fit the country’s priorities. Northern Power-
house fund anyone?
The UK could also be brought closer
together by introducing variable Air Passen-
ger Duty — such as scrapping it on flights
from Northern Ireland to Great Britain, or
halving it from Scotland to England. Impos-
sible in the EU, but possible outside.
There was a huge national moan when
duty free for passengers travelling to Europe
was abolished, because it conflicted with EU
single market rules. Come Brexit, the govern-
ment could bring back duty free for trips to
France, Spain and Italy.
As head of the British Bankers’ Asso-
ciation, I promoted competition in banking,
arguing that challenger banks should have a
level playing field with large banks on pru-
dential regulation. The government was sup-portive, but the barrier was the EU. It was a
constant frustration to the UK’s global finan-
cial institutions that the EU would apply its
rules to their operations all over the world,
making them less competitive international-
ly. Come Brexit, it seems likely the govern-
ment would be able to ensure that a UK bank
or insurance company working in the US or
Asia can compete with US or Asian banks on
a level playing field.
Byzantine EU rules can make procure-
ment by public authorities a tortuous quag-
mire. The former minister Francis Maude
fought a valiant battle for major reform. ButBrexit means the government can set up a
more effective procurement regime, helping
improve public services.
David Cameron focused his brutalising
EU renegotiation on being allowed to stop
paying UK child benefit payments to chil-
dren who don’t live in the UK. Once we
leave, the government could do it in the time
it takes to write the press release. The gov-
ernment will also be allowed to ensure that
EU citizens living in the UK follow the same
rules as British citizens on bringing in spous-
es. The government will have the freedom
to set language rules for EU doctors, and to
deport EU criminals.
There are lots of things the government
opposed at the time, but which we will end
up keeping. It lost a battle to stop passengers
getting compensation if aeroplane delays are
caused by technical problems. I doubt that
will change. But I can see market stalls being
allowed to sell apples just in lbs and oz. Met-
ric martyrs could claim a late victory.
The government has made clear it doesn’t
want to scrap the EU’s employment laws. No
British government — Labour or Conserv-
ative — supported the EU’s working time
directive, but it is clearly here to stay. How-
ever, there are some aspects that might be
tweaked. When the ECJ ruled that doctors
sleeping in hospitals but being on call had to
count it as full working time, it caused staff
shortages in the NHS. With staff shortages
again afflicting the NHS, there might be an
agreement to change it.
Then there are things a future govern-
ment might want to do, but which at the
moment it can’t. It is clear, for example, that
the wholesale nationalisation of the train
system is an infringement of the EU’s Fourth
Railway Package, which requires govern-
ments to open up train services to the mar-
kets. If Corbyn were to become PM, Brexit
would enable him to deliver on his pledge.
Leaving the EU reopens whole areas of
policymaking off limits for decades. Whether
you are a rail nationaliser, a women’s war-
rior, a fuel poverty campaigner, NHS man-
ager, animal rights activist, a public procurer,
a commuter between Belfast and London,
or someone who used to enjoy duty free on
trips to Costa del Sol — there could be some-
thing in Brexit for you. We have decided to
take back control. We should start discussing
all the things we could do with it.‘B
ut what are you going to do with the
powers?’ the minister asked, while
I negotiated devolution of powers
to London when Boris was mayor. The gov-
ernment wouldn’t grant powers unless we
explained how we would use them.
And that is what is missing in the Brexit
non-debate. We are ‘taking back control’ —
but we haven’t really thought what we will
do with that control once we have it. It is
true there has been discussion of trade deals,
transforming the Common Agricultural Pol-
icy and the colour of our passports. But if that
was all we could do, even most Brexiteers
wouldn’t have considered it worth it.
So, what could we do once we Brexit?
Well actually, given how extensive EU law
is, an awful lot. Some will depend on the deal
we have with the EU. Some are things we
could do but wouldn’t want to do. But there
are also lots of popular things the govern-
ment could do.
In 1997, Tony Blair campaigned to scrap
VAT on domestic gas and electricity. But
because of the EU, he had to settle for 5 per
cent. Once we leave the EU, the government
could do what Blair couldn’t. Fuel poverty
campaigners, take note.
Tories and Labour have wanted to scrap
the hated ‘tampon tax’ — VAT on tam-
pons. But what is impossible inside the EU
becomes possible outside. Women campaign-
ers, take note. In fact, the government could
scrap the hideously complex VAT system —
a job creation scheme for accountants we
had to bring in when we joined the EU —
altogether, and go back to the simple pur-
chase tax we had before.
In the 1990s, there were endless pro-
tests along the coast against exporting live
lambs and calves for slaughter in Europe.
The government wanted to ban the exports,
but couldn’t because of EU rules. Animal
welfare groups, take note. In 2012, Nicola
Sturgeon passed a law to impose minimum
alcohol pricing in Scotland, but it has not
come in because the ECJ complained. She
could control Scottish fisheries to revitalise
Scottish fishing ports.
The last Labour government fought to
have control of EU regional development
funding to the UK. I was in charge of these
EU funds in London, and the system is a
money-go-round nonsense. Come Brexit, the
government will be able to design funding to17 rea son s to love Brexit
Imagine all we can do once we’ve left
ANTHONY BROWNELeaving the EU reopens
whole areas of policymaking
off limits for decades