LONDON, March 2 (Xinhua) -- Negotiations to forge a new relationship between Britain and the European Union (EU) after Brexit formally started on Monday as trade expert called for creative thinking to narrow the differences between the two sides.
The two parties published the negotiating position papers respectively last week, confirming that there are significant differences in aspiration between the two sides about the nature of their relationship, Amar Breckenridge, senior associate at the Frontier Economics (Europe) told Xinhua in an interview.
"Superficially, both parties state their ambition to negotiate a comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA)," said Breckenridge, "but they had very different ideas as to what this means."
The former staff economist at the World Trade Organization (WTO) explained that the EU seeks a bespoke agreement with Britain, in view of the deep integration the two parties enjoy. By contrast, Britain's position is notable that the EU should treat it like any non-EU state with which the EU has a FTA.
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has called for a Canada-style deal and rejected alignment with the EU on multiple occasions.
In practice, Breckenridge believed Britain's position is a hybrid of the Canada model and the Swiss model. The latter consists of a series of bilateral agreements on specific matters, and Britain's position paper follows that approach on a host of issues, including fisheries, aviation, energy and civil nuclear cooperation.
He pointed out that the crux of this divergence is the EU's position that Britain should abide by "level playing field requirements" as a condition for EU market access.
For Britain, the expert noted that it would raise two issues, the scope of the requirements and the dispute settlement provisions. He said the latter would provide a role for the EU Court of Justice (EUCJ) to issue rulings on matters of interpretation of EU law.
The British side says these two requirements are unprecedented in any FTA outside the EU single market and simply would not be countenanced by any of the EU's non-member trading partners. But the EU argues that Britain is unique and therefore requires special arrangements.
"Solving this impasse is going to take a lot of creative thinking by negotiators on both sides,"said Breckenridge.
The crucial question, in his judgement, is how far in practice is Britain likely to deviate materially from EU provisions in a way that "undercuts" the EU.
Breckenridge suggested it would be better for both sides to address level playing field issues through a more collaborative structure.
"It is indeed how jurisdictions usually work together on matters like regulation and competition policy," he said.
