EU pushes October Brexit agreement, threatens no deal

[webfact]

EU pushes October Brexit agreement, threatens no deal

By Elizabeth Piper, Gabriela Baczynska and Francois Murphy

 

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May talks to the media as she arrives for the informal meeting of European Union leaders ahead of the EU summit, in Salzburg, Austria, September 19, 2018. REUTERS/Lisi Niesner

 

SALZBURG, Austria (Reuters) - European Union leaders will push for a Brexit deal next month but warned Prime Minister Theresa May on Thursday that if she will not give ground on trade and the Irish border by November they are ready to cope with Britain crashing out.

 

"Don't worry, be happy," joked EU chief executive Jean-Claude Juncker after telling reporters after a summit in Austria that the Europeans had full plans in place in the event there was no deal before Britain leaves next March.

 

May promised new proposals to reassure Dublin that it would not get a "hard border" with the British province of Northern Ireland but warned she too could live with a no-deal outcome -- though many round the summit table in picturesque Salzburg see that as more of a negotiating tactic than a credible threat.

 

She said her "Chequers" proposals for trade with the EU, intended also to resolve arguments over the borders of Northern Ireland, were the only way forward. EU leaders repeated their view the plans would undermine their cherished single market.

 

But leaders also tried to put a positive spin on their 24 hours of talks. Summit chair Donald Tusk said he was more optimistic about getting agreements both to ease Britain out gently and to sketch out a future free trade pact.

 

Tusk said a Brussels summit on Oct. 18 would be a "moment of truth" to overcome remaining big problems and leaders pencilled in the weekend of Nov. 17-18 to formalise a final agreement.

 

But May and German Chancellor Angela Merkel were among those who stressed there was still "a lot of work" to do.

 

May faces a fight with angry Conservatives at her party's conference in 10 days. They deride her willingness to bind Britain into much EU regulation in return for free trade; some would prefer a no-deal "hard Brexit" in March, despite warnings that would ravage the British economy.

 

EU leaders understand that she can give little away before the conference ends on Oct. 3. But they hope their negotiator, Michel Barnier, can secure her agreement next month to what will be new EU proposals. These will be fundamentally unchanged but may be politically more palatable, notably on Northern Ireland.

 

"Ritual dance is always a part of such negotiations," a senior adviser to one of May's summit peers told Reuters.

 

"It may be that they will just accept what we have proposed after the Tory conference."

 

MERKEL, MACRON SCEPTICAL

Whether it can be done by mid-November, many doubt. Brussels is familiar with the theatre of diplomacy, where being seen to hold out to the bitter end can help sell the unpopular back home and some diplomats believe a deal could take until Christmas.

 

Any later, and there would be a risk of failing to get it ratified by both parliaments before Brexit Day on March 29.

 

"It was clear today that we need substantial progress by October and that we then aim to finalise everything in November," Merkel said. "But there is still a lot of work to do on the question of how future trade relations will look."

 

"You can't belong to the single market if you are not part of the single market, but you can develop a lot of creativity to find practical, good, close solutions."

 

French President Emmanuel Macron rammed home the message: "It was a good and brave step by the prime minister," he said of her trade plan. "But we all agreed on this today, the proposals in their current state are not acceptable.

 

"The Chequers plan cannot be 'take it or leave it'."

 

The EU also insists on a "backstop" clause in any withdrawal treaty. This would keep Northern Ireland under EU economic oversight if London and Brussels cannot agree a trade pact to keep UK-EU borders open after a transition period ends in 2020 -- an idea that May and a small party in the province that props up her minority government oppose.

 

"We need to ensure that nothing is done which effectively carves Northern Ireland away from the rest of the United Kingdom," May told reporters after Tusk had briefed her on the discussions the other 27 had on Brexit over lunch.

 

Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said there was no chance the EU would compromise on its demands and rejected speculation the other countries would be tempted to fudge the Irish issue until later. But he also said he thought there would be a deal.

 

(Additional reporting by Alastair Macdonald; Writing by Alastair Macdonald; editing by Richard Balmforth)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-09-21

[Samui Bodoh]

"...May faces a fight with angry Conservatives at her party's conference in 10 days. They deride her willingness to bind Britain into much EU regulation in return for free trade; some would prefer a no-deal "hard Brexit" in March, despite warnings that would ravage the British economy..."

 

I can't help but notice that those that "prefer a no-deal "Hard Brexit" in March, despite warnings that would ravage the British economy..." seem to be a minority. Did the British public vote for a 'hard Brexit'? It did not seem that way to me.

 

I have said it before and will say it again, this entire 'Brexit' agenda is one of the stupidest public policy decisions I have ever seen. 

 

It is clear that there is no consensus among the UK's politicians nor people regarding the way forward; the best thing Teresa May  could do is call the whole thing off for a decade. Yes, it would ruin her political career, but would likely save the UK terrible, terrible damage.

 

As the US military says, "what a cluster f***!"

 

[baboon]

9 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

"...May faces a fight with angry Conservatives at her party's conference in 10 days. They deride her willingness to bind Britain into much EU regulation in return for free trade; some would prefer a no-deal "hard Brexit" in March, despite warnings that would ravage the British economy..."

 

I can't help but notice that those that "prefer a no-deal "Hard Brexit" in March, despite warnings that would ravage the British economy..." seem to be a minority. Did the British public vote for a 'hard Brexit'? It did not seem that way to me.

 

I have said it before and will say it again, this entire 'Brexit' agenda is one of the stupidest public policy decisions I have ever seen. 

 

It is clear that there is no consensus among the UK's politicians nor people regarding the way forward; the best thing Teresa May  could do is call the whole thing off for a decade. Yes, it would ruin her political career, but would likely save the UK terrible, terrible damage.

 

As the US military says, "what a cluster f***!"

 

I am just hoping and praying that the current acrimony is simply brinkmanship / posturing before some sort of deal is made. No deal is better than a bad deal? Ball locks. We are in enough trouble as it is...

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, baboon said:

I am just hoping and praying that the current acrimony is simply brinkmanship / posturing before some sort of deal is made. No deal is better than a bad deal? Ball locks. We are in enough trouble as it is...

There’s no evidence that the British government have any idea what they want from Brexit and certainly no evidence of a plan.

 

The hardline Brexiteers in the Tory Party have ranted throughout the Brexit process that they have a better idea how to proceed - then failed miserably to agree amongst themselves and produce their own plan.

 

“If in doubt do nothing” comes to mind.

[Sir Dude]

19 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Did the British public vote for a 'hard Brexit'? It did not seem that way to me.

 

In the 2016 referendum, the UK public were asked "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" 

 

And there were two answers given for people to make a choice from...

 

Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

 

Pretty crystal clear there really. Nothing about trade deals or or anything else, it was in or out. Whatever your stance is on this divisive and toxic issue, that was what they were asked.

[baboon]

3 minutes ago, Sir Dude said:

In the 2016 referendum, the UK public were asked "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" 

 

And there were two answers given for people to make a choice from...

 

Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

 

Pretty crystal clear there really. Nothing about trade deals or or anything else, it was in or out. Whatever your stance is on this divisive and toxic issue, that was what they were asked.

And it was a bloody stupid question given the complexities of leaving. As we are seeing now.

Edited September 21, 2018 by baboon

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, Sir Dude said:

In the 2016 referendum, the UK public were asked "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" 

 

And there were two answers given for people to make a choice from...

 

Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

 

Pretty crystal clear there really. Nothing about trade deals or or anything else, it was in or out. Whatever your stance is on this divisive and toxic issue, that was what they were asked.

And now what Brexiteers refereed to as ‘Project Fear’ is turning into ‘Project Reality’ and the adults in the room agree, people are allowed to change their minds.

Edited September 21, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[baboon]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And now what Brexiteers refereed to as ‘Project Fear’ is turning into ‘Project Reality’ and the adults in the room agree, people are allowed to change their minds.

Indeed. I am not the biggest fan of the EU, but if 'project fear' are trying to scare me then it's working...

[Samui Bodoh]

7 minutes ago, Sir Dude said:

In the 2016 referendum, the UK public were asked "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" 

 

And there were two answers given for people to make a choice from...

 

Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

 

Pretty crystal clear there really. Nothing about trade deals or or anything else, it was in or out. Whatever your stance is on this divisive and toxic issue, that was what they were asked.

You make a fair point.

 

However, if you insist on a strict interpretation like that, let me add another...

 

The referendum was not legally binding and can be easily and completely ignored by Parliament.

 

 

[citybiker]

And it was a bloody stupid question given the complexities of leaving. As we are seeing now.

The complexity of leaving is down to the current Government, that’s why they’re MP’s & in that position & role.(albeit Civil Service doing the rest).

Thus, the current government gave the electorate the choice in a referendum.

Voters done they’re job, it’s down to the ministers to fulfil theirs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bristolboy]

 

23 minutes ago, citybiker said:

The complexity of leaving is down to the current Government, that’s why they’re MP’s & in that position & role.(albeit Civil Service doing the rest).

Thus, the current government gave the electorate the choice in a referendum.

Voters done they’re job, it’s down to the ministers to fulfil theirs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 Just because you ask for the impossible, that doesn't mean you're entitled to get it.

[welovesundaysatspace]

2 hours ago, Sir Dude said:

In the 2016 referendum, the UK public were asked "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" 

 

And there were two answers given for people to make a choice from...

 

Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

True. So the government could just leave the EU (delivered on the referendum result) and strike a deal with the EU in which the U.K. would stay in the single market and enjoy the benefits of the four freedoms for a certain annual contribution and by accepting certain EU regulation. 

 

Edited September 21, 2018 by welovesundaysatspace

[marko kok prong]

It's FUBAR.

[Tchooptip]

In fact, the British no longer want to be part of the European Union to no longer have financial participation in it but want to keep the same customs and commercial benefits.

[billd766]

The attitude of the EU towards Brexit reminds me of the chorus of a song called Jobsworth from 1973 by Jeremy Taylor. My apologies Jeremy and you were a great singer.

 

"

Jobsworth, jobsworth; it's more than my job's worth.
I don't care, rain or snow, whatever you want - the answer's no!
I can keep you standing, for ...years in the queue,
And if you don't like, you know what you can do! (You can lump it!)

You know what ... you ... can ... do!

[dick dasterdly]

4 hours ago, baboon said:

Indeed. I am not the biggest fan of the EU, but if 'project fear' are trying to scare me then it's working...

Whereas 'project fear' has just annoyed the hell out of me!

 

Consequently, my attitude has changed from:-

1) registering to vote - thinking that a leave vote would force the eu to make clearly necessary reforms, which would then provide a good reason for another referendum on remaining within the reformed eu 

2) deciding not to vote - (mainly) because I think UK MPs are even less trustworthy than EU MPs

 

to:-

 

becoming increasingly annoyed at the tactics used by both uk and eu politicians/media/civil servants - to the extent that if there is another referendum, I'd use my vote this time - and vote leave. ☹️

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

The attitude of the EU towards Brexit reminds me of the chorus of a song called Jobsworth from 1973 by Jeremy Taylor. My apologies Jeremy and you were a great singer.

 

"

Jobsworth, jobsworth; it's more than my job's worth.
I don't care, rain or snow, whatever you want - the answer's no!
I can keep you standing, for ...years in the queue,
And if you don't like, you know what you can do! (You can lump it!)

You know what ... you ... can ... do!

If you don’t transfer 100,000 Baht to my account immediately your attitude towards me would remind me of the same. 

[Guest]

Sounds like the attitudes are changing. 

 

EU has patiently waited for UK to make it's mind over the past 18 months. Instead of coming with a valid plan, which EU could agree to, UK has been fighting internally and now come up with the Checkers list, which is unusable.

 

From now on, UK will meet a lot less patient and a lot more demanding EU. The deal must be done soon, or we are left with no-deal, which seems likely at this moment. 

 

 

[dunroaming]

8 hours ago, Sir Dude said:

In the 2016 referendum, the UK public were asked "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?" 

 

And there were two answers given for people to make a choice from...

 

Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

 

Pretty crystal clear there really. Nothing about trade deals or or anything else, it was in or out. Whatever your stance is on this divisive and toxic issue, that was what they were asked.

Yes and (once again) the people based their vote on lies and miss-information.  And yes that was from both sides but that doesn't negate the facts.  For some reason the leavers are OK with that and even though Brexit is not going to deliver any of the promises (or so it seems today) they are still happy to go along with it.

 

I will repeat what I have said before, that I don't think a second referendum would be a good idea.  In fact I think it would be a crap idea and would just lead to more division.  What we need is for the  government to come clean and say that they have screwed it up and because of ludicrous red lines and bullsh*t, they are left in a weak and vulnerable position.  The EU won't accept the May's chequers agreement and neither will her own party.  The only plan b she has is a no deal and that would be a disaster and political suicide for her and the party.

 

I know many of the Brexiteers are prepared to cross their fingers and hope for the best but the rest of us would prefer to shout from the rooftops!

[Sir Dude]

17 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

  In fact I think it would be a crap idea and would just lead to more division. 

It would also open the Pandora's box of the neverendum situation which would be a disaster as there would be referendums every couple of years on serious things and business/investors would just go elsewhere due to the unpredictability. Only way is make referendums non legally binding and then political parties take note of the results and try to deliver it if they get into power and they can be judged at general elections for their success or misdeeds. Look what the Irish did when they voted the "wrong" way, forced to vote again and then referendums were outlawed...lol. As I have said before, be careful what you ask the average person in the street as you might not like it when they get the sh%t end of the stick most of the time. However, this whole mess was brought about by Brussels's sneering intransigence as they should have tossed David Cameron a bone or two and it would never have happened. 

Edited September 21, 2018 by Sir Dude
Typos

[citybiker]

 
 Just because you ask for the impossible, that doesn't mean you're entitled to get it.

Only the weak believe Brexit is Impossible.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

[AGareth2]

1 hour ago, Sir Dude said:

 Only way is make referendums non legally binding

they are

unless an act of parliament is passed stating otherwise

[bristolboy]

21 minutes ago, citybiker said:

Only the weak believe Brexit is Impossible.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk
 

I didn't write that Brexit was impossible. What is impossible is stipulating that something as complex and costly to the UK as Brexit be completed within the time frame stipulated.

[bomber]

5 hours ago, billd766 said:

The attitude of the EU towards Brexit reminds me of the chorus of a song called Jobsworth from 1973 by Jeremy Taylor. My apologies Jeremy and you were a great singer.

 

"

Jobsworth, jobsworth; it's more than my job's worth.
I don't care, rain or snow, whatever you want - the answer's no!
I can keep you standing, for ...years in the queue,
And if you don't like, you know what you can do! (You can lump it!)

You know what ... you ... can ... do!

The EU shouldnt even have to be at a table with the UK goverment,its the UKs choice and they shouldnt and wont give anything perks to us,they know there is some big companies coming to their shores,plus the UK is only 8% of the EUs trade,the EU is 44% of the UKs trade,we know who needs who the most

[dunroaming]

3 hours ago, Sir Dude said:

As I have said before, be careful what you ask the average person in the street as you might not like it when they get the sh%t end of the stick most of the time. However, this whole mess was brought about by Brussels's sneering intransigence as they should have tossed David Cameron a bone or two and it would never have happened. 

It all started with Cameron agreeing to a referendum.  Without that we wouldn't be in this mess. Referendums are always a dumb idea and I am sure that no government is going to make that mistake again any time soon!  People are not well informed enough to make valued judgements because they are never aware of the consequences.

[Sir Dude]

4 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

People are not well informed enough to make valued judgements because they are never aware of the consequences.

Lol...that one could attract all sorts of negative posts bordering on the arrogant flavour sort of type...'supercilious' is the word, I think. Elections/referendums have consequences and you need to be careful what you ask people as the answer is probably not what you want to hear. Democracy is a double edged sword as you don't always get what you want but you have to suck it up for democracy to exist. You can't call it democracy if they vote for the "wrong" choice and then demand a new vote so everyone can vote for the "correct" answer...come on man.

[dunroaming]

1 minute ago, Sir Dude said:

Lol...that one could attract all sorts of negative posts bordering on the arrogant flavour sort of type...'supercilious' is the word, I think. Elections/referendums have consequences and you need to be careful what you ask people as the answer is probably not what you want to hear. Democracy is a double edged sword as you don't always get what you want but you have to suck it up for democracy to exist. You can't call it democracy if they vote for the "wrong" choice and then demand a new vote so everyone can vote for the "correct" answer...come on man.

I am talking about referendums and not democratic elections.  In elections you vote for people (MPs) who do have access to the information needed to make those informed decisions and then trust them to represent you and your interests.  That is the theory anyway.  If you inform the people of all the actual consequences and all the relevant risks and pitfalls then by all means let them vote directly. But as we know the people were just given a load of spin. 

[Chomper Higgot]

6 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Whereas 'project fear' has just annoyed the hell out of me!

 

Consequently, my attitude has changed from:-

1) registering to vote - thinking that a leave vote would force the eu to make clearly necessary reforms, which would then provide a good reason for another referendum on remaining within the reformed eu 

2) deciding not to vote - (mainly) because I think UK MPs are even less trustworthy than EU MPs

 

to:-

 

becoming increasingly annoyed at the tactics used by both uk and eu politicians/media/civil servants - to the extent that if there is another referendum, I'd use my vote this time - and vote leave. ☹️

It’s worth reading European press reports to compare and contrast with what’s said in the UK’s right wing press.

 

There’s a huge gap between what’s being reported in Europe and what’s being relayed to the British public via the Daily Mail, The Sun, The Telegraph and The Daily Express.

[dunroaming]

Steely performance from May in her statement after being ridiculed in Salzburg.  Re-iterating that she will not overturn the referendum and that a second one is not viable.  I think that she has to stick to that.  It does mean that the options now are very limited and both sides are hardening their positions.

[Retiredandhappyhere]

14 hours ago, baboon said:

And it was a bloody stupid question given the complexities of leaving. As we are seeing now.

It is the complexities which are being negotiated now.  An agreement will be reached at the eleventh hour.   All the "no deal" talk is just bluster.  Unravelling 40 years of EU membership takes time and most of the detailed work has been carried out behind the scenes. Of course, it is not easy and constant criticism of the work  being done, without knowledge of all the details is ridiculous.  Still, it seems to keep the remoaners  happy.  They will still be unhappy whatever the outcome of the negotiations, because they did not want the British people to have their say on the question of EU membership in the first place.  However, we will be out next March and that is it.