Britain will be leaving the EU common market at the end of the year and there are still important issues to be hammered out. Both sides could be facing a disaster in the form of huge traffic jams, job losses and rising prices.
Suddenly, everything screeches to a halt in the Port of Dover. It's a
Wednesday in September and dozens of semi-trucks are backed up on the
four-lane road that leads out of the port to the highway. Diesel exhaust
wafts over the compound as some drivers nervously pump the gas pedal.
A red truck has collided with a gray truck in a curve. Nothing major,
just a couple of small dents and scratches on the trailers. Yet the
column of trucks quickly backed all the way up to the ferries, which
were supposed to have immediately begun loading up other trucks for the
return trip across the English Channel.
Everyone is going to be
late today: the ferry captains and the truckers. Yet the mini-accident
is just a precursor to the gigantic traffic jam that everyone expects to
occur on January 1, the day on which the United Kingdom, after a
year-long transition period, finally leaves the European single market.
Hectic talks in both London and Brussels are ongoing regarding the
final details of the deal - things like customs and certificates,
professional qualifications and environmental regulations, startup
subsidies and fishing rights off the British coast.
Recently, it
looked as though the two sides would be able to at least agree on a
rudimentary deal that would prevent customs and tariff quotas. Such an
agreement could significantly limit the economic harm produced by the UK
exit from the EU, particularly for the UK itself. In truth, though,
that is rather cold comfort: Essentially, the only choice now remaining
is between an ugly divorce and an extremely ugly divorce.
Significant damage has already been done. Since the British voted by a
razor-thin margin to leave the European Union four years ago, trade
between the UK and the EU has plunged. Prior to the Brexit vote, Britain
was Germany's third-largest export market, but it has since dropped to
fifth place. At the same time, British exports to the Continent have
sunk by 17 percent in just the first seven months of this year relative
to the same time period one year ago, a steeper drop than that seen by
exports from Japan or the United States. Economists refer to the
phenomenon as "decoupling."
If there are any winners in this
development, it is those people in Britain who see Brexit as a symbolic
expression of national sovereignty. Because from an economic
perspective, there will only be losers. Particularly in the UK,
consumers will be faced with higher prices and less selection. Companies
will be forced to deal with a radically altered trade regime, more
bureaucracy and higher costs. The labor market will experience job
losses. And politicians on both sides of the channel will be faced with
difficult questions as to why their Brexit strategies didn't produce the
desired results in the end.
When the EU member states had recovered from the shock of the 2016
Brexit referendum, they still hoped to be able to form as close a
partnership as possible with Britain. Four years later, though, it has
become clear that that goal will not be realized. On trade policy, the
country will be further away from the EU than either Norway or Turkey.
Indeed, not only will Brexit result in the EU losing almost a sixth of
its economic power, Britain will become a new competitor whose primary
goal will be that of taking away market share from the EU.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Boris Johnson's plan of forming lucrative
trade agreements for Britain following Brexit has also proven
unsuccessful. And his much-hyped idea of transforming Britain into
"Singapore-on-Thames," with low taxes and even less bureaucracy, is
nowhere in sight.
Britain's "glorious" post-Brexit future, as
Johnson has promised, could thus begin with traffic chaos,
administrative disarray and supply shortages. Even the reserved language
of government bureaucrats in London sounds like the script for a horror
movie, with concerns being voiced about things like blocked ports,
medication shortages and mass lay-offs. And the fact that British
citizens have been left largely in the dark about their government's
concrete plans hasn't exactly helped calm nerves.
The fear and
distrust are on full display in the southern England town of Sevington,
located in Kent County. From the village cemetery, the view looks out
over a busy traffic circle located just behind the church. The M20
motorway, one of the country's most important traffic arterials
connecting London with the Port of Dover, isn't far away.
In July,
earthmovers showed up essentially overnight to an 11-hectare plot of
land just south of the church, where they bulldozed a field of poppies,
ragwort and blackberry bushes. Because of Brexit, it is being
transformed into "a gigantic field of asphalt for thousands of lorries,"
says Mandy Rossi, a Green Party politician. "It's appalling."
Officially,
the site had been set up for trucks to clear customs - fully 34
kilometers from the border. Referring to the extensive detour it would
require, Rossi says: "It would essentially be an invitation for
smuggling."
She is particularly concerned that it will soon
transform into a parking lot for at least 1,500 trucks. The British
government, after all, believes that Brexit will result in traffic jams
extending several kilometers from ferry ports.
In early September,
Johnson promised his fellow citizens a "good result" from the
negotiations. Unfortunately, though, a confidential government document
had been leaked ahead of his comments, a paper that outlined the
"reasonable worst-case scenario." It reads like the screenplay for an
apocalyptic BBC drama, including power outages, tight fuel supplies,
food shortages on the Channel Islands and thousands of trucks backed up
more than 100 kilometers on the nation's highways.
Should there be
no deal, the paper noted, the government could be faced with having to
send soldiers into the streets to maintain order, while the Navy would
be sent out to prevent French fishing boats from encroaching on British
waters. Because medications could get stuck at the border, the paper
noted, there would be a danger of animal diseases spreading through the
countryside. Across the country, one in 20 town halls could go broke,
leaving millions of people without necessary financial support.
The final divorce from the European common market will take place at
the end of December - right in the middle of winter and possibly also at
the peak of a second coronavirus wave. Yet the first swath of
destruction has already eaten its way through the country. Nowhere in
Europe have more people died from COVID-19 and no other Western
industrialized country saw a larger second quarter GDP plunge. When the
government's generous coronavirus aid program expires in November,
millions of workers will find themselves facing unemployment. A no-deal
scenario in the middle of the pandemic would be, according to economist
Jonathan Portes of King's College London, "the perfect storm."
The
island country's weakest links are the ferry and shipping ports on the
English Channel. Even if the two sides can agree on a trade deal, the
goods would have to be registered and checked in Dover. Michel Barnier,
the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, explained why early on, saying that
the EU could not risk goods from around the world being assembled in
Britain, being declared as British goods and then entering the EU single
market through the back door.
The controls required to prevent
that, say experts, will lengthen delivery times by up to two days. Such a
delay would not only adversely affect just-in-time supply chains, it
would also disrupt the food industry. Fish, shellfish and vegetables
could rot as the trucks wait in line. Some medications are also
extremely sensitive to delays.
British haulers are clear about
where the blame for the chaos lies. "The government is way too late. How
can they ask us to prepare everything if we don't get any information?"
wonders Richard Burnett, CEO of the Road Haulage Association.
Only
three months remain, and much is still up in the air. Where will the
truck checkpoints be located? Which computer programs should haulers
install given that the government is still testing its customs software?
Who is supposed to process the customs declarations for hundreds of
millions of deliveries?
Thus far, 5,000 officials have handled 50
million customs documents a year, Burnett says. After Brexit, there will
be an increase of around 220 million declarations, meaning that the
customs office would require tens of thousands of additional agents, he
says. Many EU haulers, Burnett fears, could completely eliminate Britain
from their schedules. "Nobody wants to be part of this chaos."
Carmaker Honda has calculated what the additional effort would cost
and found that even delays of just 15 minutes would result in annual
extra expenditures of 850,000 pounds. Numerous British companies in the
automobile and chemical industries have developed emergency plans to
transfer some of their production to the Continent, should it become
necessary. That means that tens of thousands of jobs in the industrial
regions of northern and central Britain could be in danger - regions
that delivered the Conservatives their election victory in December.
Johnson's
Brexiteers, though, continue to propagate the fairy tale that trade
deals with other regions of the world will be enough to balance out any
losses that might occur via Brexit. One of those is trade lawyer Shanker
Singham, the adviser to the Johnson government who rhapsodizes about
the business opportunities in Asia, the Indo-Pacific region and the
Middle East.
But Johnson's Global Britain strategy has thus far
enjoyed rather limited success. The trade deals that have been
negotiated with countries like Japan and South Korea in recent months
have only secured conditions for Britain that are similar to the ones
they currently enjoy as an EU member state. Talks with the U.S.,
meanwhile, have been stagnant for months, despite U.S. President Donald
Trump's March claim that the trade deal would be "fantastic and big." As
such, says Clemens Fuest, president of the Ifo Institute for Economic
Research in Munich, the concept promulgated by the Brexiteers is "an
illusion."
Europeans are looking at the approaching Brexit debacle
in Britain with a mixture of disbelief and schadenfreude. Many in
Brussels see it as evidence of what happens when countries try to leave
Europe's successful trade bloc.
But there is no cause for
derision. Not only because the EU shares the blame for the Brexit
disaster, as Gabriel Felbermayr, president of the Kiel Institute for the
World Economy, told DER SPIEGEL. But also because Brexit will result in
lower growth for the EU. Additional border formalities, for example,
will cost German companies alone up to 300 million euros extra each year
– whether there is a deal or not. On top of that will be significant
costs associated with new certificates, shipping documents and other red
tape.
The situation will be even worse if the EU and Britain slap
tariffs on each other's products. "Many customers have already told us:
'If these tariffs come, we will no longer deliver to the UK.' Then, it
will no longer be worth it," says Andy McFarnell, who is in charge of
Brexit-related issues for the Belgium hauler Sitra, which regularly
transports foodstuffs to Britain in some of its 500 trucks. The price of
chicken, for example, could rise by more than a euro per kilogram, says
McFarnell.
European food producers are also concerned about a
disagreement regarding geographical indications. There are more than
3,000 products in the EU that are thus certified, protecting items like
French champagne, Italian gorgonzola and Nuremberg sausage from cheap
imitations.
In the Withdrawal Agreement it signed with Brussels, Britain
guaranteed that such products would enjoy "at least the same level of
protection" as they do now. But Johnson's negotiators suddenly seem to
have backed away from that pledge. An internal German Foreign Ministry
paper from early September about the ongoing negotiations notes that
London now wants to "refashion" the provision.
It is quite
possible that British supermarkets will soon be carrying champagne from
California. But what will happen to the Scotch whiskey, the cheddar
cheese or the rest of the around 80 British products that currently
enjoy protection in the EU? Would Brussels block them from being
imported? There is a significant risk that both sides will end up losing
in the end.
It's the same story in a number of other sectors of
the economy. In the case of a no-deal Brexit, says Oliver Holtemüller, a
professor of economics at Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg,
some 180,000 jobs could be in danger, especially in regions that host
Germany's carmakers.
European hopes that several thousand bankers
from London would move to the Continent as a result of Brexit have thus
far not materialized. Hubertus Väth from the initiative Frankfurt Main
Finance and the financial hub's chief lobbyist believed that his city
would be able to attract up to 10,000 industry professionals from
London. Four years later, though, only 2,500 people have made the move,
among them many Germans who took the opportunity to return home after
spending several years abroad.
It seems unlikely that many more
will follow suit. That is partly due to the EU realization that
financial deals aren't really workable without the British. In late
September, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) ruled
that British clearing houses could continue offering their services in
mainland Europe until at least the middle of 2022. "A clear victory for
the City," says Väth.
Without clearing houses, banks and funds are
unable to settle and process deals involving securities and
derivatives. They jump in when a deal falls apart. To avoid chaos on the
financial markets in times of trouble, they have to build up billions
in reserves.
But clearing houses, too, can run into trouble in
times of financial crisis. They must then be propped up by the country
in which they are located - and no European government is interested in
having to throw aid their way should a crisis erupt. As such, it is
hardly surprising that Europeans are content to continue relying on
British clearing houses.
Unfulfilled hopes and murky prospects:
Shortly before the deadline, the mood on both sides of the channel is
dark. The further the EU and Britain drift apart, the greater will be
the economic harm, a truth that is clear to all involved. As such, the
question has become: Will they at least be able to come up with a
slimmed down agreement to avoid the worst?
There has been a fair degree of optimism expressed recently in
London, Brussels and Berlin. But the diplomats directly involved in the
talks have been less sanguine. A telephone call between Boris Johnson
and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen 10 days ago
Saturday was likewise unable to produce a breakthrough.
The two
sides remain significantly at odds on two decisive issues: future
competition rules for things like state aid and environmental
regulations; and North Sea fishing rights.
Despite the fact that
the fishery is largely meaningless from an economic point of view, the
dispute over the British fishing grounds has become one of the tallest
hurdles for a trade agreement. The issue has become symbolic, in part
because it is one of the few where Johnson has the most leverage.
Britain wants to limit the access of EU fishing boats to its waters and
renegotiate catch limits annually for every one of the around 100
species of edible fish. The EU is demanding continued access and is only
ready to agree to catch limits that are valid for a longer period of
time.
The message from Brussels has been that the EU will not sigh
a deal that does not contain a satisfactory solution to on the fishing
issue. In a video conference with Barnier last Wednesday, Germany
Agricultural Minister Julia Klöckner clearly outlined the position of
Germany, which currently holds the rotating presidency of the Council of
the EU. In comments to DER SPIEGEL, she said: "I will not sacrifice the
fishing industry for an agreement in other sectors."
The EU has
also shown its stubbornness elsewhere. Because the UK violated crucial
elements of the Withdrawal Agreement with its recent Internal Market
Bill, the EU is insisting on an obligatory mechanism for solving future
disputes.
In addition, Brussels wants British environmental,
social and labor market standards to continue to live up to EU
standards. Whereas the British are apparently prepared to agree on that
point when it comes to regulations currently in place, the two sides
continue to disagree regarding how future EU regulations should be dealt
with. Paris, in particular, is insisting that Britain adopt them as
well, Johnson is strictly opposed. One compromise that has been proposed
involves the EU making concessions on competition rules in exchange for
British agreement to a mechanism for solving disputes.
Time,
though, is growing short - again. EU heads of government are meeting for
a two-day summit on Thursday and Friday to address the most pressing
questions. Brussels says that the outline of a treaty text must be
finished by the end of the month to allow sufficient time for
ratification by year's end.
That won't, of course, be enough to
prevent all the damage caused by Britain's departure from the EU, but it
could at least dull the edges. Or, as economist Felbermayr puts it: "A
deal is better than no deal."
© Der Spiegel
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article