PKP Plenaries: Lord Chris Smith

Summer in Pembroke is a busy time. After the exams are done and graduation is over we welcome 300 – 350 international students annually on the Pembroke-King’s Summer Programme. They take part in a packed six-week programme of courses on a huge range of subjects and experience aspects of Cambridge life like tea at Fitzbillies, and formal dinners. On of the highlights is three plenary lectures spread out over the six weeks.

The first of these was given by the Master of Pembroke, Lord Chris Smith, on a particularly topical subject: Brexit, and what the future of the UK might look like post-March 2019. 

He began his talk by going over the immediate consequences of Brexit: a change of Prime Minister, the effect on the pound, and a hung parliament after the general election. He argued that one of the crucial longer-term impacts is the uncertainty faced by businesses. Industries like agriculture, which depends on seasonal agricultural workers from the EU, and healthcare, are likely to be hit particularly hard by Brexit. And, he went on, you don’t have to go far to find this kind of effect – the number of applications from EU students to British universities has dropped already.

Secondly, he argued that there are key flaws in the foundations of Britain’s negotiating position. Theresa May set out red lines after triggering Article 50: no membership of the customs union, no single market, and no jurisdiction for the European Court of Justice. These lines, Chris Smith believes, should have “snookered” negotiations because they fail to recognise the importance of the EU’s fundamental freedoms. The freedom of movement of labour is the most contentious of these, and in his view the Remain campaign failed to adequately make clear that freedom of labour does not necessarily mean freedom of movement; it could mean freedom of movement dependent on employment in the host country.

The Irish border is at the heart of this debate.  A hard border in Northern Ireland, Chris Smith believes, would fundamentally change everything that’s been achieved over the last two decades to maintain peace in Ireland, and must therefore be absolutely avoided.

Putting aside the big questions of trade relationships and borders, he identified problems close to home due to what he called ‘Parliamentary arithmetic’. There are strong opinions and divisions within and between parties, and Parliament contains both passionate Brexiteers and pro-Europeans. The Labour party is primarily pro-Remain, but is led by Jeremy Corbyn, a Eurosceptic. There is therefore very little strong opposition to Theresa May, and both major parties lack a clear voice.

The divisions within the Conservative party have only deepened since the creation of the Chequers’ agreement, which has met with strong criticism from Brexiteers and resignations from key figures like David Davies and Boris Johnson. The agreement, which calls for a common rule book on goods and agricultural projects, and commits to maintaining current labour standards, has not been welcomed by remainers either. Chris Smith argued that it will require significant strengthening before the EU will accept it as a basis for negotiations.

So what happens next? He set out four possibilities: firstly, the Chequers Bill is strengthened and becomes the basis of future negotiations; second, Parliament gets the Prime Minister to accept membership of the customs union and single market without being EU members; thirdly, “crashing out” with a no-deal scenario; and fourthly, the imminent possibility of a no-deal scenario prompts a second referendum.

Whichever of these potential futures come true, Chris Smith concluded, he hopes that we will find sensible options for the future of the UK.

Please note this blog was written about a talk given in July 2018 and may not reflect more recent developments in the Brexit negotiations.