RICHARD CORBETT CBE | Leader of the European Parliamentary Labour Party, until Brexit | Brexit Reset

Privileged Discussions is now Global Trade Deciphered, a sharper reflection of our focus on global trade and business. Same expert insights, new name. Global Trade Deciphered is a Privileged Discussions Productions podcast. Thanks for joining us!

Episode Description

Join host Justin Hayden Miller, a global trade lawyer, as he interviews Richard Corbett, former Leader of the European Parliamentary Labour Party and CBE recipient, on Brexit and the recent UK-EU Reset Summit. Recorded the morning after the summit on 21 May 2025, Corbett shares his insights on Brexit, its economic consequences, its trade and business impacts as well as the summit's outcomes. Key discussions include:

- Brexit’s Economic & Trade Impacts: Corbett reflects on the 2016 referendum, the flawed Remain campaign, and Brexit’s economic toll, with a 4-5% GDP loss and £40 billion in annual lost tax revenue, as per the OBR.

- UK-EU Reset Summit: The summit addressed trade barriers, security cooperation, and agriculture, but Corbett notes it’s a modest step, not fully resolving customs union and single market challenges.

- Trade Challenges: From red tape to rules of origin, businesses face ongoing hurdles, with limited summit relief for most sectors.

- Security & Geopolitics: Post-Brexit, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and US policy shifts under Trump highlight the need for UK-EU collaboration.

- Future Relations: Corbett sees the summit as a mindset shift, paving the way for deeper UK-EU ties, potentially rejoining the EU by 2033.

Corbett also discusses Margaret Thatcher’s European stance, the summit’s “reset” terminology, and possible future Labour representation in the European Parliament. A must-listen for insights into UK-EU relations and global trade dynamics.

Trade Policy 2025

Margaret Thatcher clips: © UK Parliamentary Recording Unit, All rights reserved

If you like the podcast, please subscribe so you don't miss any episodes and leave a rating. Also tell friends and colleagues about it so the podcast can grow.

*Follow Justin on X: @JustinHaydenM

or contact us by email at GlobalTradeDeciphered@gmail.com

Sign up to our newsletter. (We won't spam you and will remove your email on your request.) https://bit.ly/PrivilegedDiscussions

*Disclaimer: This podcast is simply for informational and entertainment purposes only and does not in way constitute legal, business, financial or other advice whatsoever. Should you require advice then please seek such from an appropriately qualified professional, explaining your specific circumstances.

Chapters

• 0:00 Introduction to Richard Corbett
• 2:13 Brexit Referendum Reflections
• 4:30 UK-EU Reset Summit Explained
• 6:00 Trading Barriers / Red Tape / Summit implications
• 19:34 Thatcher's European Vision
• 22:16 UK-EU Relations and Future Outlook
• 27:45 Closing Thoughts

Transcript

SPEAKER_01: 0:00

We have Richard Corbett in store for you today, former EU Labour leader on the subject of Brexit and the newly completed UK-EU reset summit. Talking about the United Kingdom's relations with the European Union, here's a taster.

SPEAKER_00: 0:16

Since Brexit, we've had the Russian invasion of Ukraine. We've had Donald Trump arrive at the White House, putting into question America's commitment to European security. Both the EU and the UK are in the same position. Welcome

SPEAKER_01: 0:35

to Privileged Discussions, offering fresh perspectives on current affairs shaping global trade. I'm Justin Hayden Miller, global trade lawyer and partner at a leading European law firm, decoding the latest global trends. Having studied PP at Oxford University, Richard Corbett was a European Member of Parliament for some 19 years in total, becoming leader of the European Parliamentary Labour Party from 2017. And in this role, he attended Labour Party shadow cabinet meetings. Richard, you were therefore the last Labour European leader and until the UK left the European Union in 2020. You were also awarded a CBE, one of the highest rankings of the British orders, for... European Parliamentary and Political Services. You even famously coined the term democratic deficit. Richard Corbett, welcome to Privileged Discussions. Good morning. Now, I know you're a very, very busy man, particularly following the recently concluded UK-EU Reset Summit. And given your current commitments, just to say that we're very, very grateful that you have the time to join us today to talk about Brexit and yesterday's summit in particular. The 24th of June 2016, the date of the result of the Brexit referendum was one of those where were you when moments. Where were you on the 24th of June 2016 when the Brexit referendum result was announced?

SPEAKER_00: 2:10

At the Count in Leeds in Yorkshire. And were you surprised by the result? No, I had been rather pessimistic. I thought it might go what I considered to be the wrong way, given the alignment of media and political forces and given the rather catastrophic Remain campaign, which was not very well organised. So I did fear that it might go that way.

SPEAKER_01: 2:34

And how did you feel when the result came out?

SPEAKER_00: 2:38

Totally deflated. I thought this was a wrong turn for Britain and the consequences would be far worse than many people expected. The Leave campaign, after all, painted a picture of Brexit, which bears no resemblance to what it subsequently turned out to be. They said it would save lots of money that would all go to the NHS. In fact, it's cost us a fortune. They said we'd have new free trade deals with countries across the planet to replace the deals we had via the EU as a member of the EU. On day one, those have actually proved rather tricky to negotiate, certainly to retain the benefits of the deals retained via the EU, negotiating with the clout, the leverage of the world's largest market, and now coming along just as Britain, saying, could we have the same, please? We sometimes manage to get the same, sometimes worse deals. They said we wouldn't lose any of our trade with Europe. We'd still have full access, unfettered access to the single market, which we'd essentially be part of, or at least some of them said that. None of this turned out to be true, of course. And I knew enough about the realities of Europe, the way it works, how our economy was intertwined with the rest of Europe, to know that we were heading for some pretty big problems.

SPEAKER_01: 3:54

You surely know quite a bit about the workings of the UK government, and that's why I find it so particularly interesting to have you on the podcast, because you can inform us from both sides of the fence. Moving on to today, some nine years later, can you believe it, the important UK EU The EU Reset Summit ended yesterday. Many of our listeners around the world might not be aware of the UK EU Reset Summit. Can you explain to us what it was and why it was so important?

SPEAKER_00: 4:25

Well, it's addressed some of the problems that have been created by Brexit and in particular the deal that the Boris Johnson government had hastily cobbled together with the EU at the end of the Brexit saga. And it's addressed a new issue or an issue that's suddenly become much much more important, the issue of security cooperation. To start with the latter, of course, since Brexit, we've had the Russian invasion of Ukraine. We've had Donald Trump arrive at the White House, putting into question America's commitment to European security. Both the EU and the UK are in the same position here. We need to work together. But on the economic aspects, rectifying some of the shortcomings of the Johnson deal and the problem created by Brexit. There, there is some important but modest steps forward. I mean, on trade, the UK will follow European standards. I won't cut its standards below that, as agreed that essentially European rules on agriculture, farming and fishery products. That means we will eliminate the need for form-filling veterinary certificates checks at borders, etc., which has disrupted trade in agriculture and in fishing ever since we left the European Union. It's a significant improvement for fishery products and for agriculture.

SPEAKER_01: 5:56

Do you think that the Reset Summit eradicates sufficient red tape? On the BBC Today programme yesterday, I heard Stefan Hoffmann, the managing director of Bosch, who said that their entity, Robert Bosch Ltd., Brexit had 50 import transactions per year. It now has 10,000. He said that you can imagine the red tape. They had to create a whole new department of people to handle the paperwork, spending time and money on non-value added admin. That's a real issue, isn't it? I mean, a lot of businesses were hoping that the Reset Summit would eradicate a lot of that red tape, and it will eradicate some of the red tape, notably in respect of agro agro-food. But for the majority of businesses, it's not actually going to affect their day-to-day operations trading with Europe.

SPEAKER_00: 6:52

By leaving the customs union, we created a customs border between us and the European Union. Even though we negotiated zero tariffs mutually, nonetheless, because your goods are entering the customs union under WTO rules, they have to be checked to verify their origin, the rules of origin, so that the EU is not finding that it's accepting a load of Japanese or Chinese products that have been routed via Britain. You still have to have a check. Even with zero tariffs, all British exports to the EU have to be checked, verified, forms filled in to prove what value added was in Britain or elsewhere, and so on. Huge amount of red tape, hold-ups, delays. You won't eliminate that unless you rejoin the customs union. Single market, different concept but similar. Having a single market meant that any product in any country can circulate without further ado across the rest of Europe because you've harmonized your rules on consumer protection, on labeling, on environmental standards, consumer protection rules, workplace rights, fair competition, state aids, so that competition is fair and according to the same rules across Europe. You don't need your product tested again to market it in each of the 27 other countries where you're selling it. If it's legal in Britain, it's legal across the rest of Europe. Leaving that system, having divergent rules, and gradually we will probably diverge unless we make an effort not to, that means that the EU and us, the other way around, have to be able to check products to check they conform to the rules. And that is another set of red tape bureaucracy. You won't eliminate that entirely unless you fully realign with single market rules. These were the two big downsides of Brexit and we're struggling to reverse some of that. This deal yesterday will in due course reduce some of the constraints and the costs and the hassle and the bureaucracy and the red tape, but it won't eliminate it entirely.

SPEAKER_01: 8:56

I understand that the Office for Budget Responsibility, the OBR, which is actually funded by the UK government, has considered that since 2016 Brexit will reduce UK imports and exports by 15%. The Bank of England in 2023 estimated a 4% medium-term GDP loss because of Brexit, a 4% productivity drop.

SPEAKER_00: 9:20

Remember the OBR, Office of Budgetary Responsibility, said that Brexit has cost the British economy between 4% and 5% of GDP. The economy is 4% to 5% smaller than it would otherwise have been because of Brexit. That translates into£40 billion Do you not agree, though, it is a

SPEAKER_01: 9:58

move in the right direction? And my own conclusion in respect of the reset negotiations is more a marking of a change of mindset. And whereas, let's be honest, the possibility in terms of military to the 150 billion scheme is very, very interesting. There are talks on energy in the European electricity market. There is meat in the will to make decisions, but it's the change of mindset which is remarkable in this setting and it paves the way for agreements of a much, much more substantial scale. Do you agree with that?

SPEAKER_00: 10:33

Yes, don't get me wrong. I think this is a step in the right direction and there's some tangible improvements there. I recognise that. What I'm saying is that those improvements at the moment are insufficient to change the dial economically. Yes, so there's no doubt it's a step in the right direction. But if we're really going to change the dial on that 4% to 5% of GDP and£40 billion a year lost tax revenue due to Brexit, it would need to go much,

SPEAKER_01: 11:02

much further. On the fishing element, I can remember a reported verbal spar between Boris Johnson and Carlo Calenda, the Italian and minister at the time, where when they were talking about access to the single market, Boris Johnson reportedly said to Carlo Calenda, you'll sell less Prosecco, to which Carlo Calenda replied, okay, you'll sell less fish and chips, but I'll sell less Prosecco in one country, but you won't be able to sell your fish and chips in 27 countries. It's very interesting that now, to an extent, Boris Johnson may be proved correct in the sense that The fish are now able to be exported to the 27 members of the European Union in principle without hindrance. But it also does illustrate, doesn't it, the difference in bargaining power to an extent that a single European country negotiating with the UK is talking about one country, but the UK when negotiating with the EU is talking to 27 countries.

SPEAKER_00: 12:06

Yeah, the EU as a single market, let's not forget, is the world's largest single market. That gives it clout in negotiations with the rest of the world, not just with Britain. So you're negotiating with a giant. It's not easy. That was one of the reasons why it was unwise to leave the European Union, but we're in that situation now. So that means that in such negotiations, you are starting off at a disadvantage. You have to do the best you can. Trump would probably say they hold the cards. the better cards. So you've got to play your hand very skillfully.

SPEAKER_01: 12:45

Or Trump would say to the UK, perhaps, you don't hold the cards, but you know, the

SPEAKER_00: 12:52

other side of the coin. There's an agreement to work together on carbon and electricity trading. So the electricity interconnectors across the North Sea and the English Channel, the trading of electricity to even out the intermittencies of different kinds of renewables. That's an important important development. Working together on police cooperation against international criminal gangs by sharing data. There'll be a couple of practical things like the e-gates at borders and at airports. British Passports, this will take some time to implement, but we'll get to the point where British Passports can use the e-gates and the shorter, therefore, EU queue instead of the lengthy and slower worldwide queue at airports in European countries.

SPEAKER_01: 13:40

When I looked at the job I did find a lot of the language relatively woolly. I mean, the common understanding document states, this common understanding between the EU and the UK sets out the conclusions of those explanatory talks. So there doesn't seem to be anything necessarily substantially concrete in what decided yesterday. And look at paragraph 12, the UK and the European Commission share the view that it is in the mutual interest to deepen our people to people ties, particularly for the younger generation. Paragraph 16, the UK and the EU will continue their exchanges on smooth border management, including the potential, potential to use e-gates, wait for it, where appropriate. It seems to me that this is an agreement to attempt to agree on things rather than anything finite.

SPEAKER_00: 14:39

It's a mixture on some things. We were ready to have specific commitments and other things. There's an agreement, yeah, let's do this, but the details still need to be worked out. Like on e-gates, there's a lot of practicalities and indeed individual member states will have to adapt their systems as well. So there's a way to go on that, but it sets the direction. We will work on this. We will work on that together for those things that need further details working out. So it's a variety of things in this package.

SPEAKER_01: 15:12

And I know you were hoping great things in respect of this summit. Do you think it went far enough? Do you think it was a good result?

SPEAKER_00: 15:22

If you say, do I think it went far enough, so that's it, full stop, job done? No, I think it's the start of a process. And I think there's a lot more that should be done. More particularly, the problem with Brexit from the unpalatable choices to make. These choices were never resolved by the May government which was split down the middle on it. You either distance yourself from the EU, you know, completely leave the single market, the customs union, make trade deals with countries across the rest of the world, tear up your ties with Europe, etc. But gain extra, supposedly extra freedoms to make trade deals in the rest of the world. But this comes at a huge economic cost, because most of our trade is with the Yeah. taker, as they say. Neither of these are actually good for Britain, but that choice had to be made. The Leave campaign in the referendum, some of them said, no, we want to distance ourselves from Europe. We're shackled to a corpse. We're going to go global. And others were saying, oh, no, we won't be leaving the single market. None of that will be threatened. We'll trade just as we did before. It was totally contradictory. The May government wrestled with that for years, was bitterly divided Johnson then took it and said, okay, we'll go out completely, we'll leave a single market, customs union, everything. And now the Labour government is having to wrestle a little bit with the very same issue. And it's trying to realign with the single market, at least in some fields, so as to attenuate the economic damage caused by us having left it.

SPEAKER_01: 17:50

Let me play you a clip of Margaret Thatcher from a speech that she gave in Parliament in 1990.

SPEAKER_02: 17:54

Yes, the Commission does want to increase its powers. Yes, it is a non-elected body and I do not want the Commission to increase its powers against its House. So, of course, we are differing. Of course, the Chairman or the President of the Commission, Mr Delors, said at press conference the other day that he wanted the European Parliament to be the democratic body of the community. He wanted the Commission to be the executive and And he wanted the Council of Ministers to be the Senate. No, no, no.

SPEAKER_01: 18:27

That was the infamous part of Margaret Thatcher's speech. But I'll also play you what she said next.

SPEAKER_02: 18:38

Perhaps the Labour Party would give all those things up easily. Perhaps they would agree to a single currency, to total abolition of the pound sterling. Perhaps being totally incompetent with monetary matters, they'd be only too delighted to hand over the full responsibility as they did to the IMF, to a central bank. The fact is they have no competence on money no competence on the economy, so yes, the Right Honourable Gentleman would be glad to hand it all over. But what is the point in trying to get elected to Parliament only to hand over your sterling and to hand over the powers of this House to Europe? Perhaps the Right Honourable Gentleman will understand his brief a little bit better next time.

SPEAKER_01: 19:32

Would Margaret Thatcher have taken the United Kingdom out of the European Union?

SPEAKER_00: 19:37

I don't think she would. I mean, look at another speech of hers, the famous Bruges speech, which everyone remembers because of its opposition to some aspects of what the European Union or European communities it was then might want to do. But she did very clearly say, and I'm quoting from memory here, Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of Europe. Our destiny is in Europe as a full part of it, of the community. So whatever her criticisms of the European community, European Union on particular points, she certainly did not envisage Britain being better off leaving it. She was one that wanted to fight her corner inside it.

SPEAKER_01: 20:32

In terms of the relationship between the UK and the EU, I can remember during the Brexit years, it was particularly, particularly difficult. And that's putting it mildly. But in recent years, relations between the UK and the EU, and with France in particular, very much improved. And thanks as well to the British ambassador to France, Menna Rawlings' effort on that. How do you actually see present EU UK relations. You know the parties pretty well on both sides. Well, the

SPEAKER_00: 21:08

cordiality of relations improved pretty soon after the Johnson government and Trust government, brief as it was, came to an end. It improved a little bit already under Sunak, but there's been a big change with the election of the Labour government that was not sort of riven by a large part of its party hating the the European Union, which was the case with the Conservatives. But that doesn't immediately translate into concrete agreements. That's why there's been nearly a year of preparatory talks and then negotiations to achieve what was achieved yesterday. But there's a lot more still to come. It takes time. And you refer to France having a much better relationship with the UK. Yes, but France still has its interests to defend as well. We've We've seen it on fishing. We've seen it on access to the European funding for armaments production in Europe because of the geopolitical situation we're now in. Should British firms be able to bid for that? France has been rather reticent. So there's nitty-gritty details of negotiations which still have to be done issue by issue by

SPEAKER_01: 22:25

issue. The summit was actually called the Reset Summit. And I noted that Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England, recently said that the UK now needs to rebuild Britain's trade relationship with the European Union. But the term reset, I found even more fascinating when President Trump recently referred to a total reset in its US-China trade deal, saying that the US negotiations with China, Ontario, were a total reset negotiated in a friendly but constructive manner. What do you understand by the term reset in these negotiations?

SPEAKER_00: 23:27

the actual word that has been chosen. I think reset is a reasonably good term to use for what is being attempted at the moment.

SPEAKER_01: 23:39

A number of the elements in principle agreed this week during the summit could have potentially been agreed years ago, however, at the time of the trade and cooperation agreement was being negotiated. No?

SPEAKER_00: 23:51

Johnson had, after all, agreed on the political declaration attached to the withdrawal where both sides set out how they envisaged their future relationship, that had already made provision for a security partnership and for Britain to still participate in the Erasmus student exchange programme and things like that, which Johnson then reneged on after he got his deal through the House of Commons. When it came to negotiating that, we only negotiated a trade and cooperation agreement, nothing on security, nothing on student exchange. nothing on police cooperation and so on. So the EU was pretty fed up with that bid and I think they welcome the reset in tone, in approach. Nonetheless, it remains a modest deal. It's cautious. Britain is not fully reintegrating the single market nor joining the customs union.

SPEAKER_01: 24:53

I actually see Brexit as being similar to a divorce and trade in a manner being the children. I see this summit to an extent as post-divorce, the parents getting together, things have calmed down and basically putting in place certain practicalities for a relationship together, separate, but nevertheless working in the interest of the children, working in the interest of trade. Do you agree with that analogy?

SPEAKER_00: 25:24

It's a nice analogy and sums up a little bit of where we are at this stage. It leaves open the question of other children. As it were, we've agreed to work together to look after some of those children, but there's quite a few others. It opens the question about whether there might be a reconciliation and a remarriage one

SPEAKER_01: 25:46

day. Well, you've extended the analogy much better than me. Well, I'd just like to thank you, Richard, for your time today. I know you're busy, so I'll let you go. Just one final Final question, however. You were the last European Parliamentary Labour Party leader at the European Parliament. Do you believe there'll ever be another one?

SPEAKER_00: 26:07

When Britain rejoins the European Union, if it does, but it may well do so eventually, we will be represented in the European Parliament. The Labour Party will, I should imagine, I hope, have some seats. And so, therefore, there will be another leader of the Labour Party in the European Parliament. Yes. You do believe that will happen one day? One day, because our common interests with our neighbours, the interdependence, whether we like it or not, whether there are issues we can only deal with effectively by acting together in certain fields, the cultural ties, the economic ties we have with the rest of Europe, they're not going to disappear. And it's in our long term interest to be part of a common system to manage our common interests.

SPEAKER_01: 26:56

And Can you give us a guesstimate or forecast of when you believe that might happen?

SPEAKER_00: 27:03

Well, I noticed that Professor Richard Bentall from Sheffield University has predicted, I think he said 2033, and he's put a bet on it, I think. So perhaps that's... Do you know what the odds are? I don't know what the odds

SPEAKER_01: 27:20

are, no. Okay, well, I'll look that up. Richard, I'm very, very grateful for your time thank you very much for joining the podcast. My pleasure. And if I didn't mention a legal caveat, then I wouldn't be worth tuppence as a lawyer. So here goes. The content of this podcast Thank you very much. Stay tuned for the next episode