May Makes EU An Offer It Can’t Refuse
“So at long last we know Britain’s
negotiating strategy” for leaving the European Union, says Robert
Shrimsley in the Financial Times. As Prime Minister Theresa May has been
repeating for the past six months, “Brexit means Brexit”. The way ahead
is now clear. Britain is leaving the single market. It will control its
own immigration policy. It is rejecting the jurisdiction of the
European Court of Justice (ECJ). “Only on membership of the customs
union are the lines still a little blurred.”
She gave notice that the UK would be
stopping its “hefty contributions” to the EU budget, but signalled room
for negotiation. Her finger “lightly caressing the red button” (she said
she prefers “no deal” to a “bad deal” and warned EU leaders that
punishing Britain would be “an act of calamitous self-harm”), she also
tried to be “emollient, talking generously of Britain’s desire to see
the EU succeed”.
Her 40-minute speech at Lancaster House
provided clarity on a number of other critical issues. She confirmed
that a final deal on Britain’s exit from the EU would be put to a vote
of both Houses of Parliament; that the Common Travel Area between the UK
and the Republic of Ireland would be maintained; and that she wanted to
guarantee the rights of EU nationals in Britain and Britons living in
Europe, as soon as possible.To avoid a “cliff-edge” exit, she wants a
“phased process of implementation” of Brexit, and, from the strong
position as “one of only two significant military powers in Europe”,
adds The Times’ Oliver Wright, pledged that Brexit Britain would
“continue to cooperate” over crime, terrorism and foreign affairs.
May’s announcement that Britain will be
leaving the single market should come as no surprise, says Jon Henley in
The Guardian. Ever since her Conservative Party conference speech in
October, she has been reiterating that her two Brexit priorities are
“controlling EU immigration and withdrawing from the jurisdiction of the
ECJ”. Since membership of the single market means accepting the EU’s
four freedoms (including freedom of movement) and complying with the EU
rules that regulate these, we cannot remain in.
Instead, she said, Britain will seek “the
greatest possible access to it through a… bold and ambitious free-trade
agreement”. On the customs union, she was more ambiguous. Full
membership would prevent us from negotiating our own trade deals outside
the EU, but May wants tariff-free, cross-border trade to be as
“frictionless as possible”.
The response was mixed. Alongside
assorted accusatory headlines from continental newspapers and “howls of
outrage” from Remainers, we heard EU Council President Donald Tusk
welcoming May’s “realistic” plan and declaring the EU’s other 27 members
“ready to negotiate”, says James Tapsfield in the Daily Mail. However,
Guy Verhofstadt, who is in charge of Brexit talks for the “hostile
European parliament”, said that while her clarity was appreciated, the
“days of UK cherry-picking and Europe à la carte are over”.
What May actually did, was, in the “most
defiantly, irresistibly
optimistic terms”, to make EU leaders “an offer
they couldn’t refuse” – at least not without looking like “mindlessly
vindictive, self-harming lunatics”, says Janet Daley in The Daily
Telegraph.
The government’s position was “a lesson
in economic reality”. Trade is “not a zero-sum game”. More trade means
greater prosperity for all. If the EU refuses to play ball we will make
our own arrangements, leaving EU states “less prosperous and more
bitterly disunited”. And, as the chancellor has already hinted and May
implied, we can always “change our economic model” (ie, slash business
taxes and regulations in order to become a magnet for inward
investment). But the “real news” was the “tone”. May’s speech was mostly
“a plea for sanity on all sides”.
Post-Brexit Britain: hard choices ahead
Theresa May’s vision for the UK’s
relationship with Europe after Brexit means a completely new agreement,
or associate membership, or the retention of parts of it – exactly what
isn’t yet clear. Whatever the outcome, there will be many obstacles to
overcome and many hard choices to make.
Take immigration, says The Guardian. The
section on this was deliberately placed mid-way through May’s speech to
avoid seeming “too provocative”. Politically, however, it was “the
starting point”. Her approach is dictated by her “conviction that the
people voted for Brexit to control EU migration” – which is why Britain
has to leave the single market. Many have been in denial about this, but
not May, even though the “economic and human consequences could be, and
probably will be, grim”.
May is thought to favour an annual cap
and this perhaps implies some sort of work permit system, say Oliver
Wright and Henry Zeffman in The Times. There was very little detail in
her speech, but those details are critical. “May knows that the more
flexibility she shows on this issue the more she will get in return.”
However, the prime minister is also “acutely aware that immigration was
perhaps the key reason Britain voted to leave the EU in the first
place”. In a recent survey, notes the Financial Times, 90% were in
favour of tariff-free access to the single market, and 70% favoured
limits on EU migration.
May thinks of Brexit as a “still
photograph when it is really a moving picture”, says Rachel Sylvester in
The Times. Against a “backdrop of the migrant crisis, terrorist attacks
and economic downturn”,
right-wing populists are gaining ground across
Europe. There are elections in France, Germany, the Netherlands and
possibly Italy this year, and immigration is likely to dominate them
all.
Although the “bureaucrats at the European
Commission insist that free movement of people is a founding principle
of the EU”, attitudes among senior European politicians are changing.
Europe could be forced to make concessions about immigration that render
Brexit obsolete. “You don’t have to be a Remoaner to think that would
change many people’s calculations about the relative advantages of
staying in or leaving the EU.”
No comments