The Economist - USA (2022-05-21)

54 Britain TheEconomistMay21st 2022

Tyneside.MrGilbertsaysthatpassenger

numbersinhispatcharedownby15­20%,

whichislessthanthedeclinenationally.

LikeWileE.Coyoterunningoffa cliff,

politicianstendtotalkasthoughnothing

haschanged.“Thegovernmentcontinues

tobelievethatgoingforward,manyfirms

andindividualswillvaluethebenefitsof

workingfacetoface,”itblithelystatedin

anintegratedrail planfortheMidlands

andnorthofEnglandlastNovember.Jacob

Rees­Mogg, agovernment minister, has

leftnotesoncivilservants’deskschiding

themfor beingabsent,as thoughhome

workingisa momentarylapse.

Butchangesinworkinghabitsarelikely

toendure.AsurveybytheOfficeforNa­

tionalStatisticsinearlyAprilfoundthat

23%ofallbusinessesand43%ofprofes­

sional­servicesfirmsexpecta permanent

increaseinhomeworking.Boththosepro­

portionsarethehighesttheyhavebeen

sincetheonsbeganaskingthisquestion

inSeptember2020.Companiesaretrying

toenticeworkersbackbymakingoffices

morealluring.Buthomeworkingwillim­

prove, too: Nicholas Bloom at Stanford

Universitynotesthatpatentapplications

for remote­working technologyshot up

afterthepandemichit.

Some transport operators have ac­

knowledgedasmuch.TransportScotland

announcedlastOctoberthatitwasscrap­

pinga plantodoublethenumberoftracks

around East Kilbride railway station,

whichwouldhaveallowedmorecommut­

erstoreachGlasgowatrushhour.There­

visedbusiness caseexplained thatrush

hourisnotwhatitwas,andthatthelink

betweenjobgrowthandtransportusehad

beenbroken.Itpointedoutthatevenbe­

forethepandemic, polling showedthat

train commuters wanted to work from

homea fewdaysa week.Nowtheycan.

Other transport operators are quietly

trimming their timetables, sometimes

making the excuse that covid­19 has

knockedoutmanyoftheirstaff.Morecuts

arecoming.Busoperatorshavebeengiven

emergencyoperatinggrants,buttheseare

supposedtoendinOctober.“We’velost

quiteafewservicesandwilllosemore,”

says Greg Marsden at the Institute for

TransportStudiesinLeeds.

Ifpublictransportworsens,peopleare

likelytoworkfromhomemore,orjumpin

theircars.A surveyofrailwayusersbyLon­

don Travelwatch, an official watchdog,

foundthat64%agreedthata lessfrequent

service would deter them from taking

trains.Cutsmayalsoprovokestrikes.

TheElizabethlineisa colossalachieve­

ment—amongotherthings,it necessitated

oneofBritain’sbiggestarchaeologicaldigs.

Comparedwiththetaskofmaintaininga

decent public­transport service overthe

nextfewyears,it willseemeasy.n

No rush

Britain, journeys relative to pre-pandemic level, %

February 24th-April 10th 2022

Source: Department for Transport

London

Underground

National Rail

London Buses

Buses

(excl. London)

Cars

1009080706050

Weekdays Weekends

TheNorthernIrelandprotocol

Here we go again

T

his week’s announcement by Liz

Truss,  the  foreign  secretary,  of  a  pro­

posed bill that would give the government

powers  to  override  the  Northern  Ireland

protocol  was  not  a  surprise.  In  order  to

keep  the  province  in  the  eu’s  single  mar­

ket, the protocol imposes customs checks

on  goods  moving  across  the  Irish  Sea.

Threats to change it unilaterally, if negotia­

tions  with  the  bloc  do  not  yield  compro­

mise,  were  heavily  trailed.  But  it  is  still

shocking  that  any  British  government  is

ready to renege on an international treaty.

The claim by Ms Truss that the bill will be

legal  under  international  law  is  uncon­

vincing even to many Tory mps. 

The  gambit  also  looks  unlikely  to

achieve the two goals that she set out for it.

The  first  is  to  persuade  the  Democratic

Unionist Party (dup) to return to Northern

Ireland’s  power­sharing  executive,  which

is in limbo until it does. But the dup, which

says  it  will  return  only  if  the  protocol  is

scrapped or fundamentally changed, is un­

likely to move quickly; it distrusts the Brit­

ish  government  and  it  knows  the  bill

would struggle to get through Parliament. 

The  second  goal  is  to  extract  conces­

sions from Brussels. The European Union’s

response was measured but emphatic: na­

tional governments are not prepared to re­

negotiate  the  Brexit  withdrawal  treaty,

which  includes  the  protocol  and  required

ratification by all their parliaments. The eu

also  made  plain  that  it  is  prepared  to  de­

ploy retaliatory trade measures, including

scrapping the entire post­Brexit trade deal,

if Britain legislates unilaterally.

That  still  leaves  scope  for  compromise

in  some  areas.  It  ought  to  be  possible  to

smooth the application of border and cus­

toms  checks  through  negotiation  in  the

joint committee set up to manage the pro­

tocol, without having to change the treaty

text.  The  eu’s  proposals  put  forward  last

October,  to  simplify  or  scrap  some  of  the

checks  required  to  protect  its  single  mar­

ket, could also be expanded. 

It should therefore be possible to estab­

lish “green” express lanes for goods that go

only  to  the  province  and  are  deemed  un­

likely  to  cross  into  Ireland.  The  existing

scheme  for  trusted  traders  that  promise

not to stray into the republic could be en­

larged to cover more firms that are based in

Great  Britain  as  well  as  those  in  Northern

Ireland. And the current grace periods that

postpone  checks  for  most  supermarket

produce, live animals and parcels entering

the  province  could  be  extended  or  even

made permanent, as has already been done

for medicines.

It is trickier to do away with more sensi­

tive  food­safety  checks.  The  government

wants the eusimply to recognise Britain’s

food­safety  regime,  but  the  bloc  frets  that

Britain  could  diverge  sharply  on  such

things as hormone­treated meat or geneti­

cally  modified  crops.  The  cleanest  way  to

eliminate  these  checks  would  be  for  Brit­

ain  to  align  with  the  eu’s  standards.  The

government is against this on sovereignty

grounds and because it would scupper any

chance of a trade deal with America. Since

no  such  deal  is  on  the  horizon,  however,

some  temporary  period  of  alignment

might be politically feasible.

Anything  that  requires  a  treaty  rewrite

is  far  less  plausible.  Catherine  Barnard,  a

Cambridge professor who is part of the uk

in  a  Changing  Europe  think­tank,  notes

that  this  category  would  include  altering

the  presumption  that  all  goods  going  to

Northern Ireland are at risk of entering the

single  market  and  getting  rid  of  the  eu’s

customs  procedures.  Both  of  these  are

specified in the treaty. So are clauses apply­

ing eutax and state­aid rules to Northern

Ireland and putting the protocol under the

European  Court  of  Justice.  Britain  now

wants to change all these, even if not many

businesses in the province care that much.

Indeed,  despite  the  dup’s  hostility  to

the protocol, most opinion polls find that a

majority in Northern Ireland are in favour

of  retaining  it.  It  is  partly  because  of  the

protocol that the economy has been slight­

ly  outperforming  the  national  average,

says  the  National  Institute  of  Economic

and  Social  Research,  another  think­tank.

The biggest obstacle to smoothing the pro­

tocol is a lack of trust between Britain and

the  eu.  Threats  of  unilateral  actionto  re­

write  a  treaty  signed  barely  twoyearsago

serve only to aggravate suspicion.n

Another showdown between Britain

and the eulooms