I am writing this on the Eurostar, gambolling along at 200mph under the English Channel heading back to Blighty following an incredibly revelatory meeting in Brussels in which I was privileged to participate. I am so ‘full of it’ that I am wasting no time in sharing it all with you, Dear Reader; it has changed my thinking.

As you know, Michel Barnier is the Chief European Union Negotiator in the Brexit negotiations. I was invited to meet him to discuss the whole situation, with both of us hopefully learning from the other. Whilst I shall respect the requirement of confidentiality regarding the specific things that were actually said, I am allowed to share with you what I said and also the general impressions that I took away from the meeting.

I observed that whilst Stage One of the negotiations was about taking sides (Junker, the unelected, unaccountable General EU Panjandrum wanted €100 billion from us; we wanted to pay €20 billion and we agreed at €39 billion over 10 years) surely Stage Two means we are all on the same side.

Getting an unemployed young man in Athens into work, securing the future of a single mum in Madrid, giving hope to the 35% of the Paris banlieues who are under 30 and unemployed all require the creation of wealth to generate the tax to pay for it and that requires successful business (whatever Marxists like Corbyn and McDonnell might say to the contrary). Successful business comes from trade and Stage Two is all about that; setting out a framework for how the fifth largest economy on earth, the UK, can trade to mutual advantage with the 27 countries in the European Union.

I pointed out to M. Barnier that around 70% of the UK economy is services. Moreover, 8% of our entire national annual income is financial services, which produces some 12% of the nation’s entire tax take. No matter how unpopular bankers are, no matter how much socialists hate them, their sector is the genuine article of value-added, globally-excellent business activity. No UK government, no British negotiator, can be expected to, indeed will not, allow a Trade Agreement to ignore the services sector in general and financial services in particular.

The trade in manufactured goods will be tariff-free; both sides agree that increasing tariffs from zero would be sheer folly. Non-tariff barriers to trade are an issue; the bureaucracy, the red tape, the delays and queues of trucks at the border (and the French have previous on this one). There’s work to be done on this.

However it was made very clear to me that services will only be included in a Trade Deal if the UK accepts loss of control of our borders and submits to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, precisely what 52% of the country voted not to have. The ABC Cabal (Adonis, Blair & Clegg) do NOT represent the UK, their machinations belong to yesterday, not tomorrow.

‘Equivalence’ in financial services to obtain an EU Passport would be allowed, but only if the shedload of uncompetitive EU regulation fettered the UK in its global dealings which have nothing to do with the EU! Why? To help Paris and Frankfurt around the world. We must NOT fall for that one!

I pointed out that this was this an intractable impasse. Our country would be forced to leave the EU without a deal and join the World Trade Organisation and trade with the EU according to its rules (just as the USA, Japan, China and many other economies do). This would not only mean tariffs on manufactured goods (hurting the sale in the UK of the million cars a year made in Germany much more than the sale in Germany of UK-made cars) but, of far greater importance, there would be an expected drop in the value of sterling, probably of some 10%. Overnight every car made in the EU would be on sale in the UK at 10% more than rivals made in the UK. It is expected that there would be around 20,000 job losses in Stuttgart, Wolfsburg and Munich. That matters since Germany bosses Europe; they’re in charge.

But the hopes of that lad in Athens or woman in Madrid would also be dashed.

I was left in no doubt that Brussels and Berlin see that as a price worth paying for the preservation of ‘The Grand Project’. The political imperative trumps everything; the need to deliver, over time, The United States of Europe. Nothing will get in the way of that.

And Brussels and Berlin have moved on already; in their eyes, we’ve left and M. Barnier is merely showing us out of the door. The Remoaners’ hopes are forlorn; there is already no way back.

/ 78

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100