Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[The Larch]

Interesting...

[The Brain]

Yeah. WTF Sunderland.

[Josquius]

Sunderland's new name is Kamikaze City.
By all logic it should have been one of the most pro EU of cities, yet it has became the poster child of brexit.

[Syt]

[...]

[The Larch]

Gardening personality? 

[Tamas]

Gardening personality? 

[The Larch]

Gardening personality? 

There must be a reason why Brits love to live in houses with tiny gardens, I guess.  Must be one of the most bizarre British fascinations to me.

[Tamas]

Gardening personality? 

There must be a reason why Brits love to live in houses with tiny gardens, I guess.  Must be one of the most bizarre British fascinations to me.

I think such a tiny garden would just serve for me as a daily reminder of how closed-in my living space is.

[mongers]

It's just a consequence of having more than 1,000 people per square mile.

Plus quite a few places aren't suitable for large blocks of flats. For instance where I live, on a former 'island' in a river, so all I have below me is thick alluvial* soil and lots of loose gravel. 



* it seems to be thicker here than some areas of the valley, perhaps because for centuries the sight was also a saw mill, so a lot of extra organic material mulched down.

[Zanza]

Michel Barnier, the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, sat down with the Financial Times and other European newspapers on Monday to give his first interview since the process of the UK leaving the bloc began. Here is the edited transcript of Mr Barnier's introductory remarks and exchange with reporters.

Michel Barnier: We're at an important moment, because the decision of the UK to quit the EU is a serious decision. Right now it's about putting it in place, without wasting time. Here, as [Jean-Claude Juncker, European Commission president], said, and as I've said myself several times, we are ready. Next week the European Council will get together. At every EU27 council I should give an account of the progress of the negotiations.

Next week, it will be three months after the sending of the Article 50 letter. We haven't negotiated, we haven't progressed. Thus we must begin this negotiation. We are ready as soon as the UK itself is ready.

It could be tomorrow morning as Mr Juncker said, it could be next week, it could be the 19th [of June] as I proposed. Today I will have a meeting with Theresa May's personal envoy, her sherpa Olly Robbins, to have a first discussion on the conditions and organisation of the negotiation. We should start very quickly because time is passing and we have to work to the timeline fixed by the treaty. It will take us several months to draw out the conditions of an orderly withdrawal, with difficult and sensitive points of discussion. So let's not waste time.

Q: What did you make of the UK elections? Are you concerned that negotiations could be made more difficult?

Michel Barnier: I am concerned [by the need] to have a partner for the negotiation as quickly as possible. That's my preoccupation today. I need a British delegation on the other side of the table, a head of the British delegation that is stable, accountable and that has a mandate.

We're publishing our two documents on the rights of citizens and the financial settlement. The UK will doubtless have their own propositions that I will examine when I have them. We need explanations and precision on these subjects, during the negotiations. And then secondly, the UK government should make explicit what it hopes for from the new partnership.

What I know now is [taken from] the white paper, and the letter from Mrs May. I'm working with these two documents [to understand] the UK position.

Q: Is it worrying that you could be negotiating with a minority government dependent on [Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party], given the sensitivity of the Irish question?

Michel Barnier: The question of borders is one of the three big areas where the UK decision to quit the EU has created uncertainty — lots of uncertainty.

In particular, the Irish question is one I'm very attentive to. We must preserve the Good Friday agreement in all its dimensions, maintain the common travel area as it is, and respect the rules of the single market. [We must] organise in one manner or another the control of people and goods which leave or enter the EU. I think it's possible.

Q: Are you now preparing for a soft Brexit?

Michel Barnier: I don't know what hard Brexit or soft Brexit mean. I read yesterday "open Brexit" too. Brexit is the withdrawal from the EU — it is the UK that decided that. We're implementing it. I'll say it clearly: there's no spirit of revenge, no punishment, no naivety either, and truth. Truth on what Brexit means, what leaving the EU signifies, by its consequences. The citizens have the right to know this truth.

All options are available and on the table. Every one of these options and models has its own balance, in terms of rights and obligations. The UK government knows the rules, the conditions for each one of its options. We're preparing for all options — including that of a "no deal", which has been mentioned by a certain number of British leaders. As for constructive options, they are available, with rules that we will not compromise on. We will not accept any cherry picking.

Q: Have UK citizens been sufficiently informed of the EU's red lines?

Michel Barnier: There's always work to be done. What I observed in the debate around the referendum — very few people in charge explained what Brexit meant, or what were the consequences of Brexit. It's time now to explain [them].

Q: Are you worried you might need to push back your timeline? Three months have already passed . . . 

Michel Barnier: My preoccupation is that time is passing — it's passing quicker than anyone believes — because the subjects we need to deal with are extraordinarily complex from a technical, judicial and financial point of view. That's why we're ready to start very quickly. I can't negotiate with myself.

Q: So today, you're not thinking of the possibility of pushing back this date?

Michel Barnier: If we work seriously, I see neither the usefulness nor the interest of pushing back this date. Why? Because every extra delay is a source of instability which we don't need, which the economy doesn't need.

Q: Given this tight timetable, would you say there is no room for manoeuvring? If there's any drama, you cannot meet the timetable, right?

Michel Barnier: There won't be any drama from my side. The UK has decided to leave the EU. I know the emotions, the political, passionate dimension, I'm a politician. But we must treat this question in a judicial, serious manner.

Q: Is there a danger is that if we do lose time, we won't have time to discuss that third stage of a future relationship in a way that the UK would hope?

Michel Barnier: That's what we call sequencing. But this sequencing — it's non-negotiable for us — was not created, wanted, in order to create problems. It was wanted in order to resolve problems. Because once again, there is a sensitive dimension to the question of the rights of citizens . . . and from the British side too.

There is such sensitivity around the question of the financial settlement that I would like to very quickly play down this question, and find concrete, pragmatic and just solutions. We need trust to build the future relationship.

Among the options which are available, the one that the UK has asked for or proposed is that of a "free-trade agreement". It's lots of work — that I'd like to start as soon as possible. This free-trade agreement is of a unique character with regards to commercial agreements in EU history. [Current] commercial agreements were negotiated in a process of regulatory convergence. In the case of the UK, it's the opposite.

We are totally integrated, because we are in the single market, and we are going to diverge. What becomes of this divergence? Is it controlled, inspected, checked — and by who? Or does it become a tool of regulatory competition, with consequences on social, environmental, consumer rights? On the "level playing field", of state aid, of competition, of tax? Those are questions that I'm asked.

Q: The UK may soon make a "generous" offer to protect some citizens' rights. Does the offer seem generous to you?

Michel Barnier: I don't really know what '"generous" means . . . I want to preserve the rights of the British in the EU and the citizens of the 27 in the UK, and [maintain] the rights acquired by the citizens and their families up until the day of Brexit in a lasting manner. I don't know if it's generous to preserve the rights of people and their families who are worried. I want to be fair in this situation.

Q: When it comes to a compromise or a new relationship with the UK, will it be easy to keep the unity of the EU27?

Michel Barnier: Unity doesn't fall from the sky. You must build it every day. We've built it together for six months, it wasn't easy. My mission will be to preserve it.

Interview with the chief negotiator on the EU side. I found especially the part about free trade agreements and citizen rights interesting: No matter what the agreement will eventually be, it will be worse than what we have now from the perspective of the EU. That also means that for them a "generous" offer by May on citizens rights will still be worse than what we have now and thus not be something that can be used to sweeten a deal on trade or the fiscal divorce settlement.

[Valmy]

Wow. It is hard to read stuff like that and not be struck by how shitty the UK's situation seems to be.

Good luck May.

[Zanza]

I think that's not really her problem anymore.

[dps]

I suspect Britain is going to get the hardest Brexit possible--one with no agreements at all with the EU.  Which is probably the worst all-around outcome possible for both the UK and the EU.

[Valmy]

I suspect Britain is going to get the hardest Brexit possible--one with no agreements at all with the EU.  Which is probably the worst all-around outcome possible for both the UK and the EU.

We will see. Under a threat of disaster it is amazing what people can accomplish.

If not well...see leavers it was not scare mongering after all was it?

[dps]

I suspect Britain is going to get the hardest Brexit possible--one with no agreements at all with the EU.  Which is probably the worst all-around outcome possible for both the UK and the EU.

We will see. Under a threat of disaster it is amazing what people can accomplish.

If not well...see leavers it was not scare mongering after all was it?

Well, I'm still not convinced that even a Brexit with no agreements in place will be the disaster some have predicted.