Majority of Brexiters would swap free movement for EU market access

Agencies
July 17, 2017

Jul 17: The majority of Brexit supporters would be happy to swap European free movement for single market access, according to two studies which suggest ways for Britain to pull back from the brink in the upcoming negotiations.Brexiters

Amid calls for the government to loosen its opposition to free movement in order to protect the economy when Britain leaves the EU, the research shows compromise would result in far less popular backlash than is assumed. Campaigners opposing hard Brexit claim it also vindicates their new slogan “no Brexit is better than a bad Brexit”.

In a poll conducted by YouGov three weeks after the general election, 1,600 adults were asked how important they thought it was to reduce immigration from the EU.

Framed as an isolated issue, the study confirmed that public opinion is still deeply divided a year on from the Brexit referendum: 72% of leave voters rated immigration either as very important or the most important issue in the talks, and 74% of remain voters said the opposite, ranking it less important or not important at all.

When asked to consider free movement as a trade-off for single market access – a principle described last week as “indivisible” by EU’s chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier – British voters appear far more pragmatic and united.

Leave voters would be evenly split if the government tried to keep full access to the single market in exchange for allowing a version of free movement that limited welfare benefits for new arrivals. Across the country as a whole, twice as many voters would be satisfied with this option than not, even though it goes no further than the deal struck by David Cameron before the referendum.

But support for a trade-off soars when voters are offered the option of other limitations on free movement that are used by some countries in the single market. Asked to consider a system where EU migrants were sent home if they did not find work, 55% of leave voters said they would be satisfied with this, versus only 25% who would be unhappy. There was only slightly less support for an “emergency brake” option to control surges in immigration.

Best For Britain, a pressure group opposed to hard Brexit that commissioned the research, said it proved it was wrong to assume that the referendum result meant Britain wished to ban free movement whatever the cost.

“Our polling shows that a huge majority of people across the country support freedom of movement if they too can keep their own rights to live, work and study abroad,” said its chief executive, Eloise Todd. “The picture is much more nuanced than the government has portrayed, with clear support for some limitations on freedom of movement that are already within the government’s control.”

The reputation of opinion polling has suffered since the surprises of the referendum and June’s general election, but YouGov’s conclusion is supported by other methods of assessing the public mood.

A separate study by researchers at King’s College London, the Rand thinktank and Cambridge University used a technique called “stated preference discrete choice experiments” to ask people to weight different priorities.

It found very little appetite for the government’s “no deal is better than a bad deal” approach to the talks, and voters much keener to compromise.

“Our research is one of the most rigorous assessments to date of what the public wants from Brexit, and it clearly shows that the British people do not wish to head over a cliff edge and leave the EU on World Trade Organisation rules – they want a proper deal,” said Jonathan Grant, the professor of public policy at King’s College London. “The British public are sophisticated enough to understand that they can’t ‘have their cake and eat it’, and will need to make and accept compromises to reach a deal.”

The team found that supposed red lines on immigration and leaving the European court of justice were far less important to voters than the government.

“While our results do show a desire to control movement of people to some extent, we find that this stems from a concern about managing demand for public services, rather than from wanting to limit freedom of movement per se,” wrote the team led by Charlene Rohr of Rand.

“Our analysis indicated that, on average, respondents would prefer a future relationship in which the UK is able to make and interpret all laws itself, but this was considered less important than maintaining free trade or being able to negotiate new trade deals independently.”

The new picture of public opinion comes as polls show overall support for Brexit dipping sharply as talks deteriorate, leading some campaigners to argue that the government must now invert its “no deal is better than a bad deal” slogan.

“It’s increasingly clear that no Brexit is better than a bad Brexit: no one voted to become poorer or have their rights reduced,” said Todd. “The government has committed to delivering the ‘exact same benefits’ out of Brexit for the UK and its people – that means guaranteeing citizens’ rights as they stand, and right now the government is failing on that measure by its own standards.”

Options for a softer Brexit

Efta membership Perhaps the most radical, but obvious, solution to Britain’s Brexit wobble would be to seek some form of membership of the European Free Trade Association, which the UK was in between 1960 and 1972. First designed as a stepping stone toward EU membership, this prosperous club comprising Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Liechtenstein could serve the same role this time in reverse – at least until Britain was clearer on its final destination. At a bare minimum it could give the UK access to an internal market of four nearby economies, as well as a host of existing global trade deals. Joining just Efta would require freedom of movement but only among its four, relatively small, members.

“It could provide an elegant and relatively swift solution to some of the challenges facing the UK in securing post-Brexit trade agreements with non-EU partners,” concludes a new London School of Economics research. “The combination of continuity and flexibility could prove very valuable as the UK navigates the numerous uncertainties of the Brexit process”

Far more contentious would be using Efta to access the European Economic Area (EEA) and the wider single market of the EU, as Norway does. This is the option that gives Brexiters nightmares as it involves accepting EU rules on freedom of movement, regulation and payments, with little corresponding influence. But if this is the price of single market access either way, Efta at least provides a framework.

A customs union A less onerous alternative to the EEA might be to seek more limited access to European goods markets by striking a new customs deal with the EU, as Turkey has done. Not to be confused with the EU’s own internal customs union, which is reserved for members, this would guarantee the tariff-free frictionless trade sought by Tories and Labour, but (possibly) without all the burdens of full single market participation.

A customs union would undoubtedly come with a cost, especially in terms of Britain’s freedom to strike new international trade deals. However, recent Treasury research suggests the benefits of continued access for manufacturing supply chains far outweigh the unproven allure of far-flung new export markets. Proponents of this approach also point out that Liam Fox’s international trade department might still be able to seek new deals in the service sector instead, where Britain’s economic future looks brighter.

Associate status It is far from clear that either the Norway or Turkish models would automatically be on offer to post-Brexit Britain, but even more wishful thinking is apparent in another idea proposed by some Tories. They would like to see Britain seek associate membership of key regulatory agencies, such as Euratom and the European Medicines Agency, as a way to soften the blow of leaving the EU sector by sector.

At the very least this is likely to involve abandoning Theresa May’s opposition to the jurisdiction of the European court of justice. Ongoing associate membership would also come at a financial cost that would swell the size of Britain’s giant divorce bill. But the cost of replicating decades of accumulated bureaucracy from scratch without any international cooperation may well prove even higher.

No Brexit Vince Cable and Tony Blair have both recently predicted that Brexit may yet be abandoned entirely. As far-fetched as this might seem now, if Britain chooses the softer Brexit routes above, then it would have to accept most of the political compromises of EU membership anyway. A few years of pressing our face to the glass like Norway may be just what it takes to change Britain’s mind.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 28,2020

Berlin, Mar 28: The number of confirmed coronavirus infections worldwide topped 600,000 on Saturday as new cases stacked up quickly in Europe and the United States and officials dug in for a long fight against the pandemic.

The latest landmark came only two days after the world passed half a million infections, according to a tally by John Hopkins University, showing that much work remains to be done to slow the spread of the virus. It showed more than 602,000 cases and a total of over 27,000 deaths.

While the U.S. now leads the world in reported infections — with more than 104,000 cases — five countries exceed its roughly 1,700 deaths: Italy, Spain, China, Iran and France.

“We cannot completely prevent infections at this stage, but we can and must in the immediate future achieve fewer new infections per day, a slower spread,” German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is in quarantine at home after her doctor tested positive for the virus, told her compatriots in an audio message. “That will decide whether our health system can stand up to the virus.”

The virus already has put health systems in Italy, Spain and France under extreme strain. Lockdowns of varying severity have been introduced across Europe. Merkel's chief of staff, Helge Braun, said that Germany — where authorities closed nonessential shops and banned gatherings of more than two in public — won't relax its restrictions before April 20.

As the epicenter has shifted westward, the situation has calmed in China, where some restrictions on people's lives have now been lifted. Six subway lines restored limited service in Wuhan, where the virus first emerged in December, after the city had its official coronavirus risk evaluation downgraded from high to medium on Friday. Five districts of the city of 11 million people had other restrictions on travel loosened after their risk factor was downgraded to low.

For most people, the coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms, such as fever and cough that clear up in two to three weeks. But for others, especially older adults and people with existing health problems, the virus can cause more severe illness, including pneumonia, and lead to death.

More than 130,000 people have recovered, according to Johns Hopkins' tally.

In one way or another, the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak have been felt by the powerful and the poor alike.

On Friday, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson became the first leader of a major country to test positive for the virus. He said he would continue to work from self-quarantine.

Countries are still scrambling bring home some citizens stranded abroad by border closures and a near-shutdown of flights. On Saturday, 174 foreign tourists and four Nepali nationals on the foothills of Mount Everest were flown out days after being stranded on the only airstrip serving the world's highest mountain.

In neighboring India, authorities sent a fleet of buses to the outskirts of the capital to meet an exodus of migrant workers desperately trying to reach their home villages during the world's largest lockdown.

Thousands of people, mostly young male day laborers but also families, had fled their New Delhi homes after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a 21-day lockdown that began on Wednesday and effectively put millions of Indians who live off daily earnings out of work.

In a possibly hopeful sign, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration cleared a new rapid test from Abbott Laboratories, which the company says can detect the coronavirus in about 5 minutes. Medical device maker Abbott announced the emergency clearance of its cartridge-based test Friday night, saying the test delivers a negative result in 13 minutes when the virus is not detected.

While New York remained the worst-hit city in the U.S., Americans braced for worsening conditions elsewhere, with worrisome infection numbers being reported in New Orleans, Chicago and Detroit.

New Orleans’ sprawling Ernest N. Morial Convention Center, along the Mississippi River, was being converted into a massive hospital as officials prepared for thousands more patients than they could accommodate.

In New York, where there are more than 44,000 cases statewide, the number of people hospitalized with COVID-19 passed 6,000 on Friday, double what it had been three days earlier.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo called for 4,000 more temporary beds across New York City, where the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center has already been converted into a hospital.

The struggle to defeat the virus will take “weeks and weeks and weeks,” Cuomo told members of the National Guard working at the Javits Center.

President Donald Trump invoked the Defense Production Act on Friday, ordering General Motors to begin manufacturing ventilators. Trump had previously rejected Cuomo's pleas for tens of thousands more of the machines and the governor's calls to implement the Korean War-era production law.

Trump signed a $2.2 trillion stimulus package, after the House approved the sweeping measure by voice vote. Lawmakers in both parties lined up behind the law to send checks to millions of Americans, boost unemployment benefits, help businesses and toss a life preserver to an overwhelmed health care system.

Dr. John Brooks of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned Americans remained “in the acceleration phase” of the pandemic and that all corners of the country were at risk.

"There is no geographic part of the United States that is spared from this," he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 13,2020

Jun 13: Requiring the wearing of masks to prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus in areas at the epicenter of the global pandemic may have prevented tens of thousands of infections, a new study suggests.

Mask-wearing is even more important for preventing the virus' spread and the sometimes deadly COVID-19 illness it causes than social distancing and stay-at-home orders, researchers said, in the study published in PNAS: The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA.

Infection trends shifted dramatically when mask-wearing rules were implemented on April 6 in northern Italy and April 17 in New York City - at the time among the hardest hit areas of the world by the health crisis - the study found.

"This protective measure alone significantly reduced the number of infections, that is, by over 78,000 in Italy from April 6 to May 9 and over 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May 9," researchers calculated.

When mask-wearing went into effect in New York, the daily new infection rate fell by about 3% per day, researchers said. In the rest of the country, daily new infections continued to increase.

Direct contact precautions - social distancing, quarantine and isolation, and hand sanitizing - were all in place before mask-wearing rules went into effect in Italy and New York City. But they only help minimize virus transmission by direct contact, while face covering helps prevent airborne transmission, the researchers say.

"The unique function of face covering to block atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols accounts for the significantly reduced infections," they said. That would indicate "that airborne transmission of COVID-19 represents the dominant route for infection."

The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday urged organizers of large gatherings that involve "shouting, chanting or singing to strongly encourage the use of cloth face coverings to lower the risk of spreading the coronavirus."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 24,2020

Chengdu, Jul 24: China on Friday asked the US to close down its Consulate in Chengdu in retaliation to Washington's decision to shut the Chinese Consulate in Houston.

A statement by the Chinese Foreign Ministry said China has informed the US Embassy of its decision to withdraw its consent for the establishment and operation of the US Consulate General in Chengdu.

This was in response to "unilateral" decision by the US to shut the Houston Consulate. China's decision is legitimate and necessary response to the unreasonable actions of the US, it said.

The US on Wednesday ordered the closure of the Chinese consulate in Houston, a move it said was aimed "to protect American intellectual property and private information."

Reacting strongly to the US move, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin termed it as an "unprecedented escalation and warned retaliatory measures.

China on Thursday said that "malicious slander" is behind an order by the US government to close its consulate in Houston, Texas, and maintained that its officials have never operated outside ordinary diplomatic norms.

Wang said the order to close the consulate violates international law and basic norms governing international relations, and seriously undermines China-US relations.

This is breaking down the bridge of friendship between the Chinese and American people, Wang said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.