Azopardi urges ‘realism and political honesty’ in treaty debate

Keith Azopardi, the Leader of the Opposition, said the political agreement for a UK/EU treaty on Gibraltar was “absolutely” a positive development, but remained cautious on making a final assessment until the detail of the treaty text is publicly known.

Mr Azopardi was speaking to the Chronicle a week after the agreement was announced following a high-level meeting in Brussels on June 11 between the UK, EU, Spain and Gibraltar.

The GSD Leader called for a “politically honest” debate rooted in realism that acknowledged how and why negotiating positions had evolved during the process, noting that some the aspects revealed in recent days differed from the baselines in the New Year’s Eve agreement.

And despite the cautious stance, he shared common ground with the Gibraltar Government in stressing that any treaty emerging from the political agreement must be weighed against the reality of no deal, adding “the status quo is not on offer”.

“Whatever is put on the table needs to be judged against a no deal,” he said.

“That is the point that we have to arrive at.”

“I would hope that in the next few months [the treaty text] does emerge so that we can then make that final judgment.”

The GSD has long said that it supports a safe and beneficial deal on Gibraltar’s future relationship with the bloc.

But while the agreement in Brussels is a positive development, the Opposition will reserve its judgement until it is able to read the detail of the treaty text once it is finalised in the autumn.

Mr Azopardi said the political agreement was a necessary step to concluding a binding legal agreement.

“But it’s obvious that there's still some work to be done [and] the Chief Minister acknowledged that himself,” he said.

“So it’s a cautious welcome, but let's have a look at the treaty text.”

In the days following the initial announcement, details of the agreement have filtered through during multiple media interviews with the Chief Minister and other ministers. The Gibraltar Government has also set up an email address to answer questions from the public.

Mr Azopardi and the GSD remain guarded over what the Leader of the Opposition described as “a very heavy sell of aspects of the agreement”.

He noted too that aspects of the deal were being explained in different ways in Gibraltar and Spain.

“We are guarded in our reaction to that because, as the Opposition, we have not seen a single paragraph of the text,” Mr Azopardi told the Chronicle.

“And therefore, until we see the text, we’re going to suspend our judgment on whether it’s safe and beneficial, and indeed suspend our judgment as to the complete veracity of the way that things are being explained, because we also see that things are being explained in a slightly different way, or in a markedly different way in some respects.”

“We are hopeful that the way that it is being explained in Gibraltar is more accurate but again, we are going to suspend our judgment as to whether it is safe and beneficial until we see the treaty text.”

Mr Azopardi said it was important to have “a realistic debate” on such a seismic change for Gibraltar, adding that the Chief Minister “blows a bit hot and cold on realism”.

“There are times, for example, that he talks as he did in Parliament about the ‘manure show’, but then he’s also very keen to describe this as a fantastic agreement, a historic moment, and so on and so forth,” he said.

Mr Azopardi said it was important to acknowledge that there were aspects of the deal announced in Brussels that were not in the New Year’s Eve agreement, or that were not envisaged in the way they were finally agreed.

“I think it's important that when we have the debate, when the text emerges, that we are politically honest with people and say things have moved on and these are the reasons they’ve moved on,” he said.

“And it may be that on balance, people still take the view that it is acceptable.”

“But let's not hoodwink people when we're making the judgment of [whether a treaty is] safe and beneficial.”

“I think it's important to be honest with people and the real issue is this: We are now outside the EU in a way that we did not want to be.”

“We have been put in a place - by Brexiteers - that we've had to negotiate our unique agreement.”

“It's not a good position to be in, and in that process there has obviously been evolution of negotiating positions.”

Mr Azopardi cited as an example the fact that the agreement no longer envisages a four-year period during which Frontex officers would conduct Schengen immigration checks.

While the Gibraltar Government has explained that negotiators were able to agree a solution acceptable to all parties that obviated the need for Frontex, Mr Azopardi maintained his position that the detail of the text was key to his final analysis.

“Let me be very clear, I’m not going to judge this agreement on that [Frontex] issue alone or on the fact there are apparently now some kind of arrangements that impact on the award of the tender to manage the airport, something that again was not mentioned in the New Year’s Eve agreement,” he said.

“All I’m saying is, let’s be politically honest about the way this has happened and the way that this has evolved.”

“And at the end, once you've explained everything and once the text is known, it may be that people still think this is a price worth paying.”

“But [for now] we suspend our judgment.”

That was a position that was “generally shared and understood” by GSD MPs and the party executive, which held a scheduled meeting on June 11 just as the deal was announced in Brussels.

And while Mr Azopardi remained neutral in his assessment of the political agreement announced in Brussels on June 11, he shared a similar view to the Gibraltar Government as to the factors that must be borne in mind when the time comes to scrutinise the treaty text.

“I'm not saying this treaty is a good deal, I'm not saying it's a bad deal,” he said.

“But we need a conclusion to this process so that we can then compare what is put on the table with no deal.”

“And I think that's the focus that people need to finally come to grips with, which is that the status quo is not on offer because what we have had for the last few years is a false environment.”

“And that's important for people to understand.”

“The reality is that this is not a normal border situation that we have now. If we had a no deal situation, we wouldn't have the border that we have now.”

A hard border would put Gibraltar under more social, economic and political pressure, Mr Azopardi added.

But any solution would have drawbacks alongside benefits.

“The realism is to understand that none of these are perfect scenarios, that we're faced with a very difficult and indeed seminal challenge as a community that threatens the pillars of what we have built for decades and that we are at a crossroads, that we can survive whatever route we take but that one route is more difficult than the other,” Mr Azopardi said.

“And that this is not a fantastic deal, because you don't win football matches 10 nil. That's not real.”

Mr Azopardi acknowledged that Mr Picardo had recognised all of this publicly “in his more reflective moments” but said the Chief Minister also “gives in far too much” to the tendency to present everything “as if it were fantastic, unprecedented”.

“The reality is we were put in a position we didn't want to be in and we've had to negotiate as people who were outside the club but wanted to use the club facilities,” he said.

During the interview, Mr Azopardi also referred to the debate in recent days over the potential impact on local retail and wholesale businesses of a transaction tax envisaged in the treaty.

While the Government has pointed to new opportunities in the European market, Mr Azopardi said businesses themselves had voiced scepticism as to whether this would be beneficial for all.

He acknowledged however that any negative impact on specific sectors must be weighed against the treaty’s overall impact on Gibraltar’s economic prospects going forward.

“Some businesses are Gibraltar facing and some businesses are going to suffer much more than others,” Mr Azopardi said.

“I think there will be some businesses that will suffer tremendously to the point that it is an existential threat for those people now.”

“So everyone's going to look at this agreement from their own perspective, and for those people whose businesses will be put on the cliff edge, this is not an agreement that works.”

“But you have to see things in the round, clearly.”

Mr Azopardi, as he has done on numerous occasions in the past, said the GSD had offered its assistance to negotiate Gibraltar’s post-Brexit future alongside the Government, much as happened during the constitutional reform process.

“The reality is that the Government went at it alone,” he said, adding the GSD had not been able to influence the agreement.

“It's a matter for them how they wish to negotiate, but I have not seen a single word of this treaty text.”

“We are going to make our judgment as to whether this is safe and beneficial, but let's be clear, if there are flaws in this agreement, it's their agreement alone.”

“And I take the view that Gibraltar would probably have had a better agreement if everyone had worked on a common ground basis, on a cross-party basis, to achieve it.”

“That's not being arrogant. It's arrogant to say the reverse, that you're always going to do a better job alone.”