Despite ‘profound misgivings’, GSD offers support for treaty if Gib holds exit trigger

Keith Azopardi, the Leader of the Opposition, told Parliament on Tuesday that the GSD will support a motion calling on the UK to enter the UK/EU treaty on Gibraltar, despite “profound misgivings” about some of its provisions.

Mr Azopardi made support for the treaty conditional on Gibraltar agreeing with the UK a formal agreement, known as a concordat, in which Gibraltar and its people “hold the triggers” to terminate the treaty if needed and can ensure Gibraltar’s voice is heard in the bodies that will oversee implementation of the agreement.

The Gibraltar Government shares the same position.

Mr Azopardi tabled an amendment to the motion agreed beforehand with the Chief Minister, who had planned to move a similar amendment but agreed the Leader of the Opposition should do it instead.

The amendment said the motion calling for UK ratification was conditional on first agreeing a concordat acknowledging Gibraltar’s constitutional responsibilities, the UK’s double-lock commitment, and that any powers under the treaty could only be exercised in line with the wishes and consent of the Government of Gibraltar.

Additionally, “…the people of Gibraltar should have the right to determine in referendum whether the agreement should be terminated in future.”

The amendment was approved unanimously by MPs on both sides of the House, and the debate continued into Tuesday evening on the motion as amended.

Despite indicating Opposition support for the motion, Mr Azopardi was very critical throughout his address of provisions in the treaty which he said meant “we nearly could not bring ourselves to do this”.

“While we see the benefits we also see high prices in exchange in terms of red lines crossed or basic economic uncertainties that can go badly wrong or powers conferred on Spain that can be abused or simple instability that can be created to our economy, way of life or political viability,” he said.

But he added that, so long as there were guarantees in the concordat that placed the performance of the treaty, its review and whether it endures “clearly” in the hands of the Government and people of Gibraltar, the Opposition would back the motion.

“If anything goes wrong, we should be the ones to press the eject button and we should ensure that no-one else takes decisions to which we do not consent,” he said.

Mr Azopardi said the Opposition had agonised over its position on the treaty.

But the conclusion was that the agreement had Government backing and would happen whatever the GSD decided, and it would be legally binding by the time of the next general election.

The party decided that “if there is to be a leap of faith, that leap of faith should not be in the direction of no deal”, and that it was better to “make the best” of a flawed agreement the GSD would have preferred not to enter in its present form, and which the Government negotiated without Opposition involvement.

“So ultimately if we, Gibraltar, have control of making it work, we are prepared to take that leap of faith as long as we have those further assurances and protections,” he said.

“And it is a leap of faith because of the imponderables and a leap of faith because the deal they have brought back to Gibraltar after so many years is the one, in part, they promised they would not.”

“In that basic sense they have failed people. Our task now is to salvage the future with new hope of a brighter future.”

Mr Azopardi reflected on Gibraltar’s vote for Remain in 2016 and its longstanding view of a future inextricably linked to the EU, even in the face of Spanish “hot and cold tactics” over decades of EU membership.

Gibraltar’s relationship with the EU now depends on a pragmatic arrangement “…that is safe and beneficial so that our political and economic viability is secured, so that we do not return to fragile insularism and an environment that is viable but solitary,” Mr Azopardi said.

“The future and our future is for a relationship with Europe, understanding and accepting where we are and who we are.”

“A Latin Mediterranean people in southern Europe with our separate identity, with our rights to self-determination, seeking to stay economically afloat, bucked by waves of global politics, trying to punch above its weight but stronger together than alone.”

CONCERNS

Mr Azopardi told Parliament that the UK/EU treaty on Gibraltar promised clear benefits for residents, including greater personal freedom to travel in Europe without visas or passport stamps.

He said improved border mobility could also help key parts of Gibraltar’s economy to develop and, potentially, prosper, if there was genuinely free flow at the frontier.

But Mr Azopardi warned that these gains would come in exchange for controls, powers and information-sharing arrangements that could compromise Gibraltar’s safety, economic viability and future, with uncertain results.

The agreement had to be weighed against the prospect of a no deal and full Schengen controls that could “easily be abused” by Spain.

“If we are to reflect on our understandable fear it is that, without a deal, Spain could not be trusted [not] to abuse her position and powers in a no deal scenario and seek to strangle our economy,” he said.

“Unfortunately, that same fear is precisely the nagging doubt that tarnishes perceptions of how Spain will also then use what she gains in this agreement and the potential for abuse in future.”

Mr Azopardi said the agreement would “radically” change Gibraltar’s economic model for trade in goods and argued the potential gains from personal mobility and freer trade would need to be weighed against what he described as “intrusive” political and economic mechanisms given to Spain, a country he said had historically exerted influence in a hostile manner.

“Spanish law enforcement agents will exercise powers and control within Gibraltar in a variety of ways,” he said.

“This is an abandonment by the Government of the clear negotiating red line it repeatedly referred to.”

“It is clear from the agreement that Spanish law enforcement agents will have boots on the ground in a number of guises.”

He also raised concerns about provisions in the treaty allowing cross-border hot pursuit and surveillance.

He acknowledged that these provisions were part of Schengen rules and that there have been bilaterial agreements entered into by other states to bring them into effect.

But in those cases, there was no sovereignty claim to the territory in which those powers would be exercised.

“There are no non-self-governing people with the right to self-determination who are seeking international recognition of that right before the United Nations caught in the middle of those situations and who will feel that their rights are being trampled on by armed officers symbolic of the state that claims that they have no rights of self-determination,” Mr Azopardi said.

Given Gibraltar was not becoming part of the Schengen area, the Opposition did not understand why it had not been possible to opt out from intrusive cross-border police powers.

“The history of engagement with Spain has shown us that they use incursions as the language of communicating and asserting old sovereignty so we are simply not confident about those features nor willing to endorse them,” he said.

“Much more time and effort needs to be invested by Spain to build up trust and confidence in Gibraltar before that can be deemed palatable.”

ECONOMY

Mr Azopardi said the Opposition had no analytical or forensic means of assessing the potential impact of the treaty’s economic and trade changes, or of its annexes, and criticised the Government for not sharing any economic analysis.

“We only have our own gut instinct of what no deal would represent but no information has been shared with us on statistical or economic analysis to help guide our own view, despite the fact that we have asked for it,” he said.

The Opposition was being asked to “vote blind on instinct and assumptions” without the benefit of statistical and economic analysis carried out by the Government.

Mr Azopardi said this left “a massive question mark” over the economics of trade in goods under a customs union with the EU, adding that some businesses would be adversely affected and that consultation and information-sharing with the business sector had been poor.

The Leader of the Opposition also warned of a significant ongoing administrative and compliance burden for Gibraltar.

‘UNCERTAIN CERTAINTY’

Mr Azopardi said the treaty did not deliver certainty because termination clauses, and the EU’s stated intention to place influence over termination in Spanish hands, could leave future governments planning on the basis that the treaty might be ended at short notice.

“It does not require too much imagination to understand the political mischief to which these clauses can be put in future by any future Spanish Government,” he said.

“We could be at the mercy of future political whims.”

And he added: “To have Spain as the watchdog gives us little comfort.”

“And so in this respect and the failure to deliver stability the jury is out on whether this aspect of the framework is sufficiently safe.”

REACTION

Mr Azopardi’s observations on “boots on the ground” drew an immediate reaction from the Chief Minister after he finished intervention.

Mr Picardo had earlier told Parliament that while the treaty allowed for joint police operations, only Gibraltar officers would be able to exercise executive powers.

Additionally, Spanish police officers would carry out their immigration duties only from within the shared facility known as the Schengen shack, which would span the border equidistantly.

“Let us not have a debate which leads anybody in this House on any side to vote in favour of a treaty which puts in anybody's mind Spanish boots on the ground and puts, as the Honourable Leader of the Opposition has said, the potential for armed Spanish police to be in Gibraltar and yet that someone should vote for it,” he said.

“Because the signal that would send, when we have spent five years saying that's not acceptable, the signal that would send to Spain is that there are people in this Parliament who are prepared to at least hold their noses and vote yes to that.”

“We are not permitting that. We would not permit that. That is not permitted under these arrangements. Let’s be clear about that.”

The Chief Minister rejected Mr Azopardi’s suggestion of a Government U-turn on this point, as did Sir Joe Bossano, who said that if Mr Azopardi’s analysis was correct, he should “vote against this”.

“If I had been sitting there where I spent 60 years and I thought we were having Spaniards armed with uniform inside the terminal, I would not vote for this and vote for the collapse of the economy that would happen instead,” he said.

“Better to have a collapse of an economy than a Spaniard with a gun inside our terminal.”

The debate was adjourned at 7.40pm and will continue on Wednesday at 9.30am.