Members of the European Parliament Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) expressed concern about a possible divergence of British standards from those of the European Union and ultimately unfair British competition, during a debate with the European Commission on the post-Brexit agreement on Thursday 14 January.
All political groups, from Andreas Schwab (EPP coordinator, Germany) to Martin Schirdewan (GUE/NGL, Germany), expressed their fears about possible unfair competition. But for the Commission, it is the best trade deal the EU has ever concluded, especially in terms of protecting public services.
The Commission reiterated that the agreement was based on a text submitted by the Union and not on the one proposed by London, and that it drew heavily on the agreement with Japan, one of the most comprehensive in existence. The institution added that there will be strengthened controls and a strong EU presence in Northern Ireland to ensure that there is proper implementation of the agreement and protocol.
It insisted that customs services will in particular ensure that goods from third countries other than the UK do not transit through the UK to enter the European market by taking advantage of the exemption from customs duties and quotas.
The Commission reminded MEPs that financial services were not in the agreement and that there was no horizontal recognition of professional qualifications, despite strong British insistence. Thus, regarding the recognition of professional qualifications, it will be up to professional associations (such as architects) to make joint recommendations to the Partnership Council.
For digital services, the Commission has confirmed protection of private and personal data, a provision that has never existed before, it said, stressing also the issue of source code protection.
The institution indicated that the agreement included non-regression clauses relating to social and environmental standards. According to the Commission, the dispute resolution mechanism is very powerful. In addition, the EU will be able to take unilateral action if, over time, the two sides diverge too much. For the European Commission, this is an unprecedented mechanism.
Anna Cavazzini (Greens/EFA, Germany) regretted that the European Parliament would not have a say in the event of an amendment to the agreement decided by the Partnership Council. The Commission replied that the potential amendments will only cover non-essential parts. In any case, Parliament will always be kept informed, it assured. Finally, these are modalities existing in other trade agreements, the European Commission said.
In general, the Commission explained that there will inevitably be more friction in trade between the UK and the EU now, but that both sides were working to streamline specific customs procedures for low-risk goods. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)