[ad_1]
– We have signed the first free trade agreement based on zero tariffs and zero quotas that has been agreed with the EU. We have regained control of our money, borders, laws, commerce and fishing areas.
This is what British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said when he and the President of the EU Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, agreed on Christmas Eve on a framework for good cooperation from January 1, 2021 .
It consists of a trade and cooperation agreement, an information exchange agreement and a Euratom agreement, agreements with more than 2000 pages of text.
The British no longer wanted to be ruled by the EU and rightly claim that they have now regained autonomy in many areas.
A potentially deadly scenario for Norwegian EEA supporters if the trade turns out to continue to work. Because then we would not have to submit to all EU laws or become members of the EU.
Is the rest of the world a commercial disaster?
Norwegian commentators and leading writers quickly rose above the deal.
Fast and Furious?
Obviously, they don’t know the deal well enough. And if any of them are to be believed, international trade must revolve around a hell of bureaucracy and barriers.
At least based on how they describe the British relations with the EU when, since the New Year, they are completely outside the EU. Despite the fact that at the twelfth hour an agreement was signed that, with the exception of the EEA agreement, will be deeper than any other free trade agreement in the world.
That is, when the broad British deal with the EU is as bad as it is described by the Norwegian EEA supporters in Aftenposten, Dagsavisen, DN and others, well, then there must be really desperate conditions for the community of the world’s 162 remaining nations that they are not part of an agreement between the British and the EU, or the EEA.
They must experience even worse business conditions than the horror scenario that is now being published in the Norwegian media for Great Britain.
Other tones sound from the EU itself.
– We have finally reached an agreement, it has been a long and arduous road, but we have got a good deal. It’s a fair and balanced deal, Ursula von der Leyen said at a press conference on Christmas Eve.
Horror and horror
“EEA better than Brexit”, Dagsavisen could conclude in its editorial of December 28, and he immediately showed that his conclusion is not based on knowledge of the British agreement:
SOVEREIGNTY: By signing this agreement, we are fulfilling the sovereign wish of the British people to live under their own laws, made by their own elected parliament, Boris Johnson tweeted on Wednesday afternoon when he signed the agreements with the EU. That same morning, the president of the EU Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, signed the same, before the documents were sent by plane to London.
“The UK has reached a comprehensive trade agreement with the EU. It means that the British avoid tariffs and quotas on goods. But the British Christmas gift does not cover services, which are an important part of the country’s economy. Suffice it to mention the London’s great financial community, “he says.
Completely misunderstood. Services is part of the agreement. But the financial sector and some others are excluded. Former Prime Minister Therese May criticized the service agreement when Parliament joined the agreement on Thursday.
Men’s dog.
Dagens Næringsliv writes in a leadership position Tuesday that Norwegian fish to the EU would stay and trample the border if Norway were not subject to EU veterinary legislation, as we are through the EEA.
Interesting! Norway exports seafood to much of the world. Last time I checked, we were not subject to the laws of Japan and other countries, and then we should be subject to delayed procedures at the border.
In other words, DN’s reasoning means that the Norwegian salmon that the Japanese eat for their sushi is almost half rotten.
And Norwegian fish suffers the same fate in all other countries outside the EU.
Aftenposten’s political editor, Kjetil B. Alstadheim, is also unaware that the British deal also covers services. Alstadheim’s assessment is based, among other things, on the fact that the services do not, according to its comment on the same day. And even if goods are included, that trade will also get into trouble:
“But goods will not cross the border as easily as today. The bureaucracy is enlarging. The dominance of forms will grow. There will be more controls. The system of mutual approval of goods ceases,” Alstadheim writes, continuing:
“Norwegian companies will shudder at the thought of something like this. But for the British, it has been more important to be able to decide for themselves and that the Court of Justice of the European Union will no longer have any power in the country. Freedom at a high price. “
Yes, what he calls freedom for which too high a price is paid, is therefore a greater national self-government where political decisions are made by the elected representatives of the country.
A democratic freedom that several commentators do not seem to value highly.
Other shades of the continent
Frenchman Michel Barnier should be better up-to-date than Norwegian newspaper editors, as he was the EU’s main negotiator. See what he tells the newspaper Ouest France:
– Is this a free trade agreement or something else? It is much broader than a free trade agreement that we have signed with Japan or Canada. This agreement covers trade in goods and services, except financial services, covers energy, transportation and covers fishing, he says.
– Contains a very extensive chapter on security. It is important for citizens that we continue to work together on Europol, Eurojust, extradition, DNA data exchange, the fight against money laundering. So this is a very ambitious deal, Barnier clarified.
He emphasizes that the agreement could have been more comprehensive and cover defense, development and foreign policy if the British had wanted it.
The website of the European Commission states that the trade and cooperation agreement covers trade in goods and services, digital trade, intellectual property rights, public procurement, aviation and road transport, energy, fishing , the coordination of social benefits and other issues.
Not the other party that decides
Commentators who believe that the EEA is better than the British deal seem to be little concerned about the issue of national self-government based on parliamentary democracy.
The British have put more emphasis on it. From now on, they are not subject, like Norway, to the Court of Justice of the European Communities in Luxembourg, or its copying body to the EFTA Court.
They are not obliged to continually change their legislation at the behest of the EU, as Norway is in the EEA, and they have been given much more leeway to design their own regulations for state aid and many other matters.
But they are committed to developing in such a way that differences in business conditions in the EU and there are not so great that conditions of competition become unfair. This means that the British have to adapt to the standards, but can choose not to participate in the far-reaching social interventions that Norway has to carry out in the EEA.
The EU or the UK can notify countermeasures to restore balance if there is an imbalance between the terms on the two sides of the English Channel.
But, contrary to what Norway experiences, it is not the courts of the other party that will decide the disputes. They go to an arbitral tribunal to assess the justification of the countermeasures.
Sanctions or countermeasures?
“These measures will have a scope and duration limited to what is strictly necessary and proportionate to face the situation. Priority will be given to the measures that least disturb the function of this agreement.”, It is established in Article 9.4.2 of the agreement on countermeasures (my translation), or punitive measures as it is often called in Norway when it comes to vetoing a provision in the EEA Agreement.
Now, for example, the left wants to veto new EU legislation called Railway Package 4, which will correspond to “an imbalance” in the British agreement.
The Labor Party and other red-green parties are already under attack so that they can impose the first veto if they come to power in the government. It is then claimed that it will jeopardize the entire EEA deal and that the countermeasures will be draconian.
But wait a minute. The wording of the countermeasures in Article 112.2 of the EEA Agreement is in fact identical to the wording given to the UK!
Therefore, countermeasures must be limited in order for the agreement to work in the best possible way. Do we see bullying propaganda in broad daylight?
EEA opponents with quick conclusions
Opponents of the EEA are also quick to take Boris’s deal as income for their opinions.
Even before it has been put into practice, they mean to know that it shows that a life without an EEA agreement is okay, yes, much better.
Brexit is a better deal than the EEA, Center Party parliamentary leader Marit Arnstad announced in Klassekampen on Tuesday. And it’s followed by Heming Olaussen from SV, who says the deal is balanced and the right thing to do and balanced for both parties. He wisely adds that the “long-term” agreement may change the debate on the Norwegian EEA.
To be sure, opponents of the EEA are right on the question of more democracy and self-government in Norway if Norway followed the British.
But what about trade? Even if you are not as affected by Brexit as Aftenposten, DN, Dagsavisen and friendly EU politicians claim, there is reason to believe that something will happen.
the is The difference between being part of the EU internal market and what the UK will do from now on: trade with it.
Trade margins against democracy
Now is the time to see what happens over time, beyond the chaotic first days, maybe weeks.
The balance between whether Norway should be inspired by Boris is between the desire for greater democracy and the risk of trade in denouncing the EEA.
For the EEA debate, it will be exciting to see in the future whether the margins that the British can lose in trade will be large or negligible.
To supporters of the EU and EEA, I predict that trade considerations will in any case trump the argument for more democracy and self-government in that debate.
Thomas Vermes comments regularly on ABC News. Read the previous comments here.
Read the full agreement between the EU and the UK and the information about it in the EU
