Anne McIntosh: Time the great challenge in Brexit talks

On the face of it, the Bill is very short and straightforward, merely triggering the process for us to leave the EU before negotiations begin to establish the form of the new relationship. So what are the issues before the Lords? Parliament should resist calls for a second referendum as it would be futile to repeat the debate held during last year’s referendum. Equally, the British public were not asked for their view on what the new arrangements with our current trading partners should be. Parliament must not abdicate its responsibility to the people of this country that the subsequent legislation will be properly thought through, thoroughly scrutinised and its effects on the British economy adequately assessed. The Brexit Minister, David Jones, gave a firm, albeit verbal, assurance in the Commons that Parliament would be asked to approve the final negotiated agreement. I can see no harm in writing this commitment onto the face of the Bill. Many of the major issues to be considered would, in my view, best be considered at the next stage of legislative proceedings, like the Great Reform Bill. There will be primary legislation consequential on our leaving the EU in areas such as farming, the environment and financial services. There remains the vexed question as to who will adjudicate on any eventual dispute regarding the import or export of our goods into the EU, either during the transitional phase or subsequently, as well as the enforcement of environmental standards such as air and water quality. Immigration, jobs and economic growth are inextricably linked. We currently have record high employment and skills shortages. Those sectors with a high employment of EU citizens, such as agriculture, the NHS and social care, would all be threatened if EU nationals were to leave the UK. The rights of EU citizens living here, and those of British nationals living elsewhere in the EU, are best negotiated on a reciprocal basis. Free movement of people will remain an issue in negotiating any free trade agreement, as the Prime Minister found on an early visit to India. There is a strong argument for a cost-benefit analysis to be presented of the alternatives available, as that will best guide the negotiators and the British public have as to the best arrangement to achieve a strong economy going forward. The substance of the negotiations will involve extracting ourselves from the Single Market and Customs Union, as the Government is set to do, while agreeing to remain part of security and other arrangements. At the same time, we will be seeking alternative free trade arrangements elsewhere in the world. Yet President Trump is presiding over an increasingly protectionist United States, wanting to export American agricultural goods to us while not meeting our high standards of animal welfare and meat hygiene rules. While we might look favourably on concluding new deals with Commonwealth countries, they already have comprehensive free trade agreements with the EU. Also, they will want to export their beef, lamb, butter etc to us, undercutting our British farmers. There will be an economic cost in giving up access to the Single Market and Customs Union. The reason that falling back on the World Trade Organisation rules is such a poor option is that WTO rules not only mean potential tariffs, but a complex scenario of having to agree nomenclatures and product description of individual products which would be time consuming, and fraught with difficulty. I remember prior to 1992, goods destined for or coming from the EU would be impounded at EU borders or ports. Where the goods were perishable, failure to import or export quickly could be both costly and potentially wasteful. In 2015, the UK was the ninth largest exporter in the world and the sixth largest importer. Yet no effective free trade agreement in services has ever been concluded. The greatest challenge facing the whole negotiation process is that of time. A two-year period to conduct and conclude what will be detailed negotiations is a challenging timetable in any event without considering the fact that there will be national elections in Holland, France and Germany in the first six months of discussions. These negotiations will be lengthy and complex. No one is going to reward us for wanting to leave. The question is how much economic pain the British people will suffer with the loss of access to the Single Market. Parliament owes it to them to undertake and a full and proper scrutiny of the Government’s proposals to leave the EU. Baroness McIntosh of Pickering is a Tory peer who is due to speak in the Lords debate on Brexit.