“After the British decision to leave the EU, Europe’s trajectory, even
its destiny, has again become a matter of choice. In an increasingly volatile
world, neither the EU nor the UK have an interest in a divorce that diminishes
their influence as the balance of economic power shifts away from the
North-Atlantic world. We propose a new form of collaboration, a continental
partnership. The UK will want to have some control over labour mobility, as
well as leaving behind the EU’s supranational decision-making. The proposed
continental partnership would consist in participating in goods, services,
capital mobility and some temporary labour mobility as well as in a new system
of inter-governmental decision making and enforcement of common rules to
protect the homogeneity of the deeply integrated market. The UK would have a
say on EU policies but ultimate formal authority would remain with the EU. This
results in a Europe with an inner circle, the EU, with deep and political
integration, and an outer circle with less integration. Over the long-run this
could also serve as a vision for structuring relations with Turkey, Ukraine and
other countries.”
In
summary, it proposes some limitations on free movement of people along with:
- Participation in a series of selected common
policies consistent with access to the Single Market;- Participation in a new continental partnership system of inter-governmental decision making and enforcement;
- Contribution to the EU budget;
- Close cooperation on foreign policy, security and, possibly, defence matters
In essence what would be created would be a kind of dual system of the EU and the new continental partnership (CP). What is interesting about this proposal is that it is not just an idea for a deal to ‘accommodate’ the UK, but rather embeds this within a wider sense of a reformed EU and – something rarely discussed – a solution to some of the problems of the EEA, to the ongoing issues around the position of Switzerland, to the long-term situation of Turkey, and to some of the tensions between east and west European member states which are apparent in the run-up to the Bratislava summit. This is important if we move from a Brit-centric approach to Brexit in which the UK makes demands and negotiates for these to one which recognizes that Brexit and the negotiations around it are a two-way street.
It is striking how consistent this plan is with what May has said so far, and it could be seen as an intermediate model between Brexit-lite and hard Brexit which I and others have taken to be the only feasible options. It would be better than Brexit-lite in reducing the political and diplomatic damage of Brexit, and like Brexit-lite would reduce the economic damage. Of course, such a plan would face much opposition within both the UK and the EU and its member states. Still, it could be a workable solution. It’s certainly the most interesting idea for one that I have seen so far. It is well worth a read.
No comments:
Post a Comment