Here are some of the statements following the publication of the latest UK position papers this Wednesday.
Foreign Affairs Minister Simon Coveney: “The commitment to ‘avoiding any physical border infrastructure for any purpose’ is very welcome. However, any move away from the status quo on the island of Ireland will be difficult for us ... The immediate focus for the coming rounds of negotiations remains on advancing the issues identified for phase one, where issues on Ireland are prioritised along with citizens’ rights and the financial settlement question. Sufficient progress will have to be made on these phase one issues before we can begin discussions on trade and future relations between the EU and the UK.”IFA president Joe Healy: “While the principle of avoiding any physical border infrastructure between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland is positive, it is very difficult to see how this could operate in practice, given that the UK has stated it intends to operate its own independent customs and trade policy separate to the EU ... Cross-border trade in agricultural produce encompasses crucial issues such as food safety and animal health. If the UK insists on pursuing its own free trade agreements, two divergent regimes would have to operate on the island and it is impossible to see how border checks could be avoided. The UK will have to compromise on their future trade ambitions with third countries in the area of agricultural and food products.” ICMSA president John Comer: “Effectively the UK proposals amount to Boris Johnson’s ‘have cake and eat it’ ambition which seeks to retain trade arrangements with the EU ‘as is’ without any of what they perceive as the disadvantages of membership of either the EU or the customs union. And while the trade arrangements envisaged on that model would suit us perfectly, realistically it would be a very hard sell to several other Member States who wouldn’t have the kind of critical trade relationship we have and who might therefore be much more likely to view this through a political lens as opposed to a trade or economic one.”ICOS European affairs executive Alison Graham: “Despite reassurances against a return to a border between the north and south of Ireland, the proposed ‘stream-lined’ customs model would result in just that. It would require declarations of imports and exports on all EU-UK trade, and although reduced bureaucracy for so-called ‘authorised economic operators’ is proposed, it would still mean a considerable increase in administration and costs for business. Trade in fresh agri food products could be threatened by customs delays, and north-south supply and processing chains would be severely damaged ... While this proposal suggests no border would be required, it poses the risk that Northern Ireland would become a back door for third country imports which do not live up to EU rules and to which EU customs duties have not been applied.”Scottish Rural Economy Secretary Fergus Ewing: “In the best case scenario, where the UK Government secures a trade deal with the EU on close to Single Market terms, this would still lead to farmers and consumers being worse off than they currently are.What is clear, is that a ‘No deal’ scenario should not be considered as an option. Walking away from the EU with no deal would be disastrous for farming and food production, would harm Scotland’s economy, with consumers paying the price.” Read more
UK plan for Brexit a ‘positive’ - EU Commission
Full coverage: Brexit
Here are some of the statements following the publication of the latest UK position papers this Wednesday.
Foreign Affairs Minister Simon Coveney: “The commitment to ‘avoiding any physical border infrastructure for any purpose’ is very welcome. However, any move away from the status quo on the island of Ireland will be difficult for us ... The immediate focus for the coming rounds of negotiations remains on advancing the issues identified for phase one, where issues on Ireland are prioritised along with citizens’ rights and the financial settlement question. Sufficient progress will have to be made on these phase one issues before we can begin discussions on trade and future relations between the EU and the UK.”IFA president Joe Healy: “While the principle of avoiding any physical border infrastructure between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland is positive, it is very difficult to see how this could operate in practice, given that the UK has stated it intends to operate its own independent customs and trade policy separate to the EU ... Cross-border trade in agricultural produce encompasses crucial issues such as food safety and animal health. If the UK insists on pursuing its own free trade agreements, two divergent regimes would have to operate on the island and it is impossible to see how border checks could be avoided. The UK will have to compromise on their future trade ambitions with third countries in the area of agricultural and food products.” ICMSA president John Comer: “Effectively the UK proposals amount to Boris Johnson’s ‘have cake and eat it’ ambition which seeks to retain trade arrangements with the EU ‘as is’ without any of what they perceive as the disadvantages of membership of either the EU or the customs union. And while the trade arrangements envisaged on that model would suit us perfectly, realistically it would be a very hard sell to several other Member States who wouldn’t have the kind of critical trade relationship we have and who might therefore be much more likely to view this through a political lens as opposed to a trade or economic one.”ICOS European affairs executive Alison Graham: “Despite reassurances against a return to a border between the north and south of Ireland, the proposed ‘stream-lined’ customs model would result in just that. It would require declarations of imports and exports on all EU-UK trade, and although reduced bureaucracy for so-called ‘authorised economic operators’ is proposed, it would still mean a considerable increase in administration and costs for business. Trade in fresh agri food products could be threatened by customs delays, and north-south supply and processing chains would be severely damaged ... While this proposal suggests no border would be required, it poses the risk that Northern Ireland would become a back door for third country imports which do not live up to EU rules and to which EU customs duties have not been applied.”Scottish Rural Economy Secretary Fergus Ewing: “In the best case scenario, where the UK Government secures a trade deal with the EU on close to Single Market terms, this would still lead to farmers and consumers being worse off than they currently are.What is clear, is that a ‘No deal’ scenario should not be considered as an option. Walking away from the EU with no deal would be disastrous for farming and food production, would harm Scotland’s economy, with consumers paying the price.” Read more
UK plan for Brexit a ‘positive’ - EU Commission
Full coverage: Brexit
This is a subscriber-only article
SHARING OPTIONS: