UK’s Trade Future with EU Raises Concerns Over Return to ECJ Jurisdiction

[Social Media]

 

Downing Street has sparked debate after refusing to rule out a return to European Court of Justice (ECJ) oversight in certain areas as part of an improved trade relationship with the European Union. This marks a potential shift in the UK’s approach to Brexit-related agreements under Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership.

 

The prospect of aligning with EU laws comes as ministers from the bloc are expected to push for Britain to follow European food and agricultural standards in new negotiations. The talks, set to begin in spring, aim to address the economic impact of post-Brexit trade barriers, which are estimated to have cost the UK economy £3 billion annually. Accepting EU standards would likely mean adhering to ECJ rulings in specific areas — a condition the previous Conservative government firmly rejected when finalizing the original trade deal in 2020.  

 

When questioned on Monday about these potential concessions, the prime minister’s spokesman remained non-committal. “The prime minister has been clear that we’ve left the EU, we’re not rejoining the single market, the customs union or [reintroducing] freedom of movement. That obviously remains the UK’s position,” he said, adding that the goal of the talks is to “make a tangible difference” to UK businesses.  

 

While Starmer maintains that he will not reverse Brexit or undermine the UK’s sovereignty, critics argue that his flexible stance could lead Britain back under EU legal influence. Lord Frost, who spearheaded the 2020 trade deal, criticized the ambiguity. “Unless HMG rule out the European Court of Justice, we must assume they are open to the possibility,” he said. “Anyone who thinks the solution to this country’s problems is giving foreign courts more powers over us is truly deluded.”  

 

The issue has been compounded by recent legal disputes launched by Brussels against the UK, predating the current agreement. The European Commission has accused Britain of imposing unfair restrictions on EU citizens’ family members and failing to terminate bilateral investment agreements with six EU member states. These cases, now heading to the ECJ, underscore the lingering legal friction between the UK and the EU.  

 

Priti Patel, shadow foreign secretary, warned that these cases should serve as a cautionary tale for Starmer. “The EU’s enthusiasm to continue to take proceedings against us in the ECJ should be a warning to Keir Starmer as he tries to edge us back under its jurisdiction in more areas and extend mobility rights for EU citizens,” she said. Patel accused Labour of undermining the country’s sovereignty, stating, “Instead of focusing on securing growth through a competitive domestic economy and global trade, they want to tie our hands up in the EU.”  

 

Despite the backlash, Downing Street has remained focused on the potential benefits of resetting relations with Brussels. Starmer’s team insists the negotiations are about practicality rather than political reversal. They argue that smoothing trade barriers and improving cooperation on security and immigration could bring real advantages to businesses and the public.  

 

The debate highlights the broader tension between maintaining Brexit’s hard-won independence and addressing the economic realities of strained UK-EU trade. For now, Starmer’s government remains committed to exploring ways to “improve the relationship” without explicitly committing to or ruling out concessions that involve the ECJ. Whether this balancing act can satisfy both EU negotiators and domestic critics remains to be seen as the talks draw nearer.  

 

Based on a report by The Times 2024-12-18

 

 

 

[stevenl]

Want to export more, have to accept the rules and regulations of the countries you're exporting to.

[jippytum]

one of the main  benifits  touted pre Brexit was to dissociate the UK from the European court of justice. 

Now Starma a stout remainer is hell bent on turning the clock back casting aside the wishes of the majority of UK voters who secured a leave vote in the referendum. 

Little wonder he is the most unpopular prime minister in British history. 

[JonnyF]

Starmer disrespecting Democracy and the will of the British people. Trying to undo Brexit one step at a time. 

 

The man is a disgrace. 

 

Hopefully the EU realizes the next government will simply reverse this again and refuses to get involved in the game of musical chairs. But given the EU's love of power and disdain for Democracy, I highly doubt that. 

[Srikcir]

18 minutes ago, jippytum said:

one of the main  benifits  touted pre Brexit was to dissociate the UK from the European court of justice.

In many instances there seems little mentioned of the ill economic consequences during Brexit debates.

In 2023, UK exports of goods and services to the EU were £356 billion (42% of all UK exports). The EU's share of world imports in 2023 was 14.2%.

The European Union (EU) is the world's largest trading bloc of 27 members and the world's top trader of manufactured goods and services. EU is a key player in the World Trade Organization (WTO).

UK is a member of WTO that has over 160 members that represent 98% of world trade. The WTO's agreements create an international trade legal framework for 164 economies. Most if not all Free Trade Agreements fall under WTO provisions.

As of December 2024, the United Kingdom has 39 active free trade agreements with nations and trade blocs, covering 102 countries and territories. I've not heard that UK objects to be legally binding on WTO rulings in its FTA's. What about UK's sovereignty then - it's not absolute.

 

[herfiehandbag]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Want to export more, have to accept the rules and regulations of the countries you're exporting to.

Want to fish in other countries waters, have to accept the rules and regulations of the countries in whose waters you wish to fish.

 

Or is it only a one way process?

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, herfiehandbag said:

Want to fish in other countries waters, have to accept the rules and regulations of the countries in whose waters you wish to fish.

 

Or is it only a one way process?

Isn't there an agreement about that?

[The Cyclist]

7 hours ago, Social Media said:

The talks, set to begin in spring, aim to address the economic impact of post-Brexit trade barriers, which are estimated to have cost the UK economy £3 billion annually.

 

A whole £3 Billion ? Peanuts in terms of a £2.7 Trillion economy.

 

This is costing the UK more than £3 Billion a year, but we dont want to talk about that

 

 

 

Now higher than when Truss apparently crashed the economy, and had Labour howling like demented monkeys.

 

All hail Labour 

 

https://order-order.com/2024/12/17/reeves-budget-backlash-in-full-business-closures-job-losses-and-investment-exodus/

 

[RayC]

1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:

 

A whole £3 Billion ? Peanuts in terms of a £2.7 Trillion economy.

 

This is costing the UK more than £3 Billion a year, but we dont want to talk about that

 

 

 

Now higher than when Truss apparently crashed the economy, and had Labour howling like demented monkeys.

 

All hail Labour 

 

https://order-order.com/2024/12/17/reeves-budget-backlash-in-full-business-closures-job-losses-and-investment-exodus/

 

 

You're right. £3bn is peanuts in the big scheme of things.

 

I wonder what that figure relates to given that estimates of the cost of Brexit to the UK economy range from 2-5% of GDP?

 

(One of many reports)

https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/the-economy-forecast/brexit-analysis/#assumptions

 

[placnx]

3 hours ago, Srikcir said:

In many instances there seems little mentioned of the ill economic consequences during Brexit debates.

In 2023, UK exports of goods and services to the EU were £356 billion (42% of all UK exports). The EU's share of world imports in 2023 was 14.2%.

The European Union (EU) is the world's largest trading bloc of 27 members and the world's top trader of manufactured goods and services. EU is a key player in the World Trade Organization (WTO).

UK is a member of WTO that has over 160 members that represent 98% of world trade. The WTO's agreements create an international trade legal framework for 164 economies. Most if not all Free Trade Agreements fall under WTO provisions.

As of December 2024, the United Kingdom has 39 active free trade agreements with nations and trade blocs, covering 102 countries and territories. I've not heard that UK objects to be legally binding on WTO rulings in its FTA's. What about UK's sovereignty then - it's not absolute.

 

 In view of Britain's historic relationship to Europe and its proximity, the sensible solution on trade would be to harmonize goods standards or have UK and EU mutually accept the other's goods standards.

[The Cyclist]

18 minutes ago, RayC said:

I wonder what that figure relates to given that estimates of the cost of Brexit to the UK economy range from 2-5% of GDP?

 

Here is the GDP figures from 1960  - 2023

 

https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/GBR/united-kingdom/gdp-gross-domestic-product

 

It would appear that 2023 was the largest that UK GDP has ever been

 

Which will come as a shock to some. Especially those that think Brexit has had a negative impact on UK GDP.

 

CPTTP became active on the 15 December, which will also wipe out the paltry £3 Billion in the article in the OP.

[candide]

1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Here is the GDP figures from 1960  - 2023

 

https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/GBR/united-kingdom/gdp-gross-domestic-product

 

It would appear that 2023 was the largest that UK GDP has ever been

 

Which will come as a shock to some. Especially those that think Brexit has had a negative impact on UK GDP.

 

CPTTP became active on the 15 December, which will also wipe out the paltry £3 Billion in the article in the OP.

GDP always grows (at least on middle and long term). 🙂

 

It 's also a bit strange that you chosed statistics in USD, in a thread related to British sovereignty.

 

"In 2023, the gross domestic product of the United Kingdom amounted to around 2.54 trillion British pounds, compared just under 2.53 trillion pounds in 2022, and 2.4 trillion in 2021. 

https://www.statista.com/topics/3795/gdp-of-the-uk/#topicOverview

[RayC]

57 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Here is the GDP figures from 1960  - 2023

 

https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/GBR/united-kingdom/gdp-gross-domestic-product

 

It would appear that 2023 was the largest that UK GDP has ever been

 

Which will come as a shock to some. Especially those that think Brexit has had a negative impact on UK GDP.

 

CPTTP became active on the 15 December, which will also wipe out the paltry £3 Billion in the article in the OP.

 

France, Germany and the US all recorded their highest levels of GDP in 2023 and the GDP figures for these countries over the period 1960 - 2023 all show an upward trend, so I don't understand what point you are trying to make?

 

Apparently membership of CPTTP, while welcome, will not wipe out the "paltry" £3bn quoted in the OP, as it will only add £2 billion (0.08%) annually over the long run to UK GDP (Source: UK government impact assessment). This figure pales into insignificance against the estimated cost of Brexit to the UK economy detailed in the OBR and numerous other reports.

 

Nothing in your post negates the premise that Brexit has - and continues to be - a huge cost to the UK economy.

[Chomper Higgot]

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Starmer disrespecting Democracy and the will of the British people. Trying to undo Brexit one step at a time. 

 

The man is a disgrace. 

 

Hopefully the EU realizes the next government will simply reverse this again and refuses to get involved in the game of musical chairs. But given the EU's love of power and disdain for Democracy, I highly doubt that. 

What part of democracy has Starmer disregarded?

 

He’s the Prime Minister and head of the elected Government, nothing he has said with respect to the ECJ and trade with Europe breaks with anything that has been voted for by the electorate, not in the past election (the one that matters) or in any referendum.

 

Moreover, given your continual, complaints about Starmer, Labour and allegations of ruining the economy, why would you not welcome the UK improving trade with the largest integrated developed market in the world?

 

Improving relations and trade with the EU is good for the UK.

[The Cyclist]

30 minutes ago, RayC said:

France, Germany and the US all recorded their highest levels of GDP in 2023 and the GDP figures for these countries over the period 1960 - 2023 all show an upward trend, so I don't understand what point you are trying to make?

 

Because you brought up Brexit and GDP here

 

2 hours ago, RayC said:

I wonder what that figure relates to given that estimates of the cost of Brexit to the UK economy range from 2-5% of GDP?

 

So I gave you the figures from 1960 - 2023

 

Estimates are just that, estmates, and can be argued over depending on how they are presented. The bottom line is that GDP growth continues, despite Brexit.

 

If you want the figures for 2024

 

Q1 & Q2  ( Jan - June ) was 1.2% growth

 

Q3 ( Jul - Sept ) 0% Growth

 

Q4 ( Oct - Dec ) TBC but probably negative.

[The Cyclist]

49 minutes ago, candide said:

GDP always grows (at least on middle and long term). 🙂

 

Which in itself is actually meaningless, when Governments have to borrow increasing amounts every year.

 

Which might give you idea of how much credence I give to GDP figures, they are not worth the paper they are written on.

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Because you brought up Brexit and GDP here

 

 

So I gave you the figures from 1960 - 2023

 

Estimates are just that, estmates, and can be argued over depending on how they are presented. The bottom line is that GDP growth continues, despite Brexit.

 

If you want the figures for 2024

 

Q1 & Q2  ( Jan - June ) was 1.2% growth

 

Q3 ( Jul - Sept ) 0% Growth

 

Q4 ( Oct - Dec ) TBC but probably negative.

Yes growth is a problem, all the more reason for a trade deal with the largest developed integrated market right across the channel.

[RayC]

1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Because you brought up Brexit and GDP here

 

 

So I gave you the figures from 1960 - 2023

 

Estimates are just that, estmates, and can be argued over depending on how they are presented. The bottom line is that GDP growth continues, despite Brexit.

 

If you want the figures for 2024

 

Q1 & Q2  ( Jan - June ) was 1.2% growth

 

Q3 ( Jul - Sept ) 0% Growth

 

Q4 ( Oct - Dec ) TBC but probably negative.

 

Yes I did bring up Brexit and GDP but - as I previously remarked - none of the data which you have posted negates the premise that Brexit has had an adverse effect on the UK GDP (and wider economy).

 

Here are some of the estimates contained in the OBR report for ease of reference:

 

As a result of Brexit:

 

* The UK economy has shrunk by £140 billion. 
* The poorest 10% of the population experienced a 20% fall in living standards between 2019/20 and 2024/25. 
* Yearly household food bills have increased by £250. 
* The average Brit has lost almost £2,000. 
* The UK economy is 2.5% smaller than it would have been if Remain had won the referendum. 
* Public finances fell by £26 billion a year. 
* Brexit reduced Britain's GDP by 5.5 per cent by the second quarter of 2022. 

 

(List AI generated based on the OBR report)

 

The OBR report details the assumptions underlining its' estimates and the  methodology used.

 

Do you object to these assumptions and/or the methodology used? If so, it would be interesting to see these objections.

[scottiejohn]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What part of democracy has Starmer disregarded?

His Party's manifesto!

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, scottiejohn said:

His Party's manifesto!

You’ll have to be more precise.

[nauseus]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ll have to be more precise.

 

Given the lack of specifics within this "manifesto" that is a tough ask.
 

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Yes I did bring up Brexit and GDP but - as I previously remarked - none of the data which you have posted negates the premise that Brexit has had an adverse effect on the UK GDP (and wider economy).

 

Here are some of the estimates contained in the OBR report for ease of reference:

 

As a result of Brexit:

 

* The UK economy has shrunk by £140 billion. 
* The poorest 10% of the population experienced a 20% fall in living standards between 2019/20 and 2024/25. 
* Yearly household food bills have increased by £250. 
* The average Brit has lost almost £2,000. 
* The UK economy is 2.5% smaller than it would have been if Remain had won the referendum. 
* Public finances fell by £26 billion a year. 
* Brexit reduced Britain's GDP by 5.5 per cent by the second quarter of 2022. 

 

(List AI generated based on the OBR report)

 

The OBR report details the assumptions underlining its' estimates and the  methodology used.

 

Do you object to these assumptions and/or the methodology used? If so, it would be interesting to see these objections.

 

Inflation, largely due to Covid, ignored yet again. The 20% drop you mention is the same as cumulative UK inflation over 5 years,

[RayC]

10 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Inflation, largely due to Covid, ignored yet again. The 20% drop you mention is the same as cumulative UK inflation over 5 years,

 

I don't think that inflation is being ignored. GDP figures quoted by the ONS are real i.e. adjusted for inflation, so I would have thought the OBR uses the same datasets although I can't confirm that for certain.

[herfiehandbag]

8 hours ago, stevenl said:

Isn't there an agreement about that?

There is.

"Brussels" is demanding that it be abandoned as a precursor to any talks!

[stevenl]

1 minute ago, herfiehandbag said:

There is.

"Brussels" is demanding that it be abandoned as a precursor to any talks!

If so, up to the UK to agree or disagree.

Any source for your claim?

[herfiehandbag]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

If so, up to the UK to agree or disagree.

Any source for your claim?

Press reports and broadcast media, freely available.

 

Before the UK can even open talks, there are three demands:

1) lift restrictions on EU countries fishing boats fishing in British waters.

2) Free movement ( entry to and residing in the UK) for EU nationals under the age of 30.

3) The UK to be subject to the ECJ.

 

In other words, 3 of the major "benefits" of withdrawal from the EU,(and incidentally 3 of the main points on which the leave campaign fought and won the referendum) are to be given up, before any negotiations are to be entertained.

 

How did the Eagles song "Hotel California" put it -"you can check out but you can never leave!"

 

[stevenl]

11 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Press reports and broadcast media, freely available.

Should be easy to provide links then. I find different information, like https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-reaches-agreement-on-north-sea-fishing-opportunities-for-2025

[scottiejohn]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ll have to be more precise.

Just what he should have done instead of telling all his lies both in the lead up to the election and the flagrant lies in the manifesto!

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Just what he should have done instead of telling all his lies both in the lead up to the election and the flagrant lies in the manifesto!

I do hope that’s not you trying to be more precise.

 

 

[RayC]

51 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Press reports and broadcast media, freely available.

 

Before the UK can even open talks, there are three demands:

1) lift restrictions on EU countries fishing boats fishing in British waters.

2) Free movement ( entry to and residing in the UK) for EU nationals under the age of 30.

3) The UK to be subject to the ECJ.

 

In other words, 3 of the major "benefits" of withdrawal from the EU,(and incidentally 3 of the main points on which the leave campaign fought and won the referendum) are to be given up, before any negotiations are to be entertained.

 

How did the Eagles song "Hotel California" put it -"you can check out but you can never leave!"

 

 

We checked out in 2020 but the question is, 'Is it in our best interests to use some of the hotel's facilities?'

 

Wrt the three 'major' benefits of Brexit, the first, fishing, is almost insignificant in terms of its' economic importance. It represents 0.03% of economic activity in the UK and employs 11k people and these numbers are still declining  Why fishing became such a major issue (for both sides) in the original negotiations is a mystery to me.

 

I also don't understand why the free movement of EU nationals under 30 should present a problem. This is the group who, pre-Brexit, used to be employed in the seasonal, part-time jobs which are now proving so difficult to fill. Moreover, many (most?) of this group will not wish to settle permanently in the UK. If it is considered desirable to reduce the number of 'permanent' immigrants, surely this is one way of doing so?

 

The article suggests that the UK would be st the ECJ in matters relating to Food and Agricultural standards. In practice, currently this wouldn't be a problem. UK food standards are consistent with EU regulations and, in many cases, are stricter than the minimal requirements set by EU regulations. I accept that adhering to EU food and agriculture might be a problem when it comes to negotiating a free trade deal with the US - and if we wanted to amend standards in the future - but I would make the following two points: Firstly, is it desirable to drop our standards in such an important sector such as food and Agriculture? Secondly, given Trump's pronouncements about US trade policy, a free trade deal with the US isn't going to happen any time so in that regard, the issue of food standards is pretty irrelevant.