-Remain and the BBC’s Project Hysteria dominating the airwaves we’re stuffed if Theresa May wins the leadership election. You can see that she would fudge it by her ‘more’ control over free movement comment this morning – plus of course her clear (though carefully managed) position over the last few months. If it’s not Gove, or Leadsom, then I really do think it’s effectively all over. Every day we don’t enact Article 50 is a day closer to a dreadful compromise anyway…

  83. Posted June 30, 2016 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    I’m coming round to the conclusion that we might as well just tell the 27 we are going to leave and that there will be no more contributions to the EU budget. We could waste months attempting to retain access to the single market knowing that in the end they are not going to agree without full FOM and continuing large budget contributions.

    In return for a tariff free trade deal, and retention of the Financial services passport, we will allow freedom of movement for those either with a firm job offer for a job that the UK needs to fill, and for those over the age of 55 who do not intend to work but can prove absolutely that they have the means of fully supporting themselves.

    Those coming to work will have to compete on equal terms for a job offer with people coming to the UK from outside the EU. In other words, a level playing field.

    Naturally we will expect reciprocal rights.

    Everyone already here can remain indefinitely but will have no access to benefits until they have contributed NI payments for five years. Child Benefit for everyone, including those already here, will only be paid for children also resident in the UK and in full time education.

  84. RupertP
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

    John – Even the WTO option could be unsatisfactory for us:

    What’s wrong with the WTO option

    Given the issue with WTO status, how will we be able to leave the EU and continue trading normally with them? I cannot see that we get any satisfactory arrangement by invoking article 50 as a new trade arrangement for the UK with the EU needs the unanimous agreement of all 27 countries and at least one of the countries will probably want to use their veto to obtain some sort of advantage or to extract a concession that cannot be given. Instead, I suspect we will get to the end of 2 years and have no agreement in place for further trade at all, especially if the EU are blaming the UK for destabilising the whole EU project.

    • Mark
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:56 am | Permalink

      An exit treaty under article 50 only requires a QMV in Council – NOT unanimity – and can be imposed on the other states who vote against or abstain under the terms of the article. In that way, attempts to hijack it can be sidelined.

  85. ian
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

    Politics where are we, labour party trying to unseat their leader before the chilcott report comes out, con party elite trying to put in leader who will mess up brexit and the politicians who made it possible, no if no buts, wet & mad, ukip leader, the leader of Germany and the leader of the EU.
    So will it happen, that’s in the hands of the people and what they think and do if doze not happen.

  86. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

    Mr Carney, Bank of England Governor, made a special speech today.

    He gave a recount of history from 9/11, covering what an economics student might put into a long introductory essay about a general outline to this that and the other.
    One waited patiently for the beef of the speech. It didn’t arrive. No food whatsoever arrived.

    After a short while he spoke for a minute or two about the weather vane at the top of the building in which he was speaking.He opened it out to questions from the floor.
    He was asked if the BoE needed to intervene any time in the currency markets directly after Brexit. Like a professional politician he said he had two points to make. The first was equivalent to the story he related about the weather vane; the second point was “No”. No intervention was by the BoE was necessary .

    Conclusion: If the BoE throughout the Brexit period had been replaced by a cardboard cut-out and the BoE Governor replaced by an electricity pylon with a vivid yellow plate affixed to it, there would have been no impact on the UK economy throughout the whole of the Brexit Campaign and right up to the time of speaking.

    He takes it as read that the present level of the Pound is static in that he bases the “uncertainties” on the present currency exchange rate, today: a very odd assessment of currency movements which, irrespective of the UK economic performance, would necessarily be the victim of nations doing what they do in their own economies.

  87. DaveM
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

    Ofg topic slightly, has the BBC been appointed as the official ‘Overturn the Referendum/Keep the UK In’ campaign? Only I’ve been watching BBC World News lots this week and they seem determined to broadcast every speculative course of action which might hijack the majority decision, enhanced with non-stop doom and gloom from people in London and Scotland. Why haven’t they mentioned the parties in places which are overjoyed at the result?

    • a-tracy
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 10:03 am | Permalink

      Agreed, I never used to agree with people saying the BBC were biased but this is wrong of them. They will be written up in history as an organisation trying to protect it’s own pay cheque from the EU. Its a sad day, bad news stories stay on their front pages for five days, when good news stories appear they’re low down or only kept on for an hour.

  88. Michael McGrath
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:31 pm | Permalink

    Surely the original concept behind free movement was the founding of the United States of Europe. In this case, free movement between the individual states is normal as it is in the USA.
    Similarly, a single currency is another step towards the unification of consenting states and is totally reasonable within those states. The EU foreign service, the proposed EU army etc are similarly logical developments for the EU
    In our case, we do not want to be part of a European super-state and so none of these moves are appropriate
    I quite fail to understand the logic behind EU demands for free movement in non “USE wannabees”….will they demand free movement from the USA as part of the TTIP deal? I should like to be observing American reaction if this were tried
    Our negotiators must make this clear to the EU.
    They must also go into the negotiations, not as supplicants to join the single market, but as members of a successful sovereign nation which is pleased to discuss an arrangement which is beneficial to both sides, including agreeing the EU continued access as at present to the profitable UK market

  89. Gareth
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

    After reading your blog I must confess I would feel confident of the future with you in charge of our Brexit negotiations. It is a shame with Boris dropping out from the leadership, but I think he did make one mistake a couple of days ago when he promised the electorate access to the single market – that is something not in his control and an awful position to take before any negotiation.

    We currently do not have any free trade agreement with our largest trading partner (America) proving such an agreement is not essential.

    I believe your position on negotiations is the correct one, as long as we are prepared to walk away if the deal is not good enough we will get the best deal possible for the country.

    Even if the best deal is no deal at all.

  90. Margaret
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:44 pm | Permalink

    Well said Ian B. For how many years have we all been told that as we all lose our jobs to working hours that we must change. We did. The executives made sure via their managers that we had to. Now it is their turn to change and show flexibility . The path they tried to set in stone for our Country ( i.e down and down) is in fact meandering back. They will have to live with the consequences they tried to project on to us. As everyone is clucking in the media and in the political arena at present, life goes on. Interest rates have been going down for a couple of years now , banks are trying to recapitalise and at the same time illogically refusing to ensure they keep their savers. All these important people trying to blame others , not their decisions oh no! I have confidence that there are enough sensible people and go getters around to do, and not to talk blandly about others ineptitude.

  91. Margaret
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

    Another one: M Hesletine thinks that GB don’t have minds of their own. Apparently Boris made us vote Leave.

  92. Javelin
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

    Leadsom is my favourite.

    Gove and May have obvious baggage.

    I used to work with Andrea at BZW. It was a very very tough company to work on the trading floor at (I was fx at Royal Mint Court she was over at Swan Lane) and she stood out.

    I can thoroughly recommend her instincts to any of your readers.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:22 pm | Permalink

      She stood out in the referendum campaign too.

      A shining light.

    • Mark
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:58 am | Permalink

      That is a useful endorsement.

  93. Roy Grainger
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

    I see Carney is talking the pound down again today. Why ? Is he still fighting the campaign ?

    • LondonBob
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 7:41 am | Permalink

      Need to be normalising interest rates, absolutely no justification to lower them.

  94. fedupsoutherner
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:16 pm | Permalink

    what the hell is going on? Why has Boris stood down? Why couldn’t Gove and Johnson stand together? Theresa May has got a very large head start and we know she has stated she wants “more control over immigration” Does this mean she will accept the freedom of movement????? NO, Theresa, this is not what we voted for. I think we will get shafted.

    • CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 1:45 am | Permalink

      fedupsoutherner:
      It is a tiny Tory majority in the House of Commons. All standing for the Tory leadership are either unknown to the electorate, failed on immigration control, reaction to Rotherham, hindering the police in their duties, or the stopper of Boris the Vote Winner.
      None of them can win a General Election and realistically, sadly, would have to construct a coalition with the SNP to form a government. Impossible of course. Unless Mr Gove wins the internal Tory election then anything day by day or even overnight could happen. Everyone should keep their eyes peeled for stray email communications and sanctimonious renditions of “I’m doing this as I truly believe it is my duty”, etc ed

  95. The Prangwizard
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    Another delay over airports, but go-ahead for climate change crap. And delay for HS2?

    Your government is determined to slow the economy down so Cameron and Osborne’s dire forecasts can come true.

    Bloody disgraceful, pathetic.

    • bluedog
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 8:02 am | Permalink

      Rome wasn’t built in a day. With the Conservative Party currently lacking a leader and the nation with only a PM emeritus one can hardly expect relative minor decisions completely unrelated to Brexit to be a priority. Step one is surely to see whether any member of the parliamentary Conservative party can get enough support to form a government that will implement Brexit.

  96. Tuberville
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:03 pm | Permalink

    We have no need to worry about the EU it’s finished, just a matter of time.

  97. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

    Then there were two.

    On the right: Two populist leaders in England and Wales. Two leaders who can command a hearing from a crowd at any time on any subject, who can pick up votes across the political spectrum. Love them or hate them , they are Boris and Farage.
    One is the head of political party and one isn’t.

    The Tory Party has just ensured it will not win the next election. The election will of course be forced upon it as it does not have a populist leader as even caretaker. No mandate to rule, especially in such important times.

    Who , also ,would vote for a Tory Party with such lack of savvy in regard to elections.
    Ms May will win Tory leadership and will last no more than 12 months

  98. Iain gill
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:36 pm | Permalink

    Just so you know as far as I am concerned your party must elect a leader who was on the side of out. And Ms may who is largely responsible for out of control immigration would be especially disastrous. As for the EU tell them to get stuffed. Don’t pussy foot around.

    Yours the voters

  99. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 6:41 pm | Permalink

    We can do better than WTO rules. If we impose no tariffs on EU-27 exports to us but allow them to impose tariff and non-tariff barriers up to £3 billion per annum on our exports of goods and services to them, we would be well in the black because our net annual cash payment to Brussels is £14 billion pa. Our exports to EU-27 are £148 m of goods and £81 m of services per annum, so £3 billion is about 1.3% of that.

    Why not propose that to Jean-Claude Juncker and Angela Merkel and at the same time ask to repeal our Act of Accession to the Lisbon Treaty, thus negating the need to wait two years before leaving? We could then be out by April 2017, which might suit everybody.

    I won’t comment on the ‘who’ of the Conservative Party leadership contest but I will comment on the ‘what’. We should not seek to join the European Economic Area as some of the defeated Remainers are suggesting. This gets the worst of both worlds, as Norway is finding out to its cost – they have been forced to retain freedom of movement and continue to make payments to Brussels.

    Any Conservative leader who proposes to join the EEA will not have my support, and I venture to suggest that UKIP would not disappear in that event.

    Finally, may I sing the praises of Andrea Leadsom. She is not an assassin, she is a clear Brexiter and a logical thinker, she doesn’t carry any personal baggage, and she is a nice woman. The political world has enough testosterone; it’s time for a change.

  100. ian
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

    Bailout for Italy banks stop yesterday by german leader of 40 billion and today ECB go round Germany with a 150 billion bailout for Italy banks, free money and refugees, Portugal will be next, Italy on life support, will they strip Italy like Greece because it not coming back anytime soon.

  101. John O'Leary
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

    You do realise that if we retaliate and impose tariffs on the EU then according to WTO rules we have to impose identical tariffs on any other country we trade with? The EU on the other hand, being recognised by the EU as a Regional Trade Area (RTA) is not so affected. As the importer pays the tariff and we import more than we export then the UK is the loser anyway.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:49 am | Permalink

      1. If we were outside the EU and the EU imposed its common external tariff on our exports to them then we would impose the same tariffs on their exports to us, and by your argument also on imports from other countries around the world; but then the latter would in fact mean no change because we are already imposing the EU common external tariff on imports from those other countries.

      2. If the UK government imposes UK tariffs on imports then that revenue goes to the UK government. So the UK consumer may be a loser through higher prices but the UK taxpayer is a winner from the increased government revenue, and of course the two sets overlap to a great extent.

  102. anon
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 8:40 pm | Permalink

    Agree.

    Make it quick and clean. Revoke the 1972 act. Re-apply equivalent laws in the meantime. Let the EU make the running and respond accordingly.

    Move quickly to re-engage with world trade outside of the EU.

    Consider the kind offers from commonwealth partners particularly those that have trade deals we can get a piggy back on to get some quick wins for all parties.

    Time to help enable fair and reasonable trade rather than overseas aid.

  103. wab
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:35 pm | Permalink

    “If The EU does not want to listen to the UKs needs then they have to accept we can just leave and they may end up imposing obstacles to their very successful exports at a time when the fall in the pound has just made them dearer.”

    But Mr. Redwood and the other Little Englanders assured us before the referendum that this would never happen.

  104. John Robertson
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

    I do really hope that who ever leads the negotiations that if the EU won’t budge on telling us they run our rules and free movement that we gladly and willingly walk away,

    Our trade deficit means no compromise. We can imort from elsewhere and the rest we can grow and produce here.

  105. rose
    Posted June 30, 2016 at 11:56 pm | Permalink

    The EU has excluded us from its meetings and cancelled the negotiated terms so why should we go on paying the membership fee? It is also refusing to have informal talks with us yet happy to have them with wee Nicola.

    I think we should have Mrs Leadsom. She is the same age Mrs T was when she became leader but that is just by the by.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted July 1, 2016 at 9:38 am | Permalink

      As far as I know we have only been excluded from one meeting and technically that was not actually an EU meeting even though it used EU facilities. In any case we should be used to this, it was happening as far back as 1998:

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/106535.stm

      “Brown barred from Euro club”

      “The first so-called “Euro-11″ council started deliberations in a chateau in the suburbs of Luxembourg and will focus on measures to keep budget deficits small and government debts falling in the countries that have signed up for the euro from the start of next year.

      The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, opened the meeting, because Britain currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency.

      But because Britain will not join the single currency he had to leave after saying a few words of welcome and hand over the chair to the Austrian Finance Minister, Rudolf Edlinger.”

  106. rose
    Posted July 1, 2016 at 12:01 am | Permalink

    PS on no account should we have Mrs May. Lots of people across the political spectrum are absolutely allergic to her. That is why the BBC is trying to manipulate the party into electing her. If the majority of the PLP were out of touch with public opinion to the extent that they didn’t see Brexit coming, then I suppose they will be out of touch on this one too.

  107. rose
    Posted July 1, 2016 at 12:31 am | Permalink

    PPS I meant PCP not PLP. I can’t think how I made that mistake.

  108. Mark
    Posted July 1, 2016 at 10:12 am | Permalink

    What the EU Commission says may not be of much relevance. An exit treaty under Article 50 has to be agreed upon by a majority vote in Europarl, and a QMV vote in Council. As yet, the Commission does not have any vote in the matter. That might change were they to succeed in becoming the government of a new merged nation, but there appears to be a lot of resistance to that idea, perhaps enough to make the whole edifice implode. Then we would all be free of it anyway, with the UK in a strong position to show leadership in creating a free tariff zone – the market we always thought we were joining.

  109. Rhys Jaggar
    Posted July 1, 2016 at 4:31 pm | Permalink

    This is a most sensible analysis of trading reality.

    I”m not actually convinced that complete withdrawal isn’t actually the best long-term solution. The key question is whether the WTO is sufficiently corruptible to side with the EU to gang up on Britain. Perhaps you’d like to ask Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump their views on that one??

  • 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