His recent antics of leaving notes for absent civil servants made headlines, but Jacob Rees Mogg also had some interesting things to say about “Brexit opportunities”, writes Jill Rutter
Jacob Rees-Mogg’s recent appearance before the European Scrutiny
Committee saw the minister for Brexit Opportunities and Government
Efficiency [1] set out his Brexit plans, priorities and push-backs. Here are the five takeaways from the session.
Rees -Mogg’s unit – physically in the Treasury, “metaphysically” in the
Cabinet Office – now consists of 31 opportunity hunters. The long
search for a director for the unit was over – Mr Chris Carr had started
the day before, moving over from the deregulation part of the Business
department (suggesting the attempt to attract an outsider had failed).
Rees-Mogg was quick to point up that his empire was much smaller than
that of the now departed Lord Frost, with foreign secretary Liz Truss
and her Europe (and lots else beside) minister Chris Heaton-Harris now
leading on the NI protocol and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement.
One of the most striking comments Rees-Mogg made was in response to a
question on where he saw opportunities for divergence: “I am afraid I
think that we must get away from this idea of divergence. I do not care
what the EU does anymore, any more than I care what the United States or
Singapore do.” The question was not what the EU was doing or not – but
what was right for the UK.
As we have pointed out before, as long as the UK stays signed up to the
Northern Ireland protocol then any divergence in Great Britain from
rules that will apply in Northern Ireland simply deepens the Irish Sea
border the government negotiated. And, second, UK exporters are still
potentially very interested in how the EU regulates, given that for many
it is their biggest export market. Keeping track of what the EU is
doing – and then deciding on the merits of staying aligned or not –
should be a core part of Rees-Mogg’s unit’s role [2],
as should working with the UK Mission to the EU in Brussels to see
whether the government should be lobbying with other like-minded
countries to head off EU regulation that could be antithetical to UK
interests.
But then, a few moments later, Rees-Mogg seemed to back track from the
lure of regulatory autarky: “We want to be thinking about how India
regulates its pharmaceuticals market, one of the best and most
successful pharmaceutical markets in the world.” He is right that we
want to learn from regulatory best practice, but an
“anywhere-but-the-EU” approach fails to take proper account of business
and practical realities.
Rees-Mogg is intending to spend a lot of time legislating in the next
session. The Retained EU Law Bill – aka the Brexit freedom bill – will
contain the long-promised fast track mechanism to amend EU law we no
longer like as well as “speeding up the process” of dethroning retained
EU law from its supremacy over UK law. There will be battles ahead over
whether the mere fact that EU law was implemented via secondary
legislation justifies a lack of scrutiny when the government changes it:
Rees-Mogg made clear that there were internal battles going on about
how extensive the bill would be – he argued for as wide-ranging bill as
possible, but also acknowledged that it was not yet drafted. He is also
bringing forward legislation on procurement to make the most of the
Brexit opportunity to simplify procurement processes.
Although he did not mention the rumoured legislation to supersede the
Northern Ireland Protocol, Rees-Mogg made clear that he regarded the
protocol as highly unsatisfactory. His view that it was only agreed on
the basis it would be reformed was widely picked up. But he went on to
say: “There comes a point at which you say, 'You have not reformed it
and therefore we are reforming it ourselves'. The United Kingdom is much
more important than any agreement that we have with any foreign power.”
Many businesses would argue that the immediate consequences of Brexit
had been to put upward pressure on prices – whether from labour
shortages, or from new costs of complying with customs procedures or
duplicating regulatory approvals. But Rees-Mogg was bullish in asserting
the contrary: “Are those supply side reforms going to come from
reforming and removing EU regulation? Yes. That is our real opportunity.
It is, in a more jargony way, non-fiscal interventions to make the
economy more efficient and lower cost."
The problem for Rees-Mogg is that the examples he gave (and those set out in the Benefits of Brexit white paper [3] )
are small set alongside the costs – and there is little chance of
bigger reforms – to workers’ rights or environmental protections which
might conceivably reduce costs passing Parliament. That looks like a
cost of living cul de sac.
The session started with some banter about how the committee was now
the key accountability mechanism for Rees-Mogg to Parliament. But while
he did face some pressure over the thinness of the benefits of Brexit
white paper and urgings to go further and faster, none of the five
Labour committee members, nor the official SNP member, showed up (former
SNP MP, Margaret Ferrier, did). Scrutiny by fan club does not work.
Institute for Government
© Institute for Government
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