Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal would make people worse off than Theresa May’s | Anand Menon and Jonathan Portes
Back to the (original) backstop? By conceding that any customs border will have to be in the Irish Sea, Boris Johnson appears to have revived the possibility of a Brexit deal. But the focus on the politics of the Irish border risks missing the implications of his proposals for the economy of the UK as a whole. And, as we reveal in our report for The UK in a Changing Europe, these are significantly worse than was the case for Theresa May's Brexit plan.
Indeed, Johnson's motivations for ditching May's withdrawal agreement have little if anything to do with Northern Ireland. Rather, it is because the new prime minister sees the ultimate relationship the UK should have with the EU very differently to his predecessor. Gone is the notion that a shared customs territory and close regulatory alignment on goods should form a "bridge" to the long-term relationship. As Johnson put it himself in his letter to Jean-Claude Juncker: "The backstop acted as a bridge to a proposed future relationship with the EU in which the UK could be closely integrated with the EU customs arrangements and would align with EU law in many areas. That proposed future relationship is not the goal of the current UK government. The government intends that the future relationship should be based on a free trade agreement in which the UK takes control of its own regulatory affairs and trade policy."
Relative to the status quo and May's proposals, the economic impact of these proposals would be significant and negative
Related: 'Two borders for four years': what is Boris Johnson's Brexit offer?
Continue reading...