UK's May faces calls to soften Brexit as political limbo drags on

[webfact]

UK's May faces calls to soften Brexit as political limbo drags on

By William James and Alistair Smout

 

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May, leaves 10 Downing Street in central London, Britain June 13, 2017. REUTERS/Stefan Wermuth

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain entered a sixth day of political limbo on Wednesday with Prime Minister Theresa May yet to seal a deal to prop up her minority government and facing calls to soften her stance on Brexit days before negotiations on leaving the EU begin.

 

May's team will resume talks with Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) on a deal to secure their support in parliament after the 60-year-old leader failed to win an outright majority in last week's election - a vote she called expecting to strengthen her position.

 

Instead, the shock outcome has left May weakened among her Conservative Party and thrown open her Brexit strategy to criticism from peers, some of whom want to ditch the current plan to leave the European Union single market and customs union.

 

May said on Tuesday that talks with the DUP had been productive - a view shared by DUP leader Arlene Foster - and that Brexit negotiations would begin as planned next week.

 

"I think there is a unity of purpose among people in the United Kingdom," May said following a meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday.

 

"It's a unity of purpose, having voted to leave the EU, that their government gets on with that and makes a success of it."

But pressure was mounting for May to change course on the type of Brexit Britain should pursue.

 

The Times newspaper said finance minister Philip Hammond would push May not to leave the customs union - an arrangement which guarantees tariff-free trade within the bloc but prohibits members from striking third-party trade deals.

 

The report cited unnamed sources, and the finance ministry declined to comment.

 

Nevertheless, it illustrated the challenge May will face in the remaining days before the EU divorce talks begin: finding a position that satisfies both pro-European and euroskeptic factions of her party if she wants to remain in power.

 

DUP TALKS

 

May will also be reliant upon the 10 lawmakers from the euroskeptic DUP, who would help her edge past the 326 votes needed in parliament to avoid the government collapsing.

 

But a deal with the DUP also risks destabilising Northern Ireland by increasing the influence of pro-British unionists. They have struggled for years with Irish nationalists, who want the British province to join a united Ireland.

 

Former British Prime Minister John Major said he was concerned May's plan to govern with the support of the DUP could pitch the province back into turmoil by persuading 'hard men' on both sides of the divide to return to violence.

 

Irish nationalist party Sinn Fein said the prospect of a British agreement with the DUP was causing anxiety and fear.

 

While the DUP are deeply euroskeptic, they have balked at some of the practical implications of a so-called hard Brexit -- including a potential loss of a "frictionless border" with the Republic of Ireland -- and talks will touch on efforts to minimise the potential damage to Northern Ireland.

 

CIVIL WAR

 

Brexit minister David Davis has insisted the approach to the EU divorce has not changed, but May has recognised that a broader consensus needs to be built for Brexit and has made clear she would listen to all wings of the party on the issue.

 

She will have to manage conflicting demands from within her own party, including a proposal for business groups and lawmakers from all parties to agree a national position for Britain's most complex negotiations since World War Two.

 

Former Prime Minister David Cameron said May needed to listen to rival political parties, and that there would be pressure for a softer Brexit.

 

May faces a difficult balancing act. Divisions over Europe helped sink the premierships of Margaret Thatcher, Major and Cameron, and many of her lawmakers and party membership support a sharp break with the EU.

 

The performance of the British economy could also influence perceptions of Brexit. Government bond prices suffered heavy losses on Tuesday after consumer price inflation jumped to 2.9 percent in May.

 

As European leaders tried to fathom exactly how Britain would begin the negotiations, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said Germany wanted a Brexit deal that would limit negative consequences for the bloc but also did not want it to weaken Britain.

 

The veteran conservative predicted that Britain would regret its departure from the bloc at some point in the future.

 

France's Macron said the EU's door was still open for Britain as long as the negotiations were not finished, but that it would be difficult to reverse course.

 

(Reporting by William James and Alistair Smout; Editing by Tom Brown)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-06-14

[smedly]

I don't understand all these people calling for a soft brexit, the truth of the matter is that T.May rightfully has taken nothing off the table going into the talks, people forget all the threats that took place early on from the big mouths in Brussels, her response was simple - if you are going to make impossible unreasonable stupid ridiculous demands then we will walk away (so called hard brexit), I see absolutely nothing wrong with that response, if the EU insists on this payout settlement of some estimated 100billion euro before any talks even start then that would leave TM no option but to walk out the door, she made that clear and so she should have, even 50 billion euro is a walk out the door sum, they might get an agreement to pay maybe 10-15 billion at most.

 

All this talk of hard/soft brexit is nonsense - if one side or the other is making impossible demands then there is no option but to head for the door and nobody would fault the British for that

[Orac]

I don't understand all these people calling for a soft brexit, the truth of the matter is that T.May rightfully has taken nothing off the table going into the talks, people forget all the threats that took place early on from the big mouths in Brussels, her response was simple - if you are going to make impossible unreasonable stupid ridiculous demands then we will walk away (so called hard brexit), I see absolutely nothing wrong with that response, if the EU insists on this payout settlement of some estimated 100billion euro before any talks even start then that would leave TM no option but to walk out the door, she made that clear and so she should have, even 50 billion euro is a walk out the door sum, they might get an agreement to pay maybe 10-15 billion at most.
 
All this talk of hard/soft brexit is nonsense - if one side or the other is making impossible demands then there is no option but to head for the door and nobody would fault the British for that

Don't forget that a large part of the UK population, possibly a majority, would also not fault TM for throwing up her arms and dumping the whole Brexit affair in the "too hard" bin and remaining part of the EU should she not be able to get the deal she promised from them.

[smedly]

2 hours ago, Orac said:

 

Don't forget that a large part of the UK population, possibly a majority, would also not fault TM for throwing up her arms and dumping the whole Brexit affair in the "too hard" bin and remaining part of the EU should she not be able to get the deal she promised from them.

 

nonsense, out is out and the sooner the better, the people of the UK are fed up being dictated to by Germans while they continue to use the EU to boost themselves, enough is enough

[Orac]

nonsense, out is out and the sooner the better, the people of the UK are fed up being dictated to by Germans while they continue to use the EU to boost themselves, enough is enough

I only said possibly a majority.

48% of "the people" voted to stay in anyway and, since the vote I have not seen any positive arguments for them to change their mind - all I have noticed from those campaigning to leave is mudslinging against various EU officials about them bullying and punishing the U.K. which, frankly, speaks more to the weak and wobbly constitution of the Brexiteers if they can't take a bit of flak and criticism coming out of decisions they made.

Of the remaining 52% who voted to leave, they are now using arguments to defend leaving that would have been branded part of Project Fear had they been uttered prior to the referendum.

The halcyon days of buses declaring how much more money we would have had to spend on the NHS and "they need us more than we need them" are now replaced with, according to you, a bill of 100 billion Euros that we should walk away from which would remove the possibility of any free trade deal from the table for many years and leave us reliant on ridiculously out of date WTO rules - there is a reason that of the 164 members of the WTO only 6 do not have or are working towards a free trade deal with the EU.

[smedly]

36 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

I only said possibly a majority.

48% of "the people" voted to stay in anyway and, since the vote I have not seen any positive arguments for them to change their mind - all I have noticed from those campaigning to leave is mudslinging against various EU officials about them bullying and punishing the U.K. which, frankly, speaks more to the weak and wobbly constitution of the Brexiteers if they can't take a bit of flak and criticism coming out of decisions they made.

Of the remaining 52% who voted to leave, they are now using arguments to defend leaving that would have been branded part of Project Fear had they been uttered prior to the referendum.

The halcyon days of buses declaring how much more money we would have had to spend on the NHS and "they need us more than we need them" are now replaced with, according to you, a bill of 100 billion Euros that we should walk away from which would remove the possibility of any free trade deal from the table for many years and leave us reliant on ridiculously out of date WTO rules - there is a reason that of the 164 members of the WTO only 6 do not have or are working towards a free trade deal with the EU.
 

 

I have no argument with anything you just said above, but lets deal with facts, the British people voted to leave the EU, leave means leave. the EU first tried to claim we would owe them 50billion euro then a few weeks later they claimed it was 100billion, and also that the money would have to agreed first lol, not to mention all the threats from various people about how they were going to punish the British people, well they can say just about what ever they like - TM did the right thing - what she basically told them was - if the nonsense doesn't stop and they continue down this path it will be a very short first and last meeting and she was 100% correct.

 

The EU cannot survive without UK funds, Germany will not make up the shortfall and neither will France, they said they wanted to work towards a closer EU community and on the same breath are already planning a "2 speed EU" which if I understand that correctly is effectively splitting up the EU  (Germany protecting their own interests along with France) they are a laughing stock and they need to realise that the UK is leaving no matter what happens - it can be on good terms for all concerned or not, but one thing is for sure, TM has made it very clear that if they don't play ball it will be a very short first and last meeting - they will not be bringing a cheque book with them.

 

If TM had made it clear (like Corbin) that they would not walk away no matter how much money they demanded then that is like walking into a car showroom handing them a wad of cash and saying I want a car - you know what you will get - the banger in the corner and no change and no refund 

Edited June 14, 2017 by smedly

[dunroaming]

4 hours ago, smedly said:

I don't understand all these people calling for a soft brexit, the truth of the matter is that T.May rightfully has taken nothing off the table going into the talks, people forget all the threats that took place early on from the big mouths in Brussels, her response was simple - if you are going to make impossible unreasonable stupid ridiculous demands then we will walk away (so called hard brexit), I see absolutely nothing wrong with that response, if the EU insists on this payout settlement of some estimated 100billion euro before any talks even start then that would leave TM no option but to walk out the door, she made that clear and so she should have, even 50 billion euro is a walk out the door sum, they might get an agreement to pay maybe 10-15 billion at most.

 

All this talk of hard/soft brexit is nonsense - if one side or the other is making impossible demands then there is no option but to head for the door and nobody would fault the British for that

Yes but you see May's hard line attitude cost her dearly and  destroyed the Tories majority.  Her approach was completely wrong and the voters gave her a bloody nose over it.  She doesn't have the backing of the people and nor does she have the backing of her own party.  Dead woman walking is about right.  Gone is the strong woman image she tried to promote and you are left with a quite pathetic figure.

 

It will be a soft Brexit because that is what the vast majority of people around her want as well as the rest of the country.  She won't walk away with do deal as that is now off of the table.  She may survive until the deal is done but then she is toast! 

[ilostmypassword]

7 minutes ago, smedly said:

I have no argument with anything you just said above, but lets deal with facts, the British people voted to leave the EU, leave means leave. the EU first tried to claim we would owe them 50billion euro then a few weeks later they claimed it was 100billion, and also that the money would have to agreed first lol, not to mention all the threats from various people about how they were going to punish the British people, well they can say just about what ever they like - TM did the right thing - what she basically told them was - if the nonsense doesn't stop and they continue down this path it will be a very short first and last meeting and she was 100% correct.

 

The EU cannot survive without UK funds, Germany will not make up the shortfall and neither will France, they said they wanted to work towards a closer EU community and on the same breath are already planning a "2 speed EU" which if I understand that correctly is effectively splitting up the EU  (Germany protecting their own interests along with France) they are a laughing stock and they need to realise that the UK is leaving no matter what happens - it can be on good terms for all concerned or not, but one thing is for sure, TM has made it very clear that if they don't play ball it will be a very short first and last meeting - they will not be bringing a cheque book with them.

 

If TM had made it clear (like Corbin) that they would not walk away no matter how much money they demanded then that is like walking into a car showroom handing them a wad of cash and saying I want a car - you know what you will get - the banger in the corner and no change and no refund 

Have you ever looked at how much France spends on the EU? The net is about 0.2 percent of its gross national income.

http://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countries/member-countries/france_en

 If the UK left France might have to pay 0.25 percent of its gross national income.  This is an unbearable burden for the French economy?

And I guess you're not aware that this year Germany had a record budget surplus. The increase in costs generated by Brexit would hardly amount to a rounding error to the German economy.

Edited June 14, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[smedly]

41 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Yes but you see May's hard line attitude cost her dearly and  destroyed the Tories majority.  Her approach was completely wrong and the voters gave her a bloody nose over it.  She doesn't have the backing of the people and nor does she have the backing of her own party.  Dead woman walking is about right.  Gone is the strong woman image she tried to promote and you are left with a quite pathetic figure.

 

It will be a soft Brexit because that is what the vast majority of people around her want as well as the rest of the country.  She won't walk away with do deal as that is now off of the table.  She may survive until the deal is done but then she is toast! 

The ideal outcome and what all are aiming for will be a soft brexit or to put it in other terms - an agreement that works for all concerned, but and I go back to the demands being made by Brussels (Germany) for the huge money payment of tens of  billions of euro up front - unless they drop that nonsense the talks will go nowhere, it is a deal breaker and May has already told them as much, no British person would agree to it - it is ridiculous bordering on crazy and yet Brussels are demanding it and want it agreed to before anything else, THAT IS A SHOW STOPPER - May has rightly told them it is not on, that will end the talks unless Brussels (Germany) drop it.

 

Do you think the UK should just pay 100billion  or what ever crazy amount they are demanding  ????????? what alternative is there but to walk away if they don't drop it, it is a show stopper and May has told them that, it's not even a question of whether you agree with May or not, it is just crazy - they are making this condition that talks cannot continue without the money being agreed.................up to them and also up to May and the British people - they will not agree to it, not  now not ever

 

It is stupidity beyond belief to make such demands  

[dunroaming]

17 minutes ago, smedly said:

Do you think the UK should just pay 100billion  or what ever crazy amount they are demanding  ????????? what alternative is there but to walk away if they don't drop it, it is a show stopper and May has told them that, it's not even a question of whether you agree with May or not, it is just crazy

of course there will be a cost in leaving and that must be broken down and justified.  This will be a part of the negotiations and will have to be resolved very early on. It really doesn't matter what May has said previously because now other people will be making the negotiating positions and she will just be the mouthpiece.

 

Of course we all want a positive outcome from this divorce and a soft brexit seems the best way to achieve it. Because May's credibility has been so badly damaged I cannot see how she is the right person to spearhead it.

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, smedly said:

nonsense, out is out and the sooner the better, the people of the UK are fed up being dictated to by Germans while they continue to use the EU to boost themselves, enough is enough

 

In essence, you're advocating that leaving the EU rather than standing up to the Germans is a better option? Giving in to bullies rarely works as we've seen in the past.

 

If you check, you'll see that on many EU policies and procedures the Germans viewed the UK as their allies; often both being against the French view.

 

Of the people who voted in the EU referendum 52% voted leave 48% remain. Hardly a vast majority. But dope Cameron forgot or couldn't be bothered with winning margin for change rules on one of most important decisions this century.

 

 

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Have you ever looked at how much France spends on the EU? The net is about 0.2 percent of its gross national income.

http://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countries/member-countries/france_en

 If the UK left France might have to pay 0.25 percent of its gross national income.  This is an unbearable burden for the French economy?

And I guess you're not aware that this year Germany had a record budget surplus. The increase in costs generated by Brexit would hardly amount to a rounding error to the German economy.

 

Interesting that neither France nor Germany have been meeting the defense spends they freely committed to as part of NATO.

 

Maybe their contributions too versus rebates from the EU budget are also less than honest?

 

 

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, Orac said:

 

I only said possibly a majority.

48% of "the people" voted to stay in anyway and, since the vote I have not seen any positive arguments for them to change their mind - all I have noticed from those campaigning to leave is mudslinging against various EU officials about them bullying and punishing the U.K. which, frankly, speaks more to the weak and wobbly constitution of the Brexiteers if they can't take a bit of flak and criticism coming out of decisions they made.

Of the remaining 52% who voted to leave, they are now using arguments to defend leaving that would have been branded part of Project Fear had they been uttered prior to the referendum.

The halcyon days of buses declaring how much more money we would have had to spend on the NHS and "they need us more than we need them" are now replaced with, according to you, a bill of 100 billion Euros that we should walk away from which would remove the possibility of any free trade deal from the table for many years and leave us reliant on ridiculously out of date WTO rules - there is a reason that of the 164 members of the WTO only 6 do not have or are working towards a free trade deal with the EU.
 

 

 

If the referendum was re-run tomorrow I doubt the result would be anything like. Many of those who voted to leave are very bitter now they realize how they were duped with lies, false promises and left in the lurch.

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Interesting that neither France nor Germany have been meeting the defense spends they freely committed to as part of NATO.

 

Maybe their contributions too versus rebates from the EU budget are also less than honest?

 

 

Not true. They have made a commitment to get their defense spending up to 2 percent of GDP by 2024. 

[Baerboxer]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

Not true. They have made a commitment to get their defense spending up to 2 percent of GDP by 2024. 

 

Have they met the figures they committed to so far?  

[evadgib]

Election 2017: ministerial appointments

[ilostmypassword]

3 hours ago, smedly said:

The ideal outcome and what all are aiming for will be a soft brexit or to put it in other terms - an agreement that works for all concerned, but and I go back to the demands being made by Brussels (Germany) for the huge money payment of tens of  billions of euro up front - unless they drop that nonsense the talks will go nowhere, it is a deal breaker and May has already told them as much, no British person would agree to it - it is ridiculous bordering on crazy and yet Brussels are demanding it and want it agreed to before anything else, THAT IS A SHOW STOPPER - May has rightly told them it is not on, that will end the talks unless Brussels (Germany) drop it.

 

Do you think the UK should just pay 100billion  or what ever crazy amount they are demanding  ????????? what alternative is there but to walk away if they don't drop it, it is a show stopper and May has told them that, it's not even a question of whether you agree with May or not, it is just crazy - they are making this condition that talks cannot continue without the money being agreed.................up to them and also up to May and the British people - they will not agree to it, not  now not ever

 

It is stupidity beyond belief to make such demands  

Or maybe it's because they think either it will make the UK stay or make it definitively leave. Maybe the EU actually prefers either of those options to a soft Brexit.

[Retiredandhappyhere]

6 hours ago, Orac said:

 

I only said possibly a majority.

48% of "the people" voted to stay in anyway and, since the vote I have not seen any positive arguments for them to change their mind - all I have noticed from those campaigning to leave is mudslinging against various EU officials about them bullying and punishing the U.K. which, frankly, speaks more to the weak and wobbly constitution of the Brexiteers if they can't take a bit of flak and criticism coming out of decisions they made.

Of the remaining 52% who voted to leave, they are now using arguments to defend leaving that would have been branded part of Project Fear had they been uttered prior to the referendum.

The halcyon days of buses declaring how much more money we would have had to spend on the NHS and "they need us more than we need them" are now replaced with, according to you, a bill of 100 billion Euros that we should walk away from which would remove the possibility of any free trade deal from the table for many years and leave us reliant on ridiculously out of date WTO rules - there is a reason that of the 164 members of the WTO only 6 do not have or are working towards a free trade deal with the EU.
 

 

Will the 158 members of the WTO, "who either have or are working towards a free trade deal with the EU",  have each to pay billions of Euros each year for the privilege, as well as accepting EU rules on free movement of people etc etc?    If not, why cannot the UK have a similar deal?  

 

Regarding the so-called "exit fee". does the calculation of 60 to 100 billion Euros as quoted so far take into account the UK's proper share of EU assets accumulated while Britain was a member?  The buildings alone must be worth a few bob. 

[dunroaming]

13 minutes ago, Retiredandhappyhere said:

Will the 158 members of the WTO, "who either have or are working towards a free trade deal with the EU",  have each to pay billions of Euros each year for the privilege, as well as accepting EU rules on free movement of people etc etc?    If not, why cannot the UK have a similar deal?  

 

Regarding the so-called "exit fee". does the calculation of 60 to 100 billion Euros as quoted so far take into account the UK's proper share of EU assets accumulated while Britain was a member?  The buildings alone must be worth a few bob. 

I suspect you are not the only one questioning the amount the UK is being asked to pay so let's give the negotiators on both sides the opportunity to examine the figures and reach an amicable agreement.

[superal]

12 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

In essence, you're advocating that leaving the EU rather than standing up to the Germans is a better option? Giving in to bullies rarely works as we've seen in the past.

 

If you check, you'll see that on many EU policies and procedures the Germans viewed the UK as their allies; often both being against the French view.

 

Of the people who voted in the EU referendum 52% voted leave 48% remain. Hardly a vast majority. But dope Cameron forgot or couldn't be bothered with winning margin for change rules on one of most important decisions this century.

 

 

Spot on about the winning margin statement , in hindsight was this ever discussed ?  For such important matters a convincing margin of votes to change is sometimes invoked .  I bet Cameron had wished he had thought about that .

[rockingrobin]

13 minutes ago, superal said:

Spot on about the winning margin statement , in hindsight was this ever discussed ?  For such important matters a convincing margin of votes to change is sometimes invoked .  I bet Cameron had wished he had thought about that .

The winning margin was debated  as an amendment , as the act was going through parliament ,but refused by the minister for Europe at the time (D.Liddington), becuase the referendum was advisory

[evadgib]

It should have been mandatory/compulsory as should voting in GE's; removing any "what ifs" at a stroke.

 

PR, Secure electronic voting from anywhere on the planet and votes for life can no longer be ignored either.

Edited June 15, 2017 by evadgib

[rockingrobin]

1 minute ago, evadgib said:

It should have been mandatory/compulsory as should voting in GE's; removing the "what ifs" at a stroke.

If people dont wish to vote , for whatever reason, then is that not their democratic right

[superal]

9 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

The winning margin was debated  as an amendment , as the act was going through parliament ,but refused by the minister for Europe at the time (D.Liddington), becuase the referendum was advisory

So the referendum vote was not legal in the eyes of the law , only advisory and  the UK is leaving the EU because the MPs decided that we should . All a bit muddled , controversial and surprising .  

[nausea]

15 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

The winning margin was debated  as an amendment , as the act was going through parliament ,but refused by the minister for Europe at the time (D.Liddington), becuase the referendum was advisory

 

The referendum was "advisory", you could've fooled me, "cast-iron mandate" more like.

[evadgib]

2 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

If people dont wish to vote , for whatever reason, then is that not their democratic right

HMG can add 'Jedi' or similar for non conformists although frankly they're not my concern.

[rockingrobin]

42 minutes ago, superal said:

Spot on about the winning margin statement , in hindsight was this ever discussed ?  For such important matters a convincing margin of votes to change is sometimes invoked .  I bet Cameron had wished he had thought about that .

Going off topic a bit,

The referendum itself was lawful, the result advisory, non binding.

there is some minor commentery on when and how the formal decision to leave was taken, to satisfy Art 50(1).The Act of notification subsequently passed after the court cases could be intepreted as an implicit decision to leave ( Parliaments intention) , but as the so called three knights opinion suggested, parliament when repealing and making law has to be specific, so questioned if the UK could satisfy making the decision before negotations have been completed.

It should be noted Art50(1) is for the domestic courts and not the ECJ , therefore if no challenge to the decision making is brought it becomes a moot point

[nontabury]

17 hours ago, dunroaming said:

of course there will be a cost in leaving and that must be broken down and justified.  This will be a part of the negotiations and will have to be resolved very early on. 

That's if you think we should pay anything.Not all of us do.