BBC (“UK and EU agree post-Brexit deal on fishing and trade“):
The UK and the European Union have agreed a deal on fishing, trade and strengthening ties, in the first big reset of relations since Brexit.
A 12-year deal has been done on fishing access for EU boats into UK waters in exchange for easing some trade frictions – something which is likely to prompt a row.
The government is expected to argue it has secured improved trading rights for British food and agricultural products into the EU.
The Conservatives and Reform UK have described news of the deal as a “surrender” to the EU, while the Liberal Democrats said the government had taken some “positive first steps” to rebuilding ties with Europe.
A defence and security pact will be central to the agreement, which will be set out in a few hours at a UK-EU summit in London.
Announcements around trade and security were expected to include British access to a €150bn (£125bn) EU defence fund, which could be a boost for UK defence companies.
Both sides will emphasise the shared desire for deepening co-operation.
Talks between the UK and the EU continued late into Sunday evening, with defence, trade, fishing rights and a possible youth mobility scheme among the issues discussed.
The remaining stumbling blocks to a deal, mostly concerning fishing rights, were solved at about 22:30 on Sunday night, government sources said.
But other key elements, such as the idea of a youth mobility scheme, will still be subject to further negotiation.
A deal on allowing British travellers to use passport e-gates – automated self-service barriers at European airports – is also thought to be on the table.
Of course, Brits had all of that and much more as members of the EU. While I was and remain sympathetic to sovereignty concerns as the EU slowly evolved into something closer to a confederation than an economic union, the UK gave up so very much more than they gained through a complete divorce.
Somehow, despite the pain of the last five years, the Tory leadership seems not to have gotten it.
Fishing only accounts for an estimated 0.4% of UK GDP, but British control over its fishing waters was a big issue in the Brexit campaign.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said giving the EU access to British waters for 12 years “was three times longer than the government wanted”.
“We’re becoming a rule-taker from Brussels once again,” she posted.
Reform UK MP Richard Tice said Sir Keir had sold out British fishing and promised his party would would repeal this deal if it won the next general election.
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said the prime minister “must ignore the naysayers and dinosaurs in Reform and the Conservative Party and be more ambitious in getting the best deal in the national interest”.
When asked if Brexit freedoms were being lost, Reynolds said the deal would “reduce bureaucracy” in areas where “we’ve got the same standards on both sides”.
And commenting on the possibility of a youth mobility scheme, Reynolds said the “details would need to be worked out” but insisted “it’s something different to freedom of movement that we had in the past”.
There have been talks about a youth mobility scheme with the EU – something that Sir Keir told the Times on Saturday would be a “reciprocal” arrangement in which young people would be able to move abroad for up to two years.
No specific details about the ages of those who could be eligible and whether there would be a cap on numbers were given, and it has received mixed responses from opposition parties.
Badenoch said the lack of details on youth mobility would increase “fears of free movement returning”, while Reform UK said earlier this week that such a scheme would be “the thin end” of EU free movement.
The Liberal Democrats have backed the idea of a “capped mobility scheme”, although the party’s Europe spokesperson James MacCleary has accused the government of “dragging their heels when it comes to properly negotiating on the issue”.
Given how unpopular “free movement” has become in the richest EU states in the aftermath of mass migration from the Middle East, one would think this is a concern London could have addressed from within the Union.
Alas, aside from a change in party control, there’s a sad reason that this movement is happening now. As the NYT (“E.U. and U.K. Strike a Deal: What to Know“) reports:
The summit has been billed as a major reset of relations, and it is being especially closely watched given the context: Both Europe and Britain are trying to figure out how to reorient themselves in a world where America is a less reliable ally on defense and trade.
[…]
The European Union has been working hard to clinch trade deals and shore up alliances as it tries to prove to the United States that it is an economic and diplomatic power to be reckoned with.
President Trump has hit Europe with several waves of tariffs — both across-the-board and industry-specific — and is only beginning to make deals to de-escalate the situation. While Britain has struck a preliminary deal to avert much-higher tariffs, the European Union has made limited progress toward one.
And both partners see a need for greater collaboration in a world where the United States is a less-willing supporter of its traditional allies. Britain’s firms and its defense industry could benefit from being included in Europe’s push to rearm, and Europe could benefit from access to British military capabilities.
It’s hard to argue otherwise.
