UK and EU negotiators are understood to have reached a tentative agreement on their future relationship surrounding services, as well as the exchange of data, with just five months to go before Britain leaves.
With five months to secure a Brexit deal before Britain is due to leave the EU, business leaders are demanding certainty over the kind of trade terms the divorce will deliver.
The services deal would give UK companies access to European markets as long as British financial regulation remained broadly aligned with the EU’s, The Times reported.
Following the news, the British pound was up nearly 1 percent versus the dollar overnight at 1.28 US dollars.
Theresa May Mark One buried UKIP. Theresa May Mark Two is digging it up. That is the only conclusion one can reasonably draw from today’s Opinium poll for the Observer, which shows Labour on 40 per cent, as last month, the Conservatives on 36 per cent, down six points, and UKIP on eight per cent, up five points. The movement from the second to the third could scarcely be clearer.
That rise in support for what many will still think of, wrongly, as Nigel Farage’s party isn’t because of rebooted support for him. Nor will voters be enamoured with the charms of Gerald Batten, of whom most of them will never have heard. The driver of this result is plainly the Government’s new Brexit policy.
25 per cent of those polled approve of the way that the Prime Minister is handling Brexit, down from 30 per cent last month, while 56 per cent disapprove, up from 45 per cent last month. Her net approval rating was minus eight per cent last month; it is 24 per cent this month. The percentage of those who believe that Brexit is one of the most important issues facing the country is at its highest ever recorded by Opinium – 51 per cent this month (it was 42 per cent last month). Overall, 32 per cent of those surveyed supported May’s Brexit plan and 31 per cent opposed it.
The EU referendum result killed UKIP. After all, what was the point of supporting a party which aimed to make Britain independent once the British people had voted for precisely that? The cause of Brexit was handed overnight to the governing party, which now had an instruction from the electorate to deliver it. During the period between the referendum and last summer’s general election, Theresa May presented herself as the woman who would fulfil that mandate for “citizens of somewhere”: “Brexit means Brexit”.
For those that voted to Brexit this is a step in the right direction, but there are many other hurdles to pass in the next few month to 2019.
Slowly but surely progress is being made, now the EU need to accept what will be occurring and negotiate more than they are at present.
The Divorce Bill is but one stage, Irish border and EU and UK nationals are others. However, the main other areas need to be discussed being trade, security, financial market dealings and many others, these should be being discussed in tandem with the aforementioned. To not do so will be chaos not only for the UK but also the EU.
Discussions should be by Adults and not, as it appears, children and should be for the benefit of all not just a stated few.
There are so many twists and turns that organisations and people are making over Brexit that at times it is impossible to understand and ascertain where any of them are in relation to an eventual Brexit outcome..
Surely it would be in the best interests of the UK for everyone of us to make clear where we stand.
As this article states both McDonnell and Corbyn both were strongly against joining the EU and retaining in the EU, but were prepared to follow the Labour Party line of staying in the EU, although their visible support was hard to see. Surely they should have stood by their long held principles.
They are not on their own as Cameron tried to dupe the UK population into believing he would negotiate the best deal for the UK or would walk away, which would be his basis to put to the country in the referendum and we can all see he was not successful in achieving a best deal and therefore would never have walked away.
Ukip with Farage were always to come out of the EU completely, while the Lib Dems were always for staying no matter what the deal.
Currently the Conservatives would appear to wish to leave the EU, but cannot decide on what deal, while Labour appear to want to come out, but at the sametime stay in for the parts they like.
In the last election the country were apparently not with UKip or the Lib Dems, but more for the undecided Labour and to some extent the possible out Tories.
So we are now negotiating with the EU, but on what basis. There is still a mishmash of detail from the Tories, while the official line from the EU is to punish the UK for daring to exercise its right to leave the EU.
While in the EU various people and the 27 other EU members are unsure what they also want. They want the best deal for themselves rather than a combined approach from each of the 27.
From my point of view how the 27 are behaving is how the EU is and was for the 28, when it should have been with one voice, The EU bureaucrats again appear to be in it for themselves, well they are politicians or similar and so are only there for their own power, which is my view of most, if not all politicians.
Will it be when the UK leaves the EU, for that was the will of the people, a good result for the UK, well that is for the future and so will how the EU continues, if it so does.
Currently the EU is not working for the majority of the populations within the UK, but is for its officials, so you can see why its officials do not wish any changes which could rocks their current lifestyles, but then again this could be said for the political elite in any country.
These negotiations need to be continuing and the bombastic and intransigent approach from both sides needs to change. I may be biased, but I do feel this is more so for the EU negotiators in the allout requirement to punish the UK as an example to other counties who may have an inclination to leave or some other manner of change for the EU. If they do not then I do feel the EU will not continue, as it may not anyway, but if they do achieve a reasonable settlement for the UK then the EU may have more of a survival chance than at present.
David Cameron has opened discussions at the European Council about the changes he wants to see in the European Union ahead of a UK referendum on membership.
This is an unprecedented step. It is the first time an EU leader has set out political conditions for a country to stay in the EU.
Cameron held individual meeting and calls with each of the leaders ahead of the Brussels summit on June 25, so his negotiation points will not have come as news to them. But he is still keeping the detail light, and crucially, is cagey on his motivations.
This matters because co-operation from his fellow leaders may well hinge on what those motivations are.
The key issues on the table include handing greater powers to national parliaments, cutting red tape, allowing the UK to opt out of the principle of “ever closer union”, and restricting welfare entitlements for EU migrants.
What he means by giving more power to national parliaments is very vague at the moment. Does he want to repatriate powers from the EU? And if so, which ones? Or does it mean more oversight over EU legislation? If so, Cameron’s request may be more of a rhetorical tool than a substantive demand. The British government has not exactly shown enormous interest in scrutinising EU legislation over the past few years.
The issue of red tape is not particularly controversial, and it seems that Junker’s Commission has made this one of its top priorities. And freeing the UK’s commitment to the “ever closer union” may not necessarily require a full EU Treaty change. The EU’s legal machinery may find a way to include this in an additional UK-specific annex.
The big ask
At this point probably the most sticky issue relates to EU migration. Cameron has previously stated that he wants to limit immigration through quotas for EU workers. This is problematic as it infringes upon a fundamental EU freedom. The European Council’s President Donald Tusk has reportedly stated that the fundamental values of the EU “are not for sale and so are non-negotiable“.
Cameron appears to have already toned down his rhetoric on this issue, and is now focusing his argument on benefits for EU migrants. He wants, for a start, to repatriate EU migrants after six months if they are unemployed. This is controversial as it goes against the fundamental EU principle of free movement. It is also potentially hard to implement, as it will require very rigid immigration controls. It is unclear how the government will track these EU migrants in the first place.
He also wants longer transition periods for EU migrants before they can claim tax credits and have access to social housing. The question here is whether this could be legally implemented through UK legislation without EU Treaty change.
Cameron’s argument will be that since the UK system is non contributory – unlike other EU member states – this change does not necessarily contravene EU legislation. Perhaps less controversially, he wants to stop migrants claiming benefits for children living outside the UK. These proposals have already been criticised by the adviser to the Polish PM who argued that this might be tantamount to discrimination.
And here lies the problem. Cameron’s success may depend on what his goal actually is. Is the objective to stop EU migrants from abusing the UK welfare state or to stop them moving to the UK altogether? If it’s the former, some EU leaders may concede to some of his demands. But if it’s the latter, Cameron is unlikely to be a winner in the EU.
Cameron will now present his full reform plan at the next European Council in December. The PM has already conceded that Treaty change may not be possible, so it looks like he will have to be very pragmatic regarding what he asks of EU partners. And he’ll not only need to be convincing about the changes he wants – but why he wants them. ………….’