Theresa May will stand in front of MPs today to field questions on her Brexit deal – the third time she’s done so in less than two weeks. Her statement is unlikely to be anything new. But now we have the final text of the deal, MPs can be more forensic in their questioning, exposing the holes in May’s offer.
MPs should therefore ask whether the prime minister can confirm…
…that we only have an option to “request” an extension to the transition period, and that saying there is an “option to extend the implementation period” is misleading?
This is important because we will have to negotiate any extension to the transition period with the EU beyond 2020. We’ll be desperate to do a deal and our negotiating hand will be very weak by that point. The EU will be able to set the price. The government’s Explainer of May’s deal contradicts itself on this (see paragraph’s 122 and 158).
…we could end up paying more per year to the EU than we do now if we extend the transition?
The FT has reported that the the EU will be looking for €10-15 billion for each extra year in the transition. Given that we would no longer be getting any money back from the EU for farmers, poor regions of the UK and science if the transition is extended, the €15 billion would be higher than our current net payment to the EU. Added to that is the fact we would no longer benefit from the rebate that Margaret Thatcher negotiated for us.
…the EU is going to insist on a fisheries deal that involves “existing reciprocal access and quota shares” in order to get an extension?
This is a very sensitive political issue, particularly for Scottish Conservative MPs with fishing communities in their constituencies.
Leave a Reply