Chequers Statement From HM Government
Chequers Statement From HM Government
Chequers Statement From HM Government
The
United
Kingdom
will
leave
the
European
Union
on
29
March
2019,
and
begin
to
chart
a
new
course
in
the
world.
After
a
time-‐limited
implementation
period
that
will
conclude
at
the
end
of
2020,
the
UK
and
the
EU
will
enter
into
a
new
relationship
–
one
that
must
work
for
both
sides,
underpinning
shared
prosperity
and
security.
Today,
the
Cabinet
met
at
Chequers
to
discuss
and
collectively
agree
the
UK’s
vision
for
this
relationship.
The
conclusions
we
reached
covered:
I. a
substantial
evolution
in
our
proposals
for
the
UK’s
future
relationship
with
the
EU;
II. agreement
on
the
benefits
of
the
model
that
should
result
from
this
position;
and
III. the
need
to
step
up
preparedness
for
the
full
range
of
scenarios
that
might
result
from
the
negotiations.
I.
POSITION
ON
THE
FUTURE
RELATIONSHIP
2.
We
reflected
on
the
position
on
the
future
relationship
that
the
Government
had
put
forward
in
the
spring.
We
concluded
that
the
Government’s
vision
for
a
future
relationship
built
around
an
economic
partnership
and
a
security
partnership
remained
fundamentally
sound,
but
that
the
position
needed
to
evolve
in
order
to
provide
a
precise,
responsible
and
credible
basis
for
progressing
negotiations,
achieving
the
best
outcome
in
the
UK
national
interest
and
for
our
future
prosperity
and
security,
and
which
works
for
both
the
UK
and
the
EU.
3.
We
therefore
agreed
to
a
more
developed
and
comprehensive
proposal
for
the
economic
partnership.
At
the
core
of
this
proposal
is
the
establishment
by
the
UK
and
the
EU
of
a
free
trade
area
for
goods.
This
would
avoid
friction
at
the
border,
protect
jobs
and
livelihoods,
and
ensure
both
sides
meet
their
commitments
to
Northern
Ireland
and
Ireland
through
the
overall
future
relationship.
4.
The
Government
will
publish
a
White
Paper
setting
out
this
proposal
in
detail
next
week,
but
in
summary
we
agreed
its
four
main
elements.
a. The
UK
and
the
EU
would
maintain
a
common
rulebook
for
all
goods
including
agri-‐food,
with
the
UK
making
an
upfront
choice
to
commit
by
treaty
to
ongoing
harmonisation
with
EU
rules
on
goods,
covering
only
those
necessary
to
provide
for
frictionless
trade
at
the
border.
These
rules
are
relatively
stable,
and
supported
by
a
large
share
of
our
manufacturing
businesses.
The
UK
would
of
course
continue
to
play
a
strong
role
in
shaping
the
international
standards
that
underpin
them,
and
Parliament
would
have
oversight
of
the
incorporation
of
these
rules
into
the
UK’s
legal
order
–
with
the
ability
to
choose
not
to
do
so,
recognising
that
this
would
have
consequences.
We
would
strike
different
arrangements
for
services,
where
it
is
in
our
interests
to
have
regulatory
flexibility,
recognising
the
UK
and
the
EU
will
not
have
current
levels
of
access
to
each
other’s
markets.
b. The
UK
and
the
EU
would
ensure
a
fair
trading
environment
by
incorporating
strong
reciprocal
commitments
related
to
open
and
fair
trade
into
the
legal
agreements
that
define
the
future
relationship.
The
UK
would
commit
to
apply
a
common
rulebook
on
state
aid,
and
establish
cooperative
arrangements
between
regulators
on
competition.
In
keeping
with
our
commitments
to
uphold
international
standards,
the
UK
and
the
EU
would
also
agree
to
1
maintain
high
regulatory
standards
for
the
environment,
climate
change,
social
and
employment,
and
consumer
protection
–
meaning
we
would
not
let
standards
fall
below
their
current
levels.
c. The
UK
and
the
EU
would
establish
a
joint
institutional
framework
to
provide
for
the
consistent
interpretation
and
application
of
UK-‐EU
agreements
by
both
parties.
This
would
be
done
in
the
UK
by
UK
courts,
and
in
the
EU
by
EU
courts
–
with
due
regard
paid
to
EU
case
law
in
areas
where
the
UK
continued
to
apply
a
common
rulebook.
This
framework
would
also
include
robust
and
appropriate
means
for
the
resolution
of
disputes,
including
through
a
Joint
Committee
and
in
many
areas
through
binding
independent
arbitration
–
accommodating
through
a
joint
reference
procedure
the
role
of
the
Court
of
Justice
of
the
European
Union
(CJEU)
as
the
interpreter
of
EU
rules,
but
founded
on
the
principle
that
the
court
of
one
party
cannot
resolve
disputes
between
the
two.
d. The
UK
and
the
EU
would
work
together
on
the
phased
introduction
of
a
new
Facilitated
Customs
Arrangement
that
would
remove
the
need
for
customs
checks
and
controls
between
the
UK
and
the
EU
as
if
a
combined
customs
territory.
The
UK
would
apply
the
UK’s
tariffs
and
trade
policy
for
goods
intended
for
the
UK,
and
the
EU’s
tariffs
and
trade
policy
for
goods
intended
for
the
EU
-‐
becoming
operational
in
stages
as
both
sides
complete
the
necessary
preparations.
This
would
enable
the
UK
to
control
its
own
tariffs
for
trade
with
the
rest
of
the
world
and
ensure
businesses
paid
the
right
or
no
tariff
-‐
in
the
vast
majority
of
cases
upfront,
and
otherwise
through
a
repayment
mechanism.
5.
We
agreed
that
this
proposal
strikes
a
new
and
fair
balance
–
both
of
rights
and
obligations,
and
of
continuity
and
change.
Taken
together,
we
noted
that
such
a
relationship
would
see
the
UK
and
the
EU
meet
their
commitments
to
Northern
Ireland
and
Ireland
through
the
overall
future
relationship:
preserving
the
constitutional
and
economic
integrity
of
the
UK;
honouring
the
letter
and
the
spirit
of
the
Belfast
Agreement;
and
ensuring
that
the
operational
legal
text
the
UK
will
nonetheless
agree
on
the
‘backstop’
solution
as
part
of
the
Withdrawal
Agreement
would
not
need
to
be
brought
into
effect.
In
this
context,
we
also
noted
that
this
proposal
should
allow
both
parties
to
resolve
the
remaining
Withdrawal
Agreement
issues,
including
the
‘backstop’.
2
arrangements
on
financial
services
that
preserve
the
mutual
benefits
of
integrated
markets
and
protect
financial
stability,
noting
that
these
could
not
replicate
the
EU’s
passporting
regimes;
c. enable
the
Government’s
commitments
to
Northern
Ireland
to
be
met
through
the
future
relationship,
avoiding
the
need
for
a
border
between
Northern
Ireland
and
Ireland,
or
within
the
UK;
d. mean
that
the
UK
will
leave
the
Common
Agricultural
Policy
and
Common
Fisheries
Policy
–
taking
back
control
of
UK
waters
as
an
independent
coastal
state
and
designing
a
domestic
agricultural
policy
that
works
in
the
best
interests
of
the
UK;
e. deliver
an
independent
trade
policy
–
the
UK
would
have
its
own
seat
at
the
WTO,
be
able
to
set
tariffs
for
our
trade
with
the
rest
of
the
world,
and
have
the
ability
to
secure
trade
deals
with
other
countries
–
including
potentially
seeking
accession
to
the
Comprehensive
and
Progressive
Agreement
for
Trans-‐Pacific
Partnership;
f. ensure
that
in
the
future
all
laws
in
the
UK
would
be
legislated
for
by
Parliament
and
the
Devolved
Administrations
and
subject
to
proper
oversight
and
scrutiny,
recognising
that
where
the
UK
had
chosen
to
apply
a
common
rulebook
Parliament
would
still
have
a
lock
on
incorporating
rules
into
the
UK
legal
order,
but
choosing
not
to
pass
the
relevant
legislation
would
lead
to
consequences
for
market
access,
security
cooperation
or
the
frictionless
border;
g. restore
the
supremacy
of
UK
courts,
ending
the
jurisdiction
of
the
CJEU
in
the
UK,
with
no
more
preliminary
references
from
UK
courts,
but
committing
that
UK
courts
would
pay
due
regard
to
the
CJEU’s
jurisprudence
where
the
UK
had
chosen
to
apply
a
common
rulebook
to
ensure
consistent
interpretation;
h. end
free
movement,
giving
the
UK
back
control
over
how
many
people
enter
the
country;
i. include
a
mobility
framework
so
that
UK
and
EU
citizens
can
continue
to
travel
to
each
other’s
territories,
and
apply
for
study
and
work
–
similar
to
what
the
UK
may
offer
other
close
trading
partners
in
the
future;
j. end
vast
annual
payments
to
the
EU
budget,
with
appropriate
contributions
for
joint
action
in
specific
areas,
such
as
science
and
innovation,
releasing
funds
for
domestic
priorities
–
in
particular
our
long-‐term
plan
for
the
NHS;
and
k. maintain
operational
capabilities
on
internal
security,
and
ensure
that
the
UK
has
an
independent
foreign
policy,
with
suitable
arrangements
to
work
with
the
EU
as
required.
III.
PREPAREDNESS
7.
It
remains
our
firm
view
that
it
is
in
the
best
interests
of
both
sides
to
reach
agreement
on
a
good
and
sustainable
future
relationship.
But
we
also
concluded
that
it
was
responsible
to
continue
preparations
for
a
range
of
potential
outcomes,
including
the
possibility
of
‘no
deal’.
Given
the
short
period
remaining
before
the
necessary
conclusion
of
negotiations
this
autumn,
we
agreed
preparations
should
be
stepped
up.
HM
GOVERNMENT
Chequers
|
6
July
2018
3