Keir Starmer wants to sign a new agreement with the EU — one which would smooth disruption to trade, solve the Northern Ireland border issue, and make life simpler for farmers, all in one go.

But there’s a catch.

EU officials have told POLITICO that Brussels would be interested in such a deal — known as a sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement — only if London was willing to accept European Court of Justice (ECJ) oversight.

“There is no doubt in our mind” that ECJ oversight would be a “prerequisite” for such an agreement, said a senior EU official, who was granted anonymity to discuss the matter.

  • Risk@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    If the move would be of interest to the EU, then unless they are completely politically inept, can these officials not see how saying it would require ECJ oversight before an election risks it being eliminated from Labour policy?

    It gives a free attack point for the Tories and couldn’t be a bigger face palm - for anyone actually interested in it, of course.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Doesn’t matter. The EU pointedly does not care about how idiotic UK politics have gotten. They’re saying “we can make it suck less for you, but it’s not free, and this is the price”.

      The EU can and will hold out indefinitely on this.

      The UK is hemorrhaging tens of billions of pounds, and it’s only set to accelerate. They’re not really a financial center anymore. No single market. No Schengen. None of the huge benefits of being in the EU.

      But, you know, keep machine gunning your own foot, I guess. That’ll show those silly euros. Or something.

      • Risk@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        I feel like you took my comment to be a critique of the EU’s position, which is not what I was trying to say at all.

        I presume that such an agreement would be in the EUs interest - hence the expression of such. Public clarification at this stage of the ‘cost’- as you put it - is a great way to take it off the official policy booklet. Which doesn’t make sense to me.

        I am aware that UK politics is stupid. I live here.

        • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I apologize - I know I sometimes come across a bit pugilistic when I don’t actually intend to. It’s more that I am deeply frustrated by the situation, even as an outside observer.

          For what it’s worth, I empathize with you on how frustrating our political ”leaders” often are. Feels like they’re pretty much all aggressively competing for the Upper Class Twit of the Year award on both sides of the pond :(

          • Risk@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Pugilistic - TIL a new word!

            No worries. What I’d give to shoot the person that came up with the FPTP voting system…