The EU has slapped down the UK government after it attempted to bypass Brussels on post-Brexit trade rules.
Documents obtained by The Independent show that the European Commission was unhappy after British officials asked each member state directly about their plans to cope with new checks on goods coming into the UK.
At one point, the commission told countries in the bloc to ignore the UK government completely. It then sent a memo telling member states to provide only “short general information” because of the “problematic” nature of the British request.
The commission later warned the UK that contacting each country directly was “outside” the terms of Boris Johnson’s Brexit trade deal – saying it was of “significant concern” since a proper response to British queries should be “harmonised at EU level”.
The rebuke emerged as Rishi Sunak’s government came under pressure from both the EU and British business bosses to spell out exactly how the latest controls on imports, due to come into force in October, will work.
Peter Mandelson, the former business secretary who served as EU trade commissioner from 2004 to 2008, said trying to circumvent Brussels was always going to backfire.
He told The Independent: “It is tempting to try and go round the commission, but this doesn’t work and is counterproductive. The British government should be doubling down on a good relationship with the commission and building trust. Britain desperately needs this in order to mitigate our losses in trade.”
Member states were advised ‘not to respond’ to questions from the UK— (Supplied)
Trade experts also said it had been “unwise” to try to go round Brussels chiefs, and that it was indicative of a “still-struggling relationship” ahead of another mountain of red tape for businesses across the continent to navigate.
One food industry expert said the memos showed “unhelpful friction” between the UK and the EU at a time when they should be working together to avoid major disruption later this year.
The issue began on 2 June, when officials from the UK’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) sent a message to EU member states asking each to fill out a questionnaire on their readiness to deal with new controls on food and agriculture trade.
A week later, on 9 June, a memo from the European Commission, forwarded to member state diplomats by officials from the Council of the European Union and passed to The Independent, warned: “Member states are advised not to respond to the online questionnaire requested by the UK.”
On the same date, an official at DG Sante, the commission’s health directorate, wrote to officials at Defra warning against “the use of channels outside” the EU-UK trade agreement for communicating on such matters.
Documents seen by The Independent show that EU member states were warned to ignore the communications from the UK— (Supplied)
A follow-up memo, sent to member states by the commission on 21 June, said that countries “wishing to respond” should avoid giving too much detail.
After telling members of the bloc that it was “harmonising” communication with the UK, the commission then shared its own list of more than 70 questions for London – grilling British officials on preparations for the import controls set to come into force on 31 October.
The Independent understands that the British government explained to Brussels that it was willing to work through the EU Commission.
But David Henig, a director at the European Centre for International Political Economy, said UK officials should have known that Brussels coordinates member states’ responses to avoid any potential divisions on Brexit issues.
The Brexit expert said: “It looks unwise for the UK to have approached the issue in this way, something that could damage the trust we need.” Mr Henig added that the row was “symbolic of a still-struggling relationship – it’s more friction that we don’t need”.
Dr Kirsty Hughes, director of the Scottish Centre on European Relations, said the memos appeared to show the EU “implicitly advising member states that if they give the unintentional impression [that] they are fully ready, then the UK might use that to blame them if there is disruption”.
Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal brought in the need for controls on EU goods— (PA Archive)
David Davis, the UK’s first Brexit secretary, who led talks with the EU from 2016 to 2018, told The Independent that it was unlikely to be the last time something like this occurred.
“This is going to happen time and time again in the coming years. Good diplomacy tries to understand the person you are negotiating with, or dealing with, always. So you’re always going to run into this, and the commission for its part, perfectly properly, is always going to try and maintain a common front.
“That’s what comes out of these things: it certainly isn’t the first time, and it certainly won’t be the last time it happens, I’m sure.”
Mr Davis added: “It’s ever the way: the EU is always suspicious of any attempt to talk directly to member states.”
Recalling his own experience during negotiations, Mr Davis told The Independent: “At that time, they were suspicious that we were trying to undermine their common position – which we weren’t. We were just simply trying to find out what the priorities of different member states were.”
Sir Malcolm Rifkind said the EU is “probably correct” but that the commission “should not be so bureaucratic about it”.
“Trade is an EU responsibility, not the responsibility of individual member states, so to be strictly correct, the proper communication should be with the EU people responsible for trade,” he said, adding: “They could have treated it a bit more lightly. It is not exactly a capital offence.”
Brexiteer John Redwood said the EU “seems set on being unfriendly”— (Getty Images)
Brexiteer John Redwood argued that it was in the EU’s interest to take a more conciliatory approach.
“The EU seems set on being unfriendly when it would be much more sensible for them to be cooperative, as they export a lot more to us than we export to them,” he said. “I think the EU should understand that we voted to leave, and they shouldn’t treat us as if we were still in the thing. We want to be free of their jurisdiction and we will make our own way in the world. I think Britain should do whatever Britain wants to do.”
Fellow Brexit backer Craig Mackinlay also defended the government’s actions, saying: “The UK is the single biggest and most profitable trading partner for many EU countries.
“As we introduce reciprocal border checks for imports it is reasonable for Defra and the Department for Business and Trade to wish to make future trade as seamless as possible, hence their approach to EU countries directly.
“The missive sent by the EU Commission to member states serves as an example of the absolute control that it wishes to exert across its empire.”
Jacob Rees-Mogg claims the controls are a ‘protectionist measure’— (PA Wire)
Former Brexit minister Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg described the memos as a “storm in a teacup” but restated his objections to the checks themselves.
“I don’t think we should be imposing these controls at all,” he told The Independent. “I managed when I was Brexit opportunities minister to delay them because they purely impose costs on British consumers for no real advantage.
“It seems to me to be a protectionist measure designed to make trade more difficult, and not in the interests of the UK economy.
“I wouldn’t bother with these checks, they’re pointless, and in an inflationary time, a cost to British consumers we could do without.”
Britain’s food and logistics leaders have warned the coming wave of post-Brexit red tape could cause disruption and worsen the inflation crisis by pushing up food prices at the supermarket.
The Port of Dover has seen waves of disruption due to Brexit checks— (PA Wire)
Shane Brennan, chief executive of the Cold Chain Federation, warned that there was still “a lot of uncertainty and confusion” among European businesses about the certificates they will need and how border controls will operate. “They’re not confident it will go smoothly,” he said.
He added that the “unhelpful friction” had come at a time when UK businesses and port chiefs are “livid” that they don’t have enough information from the government on how the import checks are supposed to work.
“There’s going to be a period of disruption and paralysis,” he told The Independent. “There’s still so many unanswered questions; yet again, we’re going to have to deal with it when it comes. It’s a complete mess.”
A truck leaves Dover after undergoing checks required as a result of Brexit— (AFP via Getty)
Mr Brennan said it still isn’t clear exactly which types of food and agricultural goods will fall into the low, medium and high-risk categories, each of which demands a different set of controls – although Defra has provided outlines as part of the “target operating model”.
He also said it isn’t yet clear which digital forms will have to be uploaded to the British government website from 31 October, given that the autumn start date is supposed to represent a “soft launch” and that some physical inspections won’t begin until January.
An EU official said: “It is up to the UK to draw up a workable import regime, taking into account the significant volume of exports from the EU to the UK.
“Nevertheless, the commission is in close contact with the UK authorities and member states in order to understand the consequences and requirements resulting from the future implementation of the ‘Border Target Operating Model’ for the EU.”
A government spokesperson said the target operating model “will transform the UK’s border controls” and create “a new world-class system to provide protection from security and biosecurity threats”.
They said the system would prevent delays at the border “through a reduction in the need for physical checks and by ensuring that checks take place away from ports where this is needed to allow traffic to flow freely”.
The spokesperson added: “We continue to engage extensively with industry and will publish the target operating model shortly.”
