logo
Is this tough US-EU trade deal a triumph for Brexit Britain? Only in leavers' most delusional fantasies

Is this tough US-EU trade deal a triumph for Brexit Britain? Only in leavers' most delusional fantasies

The Guardian3 days ago
Those who misled the country over Brexit are usually quieter these days. They do not hang their heads in shame, but change the subject whenever they can. They deflect with their new war-cry that Britain must also leave the European convention on human rights.
As the effects of their wicked Brexit folly worsen by the month, they rarely get a chance to whoop: 'We were right!' So their glee was unrestrained when the great US global bully gave Britain a less hard beating with a 10% tariff on its goods, compared with the EU, which was walloped with 15%.
Their joy overflowed when the business and trade secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, conceded: 'I'm absolutely clear, this is a benefit of being out of the European Union, having our independent trade policy, absolutely no doubt about that.' But what else can a trade secretary, speaking through gritted teeth, actually say? In his attempts to attract foreign investment, he can hardly tell the truth about the damage done by leaving the EU.
These advocates of Brexit should gloat while they can. When the French prime minister called the EU's deal with Donald Trump a 'soumission' (submission), Kwasi Kwarteng seized on the word in a piece for the Telegraph, writing: 'For the French, with their memories of capitulation to the Nazis in 1940, the word is even more associated with abject humiliation than it is in English.' Yes, that's the same Kwarteng who hurled the British economy over a cliff only three years ago.
'This trade deal is the EU's greatest humiliation since Britain voted to leave', read the headline on his column. But he would never confess that the difference between a 10% and 15% tariff with the US is minimal, since we trade twice as much with the EU as the US. It barely equates to the regular variation in exchange rates: in other words, it's 'a rounding error', the Centre for European Reform's trade expert, John Springford, told me, when compared with the hammer blow Britain gave itself with Brexit.
The UK-India trade deal signed with the Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, last week was greeted with another Brexiter whoop from the Conservative peer Daniel Hannan. Also writing in the Telegraph, he said: 'My party, and Brexiteers more widely, should be taking credit for having done what all the clever Europhiles have spent six years telling us was impossible. Instead of moaning, we should welcome Starmer's belated understanding that world's biggest and fastest-growing markets are outside the EU.' But the Tory leader took another view: 'Keir Starmer called this 'historic.' It's not historic, we've just been shafted!' Kemi Badenoch said, dismissing the India agreement as a bad deal that would increase immigration.
I don't know whether clever men like Kwarteng and Hannan are blinded by Brexit monomania or paralysed by the awful knowledge of the damage they have inflicted on their country, unable to confess an act of treachery and delusion hardly matched in British history. But as ever, facts are too inconvenient for them to deal with.
Yes, the India deal is the biggest and most substantial trade deal since leaving the EU. Yes, it's a deal that would have been impossible to do from inside the union. But how big is it? It will add 0.13% to our economy. That's better than the Australia agreement, worth just 0.08%, the New Zealand deal, worth 0.03%, or the proposed US agreement, worth 0.16%, according to Department for Business and Trade analysis. But our fragile economy needs all the help it can get, so hurrah for Brexit and our new trade deals!
But the gloaters ignore the context: our great Brexit losses. Here's the Office for Budget Responsibility's assessment: 'Our forecasts have assumed that the volume of UK imports and exports will both be 15% lower than if we had remained in the EU.' That 15% loss in trade 'will lead to a 4% reduction in the potential productivity of the UK economy'. In other words, as Jonty Bloom of the New World calculates, we need 50 India trade deals to make up for Brexit, because Britain does more than 40% of its trade with the EU – more if you include the European Economic Area and Switzerland. India has just 2% of our trade.
Brexiters bleat that Labour is sneaking us into the EU by the back door, with deals on Horizon, the EU's research and innovation funding programme; soon, hopefully, Erasmus; and maybe a youth experience scheme. We hope for agricultural products and energy deals. But even these, say the trade experts, are still small potatoes. Major attempts to rescue Britain's 4% loss in productivity since 2020 hit the concrete walls of Boris Johnson's monumentally bad trade and cooperation agreement. Brexit zealots protest against agreements to keep a dynamic alignment with EU standards that would make trade easier. But it doesn't apply to our internal environmental standards: outside EU rules, we have let our water quality fall behind the EU. More than 85% of bathing waters in the EU are rated excellent compared with just 64% in the UK, with the gap rising every year, reports the European Movement.
Public opinion has shifted rapidly: we are now a 'Bregretful' country, where only 31% still think it was right to leave and 61% say Brexit has been more of a failure than a success. Who do they blame? The Conservatives and Boris Johnson are top of the list, with 88% and 84% respectively holding them responsible. More than two-thirds (67%) blame Nigel Farage. A majority of Britons (56%) want to rejoin the EU as the grim reaper carries off old Brexiters, replacing them with young, pro-European voters.
Don't expect bolder moves from the Labour government in its current frame of mind. Though defence and security draw us towards ever closer union, public opinion is not to be trusted. If people were confronted now with actual re-entry terms – paying in, free movement, joining the euro, no special deals – their answers might change. The mood might also be different if the far right continues its gains in EU countries, dividing the union's values.
What might it take to throw off the economic, political and psychological darkness of Brexit? A clever – or Cleverly? – new Tory leader daring to break with the past, confessing the error of Brexit and taking us back into the EU, once and for all. It may take another generation to recover.
Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

MTG hints that she might be finished with the GOP: ‘I don't know if the Republican Party is leaving me'
MTG hints that she might be finished with the GOP: ‘I don't know if the Republican Party is leaving me'

The Independent

time27 minutes ago

  • The Independent

MTG hints that she might be finished with the GOP: ‘I don't know if the Republican Party is leaving me'

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, a well-known far-right Republican and loyal ally to President Donald Trump, has expressed deep frustrations and a growing rift with her political party. Over the last few weeks, Greene has notably broken with her party and the president on several matters she cares deeply about. She condemned Israel's war in Gaza and called it a 'genocide,' opposed Trump's recent artificial intelligence executive order, and advocated for the administration to release the Epstein Files. The pattern, Greene said in an interview with The Daily Mail this week, represents her frustrations with the Republican Party, which she believes is abandoning policies geared toward regular Americans. 'I don't know if the Republican Party is leaving me, or if I'm kind of not relating to the Republican Party as much anymore,' Greene said. 'I don't know which one it is.' The Georgia congresswoman said she felt as if the party had given up on issues that she resonates with, such as stopping foreign aid, using the Department of Government Efficiency to make cuts across the federal government, and driving down inflation. Greene had long advocated for the U.S. to stop sending military aid to Ukraine amid the Russia–Ukraine conflict – something that has not ceased. She has also criticized the administration for involving itself in the Iran–Israel conflict. Since Elon Musk, the de facto head of DOGE, left the White House, the administration appears to be less focused on using DOGE to make cuts. While DOGE staffers are still present throughout the government, reports indicate they have less authority. 'Like what happened to all those issues? You know that I don't know what the hell happened with the Republican Party. I really don't,' Greene said. 'But I'll tell you one thing, the course that it's on, I don't want to have anything to do with it, and I just don't care anymore,' she added. Greene has said online that she believes Republicans are pushing away younger voters by continuing to push the same unpopular policies. But she told The Daily Mail that the GOP may also be unpopular with conservative women based on how it treats them. 'I think there's other women in our party that are really sick and tired of the way men treat Republican women,' Greene said. The Georgia congresswoman specifically referenced Elise Stefanik, the Republican Rep. from New York. Trump initially nominated Stefanik to serve as U.S. ambassador to the U.N., but then reportedly pulled her nomination to maintain a safe majority in the House of Representatives. Instead, he nominated former national security adviser Mike Waltz. Greene said Stefanik got 'screwed' by Speaker Mike Johnson and people in the White House – Greene specifically said she did not blame the president. While Greene expressed frustrations with the current state of the Republican Party she did not say she would definitely rescind her affiliation with it.

Villagers whose country idyll was 'destroyed' by traveller site overnight furious after family submits retrospective permission to make site permanent and some are even considering moving
Villagers whose country idyll was 'destroyed' by traveller site overnight furious after family submits retrospective permission to make site permanent and some are even considering moving

Daily Mail​

time28 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Villagers whose country idyll was 'destroyed' by traveller site overnight furious after family submits retrospective permission to make site permanent and some are even considering moving

A luxurious property has gone on the market just weeks after an illegal travellers' site appeared on its doorstep. The stunning four-bedroom detached bungalow – priced at offers around £950,000 – is less than 150 yards from the caravan park, which is built on green belt land and without planning permission. Set in 3.5 acres of rural land, the high-specification property includes stables and a hot tub area, perfect for entertaining friends. Estate agents Stapleton Derby described the home as: 'Set within a peaceful rural location and offering superb access to all major motorway connections. 'This absolutely stunning, newly built four-bedroom detached bungalow presents a rare opportunity to acquire a luxurious home with its own equestrian facilities and expansive land. 'Designed with elegance and practicality in mind, the property is a true sanctuary, combining high-end finishes with thoughtful architectural detail. 'Externally, the front of the property welcomes you with a charming courtyard and ample parking for multiple vehicles. 'To the rear, a private oasis awaits, featuring patios, a hot tub, decking with seating areas, an Astro turf lawn, and a large pergola with its own bar and social space —perfect for entertaining or unwinding in style.' The current owners made the decision to sell as villagers fear the caravan camp, which sprung up in May – will knock hundreds of thousands of pounds off property prices. Rex Bennett, 78, said: 'Judging from past experiences of travellers' sites appearing close by, house prices will definitely fall. 'I've lived here nearly 40 years, and it's happened before when travellers' site spring up. 'The value of people's houses will fall and the owners lose money. 'Whether the reasons are justified or not, no one would choose to live near a caravan site.' He added: 'I haven't heard of anyone having trouble with the travellers but that doesn't make what they have done right. 'They have been very clever about how they have gone about building it. 'Turning up on a Bank Holiday weekend, knowing full well they wouldn't be stopped. 'It was very well thought out.' Stephen Holgate, 55, said: 'I don't have a problem with the site but then again, I don't have to live next to it. 'I'm not sure how I'd feel if they were my neighbours.' The travellers tore up the protected six-acre greenbelt plot, in Burtonwood, Cheshire, in just 72 hours – covering it in hardstanding and erecting a 10ft perimeter fence. The site located between Tan House Lane and Farmer's Lane was lit up like 'Blackpool Illuminations' at night according to one neighbour. Warrington Borough Council said it was aware of the 'potential breach of planning control' and vowed to 'take strong enforcement action within the legal framework.' A retrospective application has been submitted seeking full planning permission for a change of use of land associated with Tan House Farm. The documents state the change of use is for a gypsy and traveller residential site, with four pitches and associated landscaping, and the installation of a farm gate to a footpath on the corner of Tan House Lane and Farmers Lane. Applicant John Varey said the pitches can accommodate a mix of 16 caravans and mobile homes, occupied by Romani gypsies. The report added: 'All of the proposed occupants grew up in nomadic families and have continued to follow that way of life. The families travel in caravans for work and to attend fairs. 'The site is in the greenbelt, however, the land represents 'grey belt', and on that basis, the development is not necessarily inappropriate within the green belt.' Planning documents continued: 'The proposed site provides four gypsy and traveller pitches which are safe, well-designed, and ensure that the site will be private and provide a favourable living environment. 'The proposals include substantial planting and screening, which will result in an on-site biodiversity net gain 'The site will be well screened and capable of integrating with the area, which is characterised by farmland and some other pockets of residential development. 'The site is already connected to water, and connection to the electricity grid is proposed and achievable. 'The package treatment plant and welfare units facilitate the effective management of foul waste. 'The entire site remains permeable, ensuring that surface water will soak away, and the site is well drained with a ditch along the northern boundary. 'Given the families' lack of alternative accommodation, their living standards have been greatly improved since moving onto the application site.' Villagers have already expressed concerns that a metal gate has been installed on a public right-of-way. The planning document read: 'The metal gate is 3.6m, and a 1.2m gap is left to the right-hand side for pedestrians which enables continued access to the public right of way. 'The road is owned by the applicant and the gate is locked with a padlock. For reasons relating to fly-tipping and security, we would argue that the gate should be approved as part of the planning application.' The council has been inundated with objections by villagers. One objector wrote: 'The land has been destroyed without any planning permission, our greenbelt completely vandalised with absolutely no regard to the rules or residents. 'It is absolutely disgusting that this has been allowed to happen.' Another said: 'The site has damaged the natural beauty of the area and transformed once green belt land into a caravan park. 'Not only this, but a footpath has been obstructed with little to no consideration for anyone who plans to use this regularly used route. 'Failure to reject this planning application will only lead to further exploitation of the system in similar ways around the area, which will seriously damage an area of considerable natural beauty and wildlife.' But one letter of support read: 'I have spoken with some of the people on the caravan park at the village café. 'They were polite, friendly, and explained the situation of Warrington having no caravan sites for them to live on. I am happy with them being there. It is better than them on our parks.' The council is expected to reach a decision on the retrospective planning application later in the year.

Trump dubbed himself the ‘father of IVF' on the campaign trail. But his pledge to mandate insurance cover has disappeared
Trump dubbed himself the ‘father of IVF' on the campaign trail. But his pledge to mandate insurance cover has disappeared

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

Trump dubbed himself the ‘father of IVF' on the campaign trail. But his pledge to mandate insurance cover has disappeared

Donald Trump's vow to expand in vitro fertilization (IVF) access to millions of Americans is on hold, with White House officials backing away from plans to require Obamacare health plans to include the service as an essential health benefit, the Washington Post reported on Sunday. The Post reported that White House officials have privately moved away from the prospect of pushing for legislation to address the issue despite it being one of Trump's signature campaign promises, citing two persons with knowledge of internal discussions in Trumpworld. A senior administration official also acknowledged to the newspaper that changing Obamacare to force insurers to cover new services would require congressional action, not an executive order. The president has governed largely by executive fiat in his second term as he grapples with a closely-divded Congress and an unruly GOP majority in the House of Representatives. He's used those executive orders to dismantle whole parts of the federal government, including USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The president even tried to take an axe to the Department of Education, though that battle is still being waged in the courts. The Supreme Court recently cleared the way for Trump to cut roughly a quarter of the agency's staff. But many of Trump's campaign promises lie outside of his ability to influence via the hiring or firing of people and redirection of agency resources or agendas. In 2024, he laid out no direct path for his goal to expand IVF access, only telling voters that insurance companies would be forced to cover it. Still, he proclaimed himself the 'father of IVF' at at Fox News town hall, and promised during an NBC News interview: 'We are going to be, under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment. We're going to be mandating that the insurance company pay.' At the time, there was little to no acknowledgment of the fact that many if not most conservatives still oppose the Affordable Care Act and the same healthcare exchanges which Trump was now promising to utilize as he sought to use the power of the federal government to expand healthcare coverage. Now, with the passage of Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' without any provisions expanding IVF access, and with the prospect of further policy gains before the midterms growing dimmer, it's unclear when the White House would have another chance to press the issue in Congress. In February, the president signed an executive order directing his advisers to 'submit to the President a list of policy recommendations on protecting IVF access and aggressively reducing out-of-pocket and health plan costs for IVF treatment.' It's been crickets on the issue since then. In 2024, many of Trump's critics and the media pointed out that the policy would essentially amount to a reversal or at the very least coming in sharp contrast to the first Trump administration's efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which ended in failure, and a contradiction of the conservative view that government should not exercise that level of control over Americans' health care decisions. The president's promise thrilled his party's natalists, embodied by Vice President JD Vance and an army of right-wing immigration hawks who fear the changing American demographics brought on as a result of falling birth rates and high levels of migration. It also wowed some of his Democratic and left-leaning critics, who see the policy as a means of furthering their goal of expanding access to healthcare for poorer Americans. For Vance, the issue of declining U.S. birth rates predates his MAGA heel-turn. In 2019, he told a gathering of conservatives in Washington: 'Our people aren't having enough children to replace themselves. That should bother us.' 'We want babies not just because they are economically useful. We want more babies because children are good. And we believe children are good, because we are not sociopaths,' the future vice president added at the time. Two years later, he'd tell a right-leaning podcast: 'I think we have to go to war against the anti-child ideology that exists in our country.' During the 2024 campaign, those views emerged again as Vance attacked Democrats as 'childless cat ladies' and leaned heavily into attacking the left for supposedly being anti-family. Progressives fought back, pointing to efforts to expand the child tax credit and other benefits that aid young families under Joe Biden and other Democratic administrations, including the passage of Barack Obama's signature law: the Affordable Care Act.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store