Andrew Hammond is an associate at LSE Ideas, the centre for international affairs, diplomacy and strategy at the London School of Economics
Strong concerns were expressed at the China-hosted G20 summit on Monday about the need for the U.K. government to share its plans for Brexit. Governments, including the United States and Japan, expressed the need for more information, not least given the large amounts of investment in Britain from companies headquartered in the U.S. and Japan.
The G20 spat points to the fact that, 21/2 months after June's landmark Brexit referendum, major elements of the U.K.'s negotiating plan to leave the European Union are still unclear. What is certain is that British Prime Minister Theresa May has indicated that her government is likely to play a long game by not seeking to trigger Article 50 – the formal mechanism for bringing about the EU withdrawal process – until next year.
On balance, her tactics are wise as the massive scale of the negotiation is becoming clear. The reason the challenge is so great is that, as a recent analysis from LSE Ideas at the London School of Economics has revealed, the Brexit referendum triggered not one, but some nine overlapping negotiations to contend with. Collectively, these comprise discussions centred within the United Kingdom, between the United Kingdom and the EU, within the EU, and internationally, and collectively could be very protracted.
Indeed, it is even possible that Article 50 will not be triggered until the second half of 2017, after the French and German elections. This is because some elements of the U.K. government believe that the negotiating positions of both Paris and Berlin will be tougher toward London before the ballots than afterward, given the election-year pressures faced by French President François Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Once U.K. negotiations formally begin with the EU, a key area of contention will be what tradeoffs can be agreed. If Ms. May wants to secure curbs on the free movement of people, it will likely be in exchange for reduced access to the EU's single market, on which a significant array of British jobs and investment depend.
So far, she has said nothing concrete as prime minister about what her views are on this, nor what alternative model she wishes to adopt with the EU instead of the existing full membership.
More insight on the U.K. government's post-Brexit thinking will come at the British Conservative Party conference in early October, including in Ms. May's keynote speech. As the Prime Minister is discovering, the complexity of the exit negotiations will be difficult to finalize before the next scheduled U.K. general election in May, 2020. Hence, she may well be tempted later this year or next to try to engineer an early ballot if polls show she would win a larger majority and a new five-year term.
Whether or not an early election is called, the government is likely to find it very hard to find an alternative model – which would have to satisfy key political parties – that comes close to providing the same balance of influence and advantages that Britain gets from its current status inside the 28-member union. For all the EU's flaws, and it has many that need to be better tackled, the U.K. currently enjoys a uniquely positive position in what is the world's largest political and economic union.
The stark reality is that, while the nature of bilateral agreements with the EU vary, all have major disadvantages, including the fact that none provides full access to services, which account for 80 per cent of the British economy. Take Norway, which has considerable access to the single market. In exchange, it is required to adhere to EU rules without having a vote on them; it accepts free movement of people; it makes contributions to EU programs and budgets; and it still is required to do customs checks on goods crossing into the EU.
Taken over all, it seems increasingly possible that the U.K. will play a long-game Brexit negotiating strategy, although barring an early general election, Ms. May will want to try to finalize negotiations in 2019, in advance of the currently scheduled 2020 ballot.