Yesterday it was announced that Theresa May plans to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act, which makes European law binding in the UK, and today May has said that Article 50 will be invoked by the end of March next year.
In the next Queen’s speech a “Great Repeal Bill” will be introduced, removing the Communities Act from the statute book. EU law will then automatically be carried over into British law—where Parliament will have the power to unpick it. According to May, this “marks the first stage in the UK becoming a sovereign and independent country” in the wake of Britain’s vote to leave the European Union. The bill will come into effect on the day of Brexit, which we now know will be March 2019 at the latest (once Article 50 is invoked, a two-year countdown begins.)
The news comes at the start of the Conservative Party’s annual Conference, which discussion of Brexit will dominate. Below, Gerald Howarth writes on some of the many other aspects of Brexit that are yet to be settled—and makes the case for prompt and “hard” exit from the EU.
Alex Dean, Assistant Digital Editor
On 23rd June the people of Britain voted decisively to leave the European Union. The debate now centres on the mechanics of Brexit.
As someone who campaigned to leave in the 1975 referendum (and voted against the Single European Act in 1986), I am enthusiastic and optimistic about Britain’s prospects outside the EU. I and my colleagues in “Leave Means Leave” want to see our departure secured as swiftly as possible, partly to maintain faith with the electorate but also because we know industry and commerce want certainty as they contemplate imminent investment decisions, although companies like GSK have already concluded that the remains an attractive place for investment.
Current discussion seems to centre on whether we should, or should not, remain members of the “single market.” Since membership of the Single Market requires a nation a) to apply EU regulations to every company regardless of whether that company trades with other EU countries or not, and b) to permit free movement of people, it stands to reason that there is no way we can continue as members of the “Single Market.” What we seek is tariff-free trade with our continental partners. Since they export some £70 billion more to us than we export to them it can hardly be in their interests to engage in a trade war with one of their best customers. As for free movement of people, that is simply non-negotiable; the people of Britain voted for control of their borders under arrangements agreed by their sovereign Parliament.
Negotiations are not confined to trade matters. We need to determine when we cease making the net £11 billion annual subscription; we need to disentangle ourselves from the common fisheries policy (which so disadvantages British fishermen) and re-establish our own territorial waters; we need to agree a programme for our diplomats to withdraw from the EU’s External Action Service (i.e. the EU’s Foreign Office) without causing unnecessary disruption to them, and at the same time beef up our own Foreign and Commonwealth Office, which has been seriously starved of cash.
And, of course, we need to establish a set of rules to enable key staff employed by companies such as Airbus, all of whose wings are made in the UK, and BMW, who manufacture Minis and engines in Britain, to move seamlessly around the different European plants. In 1956, my father set up the Johnson’s Wax company in Germany and we used to travel perfectly freely around the Continent. British Aerospace was working on the joint Anglo-German-Italian Tornado jet programme and on the Anglo-French Concorde programme well before the UK joined the then Common Market in 1973, so ways will be found to ensure collaboration continues. How much easier will it be today with the benefit of modern technology?
Theresa May has already shown her commendable mettle of boldness. There is much to do, and we need to get the formula right, but we cannot allow discussions to drag on. In everyone’s interests we need to invoke Article 50 early next year, asserting that we intend to continue trading with EU members without imposing tariffs—unless they introduce them first. Over to them!
