Mansion House is the residence of the Lord Mayor of London, and it was at Mansion House on March 2nd that Prime Minister Theresa May set out her vision for the UK's future relationship with the EU; "our future economic partnerships with the European Union," she called it. This was the source of today's featured quote.
Some in the EU have already dismissed the speech as merely a repetition of old talking points. As we listened to it, however, it seemed more a genuine olive branch than empty rhetoric. Whatever one's view of it, it was undeniably a speech about trade and arguably a more detailed offering (on any subject) than one usually hears from a head of government.
"The rights of Canada and the obligations of Norway" refers to different models for a relationship with the EU for countries that are not part of the EU. Norway, for example, is not a member of the European Union, but it is part of the EU's single market. The price for that is that Norway must implement EU legislation automatically and accept the condition of free movement of people. The improved trading conditions that result from the still new agreement between the EU and Canada, CETA, are significant, but Canada is not part of single market and does not enjoy the trading privileges of Norway.
Only time will tell just what kind of relationship the UK and the EU will forge in the coming year, assuming Mrs. May's optimism is borne out and a new deal can be struck. In her speech on March 2nd, the Prime Minister could, of course, only set the range of possibilities. At the lower end is the fact that the future - at least for the UK and the EU - will be something less than the present. On that she said:
We are leaving the single market. Life is going to be different. In certain ways, our access to each other's markets will be less than it is now.
At the other end of the spectrum was this aspiration:
I want the broadest and deepest possible partnership - covering more sectors and cooperating more fully than any Free Trade Agreement anywhere in the world today.
In a sense that declaration of hope followed from the Prime Minister's description of the June 2016 referendum early in her speech:
[T]he agreement we reach with the EU must respect the referendum. It was a vote to take control of our borders, laws and money. ... But it was not a vote for a distant relationship with our neighbors.
On other occasions, quoting other speeches and presentations, we have said we expected to return to them. That is especially true in this case. In her Mansion House speech Prime Minister May went into a fair amount of detail on a range of important issues: goods, services, fisheries, the role of the European Court of Justice, the sovereignty of Parliament, and the Irish border. With luck, we will manage one or more entries on each of these areas in the coming months.
On Cherry-Picking. Today, we'll close this Context Section with something Mrs. May said about "cherry picking," that is, signing up for only certain obligations. The term has been used disparagingly by EU officials describing Britain's approach to negotiations. As Mrs. May sees things, all trade negotiations are exercises in cherry picking. As she explained:
The EU agreement with Ukraine sees it align with the EU in some areas but not others. The EU's agreement with South Korea contains provisions to recognize each other's approvals for new car models, whereas their agreement with Canada does not. Equally the EU's agreement with Canada contains provisions to recognize each other's testing on machinery; its agreement with South Korea does not.
The EU itself is rightly taking a tailored approach in what it is seeking with the UK. For example, on fisheries, the Commission has been clear that no precedent exists for the sort of access it wants from the UK.
The fact is that every Free Trade Agreement has varying market access depending on the respective interests of the countries involved. If this is cherry-picking, then every trade arrangement is cherry-picking.
