In Brexit poker, clock narrows transition options

[webfact]

In Brexit poker, clock narrows transition options

By Alastair Macdonald, Gabriela Baczynska and Jan Strupczewski

 

EU and British flags fly outside the European Commission building in London, Britain August 12, 2017. REUTERS/Neil Hall/File Photo

 

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Nerves are fraying in the Brexit talks, negotiators are trying to work out if the other side is bluffing about walking away, and a ticking clock is fast narrowing British options come March 2019.

 

Philip Hammond, Britain's finance minister, echoed recent EU assertions when he said that a transition period to some new relationship was a "wasting asset", the value of which would "diminish significantly" for both sides if its form remains unclear to businesses much after the start of the new year.

 

As negotiators in Brussels make little progress before Prime Minister Theresa May meets EU leaders next week, a warning about a breakdown in talks from a minister seen strongly to favour a business-friendly "bespoke" transition out of the EU came a day after the EU summit chair spoke of a similar new year deadline.

 

Donald Tusk said on Tuesday that if London fails to settle divorce terms by December, and so unlock talks on the transition and future trade pact, then the EU would reconsider its objectives. That reflects mounting doubts across Europe that any legal exit deal can be struck.

 

The longer the stand-off goes on, EU negotiators said, the more Britain's choice come March 30, 2019 will be between the "hard Brexit" by which it will simply quit all EU systems and be treated like, say, Australia, and a virtual status quo, staying in most EU systems, without voting rights, rather like Norway.

 

"The closer we get, the less there is to discuss about a transition and the more it just goes to a standstill transition, with Britain still in everything, but without a vote," one said.

 

"Pretty soon," said another, "It will be Norway or nothing."

 

While all such commentary reflects the sides' jockeying for negotiating advantage, the evidence this week is that they remain far apart and are getting tetchy. May and the EU traded jabs over whose court "the ball" is in after the prime minister made concessions in a speech at Florence on Sept. 22.

 

Behind closed doors, British negotiators voiced outraged surprise that her offer was seen as insufficient to launch talks on the future relationship. "It's hard to say it was genuine," one EU official said of the show of emotion. "It's a form of pressure."

 

BUSINESS WORRIES

 

Businesses are sounding the alarm. A German industry federation warned members to start preparing for a "very hard Brexit". A senior representative of London's financial services industry told a Brussels audience this week that a legal transition agreement must be reached by the end of this year.

 

"Most importantly, it must reflect the status quo," said Catherine McGuinness of the City of London Corporation. "There is no feasibility in asking firms to transition to a transition. If uncertainty continues, businesses will vote with their feet."

 

Hammond ruled out budgeting -- yet -- for more customs and border facilities, and few on the continent believe threats of a walkout they say would hurt Britain more than them.

 

So leaders will watch May's struggle to unite her government and sit tight. One senior EU diplomat said British counterparts were in such a weak position that "sometimes I feel sorry them".

 

For many in Brussels, that makes a virtual status quo after Brexit the increasingly likely outcome: "In March 2019, Britain will formally leave," said another EU official.

 

"But de facto most of the existing arrangements will remain ... They will have their celebration of 'independence' and then we will sit down to talking business again."

 

May insists a two-year transition period is enough to agree a new free trade pact, but many question that.

 

John Bruton, the former prime minister of Ireland, has recommended an alternative to either no deal at all or a virtual status quo transition -- just keeping Britain fully in the EU for four years beyond 2019.

 

Arguing that the two-year deadline set by Article 50 of the EU treaty raises the risk of talks collapsing, and that agreeing first a transition and then another accord is complex, Bruton said this week that Britain and the EU should agree to a six-year negotiating period, with Britain only leaving in 2023.

 

Neither wants any extension. But Bruton warned: "The present tight time frame ... increases the likelihood of miscalculation and of the UK leaving the EU with no deal at all."

 

(Additional reporting by Luke Baker and Richard Lough in Paris and Alissa de Carbonnel in Brussels; Writing by Alastair Macdonald; Editing by Hugh Lawson)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-10-12

[Phuket Man]

It is about time this nonsense came to an end.

The whole process needs stopping before too much damage is done to the U.K.

 

[stag4]

Oh, here we go,  another great believer in democracy

[soalbundy]

1 hour ago, Phuket Man said:

It is about time this nonsense came to an end.

The whole process needs stopping before too much damage is done to the U.K.

 

nothing was done to the  UK, they did that all by themselves, didn't they do well.

[Phuket Man]

1 hour ago, stag4 said:

Oh, here we go,  another great believer in democracy

Democracy?

A slender majority made up of racists and gullible people who were lied to and mislead.

That was never a mandate to wreck the lives of millions.

[boomerangutang]

2 hours ago, Phuket Man said:

It is about time this nonsense came to an end. The whole process needs stopping before too much damage is done to the U.K.

It's like a divorce.  The man (UK) declares one day, "that's it. I want a divorce."  ....and he thinks it will be relatively quick, and he won't have to pay much because he's a smart businessman.

 

The woman (EU) is no dummy, and she checks all her options.

 

The man is pissed off, saying, "I just wanted to split up, walk away, and be done with it.  Now you're making all sorts of demands.  It's not fair."

[Guest]

I hope our EU keeps the 2 year Brexit timeline. No further extension, no ability to cancel Brexit anymore.

 

It's time to move on and say goodbye to Britain. It's best for the EU.

[gamini]

1 hour ago, Phuket Man said:

Democracy?

A slender majority made up of racists and gullible people who were lied to and mislead.

That was never a mandate to wreck the lives of millions.

so very true

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, stag4 said:

Oh, here we go,  another great believer in democracy

No, a believer in common sense!

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

It's like a divorce.  The man (UK) declares one day, "that's it. I want a divorce."  ....and he thinks it will be relatively quick, and he won't have to pay much because he's a smart businessman.

 

The woman (EU) is no dummy, and she checks all her options.

 

The man is pissed off, saying, "I just wanted to split up, walk away, and be done with it.  Now you're making all sorts of demands.  It's not fair."

The man's Id says divorce, his ego says remain, his super ego says "what about democracy"

[Estrada]

Following over 116,000 signatures, the UK Parliament is going to debate on the petition “Hold a referendum on the final Brexit deal”.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/200004

The debate is scheduled for 11 December 2017.

The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament

[alant]

1 hour ago, Phuket Man said:

Democracy?

A slender majority made up of racists and gullible people who were lied to and mislead.

That was never a mandate to wreck the lives of millions.

You have the right, of course, to refer to those who voted to leave the disastrous pact hereby referred to as the EU as racist. What gives you that right to call me that?

You of course know it all, lets replace the "for sale complete set of Encyclopedia Brittanica, reason for sale, no longer needed, wife knows it all" by substituting wife for Remoaner.

Not once has a Remoaner explained to me why it is better to remain in a trade organisation where we trade at a loss, our debt grows but what do we hear? Nothing just we should stay in. No facts, just slurs, name calling, attempted bullying and an unbelievable desire to dash democratic values.

 

[nontabury]

4 hours ago, Phuket Man said:

It is about time this nonsense came to an end.

The whole process needs stopping before too much damage is done to the U.K.

 

Agree, let’s depart this undemocratic so called union NOW. Implement the decision of the British electorate, as voted on the 23rd of June 2017, And stop this back stabbing of our own national interest.

 

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Agree, let’s depart this undemocratic so called union NOW. Implement the decision of the British electorate, as voted on the 23rd of June 2017, And stop this back stabbing of our own national interest.

 

Out of curiosity, why do you think common EU army would be a bad thing? I think spending less to military, by collective forces is a really good thing. 

 

Ps. Charge your battery. 

[nontabury]

23 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Out of curiosity, why do you think common EU army would be a bad thing? I think spending less to military, by collective forces is a really good thing. 

 

Ps. Charge your battery. 

Firstly, in the run up to the referendum, the bureaucrats in Brussels and their supporters flately denied any plans or intention to create a EU army. As indeed they denied any plans for greater integration. How some people were easily duped.

Secondly, it may not be in the interest of the UK.

Thirdly, in the event of any military conflict, whose national army would be expected to do most of the fighting. The French or perhaps the Italians,maybe the German Bundeswehr,with their constitutional restrictions. Or would it be the old favourite, the British Tommy.

 

 

P.s do not understand your comment regarding Battery.

 

 

 

[Khun Han]

Of course, former Irish PM John Bruton is taking an entirely objective stance in recommending a six year transition period, isn't he? 

Edited October 12, 2017 by Khun Han

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Firstly, in the run up to the referendum, the bureaucrats in Brussels and their supporters flately denied any plans or intention to create a EU army. As indeed they denied any plans for greater integration. How some people were easily duped.

Secondly, it may not be in the interest of the UK.

Thirdly, in the event of any military conflict, whose national army would be expected to do most of the fighting. The French or perhaps the Italians,maybe the German Bundeswehr,with their constitutional restrictions. Or would it be the old favourite, the British Tommy.

P.s do not understand your comment regarding Battery.

I think it's beneficial for all parties to get UK out of EU as fast as possible. After finalizing Brexit, we'll be able to start moving to further integration of our nation. 

 

Generating collective defence forces is one step on the road to become similar country as USA is today.

I wish that to happen. 

 

Ps. Check the image, you shared earlier. 

[nontabury]

29 minutes ago, oilinki said:

I think it's beneficial for all parties to get UK out of EU as fast as possible. After finalizing Brexit, we'll be able to start moving to further integration of our nation. 

 

Generating collective defence forces is one step on the road to become similar country as USA is today.

I wish that to happen. 

 

Ps. Check the image, you shared earlier. 

If only the bureacrats in Brussels, along with their supporters had been as honest as yourself regarding further integration. Then I’m positive the majority for Britexit would have been far greater.

[Grouse]

Has anyone noticed that the politicians say "The UK has voted, we will deliver according with their democratic will"? Or words to that effect

 

Why are they not saying "what a great idea! Let's leave! I'm personally 100% behind this!"

 

You know why really, don't you...

 

They think it's the most ridiculous decision ever!

[Khun Han]

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/eu-apos-chief-negotiator-wants-084052356.html

[Grouse]

4 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/eu-apos-chief-negotiator-wants-084052356.html

http://uk.businessinsider.com/foi-asking-government-to-publish-legal-advice-on-halting-brexit-2017-10?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=referral

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, alant said:

You have the right, of course, to refer to those who voted to leave the disastrous pact hereby referred to as the EU as racist. What gives you that right to call me that?

You of course know it all, lets replace the "for sale complete set of Encyclopedia Brittanica, reason for sale, no longer needed, wife knows it all" by substituting wife for Remoaner.

Not once has a Remoaner explained to me why it is better to remain in a trade organisation where we trade at a loss, our debt grows but what do we hear? Nothing just we should stay in. No facts, just slurs, name calling, attempted bullying and an unbelievable desire to dash democratic values.

 

https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/

 

Stop buying German cars then.

[partington]

Can someone who believes in referenda explain to me why they think the decision of the 67% who voted in the referendum of 1975 in favour of staying in the EEC now doesn't count as a democratic decision?

 

If the argument is "things have changed", then do you also accept that if things change in the future there could be another referendum to stay in or re-enter?

 

If not, why not?

 

Is one referendum better than another? Why? And how do you decide?  For example when all the very old people who voted to leave have died in 10 years or so, another referendum will probably be overwhelmingly  in favour of rejoining. Would this also be Democracy and so a good thing? If not , why not?

[dunroaming]

3 hours ago, alant said:

You have the right, of course, to refer to those who voted to leave the disastrous pact hereby referred to as the EU as racist. What gives you that right to call me that?

That is a valid point.  Not everyone who voted for Brexit was a racist or gullible just as in the USA not everyone who voted for Trump was a racist or gullible.  I guess the similarity is that both ended up making a big mistake.

[dick dasterdly]

I apologise for repeating a comment in another thread, but this thread is more appropriate in saying that brexit has turned into a "poker game".....

 

As far as I can make out, the EU has no interest in genuinely negotiating to reach a mutually acceptable deal - and the prolonged uncertainty is affecting the UK more than the EU.  Consequently, it's probably time for the UK to say 'enough is enough - we're leaving at the end of the 2 year 'notice' period' - which gives businesses time to make their plans for this deadline and/or (preferably) the EU to immediately give up on dictating, and start negotiating.

 

(I've given up on the hope that they will reform ).

[dick dasterdly]

8 minutes ago, partington said:

Can someone who believes in referenda explain to me why they think the decision of the 67% who voted in the referendum of 1975 in favour of staying in the EEC now doesn't count as a democratic decision?

 

If the argument is "things have changed", then do you also accept that if things change in the future there could be another referendum to stay in or re-enter?

 

If not, why not?

 

Is one referendum better than another? Why? And how do you decide?  For example when all the very old people who voted to leave have died in 10 years or so, another referendum will probably be overwhelmingly  in favour of rejoining. Would this also be Democracy and so a good thing? If not , why not?

I'm not sure of your point as the 1975 referendum result was adhered to - and only 41 years later was there another referendum on the subject!

 

Not quite the same as those arguing that there should be another referendum now (a little more than a year after the referendum).....

[dunroaming]

6 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

As far as I can make out, the EU has no interest in genuinely negotiating to reach a mutually acceptable deal - and the prolonged uncertainty is affecting the UK more than the EU.

 

The EU doesn't need to do anything at all.  They can just sit on their hands and watch the UK squirm.   The rush to trigger article 50 was a big mistake, there should have been much more preparation first.

 

May's threat to leave without a deal is on one hand ballsy and on the other suicidal.  It is a bit like being in divorce negotiations and saying  "you can have the house but I want the car, the fridge freezer, the cd collection and the flat screen TV.  If you don't agree then I will just walk away with nothing but not pay the mortgage any more then we will see who's won!" 

[dick dasterdly]

19 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

 

The EU doesn't need to do anything at all.  They can just sit on their hands and watch the UK squirm.   The rush to trigger article 50 was a big mistake, there should have been much more preparation first.

 

May's threat to leave without a deal is on one hand ballsy and on the other suicidal.  It is a bit like being in divorce negotiations and saying  "you can have the house but I want the car, the fridge freezer, the cd collection and the flat screen TV.  If you don't agree then I will just walk away with nothing but not pay the mortgage any more then we will see who's won!" 

Better still (IMO), the UK needs to say  'enough is enough - we're leaving at the end of the 2 year 'notice' period' - which gives businesses time to make their plans for this deadline and/or (preferably) the EU to immediately give up on dictating, and start negotiating.

 

But of course, it's all opinion at this point.

 

My opinion is based on the UK suffering more from the uncertainty, than the EU.

 

Edit - can't be bothered to reply to the 'divorce' analogy, it's too ridiculous.

Edited October 12, 2017 by dick dasterdly

[dunroaming]

2 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Edit - can't be bothered to reply to the 'divorce' analogy, it's too ridiculous.

Fair enough, it was tongue in cheek anyway. 

 

And of course you are right it is all opinion and the politicians are not going to want to discuss the consequences of the UK walking away with no deal anyway.

[Grouse]

Anybody seen an upside to any of this?