18-05-2025
An unnecessary and costly EU ‘reset'
On the eve of the 'reset' summit with Brussels, Nick Thomas-Symonds has let the cat out of the bag. In a BBC interview, the Europe minister admitted that the Government is about to accede to one of the EU's cardinal principles: 'dynamic alignment'. This sinister doctrine implies that Britain will once again be obliged to accept 'common standards' on food and be subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg.
It is hard to exaggerate the significance of this concession. At a stroke, Labour will have sacrificed one of the biggest benefits of Brexit: taking back control of our own rules. Once national sovereignty is given away on food standards, we will find ourselves on a slippery slope. Over time, other areas of the economy will inexorably be drawn back into the EU's orbit. This is the true meaning of 'dynamic alignment': a one-way ticket to Brussels.
So what will we get in return for selling our birthright for a mess of EU pottage? Mr Thomas-Symonds claims that cross-Channel trade will become 'far easier'. Yet the promised reductions in red tape are specious. Not only will they be conditional on the UK renouncing regulatory independence, but they will put at risk deals already negotiated with other trading partners – including, crucially, the United States. We risk becoming a mere EU satellite.
Indeed, the so-called reset appears to be almost entirely one-sided. We must accept EU food standards and ECJ jurisdiction; join a defence pact on the EU's terms; grant free movement for young EU citizens, many of whom we will subsidise at our universities; and let the EU fish in our waters. If all this seems too much of a giveaway in exchange for shorter passport queues, that's because it is. This EU deal looks less like a reset than a capitulation.
Over the coming days, ministers will doubtless try to reassure the British public that none of their concessions amounts to abandoning Brexit. But beware of doublespeak. When Mr Thomas-Symonds tells us that the Government's perspective is not 'ideological' but 'practical', he means that we will be giving away fundamental freedoms, such as the right to make and apply our own laws, in return for technicalities, such as the right to use e-gates at passport control.
Labour's slow-motion unravelling of Brexit is quite unnecessary. By the time the party is punished at the ballot box, however, it may already be too late.
