Select committee inquiry

Brexit and the implications for UK business: Automotive inquiry

Closed

Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee · Opened 20 July 2017 · Closed 14 September 2017

14 recommendations · 1 conclusion
Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗

What the inquiry looked at

“This is the automotive strand of the Committee's Brexit and the implications for UK business inquiry . Overall, no-one has argued there are advantages to be gained from Brexit for the automotive industry for the foreseeable future. We urge the Government to acknowledge this and to pursue an exercise in damage limitation in the negotiations. This involves retaining as close as possible a relationship with the existing EU regulatory and trading framework in order to give volume car manufacturing a realistic chance of surviving in this country. Terms of reference: Brexit and the implications for UK business”

The committee's words, from the inquiry page on parliament.uk ↗.

What it found

In the committee's words, from the summary of 5th Report - The impact of Brexit on the automotive sector ↗

This report is intended to inform public and parliamentary debate and to influence the Government’s objectives as it begins phase 2 of the negotiations on leaving the European Union.

The automotive sector is one of the most productive and successful in the UK, employing, directly or indirectly, over 900,000 people and generating almost one tenth of the country’s manufacturing output. The automotive sector in Europe is heavily integrated, with highly complex and efficient supply chains relying on the friction-free transfer of components across the continent. The sector is highly competitive, with high volumes and low profit margins. UK manufacturing plants have in recent years proved successful in winning competitions for the construction of cars for the European market, where the majority of our exports go. The single market and customs union has been instrumental in forming the regulatory and trading environment which has produced a diverse market with competitive prices for UK consumers.

We conclude that leaving the EU without a deal would undoubtedly be hugely damaging to the UK automotive sector, more so than to other European countries. It would involve the introduction of a 10 per cent tariff on cars and, because of the competitive nature of the business, the shift of volume manufacturing to countries remaining in the EU.

Because mass-produced cars in the UK are less than a quarter “British” for trade deal purposes, we recommend that the Government should prioritise securing the roll-over of existing EU Free Trade Agreements with the necessary amendments to allow UK content to count as EU for rules of origin purposes. New trade deals will also need to accommodate the largely European content of cars built in the UK.

Non-tariff barriers, in the form of border delays and increased bureaucracy, will also affect UK competitiveness. We recommend that the Government should, in its negotiations, place a high premium on securing frictionless trade for the automotive sector.

On the key issue of the future regulatory regime, we have not identified any potential benefits from divergence from the EU, only costs. We recommend that the Government seeks in the negotiations to preserve existing arrangements for the certification of vehicles throughout the EU, whether as part of a Mutual Recognition Agreement or some alternative arrangement. In order to maximise our trade opportunities with our biggest trading partner, and to provide certainty to global manufacturers, the Government should also aim to retain regulatory alignment with the EU regulatory framework for the short to medium term.

We looked hard at potential opportunities arising from Brexit. We found that it is unrealistic to expect an expansion of trade overseas to outweigh the loss of trade to Europe arising from a hard Brexit. Furthermore, any new bilateral trade deals secured by the Government are unlikely to lead directly to a significant increase in investment and jobs in the UK automotive sector. Trade deals are helpful, but not a pre-requisite for improving exports in the automotive sector. Retaining good access to the single market is more important than securing the freedom to secure new trade deals with third countries.

What the government said

The government responded on 15 May 2018.

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response.

The government welcomes the Committee's report and sets out its approach to the automotive sector, including a seat-of-policy aim of a bold economic partnership with the EU while continuing to plan for all scenarios.

  • On tariffs and a possible 'no deal', the government is seeking "the greatest possible tariff- and barrier-free trade" with the EU, but "we continue to plan for all scenarios", with increased confidence that a 'no deal' scenario in March 2019 is "significantly less likely".
  • On regulatory alignment and type approval, market access will continue on current terms during the implementation period, but the status of VCA issued EC approvals afterwards "remains subject to future relationship negotiations".
  • On the CJEU, the government says it will end the court's direct jurisdiction in the UK, but will "engage constructively" on enforcement and dispute resolution; during the implementation period the CJEU's role will continue.
  • On supply chains and R&D, it cites £16 million committed under the Automotive Sector Deal towards an ambition of 50% UK content by 2022, and says it "will continue to keep these policies under review" as the future relationship with the EU becomes clearer.

How the inquiry ran

Each dot is a dated item listed on this page, from the inquiry's opening on 20 July 2017 to 15 May 2018.

  1. Oral evidence 14 Nov 2017
  2. Report 1 Mar 2018
  3. Government response 15 May 2018

What it recommended 14 recommendations · 1 conclusion

1The Government must seek to ensure that it is able to preserve and build upon...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The Government must seek to ensure that it is able to preserve and build upon the success of the UK automotive sector as it enters negotiations on future trading arrangements with the EU.
2It is difficult to see how it would make economic sense for multinational volume manufacturers—the...
Recommended (the committee's words)
It is difficult to see how it would make economic sense for multinational volume manufacturers—the bulk of the UK automotive sector—to base production in the UK in a no deal or WTO tariff scenario. The shift of manufacturing to countries within the customs union and single market would be inevitable; the cost in UK jobs could be in the hundreds of thousands, and inward investment in the hundreds of millions. For the automotive sector, no deal would undoubtedly be hugely damaging. The Government should not seriously contemplate this outcome.
3Whilst a “no deal” scenario would certainly be damaging to the automotive sector in many...
Recommended (the committee's words)
Whilst a “no deal” scenario would certainly be damaging to the automotive sector in many EU countries, especially Germany, the impact on the UK automotive sector would be far greater than that on each of the remaining EU Member States. We recommend that the Government should not contemplate this outcome in its approach to negotiations and that it should prioritise securing a customs arrangement which removes the risks of tariffs being imposed on vehicles produced in the UK.
4Longer journey times, with added risk of delay, plus extra customs bureaucracy would make the...
Recommended (the committee's words)
Longer journey times, with added risk of delay, plus extra customs bureaucracy would make the UK automotive sector less efficient and act as a disincentive to international companies looking for a base to manufacture cars for the European market. In a highly competitive market, small margins can make a significant impact on investment decisions. If the Government wishes to uphold the UK’s reputation as a good location for volume vehicle manufacturing, consistent with its Industrial Strategy, we recommend that it should in its negotiations on withdrawal place a high premium on securing frictionless trade for the automotive sector.
5There is no argument for a separate set of UK standards: the UK market is...
Concluded (the committee's words)
There is no argument for a separate set of UK standards: the UK market is not big enough to warrant the additional costs to manufacturers of meeting another set of standards, nor does it make sense for the UK to require vehicles manufactured in the single market to require an additional approval by the VCA in the UK.
6In a global automotive market dominated by large multinationals, regulatory convergence is a desirable trend.
Recommended (the committee's words)
In a global automotive market dominated by large multinationals, regulatory convergence is a desirable trend. It brings down costs, promotes consistent, high standards and therefore benefits consumers. No company wants to make cars to The impact of Brexit on the automotive sector 29 different sets of standards. It makes commercial sense for the UK to remain aligned with standards in the single market, which provides the majority of our trade. The establishment of a new regime for the approval of UK-manufactured vehicles would increase costs and bureaucracy for UK-based companies, and make the UK less attractive as a development and manufacturing base for vehicles. It is not a viable option and we recommend that the Government rule it out.
7We support the Government’s commitment to maintaining existing employment protections and high standards of environmental...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We support the Government’s commitment to maintaining existing employment protections and high standards of environmental protection, for example by pursuing low carbon options for vehicles. We also welcome its preference for seeking similar arrangements on type approvals to those currently in place. Given this, and the continued need of UK-based manufacturers to have access to European markets, we have not identified any potential benefits from regulatory divergence from the EU, whether in terms of competitiveness or improved access to new overseas markets. There are only costs. We recommend that the Government, in negotiations, prioritise the continuation of existing arrangements for the Vehicle Certification Agency to authorise type approvals for the European single market, whether as part of a Mutual Recognition Agreement or some alternative arrangement. As a negotiating objective, the Government should seek to ensure that it is able to retain regulatory alignment with the EU regulatory framework for the short to medium term.
8We recommend that the Government should adopt a pragmatic approach in relation to any potential...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government should adopt a pragmatic approach in relation to any potential continuing ECJ role in the automotive sector.
9We welcome the ambition of the Government to continue to work with existing European regulatory...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We welcome the ambition of the Government to continue to work with existing European regulatory agencies, which for the automotive sector is the best way to exert influence at a global level. We recommend that, in the negotiations on the withdrawal agreement, the Government seeks to support the interests of the UK automotive industry by maintaining a close association with the EU expert groups that develop regulatory standards.
10The UK cannot expect an expansion of trade overseas to outweigh the loss of trade...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The UK cannot expect an expansion of trade overseas to outweigh the loss of trade to Europe arising from a hard Brexit. As most volume manufacturers in the UK are global and foreign-owned, any new bilateral trade deals secured by the Government are unlikely to lead directly to a significant increase in investment and jobs in the UK automotive sector In its negotiations, we recommend that the Government prioritises continued friction-free access to the single market in automotives over securing the freedom to secure new trade deals with third countries.
11We welcome the Government plans to improve the UK content of supply chains, but this...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We welcome the Government plans to improve the UK content of supply chains, but this is not going to deliver what is needed in the short to medium term. The Government should therefore prepare the ground to negotiate new trade deals which allow for a lower than usual threshold for domestic content in vehicles or ideally to be able to continue to include EU content for FTAs with other countries in the future. In negotiating the roll-over of existing EU FTAs to the UK, the Government should seek to secure the necessary amendments to allow UK content to count as EU content 30 The impact of Brexit on the automotive sector for rules of origin purposes in the automotive sector. Without such provisions, the business case for locating volume manufacturing of vehicles for export in the UK would be flimsy at best and non-existent at worst.
12Whatever choice the Government makes regarding the future UK-EU relationship, it should make it quickly.
Recommended (the committee's words)
Whatever choice the Government makes regarding the future UK-EU relationship, it should make it quickly. The wait-and-see approach to the future direction of regulation may be a convenient compromise for the short term, but it would not provide the certainty needed by the sector and would undoubtedly lead to a shift in jobs and investment from the UK to the rest of the EU in the period up to exit. We recommend that the Government clarifies its intention at the earliest opportunity to seek continued regulatory alignment with the EU in the automotive sector.
13In determining its negotiating objectives on freedom of movement and subsequent immigration policy, the Government...
Recommended (the committee's words)
In determining its negotiating objectives on freedom of movement and subsequent immigration policy, the Government should prioritise ensuring that our key manufacturing sectors such as automotive retain sufficient access to essential skills to ensure that gaps can be filled adequately with UK workers.
14We welcome the investment the Government is making in Research and Development activities, particularly in...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We welcome the investment the Government is making in Research and Development activities, particularly in low-carbon technologies, and we recommend that the Government reviews its investment strategy once our future relationship with the EU becomes clearer, with a view to enhancing existing incentives to locate automotive R&D in the UK.
15There are no advantages to be gained from Brexit for the automotive industry for the...
Recommended (the committee's words)
There are no advantages to be gained from Brexit for the automotive industry for the foreseeable future. The negotiations are an exercise in damage limitation. The Government should acknowledge this and be pragmatic in seeking for the sector as close as possible a relationship with the existing EU regulatory and trading framework to provide for volume car making—one of our great manufacturing success stories—a hopeful future.

Evidence

Oral evidence sessions 1