In seems that the Norway plus proposal for Brexit is back, now called Common Market 2.0. To me, this appears to be a typical example of a bad compromise: Compared to remain, the main difference seems to be to exchange voting rights in the EU for being able to claim compliance with the Brexit referendum.

However, there does seem to be genuine support for this from several politicians, so I wonder whether there are any advantages I may have missed - maybe related to fishing, or nationalization of industries, etc?

  • 1
    Possible duplicate of What's Common Market 2.0 / Norway Plus? – Denis de Bernardy Apr 1 '19 at 16:22
  • 1
    FWIW, the impression I got so far is that it's substantially the same as being in the EU, including from a budget and ECJ and trade policy standpoint once things will play out (assuming, as I'd expect, the EU will only be happy with a Customs Union)... but without any representation or say on what goes on in the EU. That makes it rather terrible when compared to full membership, but indeed delivers on Brexit. – Denis de Bernardy Apr 1 '19 at 16:25
  • It seems that Brian's answer from the linked question does answer this one here - but actually not the other. – Arno Apr 1 '19 at 16:25
  • @DenisdeBernardy you asked to summarise the type of deal, whereas this question seems to ask more specifically about advantages from an EU point of view. As it is, I think the two questions can coexist. – JJ for Transparency and Monica Apr 1 '19 at 16:45
  • Common Market 2.0 abides by the referendum result literally but I imagine many Brexiters will think it doesn't abide by the result in spirit. – Lag Apr 4 '19 at 10:33

Quoting a Guardian quick guide from today's recap on what the Commons are going to vote on:

What is the common market 2.0/Norway-plus Brexit option?

This soft Brexit compromise has been championed as a plan B for leaving the European Union.

It is based on Norway’s relationship with the EU, which is outside the bloc and the customs union but inside the single market. Under the plan the UK would have to join Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland in the European Free Trade Association (Efta), which would then allow it to participate in the European Economic Area (EEA).

The ‘plus’ in this option refers to a temporary customs union with the EU, which would need to be negotiated to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland. This arrangement would remain in place until the EU and UK agreed a specific trade deal.

The option has the advantage of being as close to the EU as possible without full membership, and it would do away with the need for the problematic backstop for Northern Ireland. Like Norway, the UK would be outside the common fisheries and agriculture policies, and would not be subject to the European court of justice.

But it crosses a key red line for Brexiters by continuing freedom of movement, one of the preconditions of single market membership. It would also limit the UK's ability to negotiate its own trade deals while a new customs arrangement is under discussion. And it would require continued financial contributions to the EU without an influence inside the bloc, as the UK would no longer have MEPs or a seat on the European Council. It also isn't entirely clear that the UK would be welcomed into Efta.

It doesn't make clear what the customs arrangement would look like.

By contrast, Barnier was clear in the run up to May's deal in 2018, when the EU consistently rejected technological solutions, that the EU would only entertain a full Customs Union:

The only frictionless model for the future with the UK would be Norway plus, Norway being part of the Single Market plus a customs union.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Well, were those "technological solutions" at any time more than hand-waving and wishful thinking? – Deduplicator Apr 1 '19 at 22:01

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .