OPINION
Time for UK parliament to step up to preserve Britain’s
reputation
UK business secretary, writing from a trip to Berlin, says
companies need a Brexit deal to restore confidence in Britain.
By GREG CLARK 1/9/19, 11:00 PM CET Updated 1/10/19,
10:57 AM CET
BERLIN — Since the U.K.'s EU referendum it has been my job
as business secretary to work with companies and investors to convince them to
keep faith with Britain. In doing so, I always make two main arguments.
The first is that Britain’s fundamental attractions are
strong and getting stronger. We are an entrepreneurial economy, with
world-beating creative and scientific talent and flexible, competitive markets.
Through our modern industrial strategy we are building on those strengths — for
example with the biggest increase in R&D that Britain has ever had in our
history, and a national focus on the technological grand challenges that are
sweeping the world and in which Britain enjoys a commanding position.
The second is that we are, and always will be, the
pragmatic, open, pro-enterprise and dependable nation that the world has always
considered us to be. That means, of course, that the U.K. government would
always want to secure a cordial relationship with the EU that continues our
ability to trade free of tariffs and unnecessary impediments.
On the whole, these arguments have proved reassuring. For
example, of the five big competitive automotive investments up for grabs since
the referendum, we have secured every one. Last month the global life sciences
sector committed more than £1 billion of new investment in Britain on the back
of our industrial strategy.
But no one should assume that investors have been relaxed
about Brexit. In every case, in meetings and conversations from the United
States to the Far East, I have constantly had to deploy both arguments.
In recent weeks, confidence from investors has been shaken.
Debates in the U.K. parliament are monitored closely, and with mounting alarm,
in boardrooms around the world. The dire prospect that we could tolerate
trading with our largest and closest market on WTO terms — the most rudimentary
that exist between any nations on earth — is bewildering to them. And when
hundreds of millions of pounds are having to be diverted by companies from
productive investments into defending themselves against the risk of a no-deal
exit from the European Union — through piling up stocks, renting warehouses and
planning shutdowns of production — investors have every right to object.
Most worrying to investors is the signal that Britain, after
40 years of being a reliable and confident place in which to do business, may
be embarking on a previously unimagined era in which some are prepared to
contemplate policies that would harm our economy and the businesses that have
made us their home, whether those policies are to crash out of the EU without
agreement or to follow the hard-left program put forward by the Labour Party.
We can’t go on like this. January 2019 must be the month in
which parliament — for so long a source of strength for our international
reputation — resolves how we will act together as a nation and give confidence
to business.
Business has been supportive of the agreement the prime
minister has negotiated because it reflects what job creators say is needed. A
deal, rather than no deal. A transitional period to a new relationship, rather
than a cliff edge. And the prospect of continuing a close trading relationship
that avoids friction at the border that would be so damaging to just-in-time
processes. Much has been made of the backstop, but it does carry the big
advantage that Britain could never in future be forced onto WTO terms of trade
whether by the EU or by being timed out, as the ticking clock of Article 50
entails.
That is why I strongly believe parliament should support the
deal. MPs must act not simply as critics, but as responsible participants in
making the most important decision that they may ever take. I believe
parliament should move quickly and act responsibly to establish what will, and
will not, command support.
Parliament can establish that it wants a no-deal Brexit to
be ruled out. Most MPs, across the House, including many in government, would
not countenance leaving on March 29 with no agreement.
Once that was clearly demonstrated, then parliament could
make a clearer choice of how to proceed. It is not sufficient to record a
disapproval of no deal — a further step would need to be taken to prevent it
happening by default. This is a time for parliament to come together and work
intensively to establish an agreement that can command majority support, recognizing
that the deal that has been negotiated, if its terms had been considered
dispassionately at almost any time before or after the referendum, would be
regarded as clearly leaving the European Union while maintaining the close
relationship with our nearest neighbors on which our prosperity depends.
Business has been quite clear that it prefers the certainty
of a good deal to an extended debate about the terms of Brexit. It wants the
deal to pass. From my dealings with businesses — small and large, British and
international — I know that most place as the greatest priority preventing an
unintended and deeply damaging rupture in just under 80 days' time.
In that, the needs of the economy, the livelihoods of
millions and the views of most MPs are aligned. Now is the time for parliament
to act on it.
Greg Clark is the U.K. secretary of state for business,
energy and industrial strategy.
U.K. Business Secretary Greg Clark says “hundreds of
millions of pounds” are now being diverted by companies into no-deal planning |
Andy Rain/EPA
Business ‘alarm’ at Brexit impasse, says UK minister
‘We can’t go on like this,’ Business Secretary Greg Clark
warns.
Clark’s intervention comes after MPs inflicted a second
defeat on the prime minister in 24 hours |
By TOM
MCTAGUE 1/9/19, 11:00 PM CET
Updated 1/10/19, 11:05 AM CET
https://www.politico.eu/article/greg-clark-brexit-business-alarm-at-brexit-impasse-says-uk-minister/
LONDON — A no-deal Brexit must be taken off the table and a
compromise package agreed by MPs within weeks to stem "mounting
alarm" from international companies, according to U.K. Business Secretary
Greg Clark.
Writing for POLITICO, Clark — one of Theresa May’s most
powerful Cabinet ministers — says “hundreds of millions of pounds” are now
being diverted by companies into no-deal planning, undermining investment in
the U.K. economy.
“We can’t go on like this,” he warns.
Clark’s intervention comes after MPs inflicted a second
defeat on the prime minister in 24 hours Wednesday. They voted through a
controversial amendment that grabs more control over the Brexit process by
forcing the prime minister to reveal her Plan B within three days should the
House of Commons vote down her deal on Tuesday. With over 100 of her own
backbenchers saying they can't support the deal, that defeat now looks all but
certain.
The Plan B will take the form of a motion that MPs will be able
to amend, giving parliament the tool to set out the type of Brexit it could
accept. MPs could also test whether there was a majority for conditions to be
attached to any agreement, such as a second referendum.
“Debates in parliament are monitored closely, and with
mounting alarm, in boardrooms around the world" — Greg Clark
Writing exclusively for POLITICO, Clark says the impasse
cannot go on much longer, setting a deadline of the end of the month to find a
compromise. He calls on MPs to “move quickly and act responsibly to establish
what will, and will not, command support.”
In an explosive intervention, which appears to flatly
contradict the prime minister’s continued insistence that “no deal is better
than a bad deal,” the business secretary adds: “Parliament can establish that
it wants no deal to be ruled out. Most MPs, across the house, including many in
government, would not countenance leaving on March 29 with no agreement. Once
that was clearly demonstrated, then parliament could make a clearer choice of
how to proceed. It is not sufficient to record a disapproval of no deal — a
further step would need to be taken to prevent it happening by default.”
“This is a time for parliament to come together and work
intensively to establish an agreement that can command majority support,” he
wrote.
While Clark supports the prime minister’s Brexit deal, his
comments suggest that even Cabinet ministers now accept it will be voted down
next week.
Clark’s intervention comes after MPs inflicted a second
defeat on the prime minister in 24 hours |
The proposal will spark fears among Brexiteers that the
government could move to soften the prime minister's deal with Brussels even
further in an attempt to win Labour MPs' support. In the House of Commons
Wednesday, Conservative grandee Oliver Letwin suggested such an offer could be
a permanent EU-U.K. customs union — fiercely opposed by Tory Euroskeptics — and
a much more tightly bound relationship with the single market.
Clark believes that the failure to agree a deal is now
beginning to badly damage Britain’s reputation.
“In recent weeks, confidence from investors has been
shaken,” he wrote. “Debates in parliament are monitored closely, and with
mounting alarm, in boardrooms around the world.
“The dire prospect that we could tolerate trading with our
largest and closest market on WTO terms
— the most rudimentary that exist between any nations on earth — is
bewildering to them.
“And when hundreds of millions of pounds are having to be
diverted by companies from productive investments into defending themselves
against the risk of no deal — through piling up stocks, renting warehouses and
planning shutdowns of production — investors have every right to object.”
“The vote that the Government has just lost does not affect
Brexit" — Jacob Rees-Mogg
Clark’s intervention is likely to spark fury from
Euroskeptic Conservative MPs, the majority of whom fiercely oppose the prime
minister’s deal.
On Twitter Wednesday night, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of
the Brexiteer caucus in parliament, insisted Brexit could not be stopped unless
the government changes course to actively stop it. “The vote that the
Government has just lost does not affect Brexit. It merely requires a motion to
be tabled not even debated.”
However, as a result of the amendment put down by Tory
backbencher Dominic Grieve, which was passed Wednesday, those MPs opposed to no
deal now have a mechanism to try to force the government’s hand by voting down
May’s deal and then seeking to amend any Plan B proposal she puts before the
House.
Grieve said the time pressure facing parliament means it is
sensible to fast-track the process. “I realize there are a few of my colleagues
who believe that if the government’s deal is rejected we should simply do
nothing and leave the EU on March 29 with no deal at all and with all, to my
mind, the calamitous consequences that would follow on from it,” he told the
BBC.
“I disagree with that, and so I think do the vast majority
of members of parliament. The only way we can move forward if the government’s deal
is not acceptable to parliament is for parliament to engage with government and
find a solution, which is what I am trying to do.”
Despite the extra time, Labour’s Shadow Brexit Secretary
Keir Starmer said the U.K. would now inevitably have to ask for more time
before leaving the EU.
He said: "There is a question of extension of Article
50 and that may well be inevitable now given the position that we are in."
This article is part of POLITICO’s Brexit Pro service, which
dives deep into Britain's impending departure from the European Union. For a
complimentary trial, email pro@politico.eu mentioning Brexit.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário