Brexit’s darkest hour

The UK government, led by Prime Minister Theresa May, has faced its worst crisis and all of it boils down to Brexit.

The need to hold the Brexit referendum had stemmed from the UK’s wish to control immigration from the EU and to relieve itself from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice [ECJ]. The challenge is to achieve these two primary aims.

The crisis that unfolded the week before last has its source in the inflexibility of the EU and the UK MPs. In this tug-of-war between the two, it is Theresa May who finds herself faced with the nearly impossible task of reconciling their differences.

Studies have revealed that the British economy would be worse off in the event of a ‘no-deal’ situation. The deal that the UK has to strike with the EU is one which should not create a ‘hard-border’ between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, since this was a promise made by the UK government to the Northern Irish people in 1998 under what is known as the ‘Good Friday Agreement’, the breach of which could threaten Northern Ireland’s union with Great Britain. This leaves May trying to resolve the following: how to secure a trade deal with the EU which avoids the need to create a Hard Irish Border yet leaves the UK free to negotiate its own trade deals with non-EU countries while also relieving the UK from the ECJ’s jurisdiction as well as controlling immigration from the EU.

The current withdrawal agreement which May had secured from the EU provided for the UK to remain in the ‘customs union’ for a transitory period, depriving it temporarily from negotiating independent trade deals with non-EU countries. If the UK were still to fail to reach a permanent deal with the EU, the withdrawal agreement provided for a ‘backstop arrangement’ leaving the UK tied up to the customs union indefinitely and subjecting it to the ECJ’s jurisdiction.

Undoubtedly, such an ‘arrangement’ was doomed to failure at the outset, having been widely criticised. Consequently, May decided not to present it in the UK parliament, promising that she would renegotiate the deal with the EU to reintroduce it for a final vote in parliament before January 21, 2019. This led disappointed MPs from within the ruling Conservative Party to trigger a vote of no confidence in PM May’s leadership which she narrowly managed to escape. Despite that, tough challenges lie ahead of her owing to her failure to convince the EU to limit its ‘backstop’ agreement to a maximum period of 12 months.

In the absence of flexibility by the EU and the UK, a disastrous no-deal situation is inevitable. Possible solutions therefore include: one, tying up only Northern Ireland to the EU single market and customs union to avoid creating a hard Irish border [a position which would be unacceptable to the DUP, the party whose support in parliament allows the current Conservative-led government to remain in office]. Two, to agree upon a ‘Norway-EU style deal’ making the UK part of the European Economic Area thereby giving access to the EU’s single market but also relieving the UK from the ECJ’s jurisdiction.

Three, to enter into a ‘Canada-EU style’ trade agreement removing tariffs and quotas in trade with the EU but leaving the UK free to make its own trade agreements with non-EU countries. And, four, the EU will have to agree upon limiting the ‘backstop’ to a 12 months’ period as requested by Theresa May.

With a March 29, 2019 deadline, time is running out fast and that’s where the problem lies.

The writer is an advocate of the high court.

Email: qadirmuneeb@ gmail.com