In October 2016 Labour requested clarification on the future of the DSM strategy by asking “Will the government seek access to the Digital Single Market (DSM) as part of any agreement on Britain’s future outside the European Union?
Progress and developments:
- The DSM was debated in the Commons in February 2015, March 2016, and June 2016, and in the Lords in October 2015.
- The Cameron Government published this microsite devoted to endorsing the DSM.
- In advance of the referendum, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills made no assessment of the cost to the UK of being unable to access the DSM.
- After the referendum the DSM was raised as a specific policy issue for the House of Commons’ attention (see page 147 of the research briefing).
- In July 2016 and then again in September the European Scrutiny Committee of the House of Commons examined the issues for DSM and Brexit, asking that Government ask these questions of all ensuing issues:
- The timescale envisaged for any draft legislation or other agreement to take effect;
- Whether the UK will continue to influence negotiations and vote in the Council on the proposals pending Brexit, or whether it will abstain;
- Whether it considers the particular proposal in question a policy priority and would wish to apply it regardless of the withdrawal of the UK from the EU (for example by retaining it or adopting it as domestic law or by means of a bilateral agreement with the EU);
- Whether the existence of different UK and EU rules would create an obstacle to trade or otherwise harm UK stakeholders; and
- How actively the Government will be consulting the Devolved Administrations on the UK’s post-Brexit position on the proposal.
- In November 2016 the House of Lords published an inquiry into online platforms and the DSM.
- In January 2017 the Culture, Media and Sport Committee took evidence on Brexit and the creative and tourism industries within the DSM.
- In March 2017 the European Scrutiny Committee devoted substantial time to the DSM strategy throughout the Brexit process in a report collating several months of reporting. As Parliamentary language goes, their review is fairly damning of the lack of clarity and attention being given to the strategy by the May government. They have requested a response by 9 May.
- The report indicates that until the UK leaves the EU, “the Government will continue to play a proactive role in DSM negotiations and votes, using its influence to push for an open, flexible digital market.” That being said, the notion that an actor committed to withdrawing itself from a strategy can continue to carry a respected and influential voice within it is utterly delusional.
- The report further noted that the Government will provide quarterly updates to Parliament on progress of the DSM strategy.
- The ESC has requested that by 9 May,
“the Government provide the Committee with a case-by-case assessment of the extent to which, post-exit, the policy objectives of each of the different Digital Single Market proposals could be achieved solely through domestic legislation or would require some form of bilateral agreement with the EU. We accept the Government’s reluctance to provide information “about the nature of future agreements with the EU or on potential changes to domestic law following our EU exit”, but believe that it is appropriate for Parliament to seek clarification of which digital economy issues can be tackled domestically and which will require a bilateral agreement.”
In a wider sense, the Committee asked “what Digital Single Market initiatives could be achieved solely through domestic law, and which would necessitate a continuing bilateral agreement of one form or another.” This question, and all the absurdity of the scenarios it poses, is the pointless squandering of energy and resources which Brexit imposes on the digital and tech sectors in a nutshell.
- On 22 March the Committee examined the E-commerce package of the DSM as a whole, again drawing attention to the question of “which, post-exit, the policy objectives of each of the different Digital Single Market proposals could be achieved solely through domestic legislation or would require some form of bilateral agreement with the EU.”