Introduction

The upcoming trade negotiations between the UK, under Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and the European Union pose significant challenges and uncertainties. The nature of a ‘good’ deal can be subjective, with different stakeholders having varying definitions. This article delves into the complexities and potential outcomes, focusing on Boris Johnson’s ambitious plans and the varying views within the EU.

Boris Johnson’s Vision

Boris Johnson's vision for a trade deal with the EU is multifaceted, but it often seems to hover between two extremes: sticking to World Trade Organization (WTO) default rules and maintaining the benefits of the Single Market and Customs Union. The UK Prime Minister's team has indicated an interest in a middle-ground approach, which would require careful negotiation and compromise. However, this middle path might be more challenging to navigate, given the detailed nature of the terms involved and Johnson's reputed aversion to meticulous attention to detail.

The EU's Stance

The EU's approach to these negotiations seems to be driven by a desire to maintain the balance of power and prevent any perception of the UK benefiting unduly from its exit. It is crucial to understand that the UK's willingness to completely accept EU law and court judgements, or to cede control over its seas, is unlikely. Therefore, the EU's position is likely to be shaped by the desire to ensure that the UK does not achieve specific advantages through its trade deal.

WTO Terms and Their Implications

As the trade negotiations likely move towards the WTO framework, it is essential to understand the implications. The WTO framework does not guarantee a smooth or favorable outcome for the UK. For instance, the average tariff for trade from the EU to the UK is 5.3%, which can rise to higher levels for certain products, such as dairy at three times the average and foodstuffs double that average. These tariffs could significantly impact UK agriculture and food imports.

Furthermore, the UK's heavy reliance on imports from the EU, particularly for food products, could face significant disruptions. Ireland supplies the UK with meat and dairy, and the Netherlands and Spain provide vast quantities of fruit and vegetables. If the UK opts for WTO terms, the price and availability of these essential imports could be affected. On the other hand, the tariff on certain goods like nuclear reactors is exceptionally low, though such items are not at the core of food security.

Balancing Act: Fishing and Negotiations

The fishing industry is a critical sector, and the negotiations around it could be challenging. The UK's significant export of its catch to the EU means that a high tariff (9.6%) could have severe ramifications for UK fishermen. The EU's potential response might include an increase in their own fishing fleets or acquiring more from neighboring nations like Norway and Iceland, which have similar-sized or larger fleets. An FTA in place with these countries could tip the balance in their favor.

The need for compromise is evident, and the EU is unlikely to grant concessions that could be perceived as weakening their own trade position. This could lead to a no-deal scenario, which Johnson has publicly stated will be unfavorable for both parties in the long term.

Conclusion

The quest for a good trade deal between Boris Johnson's government and the EU is fraught with challenges. The UK Prime Minister's goal of finding a middle ground is laudable but might be overly optimistic given the detailed nature of trade negotiations. The EU's resistance to a favorable deal for the UK is rooted in maintaining the balance of trade and preventing any perceived advantage to the UK post-Brexit.

The future of trade between the UK and the EU will likely be shaped by the ability of both sides to find mutually agreeable terms. Until then, the uncertainty looms large, and the implications for various sectors, particularly agriculture and fishing, will be significant.