Independent readers have weighed in after reports that the EU wants to include a so-called “Farage clause” in any post-Brexit reset deal with the UK – a provision designed to protect Brussels if a future British government were to tear up the agreement.
The proposed clause, reportedly included in draft talks on a veterinary agreement that would cut red tape for UK food and drink exporters, would require Britain to pay compensation if it unilaterally withdrew.
Nigel Farage responded by saying he would simply “break” any such deal, insisting that no parliament can bind its successor.
But many readers pushed back strongly against that claim. Commenters repeatedly argued that while this principle applies to domestic legislation, international treaties are legally binding and governed by established rules.
Far from seeing the clause as punitive, many said it reflected standard international practice and was a rational response to years of Brexit-related instability in UK politics.
Others argued the EU was right to futureproof any deal against political volatility, particularly given the possibility of Reform UK entering government.
Here’s what you had to say:
No anchor to reality
As usual, Farage plays to the sycophants, but with no anchor to reality.
It is correct that a parliament cannot bind its successor in respect to legislation. Should Labour legislate to have closer ties to the EU, then a Farage government could repeal it.
But that is not the same as an international agreement. Farage would have to meet the terms of withdrawing from an agreement. If he didn’t, then the UK would be in breach – an extremely serious matter for a country to do so, not least because of the lack of trust it would create in executing any future agreements with the UK. There would be chaos.
So, while Farage huffs and puffs, the EU is entirely correct to introduce compensation clauses should the UK unilaterally withdraw and it can fully expect the UK to pay that compensation.
Yeravinalarf
A businessman who doesn’t understand contracts
For a supposed businessman, Farage seems to have little understanding of contracts, let alone international arrangements. Given how much he has helped to cost the UK already, people need to understand just how damaging he can be.
Like it or not, reducing the needless bureaucracy of trading with the EU can only be a good thing. Ask the farmers and fishermen who believed Farage the first time around!
Petetheterrible
Once bitten, twice shy
I don’t blame the EU for wanting to future-proof any deal. I’ve long thought that one of the difficulties for the rejoin movement would be that readmitting the UK would be risky for the EU as long as Brexit remains a party political issue. We won’t be able to move past Brexit until the Tories accept that it is a lost cause and Reform’s support fades.
Tanaquil2
A bitter divorce analogy
Maybe it is better for the EU itself to let us be as we were.
Let’s face it, we’re a country still not recognising the enormous damage we did to ourselves by leaving the EU. Half of us still blame the EU for us leaving. A bit like an angry husband leaving his wife and children, only to be left with a lifetime of regret, focused anger on the ex-spouse. Still not recognising the divorce when it comes to his selfish, assumed privileges. And even worse – she is better off without him.
Because this is frankly Farage’s story when it comes to the EU, as half the country contemplates making him prime minister.
A clever EU therefore indeed sets some standards and legal demands when it comes to such an ex-spouse. Because there is little love left. And the world has changed. With Russia and the US playing imperial games, it is best for the EU to recognise its own needs before inviting a potential British fifth column among its ranks.
Because let’s face it, it is not the European dream that drives British desires, but a desire for privileges once there but then taken away by the divorce – financial privileges, mainly. That is all. Not a heart for Europe, as Farage’s followers will claim – they are British!
Let it therefore be a cold piece of paper. Legal paper that leaves nothing to chance. In it, the penalties for non-compliance.
The last thing Europe needs is another British divorce.
Brad
A risky reset
Starmer and Labour should not ignore the fact that this government is deeply unpopular and will most likely be defeated at the next general election.
So far, it’s difficult to see any net benefit in any of the reset deals Starmer has agreed with Brussels.
For example, the Erasmus deal will cost the UK at least £570m per year and will likely benefit twice the number of EU students as it does British students.
Meanwhile, the UK’s replacement for Erasmus, the Turing scheme, is now well established, meaning even less demand for Erasmus from our own students. This scheme is considerably more cost-effective and has a much higher participation rate than Erasmus ever had. But Starmer just had to get his reset, didn’t he. I can hear the laughter in Brussels from here.
Ian Robinson
Who can blame them?
What a conundrum. The UK is desperate for any deals with the EU that will alleviate the financial mess, border controls, red tape and the rest caused by Brexit, as well as improving its economic prospects and hopefully alleviating some of the cost of living crisis, but it will certainly come at a price for both sides.
The EU, meanwhile, is, how shall we say, once bitten and twice shy. As setting up any deal will take months, if not a year or two, the EU is determined to protect itself against any changes – Farage or otherwise – in UK leadership that could result in the deal being abandoned and the EU picking up the bill for what would be considerable changes to reverse administrative and border infrastructure. Who can blame them?
Ambigirls
A mess the EU should avoid
More importantly, what this is saying is that Farage as PM is a real possibility. In relation to the EU, we have become a mess that they should not touch. We were always considered outsiders. I remember clearly, pre-Brexit, when they were coming out of voting for something or other and one of the MEPs said, “We are being blocked by the British yet again”. We were never a good fit.
Michael
Better safe than sorry
The EU is being cautious – very wise after all the upheavals and unpleasantness the UK has caused. Although I think Reform is beginning to unravel and will probably have disappeared by the next general election, like Ukip and the Brexit Party, it is better to be safe than sorry.
HASTINGSPIER
Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.
Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up
Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment, click here
