With the events in the House of Commons on Tuesday not having achieved anything of great significance and MPs scheduled to go through it all again in a fortnight, there is an opportunity for Leave campaigns to take the initiative. There is no shortage of leave campaigns, but what has been missing is a common strategy around which they can unite. Fortunately that is now available. I call it GATT24.
David Campbell Bannerman MEP has proposed a way forward that should be attractive to all leavers – see BrexitCentral. He has identified a procedure that is available within the existing WTO rules as set out in Schedule 24 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).
The strategy would be to leave the EU on 29th March 2019 having reached an interim agreement with the EU to pursue negotiations towards a comprehensive free trade deal. Both sides would be permitted under WTO rules to continue with the present zero tariff and zero quota trading arrangements. And the Irish border arrangements can continue as they are: no need for a backstop.
Thereafter there is space for negotiations for reaching a “Super Canada” deal which has been offered by the EU and pursued by David Davis before he had the rug pulled out from under him.
Although not specifically mentioned, my reading is that there would be no payment of £39B and freedom to agree trade deals with others, such as the USA and Commonwealth countries.
While this approach does require the EU to agree to it, and from what has been said they will not like it, the question for them becomes what better outcome is possible. For if the UK leaves without a deal they will be worse off. And if the GATT24 deal is seen by all reasonable people to be a fair compromise of all interests then the EU will be seen as the party that torpedoed the best possible way forward.
Campbell Bannerman has years of experience working on international trade within the European Parliament and has written impressively on the matter for the EFD Group. His proposal has been endorsed by John Longworth, Co-Chairman of Leave Means Leave – see here. Although every member of the Cabinet has been sent a copy of the proposal there is no sign of it being taken up. But the Government does not have a viable proposal of its own. Which is an opportunity for Leave groups to take the initiative.
If Leave Means Leave promote GATT24 then the case will be greatly strengthen if all other BREXIT groups throw their weight behind them. Some BREXIT groups, such as Lawyers for BREXIT and Economists for Free Trade are generally in support of Leaving the EU. Some, such as Fishing for Leave, want BREXIT for reason much closer to their specific interests.
No matter what the standpoint of any group, all can unite behind support for a strategy that gives them what they want without losing the ability to champion their own particular priorities. GATT24 is that strategy. Unlike MPs who are all over the place as to what they do not want, GATT24 is what all Leavers do want.
Come on John Longworth, you have a fortnight to get the show on the road, create a groundswell of opinion in favour of GATT24 and pressure MPs to take it up. What is not to like?
Well, the morning after the night before response from the EU clearly shows they are not prepared to consider change to the Withdrawal Agreement. This works well for GATT24. If the EU are not prepared to countenance any such change then there is no point trying to negotiate. Better to abandon the Withdrawal Agreement and to start again with something different, and for it to be seen that this has been brought about by the EU, not the UK.
So, restate that the UK is leaving on 29th March and the deal being offered to the EU is GATT24. We are going to leave, and if they want a deal then we are more than happy to continue trading with them as currently allowed for under WTO terms. As trade is free there is no need to change anything on the Irish border. All the EU regulations that the UK currently enforces as being a member will be rolled over into UK law, so no change there either. No need for an Implementation/Transition period. Lots of time to agree the details of the future trading relationship. As for collaboration agreements, these can be made if there is a willingness to do so rather than see them as bargaining chips. For instance, fears in the UK at not being in the EUROPE loop are going to be a minor consideration compared with EU fears at being further away from the “Five-Eyes” relationship. Or concerns about not being able to fly into the EU can be set against concerns about not being able to fly through UK air space. And so on.
The UK should have been firm from the outset. David Campbell Bannerman has shown the way to be firm and fair now.
Alan,
My fear is that your excellent article actually lays bare the root of the Brexit mayhem.
David Davis had apparently all but agreed a “Super Canada” deal with the EU and was then removed.
Davis, a genuine Brexiteer, removed from office by a Remainer PM at a point where Brexit could well have been sorted.
GATT 24 would seem to be an excellent option by which to achieve Brexit.
Will our PM and the Remain extremists who advise her, like the odious Olly Robbins, allowit to happen?
Interesting isn’t it that we can all see that WTO with GATT 24 is the simplest way to fulfill the result of the referendum but the government and the media insist that it would cause all kinds of problems. Your last sentence sums up the situation perfectly.
Methinks our PM etc dance to a different tune
Look at thehistory of Andorra.
I think
This is all a EU construct. And EU and all Pro EU fighters are making hay of nothing worth bothering about. Of course there ‘ll be chancers and all sorts trying it on. And possible some will succeed. But it’s only the industrial attempts that are of any concern. Of course , If the forces of gov’t are deliberately looking the other way, As in the case of drug trades ( or the tax relief of the Civil Service baby of Information age ) Then , Well it’s up to them !
It’s all a bit like booze cruises or Tobacco smuggling in suitcases
.Of course now it has been well advertised.. I may have the hard work of changing my mind and agreeing.
Basically it’s a straw man. And down to the public at whom it’s aimed. Meanwhile all the other nastinesses of the WA ( Rule by ECHR, ECJ etc etc All Unadvertised ) will be sneaking through.
I do not understand the point you are making in the context of the article I have written.
For instance, what “It” is a “straw man”?
A major attraction of GATT24 is that, as far as trade is concerned, it is the WA.
Sorry Alan . I try to write too much too quickly and lose myself. I was actually trying to moan about all the fuss about the ‘backstop’, and the tiny volume of trade across the border ( to my knowledge ). Of course it may increase . but only then need different steps be taken. My apologies. Its whole purpose is conquest, using any opportunity or help ( including the Catholic church.
I don’t actually disagree with your article except that it may lead to other areas and other borders.
I think that trade is not as important as internal trade, and can be easily regulated,as can many other thing, once outside the straight jacket of EU. As the EU themselves have demonstrated.
I’ve no idea if that helps I get more confused daily.
However the common sense of the agreed strategy has to happen. However our leaders dislike .
I have been posting about article 24 which is the same I think and gives you those right that you stated for 10 years , that should be long enough for brussels , but they will no be there then
Broadly I considered that I might agree but:
“All the EU regulations that the UK currently enforces as being a member will be rolled over into UK law,” is worrying as we will be unlikely ever to be rid of them.
May is unlikely to agree as she is hell bent on keeping us in the EU. Judge her by her actions, not her words.
So on seconf thoughts I prefer a simple clean exit, which was, after all, one of the choices on the ballot paper.
I think it is a sensible approach, by rolling over EU regulations into UK law, they then become OUR laws, and we can begin reviewing and repealing them as we see fit. But in the interim period, when it comes to trade, it will mean that all our goods and services remain compliant with EU laws and regulations, so its ‘business as usual’. Or even “frictionless” to coin a phrase. 😉
Stuart, that is not how I see it. On 29th March we leave and we can make our own laws, What GATT24 does is to enable a continuation of “free trade” with the EU. But goods and services that are not exported to the EU do not have to comply with EU laws. Of course, initially “our” laws will be the same as the EU. But from 29th March we will be free to change them as and when we choose to do so. And, of course, goods and services exported to non-EU countries will have to comply with the import conditions of those countries, as they have to now.
AND there is no “interim period” everything changes on 29th March. What GATT24 enables is for trade with the EU to continue as now, providing, of course, that is what the UK and the EU have agreed to do. The whole point of Schedule 24 of GATT is that the WTO thinks this is a good thing to be able to happen.
Alan, I do not disagree with your article and your comment reply, I’m not sure if you misunderstood my own comment as it was more a reply to Jack’s.
With regards to trade, as the UK already adheres to EU regulations and directives, once we leave and enact Schedule 24, there really will be no ‘cliff-edge’ or ‘crashing out” or indeed ‘disaster’, for many businesses trading with the EU it will be relatively ‘frictionless’ barring the odd minor inconvenience of completing customs declarations, which can be done electronically now anyway.
The reason why none of our politicians (barring Gerard Batten and UKIP) are championing this GATT24 is because none of them really want us to leave the EU.
Stuart,
My worry is that the politicians will resist changing those laws which derive from EU law. If we get our clean exit then we can be sure that miffed remainers and government will do their utmost to take is back in. Surely commonality of laws will assist them?