It's official then. We have got a long extension, longer than May wanted but not as long as President Tusk was suggesting beforehand. The new date is now the 31st of October (HERE) so it's a win all round I think. The PM didn't present a plan - as far as we know - and Macron didn't get the short extension he wanted either. The new cliff edge staring at us from afar is on Halloween. We are now aiming for a themed Brexit it seems. There appear to be no really onerous conditions on the granting of the extension. The full 8-page council decision is HERE.
The key part is the end of paragraph 10:
The European Council takes note of the commitment by the United Kingdom to act in a constructive and responsible manner throughout the extension period in accordance with the duty of sincere cooperation, and expects the United Kingdom to fulfil this commitment and Treaty obligation in a manner that reflects its situation as a withdrawing Member State. To this effect, the United Kingdom shall facilitate the achievement of the Union’s tasks and shall refrain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the Union’s objectives, in particular when participating in the decision-making processes of the Union
So the EU is relying on our 'commitment' to avoid some of the more ludicrous threats by some Brexiteers that we should be obstructive in Europe during the extension period - the one that WE asked for!
Theresa May gave a press conference at 2:45am this morning in Brussels where she said that although the delay extends until 31 October, the UK can leave before then if MPs pass her withdrawal deal:
"The UK should have left the EU by now and I sincerely regret the fact that I have not yet been able to persuade Parliament to approve a deal."The key word here is surely 'YET'.
The PM has not given up hope of getting MPs to accept her deal, something that doesn't seem more likely in October than it does in April, without major changes. And I wonder if this means a second referendum is out? The decision would have to be made very quickly unless the EU gave another extension.
As usual, Theresa May sat outside while the EU 27 decided our fate. One is tempted to say to Brexiteers, this is what you voted for, get used to it. After Brexit (assuming it happens) this will be our future. Decisions made in Brussels that will inevitably impact this country will be made while we are not only outside the room but outside the continent.
A few days ago I posted (HERE) about how future historians will view May's personality and character as being front and centre of the whole negotiating fiasco over Brexit. Anyone doubting it should read this opinion piece (HERE) from the New York Times at the end of March. It gives an insight into what it is to deal with the woman who is our PM. The writer, a columnist for The Times named Jenni Russel, says:
"Mrs. May’s extraordinary inability to develop or grasp the critical importance of alliances, friendships, coalitions and mutual understanding in politics has destroyed her premiership — and derailed the Brexit process from its beginning to its calamitous stalemate today".
"Mrs. May has made dozens of strategic mistakes in the past three years, from calling a general election that destroyed her parliamentary majority to vindictively sacking talented members of her cabinet who had previously opposed her, to allying herself with the most destructive and intransigent Brexiteers in her Conservative Party.
"Each of these errors has stemmed from the same fatal flaw: her belief that she can lead and win without paying attention to what her allies, enemies, colleagues — and potential collaborators — want or think. Famously wooden, she seems to regard other crucial players in politics as pieces she can move around a chessboard without motivations of their own".
"[She does not have] the mental agility or intellectual curiosity to handle a complex, shifting political landscape. An effective strategy for Brexit would have required endless brainstorming with key players, from diplomats to advisers. 'But you cannot sit in a room with her and have a free-ranging discussion, what about this, what about that. She just can’t do it.' Disastrously, she prefers secretive consultations with her husband Philip and just a couple of trusted colleagues.
It demonstrates why she was probably the worst possible person to lead the negotiations and with no sign of any breakthrough in cross-party talks with the Labour party she is still doggedly pushing the same deal that parliament has decisively rejected three times now. But is she likely to concede something in the coming days? Who knows?
The Council decision also states quite clearly (paragraph 12):
"This extension excludes any re-opening of the Withdrawal Agreement. Any unilateral commitment, statement or other act by the United Kingdom should be compatible with the letter and the spirit of the Withdrawal Agreement, and must not hamper its implementation. Such an extension cannot be used to start negotiations on the future relationship"
So, everything is being pushed back another seven months. To get the 'transition' or 'implementation' period finished by the end date of December 31st 2020, which was the original target date, we need to settle the future relationship in 14 months - MONTHS, that is. The 21 month period was always more of a distant hope than an expectation and even that is being cut to an impossibly short time for an FTA to be agreed.
Nobody seriously believes this can be done in under five YEARS and it will probably take much longer. So we will be following EU rules well into the late 2020s.
The Council decision also states quite clearly (paragraph 12):
"This extension excludes any re-opening of the Withdrawal Agreement. Any unilateral commitment, statement or other act by the United Kingdom should be compatible with the letter and the spirit of the Withdrawal Agreement, and must not hamper its implementation. Such an extension cannot be used to start negotiations on the future relationship"
So, everything is being pushed back another seven months. To get the 'transition' or 'implementation' period finished by the end date of December 31st 2020, which was the original target date, we need to settle the future relationship in 14 months - MONTHS, that is. The 21 month period was always more of a distant hope than an expectation and even that is being cut to an impossibly short time for an FTA to be agreed.
Nobody seriously believes this can be done in under five YEARS and it will probably take much longer. So we will be following EU rules well into the late 2020s.
Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, speaking (HERE) to reporters in Brussels ahead of the summit hinted we could be in a customs union and have some influence on EU policy. It's hard to know if this is genuine or a ploy to put pressure on the ERG or just Mr Varadkar thinking wishfully and aloud. This is what he said:
"If the UK were to decide to stay in a customs union, we would be able to develop something 'sui generis' so that they would have a say around things in terms of future trade deals, and a level playing field around labour rights and environmental rights."
Even before the new extension to October was agreed some prominent Brexiteers were again reaching for the humiliation and sell-out narrative. Andrew Lillico, a former member of the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee and an economist who seems to know nothing of industry was wrting in The Telegraph: 'Grovelling Britain has officially surrendered to a triumphant EU' (HERE). His short contribution was notable to me for the ending:
"If we had left on 29 March 2019, as scheduled, the EU would now be facing a no deal political crisis as the German economy was tipped over into outright recession. Populist parties would be surging in the polls in the run-up to the European elections, and senior EU political leaders would be bogged down with blaming each other.
"Indeed there would probably be pressure already emerging to come back to the UK with new proposals on the backstop".
How many ifs in the way of a successful Brexit? If only remainers had got behind it, if only the civil service hadn't blocked it, if only we had a PM who really believed in it. If, if, if.
Lillico seems to welcome one of our major trading partners being tipped into recession and chaos sweeping across the continent. He will be the last man clinging to the wreckage of the they-need-us-more-than-we-need-them illusion. He genuinely seems to think if we had played hard-ball and thrown ourselves off the cliff at the end of March the EU would have capitulated with the backstop!
Lillico seems to welcome one of our major trading partners being tipped into recession and chaos sweeping across the continent. He will be the last man clinging to the wreckage of the they-need-us-more-than-we-need-them illusion. He genuinely seems to think if we had played hard-ball and thrown ourselves off the cliff at the end of March the EU would have capitulated with the backstop!
With Lillico, and others in the Mark Francois mould, it will take a few years of 'grovelling' and humiliation before they realise leaving the top decision-making table in Europe and relegating ourselves to irrelevance was a bad idea.
