Like many of our members, I joined the most pro European party soon after the 2016 EU referendum, and am bitterly disappointed at how things have gone since, and am frustrated at the lack of short term prospect of reversing what I am convinced is an historic mistake. I’d be delighted if this party were to pledge to rejoin (for example, as the price of membership of a coalition government), but the sad reality is that this wouldn’t be credible .
The problem is that the EU gets a say too. And unless it sees a stable majority in favour of EU membership, that say will be “no” – it won’t want to risk a Brexit 2.0 a few years down the line.
Even if it doesn’t say “no”, the membership terms are going to be debated. This doesn’t necessarily imply adopting the Euro or joining Schengen, but the budget rebate and other opt outs are at risk.
Unlike the UK or Denmark, Sweden has no formal opt out of the Euro, and is committed to join as soon as it is ready. However it has unilaterally decided that being “ready” requires consent of its citizens in a national vote, and has declined to join ERM II, membership of which is a prerequisite for joining the Euro.
The UK-Ireland Common Travel Area conflicts with Schengen, is vital for stability in Northern Ireland, and is enshrined in the Treaty of Amsterdam and continues post Brexit. Whilst the Republic of Ireland may wish both it and the UK to join Schengen, I doubt it would risk preventing the UK rejoining by insisting on it.
The EU may also have evolved by the time the UK could contemplate rejoining. This may mean further integration, or it may mean a multi-speed EU – hinted at by Emmanuel Macron – where the UK may feel more comfortable in a slower lane.
If there were to be another referendum – because the last one was just so much fun – it would need to fix its predecessor’s flaws. Amongst these was that it wasn’t clear what the options were. Like in 1975, any referendum needs to happen after negotiations have concluded.
So, we cannot credibly offer a rejoin policy – it wouldn’t be entirely under our control even if we had a Parliamentary majority.
The strongest we can credibly offer is to apply to rejoin, under Article 49 of the Lisbon Treaty, initiating negotiations. This complements deepening the UK-EU relationship, such as joining the EEA, as that will make rejoining easier. But such a policy may be too nuanced, and too easily misrepresented, to get across in the limited media time we have. I’m hardly the only activist to have had to repeatedly explain our revoke policy on the doorstep.
* Andrew Kerr is a member of Tower Hamlets Liberal Democrats.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Raising a flap about letterboxes
Arriving at one of East Finchley's ghost platforms
Restrained
Chase Park fair photos
A swamp of lies and disinformation
Nigel Jones
Katharine Pindar
78 Comments
Sweden had a referendum on the euro and knocked it back!
Look, the idea that the single currency can just be glossed over is fantasy. Rejoin, reapply – it involves a treaty commitment to joining the euro and all it entails.
What you think of that is another matter but you can’t just gloss over it and hope no one notices.
If your explaining your losing as the mantra goes. Certainly the revoke message was badly received in St Ives at the last election. I now read that the Labour and Centre parties in Norway think UK got a better deal and are calling for a re-negotiation. Let us wait for the dust to settle and push Bojo to negotiate a comprehensive services deal. Common standards on food must then be settled and a re-join of Erasmus. I think it is better to re-align by small steps than one big leap.
Nice article and of course it makes a valid point.
But the difference between rejoin and apply to rejoin is slight – given at the moment we have complete alignment between the EU and the UK. Obviously we may become more
divergent but it’s unlikely that will be much – as even if they can most commercial areas will follow EU regulations as that is the biggest market. We will effect have the “fax in” position of Norway – in that we will be following EU regs – in fact we won’t even that as we don’t get a say.
On a single currency – it is perfectly plain that there is a sizeable bloc of EU countries that won’t join indefinitely – or as virtually indefinitely as makes no difference. And we can clearly won’t have to join Schengen – particularly as the number one policy position of Ireland is to maintain the common travel area.
There is not just one EU or a two-speed EU but a series of different EUs for each country. Some neighbouring countries are aligning the rules more closer – the Nordic council, the Baltic council, the Benelux countries – virtually every country is in a different place in the Venn diagram of Schengen/CTA/Single Currency etc. etc.
We are now in the bizarre position of Tory minister saying how great it is for Northern Ireland to effectively still be in the EU single market and also in the UK – doh that was the great position that the UK as a whole was in a few weeks ago.
Meanwhile people will have seen a series of articles in the Guardian about companies that are shipping jobs to the continent because they can distribute goods from there without paperwork and charges from distribution companies to deal with the taxes that are due importing into the EU now.
And jobs are going from the City of London – which will have knock on effects to the rest of London and the rest of the country. The fishermen are unhappy and seem to be in a worse position than before and so on…
@ Andrew Kerr I’m assuming you’re not the BBC’s Political Correspondent in Scotland, Andrew, and by, “We”, I assume you’re referring to ‘England’,
I gather according to Sir Edward Davey you’re no longer a member of ‘the most pro European party’. Given it’s only 14 months since Sir Edward’s predecessor as Lib Dem Leader was defending a ‘Revoke’ policy on BBC Question Time (22/11/2019) – that’s surely some Olympic gold medal standard of mental gymnastics.
I do fear for the party I first supported nearly sixty years ago. It’s not just the Tory Party that’s chasing it’s tail in ever decreasing circles.
To reapply, we have to want to rejoin. The distinction is only helpful as a reminder that rejoining depends upon meeting criteria and sufficient good will.
Europhobes have systematically burned bridges, trashed the EU and wished for its implosion. Irresponsible behaviour has consequences. Amongst modern politicians, Johnson has been second only to Trump in irresponsibility to the detriment of everyone in the UK (as well as to many outside).
The importance for Liberal Democrats is that the Party is the leading UK party for its connections and collaboration with influential parties and leading figures in Europe, While the UK will have to spend millions on lobbying to be heard, this party already has good access to many of the key decision makers. The Party needs to be seen to be making the most of and nurturing these connections. Liberal Democrats need to reassert the Party as The Party of cooperation and engagement with Europe.
It was widely recognised within the previous EU regime that it had been a mistake to grant opt outs and time to meet targets. It had led to long term fragmentation of the EU. Future potential members would have to meet entry criteria before joining. Such rules would not be relaxed. The EU had unfortunate experience of this too when allowing countries like Greece to join the Eurozone.
The new regime has not yet made its views clear on such matters but it would be prudent to assume continuity. Any ambition to join the EU should assume accepting the full package.
I have not yet heard positive reasons for joining these. I suspect that many in this party would rule out joining if it meant accepting the Euro. This is a debate that is needed before the party commits to any more doomed policies.
The policy, when it comes, will have to be to rejoin “subject to acceptable terms” and the UK would be ill advised to make the same mistake again of committing irrevocably to a particular path before the terms were known. We would be at the same disadvantage again and get another desperately inferior outcome.
It is a great undertaking and I can’t see sufficient public support and political will being around this side of a significant change in the EU for the better.
Joe Otten
Out of interest what do you think that significant change would be?
Serious question – not having a dig.
@tim rogers – ….I think it is better to re-align by small steps than one big leap.
Seems sensible, it also satisfies Alistair Carmichael’s requirement for “a clear and credible route map for getting there.”
The advantage of the small steps approach is that people will see the sense in each step: eg. by (re)joining the EEA/EFTA we get rid of all the new UK export/import red tape sving £7bn and counting per annum…
At some point in the future, it will become apparent that the small step of joining the EU would mean the UK is no longer a rule taker but have a voice at the rule setting table…
I never disagree with someone who makes his case so well.
Of course the UK cannot decide to “Rejoin.” The UK can only decide to “Re-apply.” That is the term we should use from now on.
In the re-application, the UK should not seek any opt-out from the euro or from Schengen. The reason is that I want the UK to be whole hearted in its re-application.
The last paragraph of the article completely undermines the rest – the distinction between a policy of wanting to Rejoin & wanting to Re-apply is both hard to get across & pretty meaningless. Of course The UK (or whatever is left of it) can only Ask to Rejoin & The EU may say No, I would if I was them. The distinction might matter more if we were The Official Opposition but we arent.
ICMI
Northern Ireland is not the only part of The UK half in & half out. Gibraltar is now part of The Schengen Zone.
@Peter
I think you exaggerate the barriers to re-entry. If for example we were to apply now then given we met all the criteria in December, in January we are not likely to have diverged at all. Obviously we may diverge in the future and that would have to be negotiated but divergence is likely to be slow if at all.
The biggest thing on whether our application would be successful would be the political will of the EU countries. And it is likely that the political will of the other EU countries would be massive in favour of us joining. Not least the established country are facing some if moderate threat from eurosceptic parties in their own countries (Le Pen in France etc.) – it would massively bolster the established parties that are in Government to say to their eurosceptics – “hey look the UK thought it’d be better outside but they’ve found it isn’t”
It is said that we would have to commit to joining the single currency – in fact given there is one other country – Denmark – that has an opt out and also given the massive political will for us to re-join and the realpolitik of the EU then an opt-out could be negotiated. But even if we were to commit to join a single currency then this is a sometime, never commitment. Hell will freeze over before the other countries outside the eurozone and who have already committed to joining will actually join.
“This is a debate that is needed before the party commits to any more doomed policies.”
Yep. If the Lib Dems are wanting to be the EU’s champions in the UK there is an obvious need to clarify just what you might be championing. Does the EU actually want us back in the next decade? And, if they do, what will be the terms?
Schengen, the euro, no opt-outs, a supermajority of popular support, the outlawing of Nigel Farage 🙂 ? I would expect (nearly) all of these. But, whatever they might be, there is a need to know.
I recall that the 2010 manifesto stated that the party believed it was in Britain’s long-term interest to be part of the euro (subject to the “right” economic conditions and a referendum). Did that actually stop being Lib Dem policy at some point?
It sometimes seems that the Lib Dem commitment to the EU is not as full-blooded as the impression the party has liked to give in recent years, with enthusiasm appearing to wane when it comes to the single currency, Schengen, and membership without the UK’s previous rebate and opt-outs. I understand that it would be a difficult (to put it mildly!) sell to a largely euro-sceptic or euro-agnostic country, but it is not apparent that the Lib Dems would even want to try.
I think the second biggest issue to the Rejoin movement (after freedom of movement) is the EU.
If Brexit damaged the EU, it is nothing compared to the damage that a second Brexit would cause. Whether we like it or not I don’t believe a 52% (for argument sake) vote to rejoin will be enough for the EU. They will want a large and stable majority in favour of rejoin. It would not surprise me at all if the EU demanded a supermajority of at least 60% to rejoin possibly followed by a 60% confirmatory referendum on the terms of the deal to confirm that the UK had a large and stable majority in favour of rejoining.
Forget Europe, your USPs should be the NHS and the environment.
Slamdac:
It is us that should be asking for a 60%+ support in a referendum. This is also why rejoining needs to be via re-entry to the Single Market and the Customs Union.
It is not a question of ‘the EU demanded’ this or that; any member state could make this a condition. I suppose the Council of Heads of Governments could ask for this, so could the EU parliament, but the positions of member states will be more critical.
Try not to use phrases such as ‘the EU demanded’ because the EU is not that sort of entity, it is better and more accurate to refer to ‘EU member states’.
Living in the EU and observing things from overseas, I remember watching the coverage of the Supreme Court judgement and something seemed strange. Of course, the judges were sitting in front of their own flag, and not the EU and national flag as it would be on the continent. My kids’ school also has the national and EU flag flying outside, as would any public building. On the ground here, it’s clear to me that it’s already the United States of Europe, we already have the currency and anthem and so on, the people tell me they’d like there to be an EU army to protect them. In other words it’s basically a country. The EU’s insistence that their ambassador be treated the same as any other national ambassador, and not merely a representative of an international organisation, shows that the top level thinks like that too.
Of course before, we had opt outs from all this. However, the fact that places such as the Isle of Man is kind of in and kind of not in Britain/UK doesn’t stop Britain being a country. And the fact that the UK was kind of in and for many purposes not in the EU didn’t change what it was, and what it was becoming.
I didn’t vote in the referendum, because I think the final decision should be up to the people who still live in the UK, but my own preferences were and still are:
1) That we British would have our own country – i.e. Brexit and not EEA.
2) If 1) is not possible, then for us to be full and equal citizens of this new country called the EU, using the Euro, being in Schengen and so on, not just an afterthought.
3) Continuing in the pre-2016 state of a half-member – as the Isle of Man is to the UK or Puerto Rico is to the USA.
So whether leaving the EU will eventually mean state 1) or state 2), by setting all the opt-outs on fire we have at least removed state 3) which was the worst possible option for our children in the long term – and whether some people have had their ham sandwiches thrown away in the first month of 2021 is kind of irrelevant next to that.
John Bennett
‘Forget Europe, your USPs should be the NHS and the environment.’
Spot on, voters have had it up to their necks with Brexit and just want to move on.Best left alone for at least another decade.
In any case the conditions for the UK reapplying would so draconian it wouldn’t get past first base with voters,not to mention a requirement for a 60% ‘Yes’ in a future referendum.
While I personally would be happy to rejoin the EU today as a full member with no opt-outs/rebates I really don’t get the feeling from many friends / family that there is an appetite for another referendum/negotiation to rejoin. We have voters the chance in the last election by being absolutely clear that if we won the election we would have cancelled Brexit. Even though more people voted for parties advocating a second referendum there wasn’t enough absolute support to cancel Brexit.
So while I want us to remain a pro EU party and championing re-joining EU institutions over time I think we need to focus our campaigning on reforming the UK, i.e. our aim for a federal UK & reform of the unelected House of Lords.
@john oundle
“Spot on, voters have had it up to their necks with Brexit”
Irrespective of what voters might think – could it be that Brexit (its impacts) have barely started to impact the voters?
As much as those like Martin might want to play it down it is clear that the EU has moved, and is still moving in the direction of being a single country. It’s mainly there: Currency, Flag, Anthem, Parliament, Ambassadors etc. Armed Forces to follow shortly!
The EU countries made the decision to entrust the procurement of vaccines to the central EU authority in the same way as US States might defer to the Federal Govt. There was some argument for doing that. The EU is much bigger customer than any single country and should in theory have been able to get a much better deal and secure much more reliable supplies as a result. However, theory doesn’t seem to have translated into practice in this instance. We’ll have to see how that works out.
Incidentally, I read that David Frost continually got under Michel Barnier’s skin during the recent negotiations by referring to the EU as ‘your organisation’. If it were really still that ie something along the lines of the old EEC, then I and many others wouldn’t have voted to leave. It’s not that we’re anti European. We like Europe as it was: A collection of different countries. We are happy to trade with anyone but without living in each others’ pockets.
Peter Martin 26th Jan ’21 – 10:46am…………… We like Europe as it was: A collection of different countries. We are happy to trade with anyone but without living in each others’ pockets………..
So, so typical of the ‘Leave’ attitude; living in a ‘rose tinted’ view of the past.
I lived/worked in France and saw no decline in the ‘French being French’..The UK no longer has an empire; Australia, N.Z., Canada, etc., don’t regard ua a ‘the mother country’ worthy of special treatment in trade, etc.
The EU is a reality; it was OUR failure to accept that that led to ‘Brexit’. Our continental neighbours, whose history is a fraught as ours, saw the advantage of close cooperation; the UK, on the other hand, seemed to regard compromise as a weakening of our world standing (a standing that only existed in our minds)..
BTW..Whilst acknowledging that ‘Brexit’ adversely affects them, many of my French/German friends are relieved that their whining neighbour has moved..We made few friends in the EU (just business partners) and we’ll now find out how the RotW view us..
John Bennett and John Oundle
‘Forget Europe, your USPs should be the NHS and the environment.’
Except the NHS is Labour’s USP and the Environment is the Green party’s. You, indeed we may all wish that the NHS and the environment were our USPs, but they aren’t either in fact, nor in the minds of the public and seventy years tradition will not be overturned.
Our USP was and is Europe. Pretending we can just walk away from it is naive, reckless and will be hugely damaging to us as a party.
Ed chose to open the lid of the box and have a peek inside. We have to stop him from letting it all out, and Lib Dems pretending we can just move on to something else because it sounds good as a one line slogan is not the way forward.
Peter Martin – vaccine procurement does show up the real problem with the EU though. In the UK who is responsible for getting doses from big pharma? Health minister – individual ministerial responsibility. In the EU states though who is responsible? As far as I can tell it is is a mix of national governments acting together with the initiative with the Commission. Frankly, on vaccine procurement it has felt rather refreshing to have real individual ministerial responsibility with no hiding behind the EU.
To be clear I believe that the EU scheme will come good. It will be a day late and a dollar short. It’s not worked out *as well as hoped* and to say so is not some capitulation to vinegary nationalism.
But where has Stella Kyriakides faced anything even close to the scrutiny a national minister has faced? If the EU gets it wrong then national governments are blamed for outsourcing policy. And of course the EU always has the get out of jail card of blaming national authorities. It’s a constitutional deficit – all the responsibility and none of the accountability. Indeed her lashing out on social media…not the best look.
The EU’s vaccine plan’s emphasis on driving down costs and slower, fuller, approvals might be admirable on some level but it’s not what was hoped for or needed. But in terms of the failures the lack of real accountability does show the problems with the EU. If what had happened in the EU happened in the UK Hancock would have been expected to resign.
Little Jackie Paper
‘ vaccine procurement does show up the real problem with the EU though’
The EU due to pressure from France massively over committed to Sanofi who have been unable to produce a vaccine & the second French vaccine company Pasteur threw in the towel yesterday .
At the same time Germany is saying the Oxford Astra Zenica vaccine is useless, only 8% effective but at the same time demanding supplies.
A classic example of EU blame game as a distraction for their incompetence.
As with the ventilator fiasco we are very lucky that we had nothing to do with EU procurement.
@John Oundle “At the same time Germany is saying the Oxford Astra Zenica vaccine is useless, only 8% effective but at the same time demanding supplies.”
This turned out to be based on a leak, which had mixed up efficacy rates and participation in the study. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/26/german-government-challenges-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-efficacy-reports
I doubt that story about pressure from France/Sanofi. The UK placed a big order, the US appears to have backed it heavily. I don’t know a thing about vaccines – I know a woman who does and she says she was stunned that the Sanofi one didn’t come through rapidly.
EU or not it was inevitable that some would not work out and the Sanofi thing is a red herring. The EU’s failure to go far more in on Pfizer was a far more serious error I suspect. But overall it does feel like there has been a real lack of urgency in the EU but without real, classic individual ministerial responsibility there’s no real pressure. For all the UK’s failings, vaccine procurement has been a very refreshing experience of how government should work. To say as much is not, to be clear, to have a dig at the EU.
The point does remain though that what has happened is a blame game and not a very pretty one. Once you start outsourcing policy that’s a risk because responsibility is diluted.
@Little Jackie Paper “without real, classic individual ministerial responsibility”
All commissioners, including Ms. Kyriakides, are accountable (albeit en banc)) to the EU Parliament, which can, and has, forced a Commission’s resignation¹ due mostly to a single commissioner.
I do agree that the EP should be able to remove a single commissioner, but in fairness Westminster can’t remove a single Minister, and doesn’t even get to formally approve them to begin with.
I also don’t think the current state of Westminster ministerial responsibility is anything to be impressed by!
1. They jumped before they were pushed, but they would have been pushed had they not.
Daniel Walker. Sure.
But it makes the point about accountability. The Commission is taking on member state roles. Since when was the Commission into direct procurement for national health services? If you are going to act like a state then the responsibility should also be there.
‘But Westminster…’ doesn’t cut it. If you act like a state individual ministerial responsibility is a reasonable expectation. Particularly where there is no real way to ‘undo’ integration. EU vaccines are showing the constitutional deficit.
Seriously. Do you ni
Sorry.
Seriously do you not find it a bit refreshing to see Hancock and Zahawi not be able to hide behind the EU?
john oundle 26th Jan ’21 – 1:27pm
As with the ventilator fiasco we are very lucky that we had nothing to do with EU procurement.
It’s not due to luck, but the wise decision of the Britsh people to leave the EU.
@LJP “Seriously do you not find it a bit refreshing to see Hancock and Zahawi not be able to hide behind the EU?”
While that is refreshing, it was, in many cases, unfair for UK ministers to “blame Europe” for stuff (which the UK had both influence over and often had voted for). It would have been unfair to blame Kyriakides for Sanofi’s problems—as you say, that was bad luck, not a bad choice based on what was known beforehand—and it would be unfair to entirely blame her for procurement issues when,the companies in question have failed to fulfil contracts made in good faith.
You’ll be glad to note that the EU Covid vaccine chief has appeared before MEPs to explain the situation; that seems like reasonable accountability to me.
Is the Commission now assuming that european health matters are now an EU competence? Is this the latest part of the relenless creeping ever closer integration?
If there was a Referendum now people, after the problems in the EU over the vaccine roll out would almost certainly vote to stay out of the EU. Time for us to just let the issue drift into the background. There are more important fish to fry.
Peter,
Yes, it’s called the European Health Union.
https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/promoting-our-european-way-life/european-health-union_en
Just as one cannot step into the same river twice, one cannot join the same European Union twice. Like the river it moves on while you’re away.
Daniel Walker. As I said earlier, I do believe that the EU vaccine scheme will come good, likely as much despite than because of the Commission. It will be a day late and a dollar short. Some of that was bad luck, some was poor decision-making, and some was having the wrong priorities. Blaming Astra Zeneca is simply deflection. The reason that has happened is that the EU was slow to sign the contracts around internal politics – it’s plain best endeavours and it may well be that UK deliveries are delayed too on a best endeavours basis. That was Kyriakides and Gallina lashing out. I wish it were otherwise, but yesterday was unedifying social media politics. Whilst I think that the EU vaccine scheme is not quite the disaster it’s been painted, their angst at AZ is misdirected. That scheme in its present form is not right for Europe.
But it still makes the point. In the UK the responsibility is with the minister for health. Who does my friend in Ireland blame – Irish health minister for signing up, commission for their misplaced priorities, other IVA states for slowing processes?
I make no apologies for saying it Daniel – whatever the rights and wrongs of leaving the EU, the sense of individual ministerial responsibility in this episode has been very refreshing. National governments do procurement, not the Commission, fundamentally that is the heart of the tensions in the EU vaccine programme.
@Richard S – Thanks for the link. It made me smile, they are still using the “beneficial crisis” trick that Jean Monnet envisaged back in 1957. I expect the financial crisis following the pandemic will lead to full fiscal union. That would feed into the debate being held above.
Is the EU a country? We already know the answer to that.
Will the EZ member states still be countries after fiscal union?
The EU Health Union can be added to the Euro and Shengen as another thing we would have to accept on joining the EU. Will the public vote to let Brussels run their beloved NHS?
“Germany is saying the Oxford Astra Zenica vaccine is useless, only 8% effective”
Some people in Germany are saying this for the over 65s. This would be worrying if true but the opinion here is that it isn’t.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jan/26/should-we-worry-about-claims-astrazeneca-jab-has-8-efficacy-in-over-65s
@ Theakes + Others
I see that in a Poll restricted to England 40% would Vote to Rejoin, 42% not. If England is split down the middle & Scotland for Rejoining by a large majority it sounds like The UK is probably for Rejoining. If only our Glorious Leader would argue for it.
Polls in these circumstances are too unrealistic to be reliable. I refer to Joining the EU again and even the Scottish Independence vote if it happens.
The inevitable debate at the time is what matters. The next EU vote would have issues like the Euro, Shengen, Health Union and probably fiscal union. Project fear about being in the UK is an obsolete threat. Project fear about being locked into a stagnating EU would be a growing threat. People doing polls at the moment don’t think of these.
Peter Martin
“Germany is saying the Oxford Astra Zenica vaccine is useless, only 8% effective”
And yet it’s the same Germany threatening to block exports of Astra Zenica vaccines because the can’t buy enough.
Could anyone make this up?
@john oundle
To be fair only one idiot misunderstood that the 8% figure was the the percentage of over 65 year olds and over in the trial. Nothing to do with efficacy. But Germany also have a popular press (think Bild, Spiegel etc.) so the nonsense got coverage.
The German government trashed the story but in a too little too late way. It’s as if they want to encourage vaccine scepticism (which is much higher on the continent compared to the UK).
@ John Oundle,
I thinks it’s quite likely, as Daniel as already said, that someone has totally misunderstood what they were reading re the 8%. As anyone who has experience of supplying to very large scale organisations will probably know, it can be quite usual for them to take more time to write out a purchase order than they allow the supplier to actually do the job!
The EU seems to be no exception. Leaving aside the recent misunderstanding over the 8% they haven’t approved the O-AZ vaccine for general use so it’s hardly surprising that O-AZ hasn’t put them at the head of the queue. The smart thing to have done was place firm unconditional orders with all the candidate suppliers for sufficient quantities of each vaccine well in advance. They could have even paid up front to enable production to be speeded up. The costs of doing that, relative to the economic damage caused by a rampant virus would have been neither here nor there. The worst that could have happened was that all the potential suppliers came good at the first attempt and they ended up with much more vaccine than needed.
But so what? They could have sold off their surplus or even donated it free to less affluent countries as part of their foreign aid program.
I think this vaccine business, if people are not careful could spell the death knell for Rejoin
To quote on Twitter “I can’t imagine a scenario more radicalising of public opinion against the EU than the forced rerouting of British vaccines to the continent during a pandemic. Save for the blockading of second doses destined for the arms of grannies and the vulnerable. SUCH a volatile situation.”
It would be extremely difficult to defend the EU and membership if this happened.
Personally the EEA is probably the best you can do. The astro zeneca mess up where the German papers got the 8% of above 65 age group in the trial group mixed up, the fact Eu then is trying to deflect the blame when they took over advanced negotiations from France and Germany and made a complete hash of it, and dragged out the negotiations for 2 months and got basically the same as France and Germany had already negotatiated. Then threatened to block exports for a vacaine that hasn’t even been approved. There is also rumblings that Greece is about to go bankrupt, as in literally bankrupt. And may need bailing out, where the EU is going to get the money god knows as the new Geeman Chancellor is less flexible than Merkel. Then we had the fiasco of the Chinese EU investment where the plights of Hong Kong and minorities was swept under the rug. Shows that something is going majorly wrong!
@ Dan You really shouldn’t believe everything you read in the Daily Express, Dan.
The AZ fiasco is deepening and now Merkel claims that China and the USA are of eual merit as trading partners. Thank God we got out when we did is the thought for most thinking UK voters.
https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work-travel-eu/coronavirus-response/public-health/coronavirus-vaccines-strategy_en
You only have to look to see how slow the EU was and still is in agreeing contracts with vaccine suppliers.
To give the UK credit on this one, at least they were quick of the mark to agree multiple contracts and advance orders and spread their bets across a range of different vaccines in the hope that 1 or more would come good.
The EU did not have such foresight and as usual with the EU have allowed bureaucracy to get in the way in a time of national emergency.
They really should not be blaming everyone else for their failures.
One of the reasons that I was so against the EU was because they were becoming more and more protectionist during a time when the EU’s share of global GDP was shrinking and it made zero sense to me economically.
Now threatening to block Vaccines from being exported from the block is the worse possible example of that.
When the Eu gets something wrong, especially its commissioners, it needs to hold its hands up and be accountable, but as usual, that is another area of democratic deficit within the EU.
I promised myself that when I joined the party, I would not get involved in dragging up old eu arguments and concentrate on the areas of where I di stand firm and identify with the party…rescuing and properly funding our NHS, 100% parity of esteem for mental health and tackling poverty…But when the Eu behaves in the way they have in the last 24 hours it makes it difficult to keep quiet
Personally, I think I am heading towards Maggie way of thinking. EU as a trading bloc with a central civil service to produce trading standards and documentation and then a series of cooperative agreements on a range of services and issues but does the EU need the over reach it has? I think that as a party we need to acknowledge that we are facing a gravitational pull between the in and out
May I congratulate the EU on scoring a fantastic own goal.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55822602
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-canada-eu-idUSKBN29W2NH
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he spoke with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen earlier on Wednesday, and she assured him that the bloc’s measures to track vaccine exports would not affect deliveries to Canada.
““I was reassured to hear that the transparency measures taken by Europe will not affect Pfizer and Moderna (COVID-19 vaccine) deliveries to Canada,” Trudeau said during question period in parliament.”
So, I take it the EU threats apply just to the uk? not a very good start to trading relationships.
If it continues this, it will not be long before the whole brexit argument opens up again and people start arguing for a complete break and WTO.
It does not look good on the EU’s part
David Raw… Not the daily express. It was a link in the Euro News. I have to go through the link to copy and paste it up here
The Lib Dem silence on the EU vaccine fiasco, is deafening.
The UK gives the world the only at-cost, fridge-capable vaccine, and we are threatened with a trade war as a result.
We can forget the deal if this carries on. It won’t be ratified. The EU’s actions have shocked me, an ardent Brexiteer. I never, in a million years saw this coming.
The Lib Dems need to condemn the EU’s position. Not be silent on this.
This thread is becoming like the Daily Mail/Express… The EU is not perfect but why the outrage when they act in their own self interest..Their citizens are demanding the vaccine and instead of receiving around 100 million doses before the end of March, they are now expecting 25 million…
If the vaccine shortage was in the UK would we be silent on the matter? It seems that there is a ‘Farage-like’ insularity among some LDV members
The ‘EU vaccine fiasco’, as Mr Cornwell describes it, illustrates perfectly why it is mistake to keep blathering on about rejoining. So, perhaps the EU isn’t as perfect as some would have us believe. The problem is that, geopolitically, little old us cannot avoid dealing with her/him/it/them.
Pragmatic remainers like me despair that so many people choose to drill down onto one issue and ignore all the things that need attention on this side of the Channel that have nothing at all to do with our membership of any organisation. Is this some kind of smoke screen or perhaps an example of self denial?
It’s funny how COVID has in a bizarre way sorted out quite a few things, notably Trump and
I’m not sure it is helpful to dismiss any criticism of the EU as “Daily Mail/Daily Express “.
If the UK is ever to re-join then the UK public needs to be convinced to rejoin. Even the Guardian and the Independent is giving the EU a kicking over this.
To quote Tom McTague
“I can’t imagine a scenario more radicalising of public opinion against the EU than the forced rerouting of British vaccines to the continent during a pandemic. Save for the blockading of second doses destined for the arms of grannies and the vulnerable. SUCH a volatile situation.”
I get that if the boot was on the other foot we would probably be acting the way the EU is. I imagine that we would also be criticising the UK government,
The problem for rejoin is that the boot is not on the other foot. And although we may understand as rejoiners why the EU is acting as it is. It is not the EU Citizens who will decide if the UK will reapply to join the EU. It is the UK Citizens who will do this and we need to convince the UK voter than rejoin/reapply is in our best interests. This vaccine situation is not helping at all.
Yes The Libdems/European Liberals should criticise The EU for this but for British Tories/Tabloids/Brexiteers to do the same is ludicrous hypocrisy, this sort of Nationalism is precisely what Brexit was about. The Strong “Win” & the weak go to the wall.
We are supposed to have a FTA with the EU and yet in the business I run it is easier to send an order off to USA, Canada or even Russia! We don’t have a FTA with these and yet there does not seem to be the same petty mindedness when it comes to the interpretation of customs and trade rules.
The vaccines row is just another example of the ill feeling there obviously is in the EU towards the UK for leaving. If they keep on like this there will be no chance of any reconciliation.
I just hope that the EU don’t formally demand that the UK/AZ send vaccines from the UK to the EU (before the UK population is vaccinated).
I can’t see how any UK political party could justify/allow the export of vaccines effectively removing them from the arms of UK grannies and placing them in the arms of EU grannies. (Not if they ever want to be elected that it!)
May be crass to think of it like that but this is the world we live in.
@Peter Martin
I have to disagree with you on “the ill feeling there obviously is in the EU towards the UK for leaving.”. Yes, the EU is understandably not happy with that, but this vaccine row seems more a case of trying to deflect blame from the EU procurement process.
It’s a desperate move, made possible perhaps because the Commission does not answer to an electorate?
@Slamdac
It is my understanding the EU has demanded that very thing. Output from the UK supply chain (started in May) be counted towards the EU’s vaccine production. The threat if this does not happen, is export controls on Pfizer vaccine being produced in Belgium.
If such export controls were put in place, don’t be surprised if Boris sells the whole output we can’t take delivery of, to Hungary.
It’s not a good situation. The only thing I would add is that we need to remember that ultimately EU citizens (with the exception of Irish, Malta and Cyprus) can’t vote. We need UK votes in order to regain seats.
@ Ian,
OK but it’s not just the vaccine issue. There are reports on social media of the EU charging the recipient 50 Euros to process a birthday present maybe worth half that sent from the UK. This is just petty spitefulness.
This doesn’t happen when sending something of a small value to anywhere else in the world.
A fairly typical example of German thinking is their advice not to recommend the AstraZeneca vaccine for the over 65s there:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/28/germany-recommends-oxford-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-not-used-over-65s
If you want to see the figures this is based on, see Oliver Moody’s tweet:
https://twitter.com/olivernmoody/status/1354781400071860230
Yes, because there was just one infection in 341 patients over the age of 65 who received the vaccine and one infection in 319 who received a placebo they come up with a ridiculous efficacy of 6.3% (95% confidence intervals -1405% to 94.2%).
If someone had come to me in my job as an applied physicist with a table like this, I would have told them not to be so stupid. They don’t even understand that in the LD/SD vs SD/SD comparison further down the table, those receiving the placebo would not be affected by what dose someone else received, so it doesn’t make any sense to separate those receiving the placebo into two groups, making the statistics worse.
Being cynical, this makes a convenient excuse for Jens Spahn, Germany’s Health Minister, to re-prioritise their use of the AZ vaccine (which they will not have much of) to smaller groups. Logically though, if they are citing lack of evidence over the AZ vaccine, they should also be sticking with the three-week interval between doses for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, the only interval for which trials data exist for this vaccine. We will see what they actually do.
@Peter Martin
There are small value items that are exempt. There are issues around items that do not have a majority of their value made in Britain. And sometimes it is the delivery companies charging administration charges as they now have to ensure that taxes (such as VAT) and potentially custom duties are paid and there is compliance with regulations for food items etc. etc.
This means that companies are shifting their distribution operations to the continent – meaning the loss of jobs. As they can ship en masse to the continent and then organise the distribution from there.
The guardian states:
—-
. Goods ordered from and manufactured in the UK should not attract customs duty, but products ordered from the UK worth more than that €150 and shipped from outside Britain will.
A leading French consumer website cited the example of a pair of trainers ordered from a UK website for £270 but manufactured in and shipped from China, saying customs duty of 16.9% and 20% French VAT would bring their cost to about £378.
And while continental buyers are no longer charged British VAT on UK purchases, they must now pay local VAT in their country of residence – although this is waived for orders under €22 until 31 July. Platforms such as Amazon are entitled to collect continental VAT on orders worth less than €150.
“It’s a hugely complex situation,” Hickson said. “My recommendation to anyone in the EU looking to buy goods in the UK is: don’t order anything until you know what the charges and VAT will be. And be patient. This should all sort itself out eventually, but it’s going to take some time.”
—
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jan/07/customers-europe-hit-by-post-brexit-charges-buying-from-uk
@ Laurence Cox “A fairly typical example of German thinking”. ????????
It’s a bit disappointing that once again someone writes a piece for publication which seeks to change party policy on LDV, but then doesn’t respond at all to any of the comments responding to it. It really isn’t good enough.
@David Raw
Have you worked much with Germans.??????? I have !!!!!!!!!!
Dan
‘May I congratulate the EU on scoring a fantastic own goal.’
Another own goal to-day with the Putin style raid on the Astra Zenica offices in Brussels.
Separately, am wondering how on earth Stella Kyriakidous ever got the EU Health Care job, a deputy that didn’t even make it to ministerial office in Cyprus.
@Ian Cornwell – “… The EU’s actions have shocked me, an ardent Brexiteer. I never, in a million years saw this coming.
The Lib Dems need to condemn the EU’s position. Not be silent on this.
I think it doesn’t matter where you stood/stand on Brexit, none of us really saw this coming. Also from the tone of the EU, I’m not sure whether things would be much different if the UK was still a member.
What is going to be interesting is whether AZ do as the European Commission have asked and publicly publish the entire contract or whether a redacted version is only made available to MEPs to read in a specific room etc. (as was proposed for the CureVac contract).
Yes the LibDems need to condemn the EU’s aggression, as do the ALDE, who are also silent on this matter.
slamdac 28th Jan ’21 – 1:26pm………I’m not sure it is helpful to dismiss any criticism of the EU as “Daily Mail/Daily Express “…………
I was referring to the ‘glee’ with which the EU vaccine stance has been attacked; the long awaited opportunity. However, if the UK plants are, as the EU claims, contractually obliged to supply the EU then the UK’s outrage seems misplaced; it’s more a case of ‘if it’s made in UK it’s ours’..
As for ‘typical German’… I’ve worked and lived in France, Germany, the USA, (amongst others) and I’ve yet to meet significant numbers of ‘typical’ anyone..
The EU has just added to its vaccine fiasco by creating a hard Irish border as far as vaccines are concerned just a month after reaching a deal having insisted for years that it must not be a hard border. The EU really has lost the plot.
I am perplexed that the most recent article on this forum is about a vacant position as treasurer of the party. Do the Liberal Democrats intend to express an opinion on the current vaccine crisis in the EU? In particular, do they intend to comment if (as appears increasingly likely) the EU seizes the intellectual property of companies and prevents the contractually agreed transfer of vaccines to the UK?
@Paul Murray – There has been silence on this issue from every prominent Lib Dem I’ve seen on social media.
The EU has today broken international law, by invoking article 16 without notification. It did not even notify the Irish Republic. Even when it climbed down, the statement warned article 16 would be triggered again should vaccines cross from the Republic to NI.
If the UK wanted to use its stock of Pfizer from the EU, to bring Ireland into the UK vaccine scheme (thereby avoiding vaccine going to waste), it would need to think carefully before doing it. Article 16 could be triggered in a fit of pique! Probably safer to sell to Hungary instead.
The EU has gone beyond Trumpism. The only good thing, is it cannot claim the election was rigged – because Commissioners don’t have those.
Ian Cornwell: Annex 7 of the NI Protocol allows the EU (or the UK) to apply measures “forthwith” in exceptional circumstances. So I am not sure the EU would have been in breach, had they not withdrawn the ill thought out proposal, of international law. Always provided that they had served notice and entered into consultation regarding the proposed measures as Annex 7 also provides.
However the EU problem may be that having invoked Article 16 they can hardly complain if the UK uses to argue that the Irish Sea border is causing “serious economic or societal” difficulties to Northern Ireland and seek to modify the NI Protocal to ease them.
EEA, combined with the trade minnow EFTA, would be the sensible and realistic aim and a huge step forward from the terrible position we are in now.
As a niche manufacturer exporter, I have had to set up a despatch point in Poland to try to circumvent some effects of this this near impossible situation. That still put the goods in an uncertain legal position because of brexit. Some were returned by confused clearance staff in Poland and I had to sign legal agreements with each of the carriers.
Trade with the EU and EEA is now more difficult than with North America, despite the recent situation and geographic proximity. They only have their regional state taxes plus small duty ( 2% in my case), totalling between 2% -14% added before delivery. In Europe, there will be a sudden shock of delivery being refused until around 34% is added. This is VAT at an average of 23% + handling charges and duty subject to product origin and % content, a dogs breakfast of complication and heavy disruption. This is what was negotiated by the Johnson government and is not my idea of free trade. Or else the goods are delivered followed by threatening letters arriving from day one to recover the monies.
Any goods refused by EU customers would return to UK exporters with additional charges.
Uk retail exporters will be unable to function and as soon as the stories of huge up front bills get around, few will be ordering from the UK. Debenhams and M&S realised this immediately and stopped dealing on the continent. So much for the UK as a Global Trading Super Power.
There are reasons why 50% of UK exports (inc bullion) go to the EU and there is nothing out there remotely to replace that. The BRICS countries have highly unequal incomes and the vast majority have far too low incomes to buy western made goods. Even fast growth is not changing that any time soon. The one exception to an extent is China where they have 200m middle class, but it is nowhere near as well developed a market for western goods as Germany
On india, the Economist explained why we sell so incredibly little there, perhaps 1 item every 2 years at best for me. Nearly all of the fast economic growth directly funds the super rich at 0.1% of the population, so luxury type goods could sell to them. But after that only 1% make equivalent western minimum wage at about $20 p.a and below that the 99% are on $3-$12 a day