Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Josquius]

So.  It is done.  The quislings have voted to condemn the UK the the abyss.
Fucking ridiculous.  Should have been a much longer debate about this. Far more amendments to make sure we don't end up with a hard ultra Tory brexit.

Of course they think the EU is corrupt, they're the ones corrupting it

Given that Europe has pretty good book keeping and accounts well for its spending and waste it would be interesting to see some solid numbers for the share of the corruption the loony right are responsibsle for.

[Duque de Bragança]

The Danish EU-sceptical far-right party also has to pay back hundreds of thousands euros after misuse. A pattern is emerging.

Happens to Marine Le Pen here too. I am sure they can spin it as a proof of a conspiracy against them.

[Liep]

Of course not, Putin would hack electronic voting 

It's what the Dutch fear so they went analogue too.

http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/udland/holland-taeller-stemmer-i-haanden-frygt-russiske-hackere

[OttoVonBismarck]

Meanwhile the EU agreed on abolishing roaming charges.  Against the opposition of Germany and France apparently.

Given how badly Brexit is likely to be handled here, I fully expect the EU to be levy still roaming charges against the UK.   

As the European Common Aviation Area also stipulates oversight by the ECJ, you'll have to quit that as well, so it will likely get more expensive to fly from the UK to the continent anyway, so this is less of a concern then.

I think there's a good chance the EU as it is understood today falls apart eventually, so much of this is going to have to be worked out for more countries in the future.

[Zanza]

If the EU falls apart there will just no longer be all those multilateral cooperation projects. Stuff like no roaming charges only happens across borders with a framework like the EU firmly in place. So nothing will have to be worked out ... It would just be gone for good.

[Josquius]

I wonder how they will enforce the rules to stop people trying to live in Belgium with Bulgarian phone charges.

[Liep]

I wonder how they will enforce the rules to stop people trying to live in Belgium with Bulgarian phone charges.

I don't really see this becoming a widespread issue. At any rate Denmark has some of the cheapest data plans I've seen anywhere in the world so at least I won't bother.

[mongers]

Meanwhile the EU agreed on abolishing roaming charges.  Against the opposition of Germany and France apparently.

Given how badly Brexit is likely to be handled here, I fully expect the EU to be levy still roaming charges against the UK.   

As the European Common Aviation Area also stipulates oversight by the ECJ, you'll have to quit that as well, so it will likely get more expensive to fly from the UK to the continent anyway, so this is less of a concern then.

Zanza I think you take my post too seriously. 

[garbon]

Odd, Stephen Crabb has reappeared penning an editorial for the Guardian. You'd think he'd want the national spotlight off of him for longer.

[Zanza]

Split by 'Brexit,' May and Merkel Diverge on Wider Issues, Too

LONDON — In another era they could have been allies.

Both vicars' daughters and born just a few years apart, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain share an understated pragmatism and conservative roots, and have made their way in the still largely man's world of politics. But there could be so much more.

At a time when President Trump is lashing out at friend and foe, and when the macho politics of strongmen is resurgent from Moscow to Manila, when not just the European Union but high-minded Western values, free trade and security alliances are under attack, the two women might have worked together to defend the liberal global order.

Instead, because of Britain's vote in June to leave the European Union, they find themselves on opposite sides of the biggest divorce in recent European history, a chasm that has fundamentally reordered their priorities and is hindering them from cooperating on the broader issues.

At a meeting of European leaders in Malta last week, Mrs. May and Ms. Merkel abruptly canceled a planned bilateral meeting after a brief exchange during a sightseeing excursion was deemed enough. After lunch, when it came to discussing the threats facing Europe, Mrs. May was shown the door.

Their differing priorities were on ample display this past week as they dealt with both Mr. Trump and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey.

Ms. Merkel, whose overriding strategic ambition as Germany's leader is to save the European Union, has kept her distance from Mr. Trump. After his election, she firmly outlined the liberal values on which she was prepared to work with him, and she swiftly condemned his travel ban aimed at seven Muslim-majority countries.

Mrs. May, whose priority is to sign bilateral trade deals to offset her country's departure from Europe's single market, rushed to be the first foreign leader received by Mr. Trump after he took office.

Apparently pleased to be caught on camera holding his hand, she extended a speedy invitation for a state visit with Queen Elizabeth II. "Opposites attract," she beamed.

The invitation has since become a polarizing issue in Britain's sharply divided political landscape, and reinforced a view on the Continent that as Britain cuts ties with Europe, it will become America's lap dog.

"It's chalk and cheese," said Timothy Garton Ash, a professor of European history at Oxford. "But none of this tells you very much about the contrasting character of the two women. It tells you about the contrasting positions of the two countries."

If Ms. Merkel can still afford to be an idealist, Britain's plan to leave the European Union, or "Brexit," has turned Mrs. May into a calculating realist.

Within hours of leaving Mr. Trump, she was on a plane to Turkey. Upon arriving, Mrs. May waffled in her judgment of Mr. Trump's travel ban, later stiffening her criticism after a public outcry. She also negotiated a deal with Turkey involving the British defense company BAE Systems.

Five days later, Ms. Merkel paid her own visit to Mr. Erdogan and looked far clearer in her resolve when faced with the autocratic Turkish leader, calmly noting that she had raised controversial issues like press freedom and Turkey's future Constitution.

Privately, German officials express some sympathy for Mrs. May's sometimes clumsy diplomacy, understanding that she needs new partners if she is to make good on her promise of a "Global Britain."

But only occasionally have there been glimpses of the partnership that might have been.

In July, Ms. Merkel was almost effusive in welcoming Mrs. May, who chose Berlin for her first foreign trip as prime minister. The German chancellor emphasized their countries' "common values."

During a news conference, both women stiffly answered questions about Brexit. Then a journalist asked about their first impressions of each other. Their body language visibly loosened.

Ms. Merkel laughed, and Mrs. May said, "We have two women here who, if I may say so, want to get on with the job."

Their shared gender has led to many lazy comparisons, said Rosa Prince, the author of a biography of Mrs. May that is to be published this month.

"When you are a female political leader of a certain age, you are inevitably compared to Margaret Thatcher and Angela Merkel," she said. "Theresa May is nothing like Margaret Thatcher, but as it happens has quite a lot in common with Angela Merkel."

Each cautious and deliberate, they are both childless, have quiet husbands and enjoy watching sports. (Ms. Merkel knows soccer; Mrs. May prefers cricket.)

An Oxford graduate and lawmaker since 1997, Mrs. May was Britain's longest-serving home secretary of modern times before taking over from Prime Minister David Cameron in the confusion that followed the Brexit referendum. As Ms. Prince put it, "She was the last woman standing after all the men got burned or ran away."

Ms. Merkel, a scientist before she went into politics, is long used to being the only woman in the room. Evelyn Roll, a German biographer of Ms. Merkel, said that, on the advice of a German actress, the chancellor had deliberately lowered the pitch of her voice to deter men from talking over her.

Both women endured condescension and outright misogyny as they rose. Mrs. May has been called a "bloody difficult woman" by a fellow minister. Ms. Merkel's predecessor and mentor, Helmut Kohl, patronized her as "my girl."

Even after Ms. Merkel unseated Mr. Kohl as leader of the Christian Democrats amid a party financing scandal, Germany's male-dominated news media belittled her as efficient but bland — until she took office in 2005 and gradually became "Mutti," the mother of the nation.

"The only way men can process that a woman is in power is apparently to liken her to their mother," Ms. Roll said.

Ms. Merkel, who grew up in Germany's former Communist east, has never branded herself a feminist. But on her watch Germany has introduced boardroom quotas for women and created a generous system of paid parental leave shared between mothers and fathers.

Mrs. May once wore a T-shirt that read, "This is what a feminist looks like."

In 2005, Mrs. May co-founded a group called Women2Win to elect more women to Parliament and then nurture them, something that Mrs. Thatcher was often criticized for not doing.

"They are both serious people who don't grandstand, who don't play for the gallery," said Charles Grant, the director of the London-based Center for European Reform.

But the few times the two women have met privately have been highly scripted affairs with little warmth on display, according to one person who was present at more than one of their meetings.

"Theresa May is not good at small talk," said Ms. Prince, the biographer. "She is not an easygoing, smooth person. She is not a natural diplomat."

Ms. Merkel, however, is said to respect Mrs. May, considering her the "grown-up" in the British government, officials close to the chancellor say.

For her part, Mrs. May has long expressed admiration for the German chancellor.

"There are still people who don't rate her, are a bit dismissive, perhaps because of the way she looks and dresses," Mrs. May said in a 2012 interview with The Daily Telegraph. "What matters is, what has she actually done? And when you look at her abilities in terms of negotiation and steering Germany through a difficult time, then hats off to her."

The two will soon be on the opposite side of the negotiations as Brexit talks commence.

There is no wish in Berlin to "punish" Britain for leaving, said Peter Torry, Britain's ambassador in Germany until 2007, who still lives in the German capital.

But Berlin's tone has grown more distant as Britain's resolve to leave has hardened and their interests diverge.

Mrs. May has said she will turn Britain into a low-tax competitor if no favorable deal is offered by the European Union by the end of a two-year negotiation. But given her promises for a fairer society, that proposal is not considered credible or workable by many business and political leaders in Europe. Nor is her offer to be a bridge to the new American president.

At a news conference in Malta after the European Union summit meeting on Friday, Ms. Merkel was asked whether Germany should lower its corporation tax in line with the reductions signaled by Mrs. May and Mr. Trump.

"We have a tax system in Germany that is weathering challenges well," Ms. Merkel said, suggesting that well-functioning societies rely on raising a fair amount of tax.

One reason for the difference between the two women's approaches may be that one is just starting out as head of government, while the other has been in office for over a decade. "May is like Merkel 10 years ago," Ms. Roll said.

Though sometimes accused of lacking a vision for Europe, Ms. Merkel is calm and strategic, said Daniela Schwarzer, the director of the German Council on Foreign Relations' research institute in Berlin.

"That's obviously helpful in a situation where we risk seeing a lot of provocations coming out of Washington over the next few years," she said.

By contrast, Ms. Schwarzer added, Mrs. May seems "more tactical at this point."

One leader is consumed by preparing Britain's departure from the European Union, and the other with keeping the bloc together.

Could they develop a pragmatic relationship during the Brexit talks and beyond?

"It won't be a smooth ride," Ms. Prince said, "but it certainly has a better chance of succeeding with these two levelheaded women at the top."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/05/world/europe/brexit-theresa-may-angela-merkel.html?_r=0

[Zanza]

From Brussels with love
The multi-billion-euro exit charge that could sink Brexit talks

A bitter argument over money looms



THE mother of parliaments has spoken. On February 8th a large majority of MPs backed a bill authorising the government to begin Britain's withdrawal from the European Union by triggering Article 50 of the EU treaty. (A few dissenters were told off for singing "Ode to Joy", the EU's anthem, in the chamber.) After approval from the Lords, it should become law in March. But a different sort of Brexit bill is approaching, and will be harder to manage. It could yet scupper the whole process.

Before Britain's referendum last June, Leave campaigners promised voters that Brexit would save the taxpayer £350m ($440m) a week. That pledge was always tendentious. But officials in Brussels are drawing up a bill for departure that could mean Britain's contributions remain close to its membership dues for several years after it leaves. In a new report for the Centre for European Reform, a think-tank, Alex Barker, a Financial Times correspondent, puts the figure at anything between €24.5bn ($26.1bn) and €72.8bn.

The bill comprises three main elements. All, in Brussels's view, derive from the legal obligations implied by Britain's EU membership. The first, and largest, covers the gap between payments made in the EU's annual budget and the larger "commitments" made under its seven-year budgetary framework, approved by Britain and the 27 other EU governments. This overhang has been steadily growing. Britain's share of what Eurocrats call the reste à liquider (or amount yet to be paid) would be around €29.2bn, Mr Barker estimates.

The second element covers investment commitments to be executed after Britain leaves the EU in 2019. Most of this is "cohesion" funding for poorer countries (think motorways in Poland). Mr Barker reckons Britain's share could amount to €17.4bn. The government will struggle to explain why voters should be on the hook for payments made after Brexit. But the European Commission will argue that Britain's approval of the current budget, which runs until 2020, obliges it to cough up.

Pensions make up the third component. The liabilities for the EU's unfunded scheme stand at over €60bn. Britain may be prepared to cover its own nationals. But European officials insist that all liabilities are a joint responsibility, as Eurocrats work for the EU, not their national governments. This may be the fiercest row of all.

Brussels's demand will combine these three elements with a few miscellaneous items, and may adjust for Britain's share of EU assets, its budget rebate and payments it is due from the EU (see chart).



Michel Barnier, who will lead negotiations on behalf of the commission, is said to consider that the bill stands between €40bn and €60bn. The upper figure has anchored debate in Brussels, but attracts few takers in London. Some Brexiteers believe Britain has no obligation to pay anything at all once it leaves. If a compromise cannot be reached, Britain might find itself hauled before the International Court of Justice. The talks may be over almost before they have begun.

Sequencing presents a second problem. Mr Barnier insists on settling the bill and other divorce terms before substantial talks on the much bigger matter of a post-Brexit settlement, including a trade deal, can begin. But British officials want to negotiate in parallel, and perhaps to link the departure sum to the degree of access Britain will enjoy to the EU's single market after it leaves. The law lends Britain half a hand: Article 50 says that a departing country's withdrawal agreement shall take account of "the framework for its future relationship" with the EU. But hardliners like France insist on keeping the two issues apart. And with only two years to conclude an Article 50 deal, Britain cannot waste time talking about talks.

Some British officials note that the other EU governments can tweak Mr Barnier's negotiating guidelines if they find his line too tough. Britain might seek to exploit this by offering sweeteners: defence co-operation with the Baltics, perhaps, or infrastructure grants to Poland. The trouble is that reducing Britain's bill means cuts to the overall budget, which would irk countries that do well from it, or extra payments from the wealthier governments to make up the shortfall. That creates an unusual alignment of interests among the 27. "If there's one thing net payers and net recipients agree on, it's to make the bill for Britain as high as possible," says an EU official.

Most governments do not rule out a compromise. German officials, for example, will consider opening trade talks before the divorce is settled, so long as Britain accepts the principle that it has obligations that extend beyond its departure. As for the figure itself, like all EU budgetary negotiations it will be resolved via late-night Brussels summitry. "It's like buying a carpet in Morocco," says Jean-Claude Piris, a former head of the EU Council's legal service. "The figures are always negotiable."

But there are reasons to fear a breakdown. Theresa May, the prime minister, has done little to prepare voters for this debate. Neither her speeches nor the government's white paper on Brexit have said anything about an exit payment. A whopping financial demand will therefore inflame Britain's tabloids, limiting her room for manoeuvre. More worryingly, both sides believe they hold the whip hand. British officials think the hole Brexit blows in the EU's budget will force the Europeans into compromise for fear of getting nothing if the talks derail. EU officials, for their part, are convinced that the prospect of no withdrawal agreement, and therefore no trade deal, will terrify Britain into submission. "They'll be begging on their knees at the WTO," says one.

The EU is skilled at brokering compromise on budgets. Perhaps that will prove true for the Article 50 talks, too. But two things set the upcoming negotiation aside. First, there is no precedent. Second, goodwill towards Britain has largely evaporated; it will be negotiating with the EU as a third country, not a partner. Informal meetings between British and European officials have already witnessed blazing rows. About the only thing the sides agree on is that they may be heading for deadlock.

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21716629-bitter-argument-over-money-looms-multi-billion-euro-exit-charge-could-sink-brexit

I predict that the British government will be constrained by the furious pro-Brexit media and the Brexit hawks among the Tories to an extent that any compromise on this becomes impossible. Both sides will be really salty over this. There won't be a Brexit agreement between the EU and Britain apart from a few minor concessions on the personal rights upholding citizen rights. The post-Brexit relationship between Britain and the EU will not be friendly, but rather very cautious or even hostile. 

[dps]

There's no way that I know of that the EU can compel the Brits to pay anything after the Brits leave, and I certainly don't see why any British government would agree to payments on the order of magnitude suggested in the article.  There might be some kind of exit fee that gets negotiated, but I'd think it would be more or less a nominal amount (keeping in mind that "nominal" when we're talking about government budgets still might be a very large amount of money to any average individual).

[garbon]

Well this will certainly be a bit that flips more remainers to glad they are leaving Europe /make the Brexiters feel a greater sense of we told you so.

[Josquius]

Well this will certainly be a bit that flips more remainers to glad they are leaving Europe /make the Brexiters feel a greater sense of we told you so.

Maybe, if the media spin it right.
Though many on the remain side have long been well aware leaving won't actually save us money.

[garbon]

Well this will certainly be a bit that flips more remainers to glad they are leaving Europe /make the Brexiters feel a greater sense of we told you so.

Maybe, if the media spin it right.
Though many on the remain side have long been well aware leaving won't actually save us money.

I meant if the EU tries to levy such bills (not so much that money will be saved but look at how lovely the EU treats us).  Also wasn't it the Guardian who had their sort of qualitative tracking poll where they'd seen many of the remainers in their pool starting to adopt exit thoughts?