Brexit News & Discussion v6: EU Leaders Go to Battle Over Plugging Post-Brexit Budget Gap

[MayhemMonkey]

 

[Arkain2K]

EU Parliament adopts tough Brexit 'red lines'
Lachlan CARMICHAEL | 5 April 2017

The European Parliament on Wednesday overwhelmingly adopted tough "red lines" for negotiations over a Brexit deal, on which EU lawmakers will have the final say in two years' time.

The parliament largely followed EU President Donald Tusk's draft guidelines issued last week after British Prime Minister Theresa May formally triggered the historic Brexit process.

But they omitted any mention of the flashpoint issue of Gibraltar, unlike Tusk's guidelines which said that Spain should have the final say over whether any eventual trade deal applies to the British outcrop.

The Strasbourg-based parliament is the first EU institution to formalise its stance on the Brexit talks, passing the resolution by 516 votes for, 133 against and 50 abstentions.

"You will set the tone for Britain," the bloc's Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier told MEPs just before the vote.

- Parliament veto -

The text insists that Britain must first make "substantial progress" on divorce terms -- the rights of three million EU citizens living in Britain, the exit bill and the fate of the border in Northern Ireland -- before striking a trade deal with the union.

It says that MEPs are prepared to accept a transitional deal to ease the effect of Britain's exit from the EU's single market in 2019, but that it should be limited to three years.

Barnier said the message on phased negotiations should be that "the sooner we agree the principles of an orderly withdrawal, the sooner we can prepare our future relations in trade."

The EU has rejected May's call in her letter for talks on the terms of the divorce and on a future trade deal to be held in parallel during the two years of negotiations ahead of Britain's exit in March 2019.

European Parliament President Antonio Tajani called for MEPs to be fully consulted on the negotiations, given that they must ratify the eventual agreement.

"I would like to recall that any possible final deal must be cleared by this house," he said.

The remaining 27 EU countries will rubberstamp Tusk's guidelines at a summit on April 29, paving the way for Barnier to begin formal negotiations with Britain at the end of May.

Barnier wants a draft deal by October 2018 so that national leaders will have time to approve it before a ratification by the European Parliament, most likely in early 2019.

The resolution won the backing of all the major groups in the parliament, from the conservative European People's Party (EPP), the biggest bloc, to the Socialists and Democrats alliance, as well as the ALDE liberals, the Greens and the leftist parliamentary group GUE.

Parliament's Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt said it was "key to have a united European Parliament together with the EU negotiator and the European Council," the forum for member states.

The EPP's leader, Manfred Weber of Germany, told the assembly that "we want a fair and constructive atmosphere," but warned that Britain cannot get a better deal by leaving the bloc, instead of staying inside.

- 'Mafia, gangsters' -

The Brexit talks have already got off to a difficult start after London was alarmed by a clause in the Tusk guidelines saying Spain had to be consulted on any post-Brexit trade deal that affects Gibraltar, a British territory since 1713.

But no reference to Gibraltar was contained in the adopted resolution.

Besides Gibraltar, Brexit champion Nigel Farage compared the EU to the "mafia" that was taking the EU "hostage" by demanding a multibillion-euro exit bill.

Several MEPs jeered Farage over the comments, and Tajani, who is from Italy, called his mafia remarks "unacceptable." In response Farage fired back: "I do understand national sensitivities. I will change it to gangsters."

But Verhofstadt, a former Belgian premier, predicted that a future generation of young Britons would seek to rejoin the European fold.

That generation will "see Brexit for what it really is, a catfight in the (British) Conservative party that got out of hand."

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/eu-parliament-adopts-tough-brexit-152810608.html

 

[Arkain2K]

EU Parliament’s chief negotiator brands Brexit as a 'catfight in Conservative party that got out of hand'
Guy Verhofstadt said future generations will see Brexit as a 'waste of energy, stupidity'
By Joe Watts | April 5, 2017

​

The European Parliament’s lead negotiator has branded Brexit as a “catfight in Conservative party that got out of hand”.

Guy Verhofstadt said that in the future, younger generations will call Brexit out as a “waste of energy, stupidity” and attempt to bring the UK back into Europe.

Liberal Belgian politician Mr Verhofstadt, leading for the parliament as Brexit talks begin, spoke in the institution’s chamber ahead of a vote to formalise its negotiating position.​

He said: “I am also sure that, one day or another, there will be a young man or woman who will try again, who will lead Britain into the European family once again.

“A young generation that will see Brexit for what it really is – a catfight in the Conservative party that got out of hand, a loss of time, a waste of energy, stupidity.”

Lamenting that “perhaps it was never meant to be”, he said Europeans should “never be blamed for having tried” to make a relationship with Britain work.

He then said: “Let’s not forget, Britain entered the union as the ‘sick man of Europe’ and thanks to the single market came out of the other side.

“Europe made Britain also punch above its weight in terms of geopolitics, as in the heydays of the British empire.

“And we from our side must pay tribute to Britain’s immense contributions – a staunch, unmatched defender of free markets and civil liberties. Thank you for that.

“As a liberal, I tell you, I will miss that.”

His speech came alongside interventions form Commission President Jean Claude Juncker and chief negotiator Michel Barnier who warned of the consequences of reaching no deal with the UK.

Meanwhile, Nigel Farage was booed in the chamber when he complained that the EU is acting like the mafia and said demands that the UK pay a ‘divorce bill’ are a kin to holding the country to “ransom”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...atfight-conservative-party-tory-a7667476.html

 

[Arkain2K]

German President Frank-Walter Steinmeie:
U.K politicians who backed Brexit are 'irresponsible'
Ben Kentish | April 5, 2017

Germany’s president has condemned British politicians who back Brexit, saying they are “irresponsible”, “bitter” and will be unable to deliver their promise to “take back control”.

In a provocative speech delivered at the European Parliament, Frank-Walter Steinmeier said Britain would not be able to “make its voice heard” once it leaves the EU.

“It is wrong to say, in my conviction, that in this world a single European country standing alone and without the EU can make its voice heard or assert its economic interests”, he said. “Quite to the contrary.”

“If we, as Europe, don’t become fully fledged partners on the world stage we will all individually become the plaything of other powers and I suspect that is what Michael Heseltine, a Briton of all people, was thinking when he recently said in an interview that Brexit was the biggest loss of sovereignty he can recollect, and he may be right.”

Lord Heseltine, a Conservative peer, held several cabinet posts under Margaret Thatcher and was sacked as a government adviser last month after voting against the Government on Brexit.

Mr Steinmeier also criticised Eurosceptics’ claim that leaving the EU will allow Britain to “take back control”.

“Populists paint the world black and white and turn fears into political capital”, he said. “Take back control is a strong slogan that we hear everywhere. Nationalists are unable to deliver it and if it can be delivered at all, it is something we can only do together.

“It is irresponsible to lead people to believe that, in a world that is becoming more complex, the answers are becoming more simple.”

People who wanted Britain to leave the EU were “bitter”, he added.

Mr Steinmeier, a former German foreign secretary, was speaking hours after another senior European official had warned that UK ministers had not fully grasped the consequences of Brexit.

“Some of the politicians in London have not understood what leaving the European Union means” said Manfred Weber, who leads the largest group in the European Parliament. “It means being alone.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...u-german-president-frank-walter-a7667181.html

 

[Arkain2K]

EU chief Jean-Claude Juncker warns 'everybody will lose' if Brussels and UK don't secure a Brexit deal
Chief negotiator Michel Barnier added EU wants success with, and ‘not against’, the United Kingdom

Jean-Claude Juncker has warned that “everybody will lose” if Brussels and the UK do not secure a Brexit deal.

The President of the European Commission said a failure to reach an agreement would be the “worst possible outcome” for people on both sides of the Channel.

He spoke alongside Brussels chief negotiator Michel Barnier in the European Parliament, as the body debated ahead of a vote that will make it the first EU institution to formalise its negotiating position for Brexit talks.

But his comments also come after Chancellor Philip Hammond warned there are people on both sides of negotiations that want to scupper any chance of a deal.

Mr Juncker said: “No deal means no winners. Everybody will lose.

“That’s why we will proceed with negotiations with the UK to try to reduce the damage caused to people, to trade, and to societies.

“Will we miss the UK? Yes, but without naivety.”

Mr Barnier, who Mr Juncker appointed as lead negotiator in head-to-head talks with the UK’s Brexit Secretary David Davis, spoke in the debate to warn that disunity among EU members “could lead to no deal”.

He added: “The no-deal scenario is not the scenario we’re looking for. We’re looking for success not against the United Kingdom, but with the United Kingdom.”

Mr Hammond warned while on a trip to India that there would almost definitely be “tensions” as Theresa May tries to push forward with a plan to secure the “best possible deal” for the UK as it leaves the EU.

He said: “There are definitely some people on both sides who do not want a deal, they do not want to see Britain continuing to collaborate in what the Prime Minister described in a letter as a deep and special partnership with the European Union.”

Mr Hammond went on: “I’m clear the objective from the UK side is to reach a deal and what I’m hearing from my counterparts in Europe is that is their objective.

“Those people who are hoping for no deal, I say we have to disprove their thinking by showing there is clear goodwill on the Europe side to reach a deal.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-brussels-uk-european-commision-a7667411.html

 

[Arkain2K]

Theresa May and Donald Tusk agree to 'lower tensions' over Gibraltar
The Prime Minister met the President of the European Council at Downing Street
Joe Watts | Thursday 6 April 2017

Theresa May and Donald Tusk have agreed to try and “lower tensions” over Gibraltar in Brexit talks following the recent furor over the issue.

The Prime Minister made clear however that there would be “no negotiation on the sovereignty” of the British territory without the consent of its population.

The two leaders met to discuss pending Brexit negotiations amid concerns that Gibraltar could become a flash-point in an already difficult situation.

Their meeting at Downing Street comes after former Tory leader Michael Howard suggested the UK would go to war over Gibraltar in the same way it had over the Falklands.

Sources at both No 10 and in Brussels said two hours of talks between Ms May and European Council President Mr Tusk on Thursday were friendly.

On Gibraltar, an EU source added: “They agreed to stay in regular contact throughout the Brexit process to keep a constructive approach and seek to lower tensions that may arise, also when talks on some issues like Gibraltar inevitably will become difficult.”

A Downing Street official went on: “The PM also made clear that on the subject of Gibraltar, the UK’s position had not changed, the UK would seek the best possible deal for Gibraltar as the UK exits the EU and there would be no negotiation on the sovereignty of Gibraltar without the consent of its people.”

The issue of Gibraltar arose after Mr Tusk’s draft negotiating guidelines for the EU effectively said Spain would be given a veto over any deal that would affect the status of Gibraltar, a territory it has desired to take back from the UK for many years.

Tensions became further strained following Lord Howard's unexpected intervention, in which he said: "Thirty-five years ago this week, another woman prime minister sent a taskforce halfway across the world to defend the freedom of another small group of British people against another Spanish-speaking country, and I’m absolutely certain that our current Prime Minister will show the same resolve in standing by the people of Gibraltar.”

While later ruling out any sort of military action over Gibraltar, Ms May still refused to condemn Lord Howard's comments.

At their meeting on Thursday Ms May and Mr Tusk talked further over the draft guidelines set out after the UK triggered Article 50, which will now be cemented into a Brexit negotiating mandate for Michel Barnier at a meeting of the European Council on 29 April.

The Number 10 official added: “The PM reiterated the UK’s desire to ensure a deep and special partnership with the European Union following its exit, and noted the constructive approach set out by the Council in its draft guidelines published last week.”

The European Parliament became the first EU institution to formalise its guidelines for Brexit talks on Wednesday, in which it said guaranteeing the rights EU and British citizens living abroad should be a priority.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-negotiations-council-president-a7670571.html

 

[Arkain2K]

 

[JDragon]

In the wake of Brexit, the first Sharia-conformist Fintech startup gets regulatory approval to conduct banking business in Britain.

https://www.finextra.com/newsarticle/30410/first-islamic-fintech-gets-uk-regulators-approval

 

[Arkain2K]

City of London explores ways to access EU market after Brexit
by: Jonathan Ford | April 10, 2017

The City of London is exploring alternative ways to access EU markets after Brexit, should a political deal prove elusive or only apply to certain financial sectors.

Lawyers are combing through existing agreements that could allow UK-based firms to strike trading deals on a firm-by-firm basis or even for individual lines of business.

Jonathan Herbst, the global head of financial services at the law firm Norton Rose Fulbright, said companies could volunteer to be subject to EU rules in order to gain market access.

“Think of it a bit like a manufacturer from a third country who wants to sell goods in EU markets,” said Mr Herbst. “If you want in, then you have to sign up voluntarily to meet all the packaging, labelling and product safety standards.”

So-called voluntarism already exists on a piecemeal basis in financial markets.

Britain, for instance, has what is known as the “Overseas Persons Exclusion” which allows individual foreign firms to gain unregulated access to UK markets so long as they are not physically present in the country, abide by certain rules and deal only with institutional clients.

There are also wider sectoral arrangements sanctified at a regulatory level, such as the US Foreign Boards of Trade rules through which the derivatives regulator, the CFTC, permits foreign exchanges to do business with American investors.

To opt in, participating exchanges must consent to US legal jurisdiction for their American activities. They must also be certified to be in good standing by their home country regulators.

After Brexit, UK-based firms could strike access deals directly with EU countries, which would be cemented by agreements between regulators over standards. Mr Herbst said a key advantage was that this would bypass the need for a political deal, or new primary legislation.

“As the negotiations get under way in Brussels we have to examine all options,” said David Buik, a market commentator at the brokerage Panmure Gordon. “This is something we should definitely look at as part of that debate.”

Many of the building blocks are already in place that would make it possible for UK based firms to bind themselves to follow EU standards even if no industry or sector-wide deal was in place, Mr Herbst argued.

Regulators already collaborate extensively across borders, from simple agreements that recognise each other’s standards in specific areas to formal “colleges”, where they share certain supervisory powers.

Some EU countries, such as Ireland, have legislation that gives non-EU firms the ability to deal with local customers similar to the UK’s Overseas Person Exemption. Germany’s Bundestag is presently considering a regime that would give bank traders access to its markets.

Voluntarism is seen by some as potentially a more flexible alternative to “equivalence” as a way to mimic the access conferred by EU passports.

City lobbyists have been pushing equivalence — a legal concept embedded in some but not all EU financial legislation — because it allows firms from markets deemed to have equivalent regulatory standards to trade freely with each others’ customers under their home country’s laws and regulations.

Voluntarism may not deliver the same uniform type of access, not least because many deals might be struck on a country-by-country basis with member state regulators. But it also has advantages.

One is that it may require less political heavy lifting than a formal EU-wide equivalence declaration, thus making it easier to deliver swiftly in practice. Another is that it could be less vulnerable to sudden revocation. EU law specifies than equivalence can be withdrawn at 30 days’ notice.

Mr Herbst points out that it would also get round the UK’s concern about regulatory sovereignty because it would not require the whole rule book to be deemed “equivalent” to that of Brussels after Brexit. “So you can have your own rules designed for domestic markets and those who want to trade primarily with the rest of the world,” he said.

But there are questions about how widely applicable voluntarism might be as a solution. One issue is enforcement. “Voluntarism is an interesting idea and worth exploring,” says Barney Reynolds, head of financial institutions at Shearman & Sterling. “But the idea of signing a contract to submit to EU jurisdiction does raise questions about how EU rules would actually be enforced if there were a breach.”

Mr Herbst conceded that much depends on regulators being willing to be part of a “coalition of the willing”. The system only works if a watchdog in one country is prepared to oblige the firms it regulates to obey another watchdog’s rules. Nicolas Véron of the Bruegel Institute sees the potential for clashes between EU regulators and national authorities.

“You could have different national authorities taking different stances on access which could cause a big fuss with the European Securities and Markets Authority,” he said. “Similar issues arise when it comes to the power of recognition — is the signing of deals with the UK a matter for national authorities or is it something that should happen at the EU level?” he said.

As Britain embarks on withdrawal negotiations, many bankers continue to pin their hopes on obtaining some form of deal over equivalence that will allow them to continue serving EU clients primarily out of London.

But Mr Herbst thinks that banks need to look beyond all-or-nothing answers. “There may not be an all-singing, all-dancing solution,” he said. “But a surprising amount could be achievable through small voluntary steps.”

https://www.ft.com/content/be84f5f6-193c-11e7-a53d-df09f373be87

 

[Arkain2K]

UK should re-run Brexit referendum, general secretary of Germany's SPD says
The party's leader Martin Schulz is running Angela Merkel close in recent polls
By Jon Stone | Thursday 13 April 2017

Katarina Barley alongside party leader Martin Schulz in Berlin
​

Britain should hold a second European Union referendum now that it is clear what Theresa May's plans for Brexit are, the general secretary of the German SPD has said.

SPD leader Martin Schulz could potentially be Germany's next Chancellor, with polls showing him roughly neck-and-neck with centre-right CDU leader Angela Merkel for the September 2017 contest.

Now Katarina Barley, Mr Schulz's top colleague, has called for the Brexit referendum to be re-run.

“When the referendum was held, nobody really knew what it would be about — not the British people, not even the political class,” Ms Barley told the Politico website.

“A lot of people wrongfully thought that Britain could get a deal like Switzerland or Norway without the inconveniences, without accepting the rulings of the European Court of Justice, without free movement of labor. Now they know that this isn’t the case … and they should be asked [to vote again] on this.”

Mr Schulz himself, a former president of the European Parliament, has said he will defend the interests of European citizens during the Brexit process.

Since the start of March this year most pollsters have showen both the CDU and centre-left SPD with just over 30 per cent each, with neither of the two parties opening up a commanding lead.

Whoever wins Germany's 2017 federal elections will get to exercise a powerful qualified majority vote on the final Brexit deal at European Council.

The victor will also likely be able to vote any future separate trade deal with Britain.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...nedum-spd-germany-martin-schulz-a7682706.html

 

[JDragon]

UK should re-run Brexit referendum, general secretary of Germany's SPD says
The party's leader Martin Schulz is running Angela Merkel close in recent polls
By Jon Stone | Thursday 13 April 2017

Katarina Barley alongside party leader Martin Schulz in Berlin
​

Britain should hold a second European Union referendum now that it is clear what Theresa May's plans for Brexit are, the general secretary of the German SPD has said.

SPD leader Martin Schulz could potentially be Germany's next Chancellor, with polls showing him roughly neck-and-neck with centre-right CDU leader Angela Merkel for the September 2017 contest.

Now Katarina Barley, Mr Schulz's top colleague, has called for the Brexit referendum to be re-run.

“When the referendum was held, nobody really knew what it would be about — not the British people, not even the political class,” Ms Barley told the Politico website.

“A lot of people wrongfully thought that Britain could get a deal like Switzerland or Norway without the inconveniences, without accepting the rulings of the European Court of Justice, without free movement of labor. Now they know that this isn’t the case … and they should be asked [to vote again] on this.”

Mr Schulz himself, a former president of the European Parliament, has said he will defend the interests of European citizens during the Brexit process.

Since the start of March this year most pollsters have showen both the CDU and centre-left SPD with just over 30 per cent each, with neither of the two parties opening up a commanding lead.

Whoever wins Germany's 2017 federal elections will get to exercise a powerful qualified majority vote on the final Brexit deal at European Council.

The victor will also likely be able to vote any future separate trade deal with Britain.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...nedum-spd-germany-martin-schulz-a7682706.html

Never even heard of her.

But I think she does have a point. Would Britons still vote the way they did after facing reality?

 

[Arkain2K]

Liam Fox Fights EU Attempts to Limit U.K. Trade Powers Before Brexit
by Tim Ross | April 13, 2017

The U.K. is battling to stop the European Union blocking Prime Minister Theresa May’s drive to forge new trade partnerships as the country prepares for Brexit.

International Trade Secretary Liam Fox is challenging the attempt to lock the U.K. out of the bloc’s ongoing trade talks. He’s also opposing efforts to limit Britain’s power to negotiate commercial accords with other countries before Britain leaves the EU.

EU officials are reportedly pushing for the U.K. to be cut out of sensitive discussions because they are worried confidential information on trade deals would help May’s team negotiate favorable terms with the same countries after Brexit. At the same time, Britain has been warned it can’t line up its own free-trade agreements with non-EU nations until it has formally left the bloc in 2019.

In an interview with Bloomberg, Fox hit back on both points. He insisted he has “certainly got greater freedom” to hold trade talks with other countries now May has formally triggered the Brexit process. And he declared Britain cannot be kept out of the EU’s internal trade discussions while still a member of the bloc.

“We are a full partner in the EU until we leave and intend to play our full role,” Fox said. “Clearly when the EU is discussing the U.K., that’s a matter for the 27 and not the U.K. but we intend to exercise our full legal rights as one of the 28 members until such time as we stop being a member.”

Flash Point

The question of third-country trade deals is a new flash point, with the EU and U.K. already at odds over the structure of the upcoming talks and the size of any exit bill. Such rows have sparked fears that the U.K. and EU won’t reach an amicable divorce settlement and agree new terms for future trade in the tight, two-year window available for talks.

The European Commission warned last month there would need to be “a discussion about the treatment of sensitive information in the context of certain trade negotiations, which the U.K. would continue to have access to while it remained a full member,” the Financial Times reported.

EU officials are concerned that by participating in conversations about talks with countries such as Australia, the U.K. might glean confidential information it can use itself when it tries to win post-Brexit accords.

In the interview, Fox said Britain wanted its own deal with Australia and would not give up its right to see the EU’s private trade plans. “We think that the U.K. is a key liberalizing influence, and certainly from discussions I’ve had other countries welcome us continuing to play that role right until we leave the EU itself,” he said.

Now that Article 50 has been triggered, and Britain is clearly on the legal exit path, there is no reason not to start talks with other countries about future trade agreements, he added.
“We’ve certainly got greater freedom now that we are in the process of leaving,” he said.

“Obviously we can’t sign any agreements while we are still members legally of the European Union but we can certainly begin to talk about what we want.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...empts-to-limit-u-k-trade-powers-before-brexit

 

[JDragon]

Liam Fox Fights EU Attempts to Limit U.K. Trade Powers Before Brexit
by Tim Ross | April 13, 2017

The U.K. is battling to stop the European Union blocking Prime Minister Theresa May’s drive to forge new trade partnerships as the country prepares for Brexit.

International Trade Secretary Liam Fox is challenging the attempt to lock the U.K. out of the bloc’s ongoing trade talks. He’s also opposing efforts to limit Britain’s power to negotiate commercial accords with other countries before Britain leaves the EU.

EU officials are reportedly pushing for the U.K. to be cut out of sensitive discussions because they are worried confidential information on trade deals would help May’s team negotiate favorable terms with the same countries after Brexit. At the same time, Britain has been warned it can’t line up its own free-trade agreements with non-EU nations until it has formally left the bloc in 2019.

In an interview with Bloomberg, Fox hit back on both points. He insisted he has “certainly got greater freedom” to hold trade talks with other countries now May has formally triggered the Brexit process. And he declared Britain cannot be kept out of the EU’s internal trade discussions while still a member of the bloc.

“We are a full partner in the EU until we leave and intend to play our full role,” Fox said. “Clearly when the EU is discussing the U.K., that’s a matter for the 27 and not the U.K. but we intend to exercise our full legal rights as one of the 28 members until such time as we stop being a member.”

Flash Point

The question of third-country trade deals is a new flash point, with the EU and U.K. already at odds over the structure of the upcoming talks and the size of any exit bill. Such rows have sparked fears that the U.K. and EU won’t reach an amicable divorce settlement and agree new terms for future trade in the tight, two-year window available for talks.

The European Commission warned last month there would need to be “a discussion about the treatment of sensitive information in the context of certain trade negotiations, which the U.K. would continue to have access to while it remained a full member,” the Financial Times reported.

EU officials are concerned that by participating in conversations about talks with countries such as Australia, the U.K. might glean confidential information it can use itself when it tries to win post-Brexit accords.

In the interview, Fox said Britain wanted its own deal with Australia and would not give up its right to see the EU’s private trade plans. “We think that the U.K. is a key liberalizing influence, and certainly from discussions I’ve had other countries welcome us continuing to play that role right until we leave the EU itself,” he said.

Now that Article 50 has been triggered, and Britain is clearly on the legal exit path, there is no reason not to start talks with other countries about future trade agreements, he added.
“We’ve certainly got greater freedom now that we are in the process of leaving,” he said.

“Obviously we can’t sign any agreements while we are still members legally of the European Union but we can certainly begin to talk about what we want.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...empts-to-limit-u-k-trade-powers-before-brexit

Legally, it is obvious that Fox is just plain wrong.

I understand that the UK would rather not be bound by rules of a bloc it will not be part of in the future, but how can they expect goodwill and cooperation when they openly defy those rules?

Personally I feel the UK may attempt to walk away from Brexit, if just temporarily for tactical reasons to buy time. There is so much bad blood, so much money in play and so many things that need to be clarified that the two years are not even close to enough.

 

[Arkain2K]

Legally, it is obvious that Fox is just plain wrong.

I understand that the UK would rather not be bound by rules of a bloc it will not be part of in the future, but how can they expect goodwill and cooperation when they openly defy those rules?

What good will? LOLOL.

I'm okay with Brussels prohibiting parallel bilateral trade talks between the U.K and individuals E.U members, for that's clearly against the rules.

On the other hand, the E.U trying to push the U.K out of the on-going trade talks between the E.U and other countries (Australia, et al) is also clearly illegal, since the E.U themselves constantly insists that the U.K is still a member of the E.U and must abide by their rules, including paying billion of dollars in contributions.

And it especially says a lot about the E.U's definition of "mutually-beneficial outcome" when they attempts to prevent the U.K to even entertain preliminary talks with countries outside the E.U. at the same time as Brexit negotiation.

Every now and then, we have an E.U leader taking the "good cop" role and and give a nice speech on the podium about how they should have civility in Brexit negotiation, but it's clear as day to me (or anyone else from outside looking in, for that matter) that there are politicians who want this to be as mutually-destructive as possible, and are doing their best to pull this towards a Lose-Lose situation.

If Europe want this to be an ugly all-out war in which there's no winner, which I think a lot of the E.U leaders legitimately do, for "punishment" or "deterrent" or whatever they choose to call it, everyone should just come out and throw down the gauntlets instead of all these tiresome cloaks and daggers routines, while trotting next to the war trenches on their high horses pretending that they're the ones with good wills towards a brand new and beautiful U.K-E.U relationship.

 

[Arkain2K]

A two-speed post-Brexit Europe is best avoided
EU member states should focus on striking a free-trade deal with Britain
By Hans-Werner Sinn - April 16, 2017https://www.ft.com/stream/authorsId/Q0ItMDAxNzE3NA==-QXV0aG9ycw==

Brexit is a problem not only for Britain but for the EU as well. The British economy is as big as that of the 20 smallest member states put together. So it is as if 20 of 28 countries were leaving the bloc at the same time.

Brexit destroys the European equilibrium, rendering otiose minority rights in the European Council: the Lisbon treaty specifies that a blocking minority needs 35 per cent of the EU population. Together with the UK, the so-called “Deutschmark bloc” (Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and Finland) has a population of exactly 35 per cent. These are all countries in favour of free trade.

At the same time, the countries surrounding the Mediterranean, which have traditionally been more reliant on protectionism and state intervention, have a population of 36 per cent, which is also a blocking minority. The Lisbon balance has been destroyed because the first block shrinks after Brexit to a population share of 25 per cent, while the Mediterranean countries extend theirs to 42 per cent. They may now seek to turn Europe into a trade fortress.

The erosion of minority rights requires new negotiations of the existing EU treaty, if not a notice of termination pending a change of contract by the “free traders” in the EU. This new negotiation will not be feasible once the negotiations with the UK have been completed — they have to be started simultaneously. They should re-organise both the internal relationships within the EU and the relationship with the UK. Once the latter has left, there is no chance to reform the EU.

Member states should stop promoting the idea of a “two-speed” Europe, which is reflected in the divisions between the eurozone, the Schengen area and the EU. Pursuing this idea further will antagonise Poland, as well as Denmark, Sweden, the Czech Republic and Hungary. Responding to Brexit by giving the eurozone more state-like structures is to separate the north and east and draw a dividing line through Mitteleuropa, while making the northern eurozone states paymasters of a new Latin currency union.

The fact that France wants this two-speed approach is not surprising. The division of central Europe has been a central tenet of French policy since Richelieu. For example, Emmanuel Macron, the independent centrist candidate for the French presidency, proposes a joint European budget, eurobonds, common deposit insurance and common unemployment insurance. The northern eurozone countries should resist these policies and opt for a generous free-trade agreement with Britain instead.

The advantage of free trade is particularly strong when labour cannot move. The EU insists that free trade can only be granted in conjunction with free movement of people, but this is economic nonsense. When labour cannot move, the gains from trade are particularly high. Without free movement of people, the differences in wages between countries remain greater, and the higher these differences, the larger those in the relative prices of goods. This is the basic source of gains from trade.

There are two models for a federation. The first is characterised by strong minority rights and voluntary co-operation. Decisions have to be beneficial for at least some member states and do no harm to any others. This model is stable because everybody wants to be part of it. The second is based on majority decisions without strong minority protection. In this model, decisions that benefit a majority but harm a minority will be taken even if the majority gains less than the minority loses. This model creates losers who would rather leave. To prevent exits there is a need for punishment, but the fear of punishment itself creates animosity and instability.

Whatever happens, the UK will continue to be the EU’s neighbour and it is advisable to treat one’s neighbours well.

https://www.ft.com/content/e0051162-1ee0-11e7-b7d3-163f5a7f229c

 

[Arkain2K]

Danish MEP roasts EU for "behaving like nursery children" with Brexit punishment threats
By Lizzie Stromme | Apr 17, 2017

Anders Vistisen, of the Danish People’s Party, hammered Brussels for jeopardising Britain’s special relationship with the rest of Europe with its hard-line stance ahead of exit talks with Theresa May.

The Danish MEP added all the underlying issues which sparked the UK’s departure from the bloc were still looming and Brexit was merely a symptom of a larger issue in the union.

Speaking exclusively to Express.co.uk, Mr Vistisen said: “It’s like this immature kindergarten at times in the European Parliament.

“They’ve had almost a year to adjust to the situation, that Britain is leaving the European Union but it seems like it’s still week two after the Brexit referendum.

“We hear all these things about Britain cannot have a good deal and we are united against Britain, it’s wrong from one end to the other.

“All the underlying issues that persuaded the British population to leave, are still there.”

Taking a swipe at Brussels leaders, Mr Vistisen added: “We still have problems with freedom of movement, we still have problems with a union that’s not functioning, we still have problems with all these federalist tendencies that exist in the European Union.

“We still have all these underlying issues. Brexit is the symptom, not the illness of the European Union crisis.”

The Danish MEP also took the EU to task, as he said the only thing the eurocrats would achieve if it tried to slap the UK with a bad deal, is to pave the way for other members to leave.

He said: “And all this talk about thinking you can discourage other people from leaving by punishing a country which chose to leave, I think will only give a greater resolve to people who already think the European Union is a failed project.

“That sentiment is why I think it is very difficult to take the European Parliament seriously in these negotiations if they don’t get a bit more realistic about their role and a bit more constructive in thinking about how do we shape a good future relationship with Britain.

“We are spending way too much time talking about the Brexit negotiations, they are important but the most important thing is what about the future? How are we shaping a reality where we can still be good friends, neighbours, allies?”

Mr Vistisen also urged the bloc to see sense and reconsider using Brexit as an excuse to push for a common EU army as he said it would be a “bad signal” to send to Europe’s allies.

He added: “Especially on the security front, I think we are jeopardising a very special relationship with the Britain.

“Britain is the biggest security guarantor in Europe and Britain and America have been the transatlantic link in Nato. All these ideas of a common European army is to a certain extent a very bad reaction to Brexit.”

The Danish MEP said there was a growing concern leaders in Brussels could scupper negotiations with Mrs May to further its own agenda.

“From central Europe to Scandinavia - we like our… good relations with Britain in regards to security,” he said.

“We like our good relations with the Americans so we are very afraid of a European army being pushed in the aftermaths of Brexit.

“I think it would be a very damaging situation when we have a very unstable situation in the middle east, a very aggressive Russia on our frontiers.

“It is a very bad signal to send to our Nato allies, and more importantly our allies in the UK, Canada and US, but also countries such as Norway who are in Nato but outside the EU.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...dergarten-kids-Brexit-threats-Anders-Vistisen

 

[Arkain2K]

What Does the U.K. Snap Election Mean for Brexit?
by Alex Morales and Robert Hutton | April 18, 2017

​

Prime Minister Theresa May’s call for a June 8 election reverses her opposition to an early vote. The last election in 2015 took place a year before the U.K. voted in a referendum to leave the European Union. As May prepares for two years of Brexit talks, her Conservative Party enjoys the widest public-opinion margin in three decades over the main opposition Labour Party. That gives her a chance to cement her position and widen her majority.

1. Why is May calling an election now?
While May has consistently ruled out an early vote since becoming prime minister without an election last year, her majority of just 17 lawmakers in the House of Commons makes her position in Parliament precarious. As things stand, just a few fellow Conservative "Tories," be they "Brexiteers" or ardent "remainers," could tie her hands. With her popularity on the rise and the economy performing better than expected, some polls putting the Tories 20 points clear of a divided Labour. An early election could swell the ranks of Conservative lawmakers who have May’s back before the economic data sours.

2. What does this mean for Brexit?
If May consolidates her majority, she will have a strong personal mandate to push through her own brand of Brexit. So far, she has a pushed for a hard exit, which would take Britain out of the EU’s single market and customs union and give it control over immigration and freedom from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. But Brexit will require compromise and a big win would give her the flexibility to make important concessions without worrying about her support from all wings of the party.

3. What will be the main issues in the election?
Brexit, Brexit and more Brexit, if May has her way. Labour will argue that Conservative rule is creating a more-unequal society and eroding the National Health Service. But May’s domestic agenda, promising to “build a country that works for all,” may blunt that line of attack. The Liberal Democrats will campaign as the only major party that opposes leaving the bloc.

4. What’s the state of the opposition?
Labour is in disarray. Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn fended off an attempted coup in 2016, less than a year into his tenure. While his far-left brand of politics may appeal to the party membership, there’s scant evidence that it appeals to the wider public. The Liberal Democrats, reduced to a rump of just eight lawmakers in 2015 after five years governing in coalition with May’s Conservatives, will relish a new vote as a chance to claw back more seats, having gained one in a special election in 2016. They see their pro-EU stance as a chance to win over the 48 percent of the country who voted against Brexit. In anti-Brexit Scotland, where the pro-EU Scottish National Party all but wiped out the previously dominant Labour Party in 2015, there’s more evidence of a Tory revival than a Labour one.

5. What does this mean for Scotland?
Just as the early election gives May a chance to solidify her standing, it does likewise for First Minister Nicola Sturgeon. If the SNP retains its dominance -- it took all but three Scottish seats in 2015 -- Sturgeon will be validated in seeking a second referendum on Scottish independence from the U.K. Though Scotland rejected independence in a 2014 referendum, that was before Brexit. A majority of Scottish voters chose “Remain” in the June 2016 Brexit referendum, and now face being pulled out of the EU against their will.

6. Can May demand a snap election on her own?

No. Prime ministers used to be able to call a general election whenever they liked within the five-year electoral cycle. That changed in 2011, when the Tory-Lib Dem coalition pushed through the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act. Now, to force an early election, the government needs a two-thirds majority vote in the lower chamber of Parliament, the House of Commons. May has called such a vote for Wednesday, and with Labour welcoming a general election, she should win.

7. What does this mean for markets?
The pound jumped to its highest in more than 2 months after May made her announcement. While elections typically signal a period of uncertainty for the markets, a strengthened mandate for May in the longer term is likely to bring more stability than her current slender majority, because she’ll be less beholden to various interest groups when pushing through her Brexit strategy.

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...on-and-what-it-means-for-brexit-quicktake-q-a

 

[Arkain2K]

 

[snakedafunky]

Yes very risky IMO. What if she underperforms that could be seen as a sign the people don't want a hard Brexit.
Now Merkel might very well run on a pro hard Brexit campaign. And win big if she even moves further to the right.
And her number 1 contender is a real pro-EU guy he might very well run on a pro hard Brexit as well.

Lot ifs of course, but if I wouldn't know any better I would say the UK is preparing to set the stage for a soft Brexit.

 

[Arkain2K]