Monthly Archives: March 2017

Britain, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

The sinister tone for Brexit has been set with security warning

BREXIT

Most people would have expected Prime Minister Theresa May to strike a conciliatory tone following the invoking of Article 50. Despite being one of the most significant junctures in British political history, the record indicates that she took the opposite stance.

On a day when Mrs May should have reached out to Europe, she instead issued a thinly veiled threat by raising the spectre of weakened security relations post Brexit.

Any failure to reach agreement between the UK and EU, she said, ‘would mean our co-operation in the fight against crime and terrorism would be weakened.’

In her letter to Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, which contained no fewer than 11 references to security issues, she added: ‘In this kind of scenario, both the United Kingdom and the European Union would of course cope with the change, but it is not the outcome that either side should seek.’

While there can be little doubt that Britain’s security and military apparatus – coupled with its close ties with U.S. intelligence agencies – is the envy of Europe, such remarks were felt as being ill-judged. In some EU countries, such as Belgium and France, who have a reasonably friendly relationship with the UK, and who have borne the brunt of terror attacks in recent years, Mrs May’s remarks risk being seen as crass and insensitive.

If, as seems to be the case, she sincerely believes trading security for prosperity is an acceptable opening salvo in what will be long and torturous negotiations, her reading of the situation is clumsy and damaging. There will be many across Europe, as well as here in the UK, who will clearly see it that way.

Terrorism, as the west well knows, does not respect borders or constitutions, and whatever form the UK’s future relationship with the EU takes, working closely with our European neighbours will be fundamental to tackling a global problem.

As Tim Farron, leader of the Liberal Democrats, pointed out: ‘Security is too important to be used as a bargaining chip and this will backfire in any negotiations, which rather than building up alliances will leave Britain even more isolated.’

After widespread criticism of Ms May’s letter, Downing Street attempted to backtrack, insisting it referred only to security arrangements agreed via the EU, such as the European Arrest Warrant and Europol.

But by then, the damage had been done. Less than 24 hours after Article 50 was triggered, the UK finds itself on the back foot and a needlessly aggressive tone has been set.

Given the hostile contents of Ms May’s letter, the frosty reception on the continent was entirely predictable. A sombre-looking Mr Tusk delivered his own farewell message to the UK. ‘We already miss you,’ he said. ‘Thank you and goodbye.’ If nothing else, it was a remark which ought to impress upon British negotiators that Mr Tusk’s considerable armoury includes sarcasm.

The next two years will shape Britain’s future standing in the world. This week’s developments may be symbolic in more ways than one.

Standard
Britain, Government, Politics, Scotland

The Great Repeal Bill

UNITED KINGDOM

GRB

The Great Repeal Bill will mean the UK is no longer bound by the European Court of Justice

Following the triggering of Article 50 by Theresa May, another Brexit battle is looming in the form of the government’s Great Repeal Bill. This will involve converting all EU legislation into UK law and will be proposed in a white paper.

Research, however, has shown as many as 52,741 separate relevant pieces have been passed since 1990.

The huge scale of unravelling the legal mountain – including more than 6,700 new laws applying in the UK since 2010 alone – has prompted warnings that any “bonfire of these regulations” will be a tortuous and complex process.

The Great Repeal Bill is not appropriately named and really should be titled the great repatriation bill, because, initially at least, the legislation will repeal very little.

The bill’s initial purpose is to place the entire body of existing EU law on to the UK statute books, giving parliament the power to amend and repeal them in the future, once the UK formally leaves the EU.

The bill will be introduced in the next Queen’s Speech, and will then have to pass through parliament for ratification. The plan is for it to be passed ahead of the UK’s exit from the EU but to become law only on the date of departure.

The devolved administrations in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales could yet scupper the timetable. The government has suggested their consent will be required, as the bill will have implications in areas for which they are responsible.

Scotland’s Brexit minister has warned that Holyrood could take action if its interests are not represented in the negotiations.

The UK government says this could have “very significant consequences”, leaving “a hole in our law”.

A minimum of seven new bills will need to pass through parliament in order to deliver Brexit, although the final number could be as high as 15, according to the Institute for Government. That will leave “precious little space” for other business, the institute’s director of research has said.

To give a sense of the task at hand, about 20 new pieces of government legislation are normally unveiled during the Queen’s speech.

Standard
Britain, European Union, Government, Politics

The invoking of Article 50 is momentous and unprecedented

BREXIT

The triggering of Article 50 has been hailed as a momentous day for Britain – a day in which many have grown increasingly disillusioned with the EU and one which they feared they would never live to see.

Even after the historic result last June, it seemed possible that the europhile political and judicial Establishment might find ways to overturn the will of the people.

That they have not succeeded reflects huge credit on Theresa May.

‘Brexit means Brexit,’ she said – and now she has been as good as her word, as she has invoked Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. This has given Brussels formal notice that Britain will withdraw from the EU by 29 March 2019.

Now the hard work begins. No one should underestimate the challenge facing our negotiators, as they set about disentangling the UK from 40 years of regulation.

Up against them will be an unaccountable eurocracy, anxious to defend its perks and privileges, pressing for a punitive deal to dissuade other members tempted to follow Britain’s path to freedom.

The UK enters the talks in a better position than most dared hope. Confounding Project Fear, the economy is in robust shape and countries around the world are queuing up to do trade deals with Britain.

BREXIT cartoon:

EU cartoon

Standard