[ad_1]
reowning Street’s top Brexit negotiator Lord Frost, exhausted by months of intense talks, couldn’t hide his joy on Saturday when he praised the Brexit deal reached between the EU and Brussels as “one of the largest and most comprehensive deals in the history”. Its effect, he said, would be to allow the UK to “lay down its own laws again.”
“There is no more role for the European court of justice, there are no direct effects of EU legislation, there is no alignment of any kind, and we are outside the single market and outside the customs union, as the manifesto said we would do. be, ”he declared. “This should be the beginning of a moment of national renewal for us. All options are in our hands as a country and now it is up to us to decide how we use them and how we move forward in the future.
Frost was right to emphasize the importance of reaching some kind of agreement. By avoiding a no-deal, the two sides have ensured that trade between the UK and the EU will not be routinely subject to tariffs or quotas, as would have otherwise been the case. The resulting higher costs for businesses and consumers on both sides have been avoided, although Brexit by itself will lead to more bureaucracy, form filling and checks on traded goods, and thus delays.
But no one should believe that this marks the end of the disputes between the EU and the UK. It does not represent the purpose. It was, as Labor leader Sir Keir Starmer put it on Christmas Eve, a “thin deal” that leaves a lot unsolved, which was struck to avert a catastrophe by kicking a lot down the road.
The UK, under the government of Boris Johnson, chased Brexit, it always claimed, to regain control of our laws, borders and money. But even after we are gone, your government still wants to benefit from European programs, including those affecting our security, our financial services sector, and our data, and enjoy the benefits of the European single market wherever possible. Johnson wants UK professionals to be able to work freely in other EU countries, but this deal accomplished nothing for them. Those arguments are yet to come; the fights will continue. Toby Helm
Security
Mark Townsend
Priti Patel wasted little time claiming that the deal made the UK safer. His assessment left most security analysts wondering what the home secretary knew that they did not. Few have avoided the conclusion that, at least in the short term, the deal leaves Britain less secure.
Not only are key lines of cooperation cut, but the UK police have lost some of their most valuable tools. Chief among these is the Schengen Information System (SIS), a vast database that provides real-time alerts to locate terrorists and serious criminals. On a typical day, British police access the SIS more than 1.65 million times.
With no obvious signs of a replacement system, urgent negotiations are needed to agree on a scheme that can fill this huge intelligence gap.
Similarly, losing a position at the EU law enforcement agency Europol, where the UK had a strong presence, creates potential complexities with fast-moving cross-border terrorist and criminal investigations. New agreements with each EU member state may be required to restore previous relations, again, keeping the promise of longer negotiations. Additional talks will also be needed to replace the work of Eurojust, the agency responsible for judicial cooperation in criminal cases in member states.
Downing Street claims Britain had gotten more than it bargained for in security and surveillance, and it is true that there are some notable victories, including a fast-track extradition system to replace the European arrest warrant and the ongoing exchange of DNA data and fingerprints. But it is also true that there is still much to negotiate and win. Meanwhile, the British police apparatus is diminished.
Share data
Jamie Doward
Ensuring the smooth flow of data between the EU and the UK is critical to their future prosperity.
The Institute of Government notes that “the volumes of data entering and leaving the UK increased 28 times between 2005 and 2015, and three-quarters of these data transfers are made with EU countries. Any restriction on data flows would act as a barrier to trade, putting UK companies at a competitive disadvantage “
According to the summary issued by the UK government, “the agreement confirms the strong data protection commitments of both the UK and the EU, protecting consumers and helping to promote confidence in the digital economy.”
However, much remains to be resolved. Experts say we should expect to hear a lot more about an “adequacy decision” that will relate to data transfers between the UK and the EU.
The adequacy of the data is a status granted by the European Commission to countries outside the European Economic Area. When a country has been granted this status, information can pass freely between it and the EEA without requiring further guarantees.
This will not be fixed quickly. The fastest data matching agreement between the EU and another country, Argentina, took 18 months to finalize. Therefore, there will be an interim solution whereby the UK will suspend its own data protection rules. This solution will have a maximum duration of six months, according to EU sources.
For this reason, there is pressure to reach an accommodation agreement before the interim solution expires.
Cecilia Bonefeld-Dahl, CEO of Digitaleurope, a trade body representing more than 35,000 companies in Europe, said: “The EU has yet to make an adequacy decision vis-à-vis the UK; There is an urgent need to move forward here so that data can continue to flow between our economies and our businesses. Our recent study showed that 6 out of 10 European companies transfer data between the EU and the UK. “
Service sector
Phillip inman
The government must return to the negotiating table to ensure access for service companies excluded from the “thin” Brexit deal, business leaders have urged.
Professional services companies and municipal banks, insurance companies and accounting firms are among the thousands of companies facing restrictions on EU trade as of January 1, unless ministers can expand the agreements in a new round of talks in the new year.
The service sector accounts for 80% of the UK economy and was largely left out of the Brexit deal, which focuses on removing tariffs and quotas on goods shipped between the UK and the EU. But while the UK had an overall £ 79 billion trade deficit with the EU in 2019, it had a £ 18 billion surplus in services trade.
TheCityUK, the financial services industry lobbyist, said that while the banks had an agreement covering basic transactions, there were as many as 40 treaties affecting cross-border activities in the financial services industry that needed to be renegotiated.
“We have known for some time that the service sector was going to be left out of the initial agreement. The hope is that now that some of the political tension has disappeared from the discussions, we can address other important issues, ”he said.
EU leaders, fearing that the UK will try to undermine regulations in the single market and the customs union, have also blocked agreement on data rules that allow companies to keep information about their customers.
Brussels has indicated that, on many matters affecting service companies, it wants to wait until later in 2021 to see if the UK diverges from existing EU regulations before reaching new deals.
While the EU has agreed to allow company executives to relocate from the UK to EU countries to manage their continental operations, it is unclear whether UK professionals will be able to do the same after excluding professional qualifications.
Michael Izza, Executive Director of the Professional Body of Accountants, ICAEW, He said an agreement covering legal services was welcome, but should be extended to other professions, including accountants, surveyors and architects.
Professional qualifications
Jamie Doward
From accountants to ski instructors, before Brexit, the British qualifications of UK citizens working abroad in EU countries were recognized in all member states.
However, now things will change and it will be more difficult for UK citizens wishing to work in the EU to demonstrate that their qualifications are equivalent to those recognized in other parts of Europe.
This is a setback for the UK. The drafts proposed by the British side clearly show that it wanted mutual recognition of the ratings.
“The UK had originally requested that the EU accept that UK qualifications be recognized automatically, perhaps subject to further testing if necessary,” said Sam Lowe, senior researcher at the Center for European Reform. “Instead, what we have is a framework that allows rating agencies in the EU and the UK to come forward with a proposal for mutual recognition in the future.”
This is similar to what the EU has allowed under other trade agreements. But Lowe isn’t convinced of its merits. “It relies on rather protectionist, often private, bodies that decide to recognize the ability of others to award grades in a specific field.”
However, the UK agreed to one important caveat. In the absence of an agreement at EU level, Brussels will allow UK bodies to seek other ways to agree on mutual recognition of qualifications on a bilateral basis. Therefore, a UK based rating body working with its peer rating body in an individual member state, for example Ireland or Germany, can negotiate its own agreement.
But there is no guarantee of success. These conversations could be complex, lengthy, and only achievable on a country-by-country basis.
