Why did we get the GDPR? Find out in The Closing of the Net by me, Monica Horten - PAPERBACK OR KINDLE  £15.99!

Michel Barnier presents the EU Withdrawal Agreement Brussels 28.02.18

<<On the publication of the draft of the entire EU Withdrawal Agreement, this article investigates  the Transition chapter and how far Britain’s influence could be  written out from the  very start. The analysis is based on the text published by the EU, and the British negotiators text which has been circulating online.>>

Will Britain become isolated and not influential, to paraphrase Sir John Major's words from his speech today?  There is one aspect of Britain’s proposed Transition out of the European Union that risks being overlooked. Britain – its  government, businesses and individuals such as academics, NGOs and researchers   -  could be excluded from EU decision-making bodies, agencies  and expert groups from 29 March 2019 during the Transition period. As others have already said, Britain risks becoming a rule-taker, but this goes further. It means Britain stands to lose influence not only in  law making and central banking, but regulatory and standards bodies, scientific and security agencies, and a plethora of smaller  groups that input to policy-making.

Britain is scheduled to Transition  out of the European Union from 29 March next year.  The  rules that will apply during Transition as set out in Part Four of the EU Withdrawal Agreement published today. A British proposal for this chapter has been circulating online. (See below for references)**  The two draft texts on the table suggest that  EU rules will continue to apply in Britain during the Transition period  and that all  trade agreements concluded by the European Union and which Britain currently benefits from, will continue to apply.  However, both drafts are  silent on what the UK is transitioning to.

Moreover, the EU draft** (Article 121) shortens the transition period from two years as had been widely anticipated, to just 20 months,  until December 2020. This is  very little time in which to negotiate a  ‘deep and special partnership' that the British government wants. There are so many different components of such an agreement  that all need to be carefully constructed.  Other free trade agreements have taken from four to seven years.  Hence, the Transition proposal could merely postpone the cliff edge for those 20 monthns.  This may be why the British draft** wants  extra time for however " long it will take to prepare and implement the new processes and new systems that will underpin the future partnership".

But there is one major provision in this draft Transition Chapter that affects the way that Britain can wield influence.  Britain will no longer have the  right to participate in the decision-making of EU bodies and agencies.  This is not just about the European Parliament and the the big three institutions, but it goes all the way through to bodies that work on regulatory co-operation and  standards. Britain will lose  the right to leadership posts and to any roles that oversee European Union processes.  Whilst it would seem to be of low significance, in fact, its impact will be profound.

Looking at the detail, the text says that Britain is to be excluded from participation in the decision-making and governance in  all EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. (Article 123(1) linked to Article 6).  Britain will also be excluded from attending meetings of Commission expert groups or of other similar entities, or in the meetings of expert groups or similar entities of bodies, offices and agencies of the Union.  The exclusion would start from the date that the Transition period begins,  as  confirmed  in the both the  EU and British drafts  (***scroll down for  comparative analysis of  texts). 

According to the EU draft, the British Parliament will cease to be informed of new EU legislation, and as a consequence, it loses the opportunity to give its opinion. Britain will of course lose voting rights in the big EU insitutions - European Parliament and  the Council of Ministers and it will lose its Commissioner.  This is what other commentators mean when they say that Britain will become a "rule-taker" rather than a "rule-maker".

But it goes further than that.  The Bank of England will lose it seat on the board of the European Central Bank. Britain will  be excluded from EU regulatory agencies  has been anticipated for some time, and we have already seen some examples of how this might work in practice, such as the  European Medicines Agency  moving away from London.

And it goes even deeper.  The exclusion ranges from down to small expert groups that form part of the fabric of Brussels life.  Britain will be excluded from ordinary working meetings such as committees that supervise the implementation of EU laws. British representation risks being outside of the key working groups, regulatory  and standards bodies dealing with telecoms, data protection, electronic equipment,  environmental protection, health, medicine, pharmaceuticals, and aviation and other industries. 

British representatives  will be shut out  of Commission expert groups that discuss policy  issues across the board from copyright and  banking to   food standards and fake news. These expert groups do not make policy, but they do play a part in defining it.  Expert groups can be the starting point for new intiatives, and they often  have a soft consulting role for policy makers.  They are the place where difficult and controversial aspects of policy can be discussed – such as the recently formed High Level Group on Fake News.  Being involved in the expert groups and the committees, and the working groups is an essential element of influencing Brussels policy and staying in the know.

It means that British voices will no longer be heard in EU decision-making that will continue to affect us.   For British industry, it is the closing of the door  to standard-setters and regulatory bodies, and to the myriad of committees and groups that not only influence EU policies but act as a conduit for exchange of  information with EU-based businesses.

Britain will only find out what’s going on when it is made public, at the same time as other ‘third’ countries like the US and China. It means we risk being left behind the curve on a range of things from new technologies to new medicines.

Only exceptionally, if the meeting is to discuss British interests, or if a British presence is necessary for some other reason, will we be invited in.

According to the  British negotiator's draft, the government is seeking to negotiate an amendment to the EU draft. It wants the Westminster Parliament to continue to receive drafts of proposed new EU laws during the Transition period.

The British government is also seeking an amendment to the text to focus on  voting rights, rather than participation in decision-making (Scroll down to Comparative analysis below). However, it is not clear wht this is seeking to chieve. Either the government  simply does not understand that decision-making in the EU is more usually done by consensus, or it is trying to create some wiggle-room.  However,  it has accepted that we will be shut out of EU expert groups.

The real losers here will be  British businesses  who will lose the opportunity to contribute to important policy initiatives and British citizens, whose interests will no longer be represented in Brussels .

 In a global business environment, influence and trade  go hand in hand.  The question of influence is one that has to be  factored in. Until now, we have  been an insider. The position that we have held inside the European Union cannot be replicated in any other trade agreement. For example, it is unimaginable that any Washington administration would invite British representatives  onto  US government  committees.  Or that Canberra would extend a hand to British industries and let them into Australian decision-making bodies.

The former British Prime Minister, John Major,  said today in a speech 'I want my country to be influential, not isolated. Retaining British influence in all kinds of EU decision-making is, arguably, vital to this country’s future and that aim would seem to be  inconsistent with the EU Withdrawal agreement as the text currently stands.  

---

** The full  EU Draft withdrawal Agreement   can be downloaded from the European Commission website.  The initial draft Transition chapter  was leaked to the Financial Times and is linked via this article https://www.ft.com/content/ade8e020-0b50-11e8-8eb7-42f857ea9f09

The British government draft was circulated via Bloomberg and this link https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rQVCUXtdp4QM/v0

 

 Contact me if you would like to discuss any of the  issues raised  (Via Contact Us page or Twitter @Iptegrity).

For new Iptegrity  readers, I have been analysing EU policy for over 10 years ( see 10 years of Internet wars ), and have considerable experience of interpreting EU documents, which are sometimes quite opaque. I also have over 25 years' experience of the telecoms and technology sectors.

If you liked this article, you may also like my book The Closing of the Net  available in Kindle and Paperback from only £15.99!

 If you cite this article or its contents, please attribute Iptegrity.com and Monica Horten as the author. If you are inspried by this article, I would be grateful for an acknowledgement or citation. Iptegrity is offered for free, and all I ask it that you acknowlege my work if it has helped you. To use my work, or any original ideas entailed in it, without acknowledgement, is plagiarism.

Photo: European Commission stock shot.

Sources:

** The full  EU Draft withdrawal Agreement   can be downloaded from the European Commission website.  The initial draft Transition chapter  was leaked to the Financial Times and is linked via this article https://www.ft.com/content/ade8e020-0b50-11e8-8eb7-42f857ea9f09

The British government draft was circulated via Bloomberg and this link https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rQVCUXtdp4QM/v0

***EU WITHDRAWAL AGREEMENT PART FOUR TRANSITION  - COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TEXTS

A comparative analysis of EU Withdrawal Agreement Article 123 with British negotiator's text

  A comparative analysis of EU Withdrawal Agreement Article 123 points 4-5  with British negotiator's text

panel.at.cdt.content.responsibilities.september2016.crop2.jpg

 

States v the 'Net? 

Read The Closing of the Net, by me, Monica Horten.

"original and valuable"  Times higher Education

" essential read for anyone interested in understanding the forces at play behind the web." ITSecurity.co.uk

Find out more about the book here  The Closing of the Net

PAPERBACK /KINDLE

FROM £15.99

Copyright Enforcement Enigma launch, March 2012

In 2012, I presented my PhD research in the European Parliament.

Don't miss Iptegrity! Iptegrity.com  RSS/ Bookmark      

Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten. She is  a trainer & consultant on Internet governance policy, published author& Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics & Political Science. She served as an independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee on  Internet freedom. She has worked on CoE, EU and UNDP funded projects in eastern Europe and beyond.  She was shortlisted for The Guardian Open Internet Poll 2012. Iptegrity  offers expert insights into Internet policy (and now Brexit). Iptegrity has a core readership in the Brussels policy community, and has been cited in the media. Please acknowledge Iptegrity when you cite or link.  For more, see IP politics with integrity

Iptegrity.com is made available free of charge for  non-commercial use, Please link-back & attribute Monica Horten. Thank you for respecting this.

Contact  me to use  iptegrity content for commercial purposes