Emergency brake test

There were some interesting developments on free movement at the weekend. So…remember that renegotiation Cameron had? The EU  did not give him the emergency brake on immigration he asked for.  James Forsyth, writing in the Sun, says that Cameron told the other leaders that the failure to secure the emergency brake had probably lost him the referendum. Merkel’s response: cheer up chuck, you’d never have got it anyway:

Then came a fascinating piece by Toby Helm in The Observer, suggesting that EU capitals were considering an emergency brake on immigration for seven years, along with single market access as transitional arrangement. Emergency brake redux!

"Senior British and EU sources have confirmed that despite strong initial resistance from French president François Hollande in talks with prime minister Theresa May last week, the idea of an emergency brake on the free movement of people that would go far further than the one David Cameron negotiated before the Brexit referendum is being examined." 

This would allow plenty of time for both sides to adjust. Cheers, bruv. Where do we sign?

Not so fast, the Mr Redwood is not happy – You! Can! Tell! By! The! Exclamation! Mark! on the title of his recent blog posting:

He writes:

“The UK did not recently vote for a slightly beefed up version of Mr Cameron’s attempted renegotiation with the EU. We voted to leave, to take back control of our laws, our money and our borders. Those phrases were repeated throughout the Leave campaign, heard and understood by many, and approved by the majority of voters.”

How could I not include this?..we all need a giggle now and then

And here you get a flavour of just one of the challenges ahead. The most ardent Brexiters are worried that if this goes on too long Brexit won’t really be a Brexit at all and it will all get fudged or watered down, and we’ll have what CGP Grey calls a ‘non-Brexit Brexit’. Rupert Myers has spun out a whole piece on this theme. (As a side note Myers says leavers and remainers will both be disappointed by Brexit. If that’s the case I can live with that – if everyone’s upset it’s probably a fair outcome).    

Expect, then, the True BeLeavers to fight any deal that phases our departure over many years. There are too many events that could happen in between that could derail the exit - crisis, election, change of public opinion. If Art 50 is triggered early next year, a seven year transition would take us to the mid-2020s! They will be very suspicious that a. this was all a ruse and b. will slow the path to the sunlit uplands that await us. Remember, May has a majority of 12 and these guys will rebel.

Second, Theresa May wants to reduce net immigration - probably  to the ‘tens of thousands’ (without saying exactly when). However, she will want to deliver serious progress well in time for the 2020 election (if indeed that is the date of the next general election). So the brake will have to be set aggressively enough that it makes a material impact on net migration. 

Once again the trade-off is being set-up between free movement and single market access. So here are the questions all this prompts for me:

  • How long would the transition last for?
  • At what level would the brake be set? How would it even work? Would it be phased?
  • Would those permitted to enter under the brake be eligible to remain after we full leave? 
  • What limitations on single market access would be demanded (if any)?
  • What destination would the UK be in transition towards?