Brexit weekly briefing: battle lines harden after article 50 ruling | | | While the EU is not terribly impressed by the UK's handling of Brexit, there is plenty of division at home over the supreme court decision
| | |  Demonstrators call for a hard Brexit the day before a supreme court decision on article 50. Photograph: Hayoung Jeon/EPA
| | | Jon Henley and Jessica Elgot
| | | Welcome to the Guardian's weekly Brexit briefing, a summary of developments as Britain edges towards the EU exit door. If you'd like to receive it as a weekly early-morning email, please sign up here. Producing the Guardian's independent, in-depth journalism takes a lot of time and money. We do it because we believe our perspective matters – and it might well be your perspective, too. If you value our Brexit coverage, become a Guardian Supporter and help make our future more secure. Thank you.
The big picture As expected, the supreme court has now ruled that the government must obtain the consent of parliament before it can trigger article 50, beginning the formal two-year process of Britain's departure from the EU. The ramifications of this decision – in particular, whether it will allow MPs to obstruct or alter Theresa May's Brexit plans – will be much chewed over in the days to come, and we'll look at them in next week's briefing.
But it's fair to say quite a bit of the heat has been taken out of the article 50 debate by the prime minister's announcement in her big Brexit speech last week that she would put the final Brexit deal before parliament. | | | Britain is pinning its hopes on a deal with Donald Trump's US administration. Photograph: Ron Sachs/EPA
| | | Apart from that – and the warning that Britain would walk way from the negotiating table if it did not get what it wanted from the EU, because "no deal is better than a bad deal" – the speech was mostly a confirmation of previous hints. So: bold, global Britain will leave the single market and the customs union – but keep the best of both through a new comprehensive free trade agreement, sector-by-sector deals and a bespoke customs pact allowing frictionless trade. At the same time, it will end the free movement of EU citizens, withdraw from the jurisdiction of the European court of justice, and stop paying "vast amounts" into the EU budget. That, at least, is the intention. What the EU27 will actually allow, of course, is another question. European leaders, officials and media lined up to say Brexit would hurt Britain a lot more than the bloc, and that May was (to put it politely) asking rather a lot. Not waiting to see whether or not she'll get it, on Monday the prime minister unveiled a major new industrial strategy for Britain, promising special deals for five key sectors plus a a new system of technical education and better infrastructure. And at the end of this week she will be in New York, meeting the newly inaugurated president, Donald Trump, to discuss (among other things) a promised quick UK-US trade deal. (Australia is also interested in talking trade). As the Centre for European Reform's John Springford pointed out in an interesting Twitter thread, however, Britain's trade with the US amounts to about a third of that with the EU (while Australia represents a great deal less). | | | The view from Europe Not terribly impressed, it would be fair to say. The EU commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, said the upcoming Brexit talks would be "very, very, very difficult", while the Dutch prime minister, Mark Rutte, said the UK would pay a "huge price" for prioritising immigration curbs over single market membership. Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament's Brexit negotiator, said May was dreaming if she thought she could get everything she was asking for: It is an illusion to suggest the UK will be permitted to leave the EU but then be free to opt back into the best parts of the European project, for example by asking for zero tariffs from the single market without accepting the obligations that come with it ... I hope that British people will see from the perspective of an EU taxpayer, how unreasonable this would be. Pretty much everyone (including Germany's finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble) said the government should think twice about turning the UK into a low-tax rival off the European coast, which both May and the chancellor, Philip Hammond, have said could happen if Britain does not get what it wants. Germany denied it had rebuffed an attempt by May to seal an early deal on citizens' rights post-Brexit, saying the EU27 were unanimous in the view that the subject could only be discussed once Britain had triggered article 50. Meanwhile, back in Westminster With May's hard Brexit plans confirmed, Labour MPs who had vowed to respect the referendum result agonised about backing an article 50 bill which would set that strategy in motion – especially one that might lead to the UK becoming a tax haven.
| | | Tim Farron (left) has accused Jeremy Corbyn's Labour party of giving up the fight. Photograph: PA
| | | Frontbenchers including the shadow business secretary, Clive Lewis, were among those in turmoil. Jeremy Corbyn suggested MPs would be whipped to vote in favour, but several in strong remain constituencies, including shadow ministers Tulip Siddiq and Catherine West in north London, said they would vote against anyway. The division will not help the party's prospects in two key byelections in Labour seats, Copeland and Stoke on Trent, both of which recorded strong leave votes in the referendum. Ukip's leader, Paul Nuttall, has confirmed he will stand in Stoke. On the opposite side of the fence, the Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, accused Labour of "lamely giving up" while Britain "drives off a cliff" towards Brexit, saying future generations would not forgive the party for failing to stand up to May's plans. Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, hit back at Farron, accusing him of "fanning the flames of division" and of having "absolutely nothing to say to the 52%" who voted to leave the EU. You should also know Read these: In the Guardian, Lib̩ration's veteran Brussels correspondent, Jean Quatremer, delivered a bracing broadside against May's Brexit wishlist and taught those who didn't know it the French equivalent of "to have one's cake and eat it": When someone wants the impossible, in French we say they want 'the butter, the money from the butter, and the dairymaid's smile'. This is the Brexit Theresa May wants: 'hard' only for the other 27 states but 'soft' for Britain Рbecause she wants to keep all the benefits of EU membership and concede nothing in return ... It's not going to happen. In the New Statesman, Matt Qvortrup said the content of May's speech showed she had given in to German chancellor Angela Merkel even before the Brexit negotiations had begun: The British prime minister blinked first when she presented her plan for Brexit. After months of repeating the tautological mantra that 'Brexit means Brexit', she finally specified her position ... By accepting that the 'UK will be outside' and that there can be 'no halfway house', Theresa May has essentially accepted Angela Merkel's ultimatum even before the Brexit negotiations have formally started. In Vanity Fair, Henry Porter lamented the end of the British dream: Unlike the election of Donald Trump, Brexit and the damage it has caused to the UK and Europe look almost irreversible ... Brexit London will lose its status as both a great financial hub and a centre of creativity in the arts and sciences, and that those with talent and highly valued skills will eventually leave a country that does not have the wit to acquiesce in its own survival. Tweet of the week The Economist on May's ambitions, and free trade realities: | | | | |
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment