I do not understand the optimism in some corners that a deal will be reached. Events in the last two days should open some eyes to the large and increasing chance there simply is no deal.
The Wall Street Journal reports European Parliament Votes to Toughen Stance on Brexit.
Highlights
- By a 516-183 margin, the European Parliament voted to tighten Brexit discussion rules.
- On the disputed divorce bill, which EU officials expect to reach €60 billion ($64 billion), European politicians said it should cover not just all commitments made by the U.K. during its time as an EU member, but also so-called off-balance sheet items. These items would include, for example, the U.K.’s share of any losses made by the European Investment Bank during the U.K.’s time as a shareholder.
- Parliament also warned the U.K. not to pursue any bilateral deals with EU countries or nations outside the bloc for as long as Britain remained a member.
- The parliament also said the U.K. shouldn’t use cooperation in security and defense as a bargaining chip for trade relations.
- The UK must heed the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (Financial Times).
Statement by Michel Barnier
“We are not proposing this to be tactical or to create difficulties. It is an essential condition to maximize our chances of reach an agreement together in two years” said Michel Barnier, the European Commission’s chief negotiator.
Michel Barnier Translated
“We are taking this tough stance as a tactical measure to create difficulties, to punish the UK and to give warning to others not to leave.”
To that end, the EU acts like a Mafia or gang enforcer. Once in, don’t try to leave.
Barnier’s statement minimizes the chance of a deal.
Enter Gibraltar
The Spain Report noted Former Conservative Leader Suggests UK Would Go To War With Spain Over Gibraltar Brexit Spat.
I am quite sure that is a sensationalist click-bait headline. Nonetheless, Eurointelligence discussed it.
It is easy to dismiss the war threats over Gibraltar as a tempest in a teacup, and Theresa May has laughed off the suggestion that she might go to war over Gibraltar. To us, however, the controversy started by the former Tory leader Michael (now Lord) Howard, points to a real risk that the Brexit negotiations could be derailed over Gibraltar and that the failure to reach an agreement on the future EU/UK relation could have serious consequences. We can envisage the following sequence of events:
1. The UK refuses to negotiate a separate status for Gibraltar as set out by the EU at Spain’s behest:
2. On account of Gibraltar’s airport, Spain blocks the air traffic part of either the Brexit transitional agreement – by convincing the rest of the Council – or the ultimate free-trade agreement with the UK
3. Air traffic between the UK and the EU is seriously disrupted as a result, either in 2019 or at the end of the transitional period two to five years later.
4. English politicians and tabloids construe this as a ‘blockade’ of the UK by Spain over Gibraltar;
5. A ‘blockade’ is a classic example of casus belli – Lord Howard gets his punitive expedition on Spain.
These events are not likely, but it is not out of the question either given the rhetoric of the past week-end. If the rest of the Council overrules Spain on the transitional agreement, Spain might even adopt an ’empty chair’ policy in protest for the EU’s lack of solidarity.
As we noted six weeks ago from this FT story, Spain has blocked revisions of the EU aviation agreements for four years now, on the issue of whether they would apply to Gibraltar’s airport which Spain claims was built on no-man’s land, outside Gibraltar’s territory.
Numerous Breakdown Points
Since all 26 nations have to agree to Brexit terms, plus the European Parliament, there are numerous places negotiations can break down.
- European Court of Justice
- Gibraltar
- €60 billion Brexit bill
- Bilateral deals
- Security and defense cooperation
- Fishing rights
- Corporate income taxes
UK prime minister Theresa May has two sensible options.
- Inform the EU it will not accept blackmail and will not start talks unless trade is considered at the same time.
- Just leave now and be done with it.
Time For Hardball
Option number two makes the most sense.
If May chooses option number one, she must threaten to remove fishing rights, not pay a penny of Brexit costs, start bilateral talks, and threaten to lower corporate income taxes again.
The EU can mull that over. I suspect however, the EU nannycrats would simply choose to let time run out.
The only advantage of option one is it lets the EU know it is not in charge of Brexit, while simultaneously suggesting a willingness to negotiate.
Optimism Seriously Misguided
The only grounds for optimism I see is the fact that both sides lose more if there is a messy agreement than if they negotiate.
However, the EU demands are so out of whack with reality of what May can accept, and it takes all 26 EU nations plus parliament to agree.
A core underlying problem is Brexit is a Religious Battle (And You Can’t Negotiate Religion).
No Deal Is Better Than a Bad Deal
At the top of the list of absurd Brexit advice is the notion that a bad deal is better than no deal. For discussion, please see Bad Brexit Deal Better Than No Deal? Mathematical Idiocy! Odds of No Deal?
The EU believes it has the upper hand and the UK will not just walk away. Theresa May needs to shatter that belief now.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Welcome to the Hotel Europa
“You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave…”
It’s all coming back to me now….sounds alike the ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION which provided LEGAL RIGHT TO SECESSION….only to have the “NEW” Constitution and Lincoln’s interpretation thereof, claim that the states do NOT have that “right” after all.
CIVIL WAR in EUROPE ? If these GOLDMAN SACHS goons in Brussels (along with the monopolized media) keep “doing the Lord’s work” by strangling every nation’s sovereignty and continuing to try and crush all opposition, it could happen. In fact, in a way, it did already, many times before. But my personal favorite is Robespierre.
They make a mean cake in Brussels….could be they get it rammed down their throats.
As a Brit I have to agree entirely that option 2 is the only option that is realistically open. I never thought it would be possible to get all 27 countries too agree a deal anyway; just look at what happened to the trade deal with Canada.
This is going to get very acrimonious unless Europe gets it act together but I do not see any indication of that.
If it is not a hot war it will be a cold war for as far as the eye can see unless La Pen wins the French election and also pulls the plug on the EU. Never thought we would be in bed with the French but it is beginning to look that way.
She is now PRO-EU, just anti-euro. She won’t be allowed to win under any circumstances.
Brexit actually happened 450,000 years ago, scientists find
Theresa May has repeatedly insisted that Britain is leaving the EU and not Europe – but she might be a few hundred thousand years too late
Andrew Griffin
@_andrew_griffin
Tuesday 4 April 2017 16:07 BST
This is an illustration of what the land bridge connecting Britain to Europe may have looked like before the formation of the Dover Strait. The foreground is around where the port of Calais is today and way in the distance (the background of this illustration) is early Britain. Huge waterfalls cascading over the land bridge represents the beginning of physical separation of Britain from Europe Imperial College London/Chase Stone
Brexit might feel like it’s been going on a while. But it’s been 450,000 years in all, according to new research.
Scientists have shed new light on how ancient Britain separated from Europe, a movement that happened in two stages. The new research shows how exactly Britain left the European continent, before which the two had been stuck together.
And it also proves that the split was caused by a set of chance, unlikely circumstances. If that hadn’t happened, Britain would continue to stick onto mainland Europe, jutting out in the same way that Denmark does today.
…
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/brexit-occured-450000-years-ago-british-isles-separate-europe-continent-uk-eu-scientists-a7666351.html
I watched the debate in the European Parliament today – 1 and 2 minute speeches by members from all European countries from Malta to Bulgaria. The European Parliament thinks that it will get to vote on any deal in the same way that the UK Parliament thinks it will get a vote.
I agree that the negotiations can and will fail sooner or later, Here are three reasons that the EU CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH:
1. each country has a “line item veto” (any country can reject the entire deal fover a single issue). Although they are slowly but surely being voted out of office for their profligate wasting of taxpayers money, the libtard socialists remain for the most part in charge of European politicis and will vote down any item any member country views as a breach of its form of libtard socialism – aka, a gravy train of living beyond a country’s means by not taking enough taxes and spending too many of them, underwritten by the co-dependent enabler of socialist corruption, the ECB
2. neither MEP’s nor MP’s have a mandate from their electorate – as such they are accountable to no-one in their home countries and do not reflect the views of their countrymen. EU parliamentarians are the majority amongst a declining electoral turnout – that is EU MEP’s are elected by winning a majority amongst a turnout of only 42% of the electorate (40% UK MEP turnout) and falling. If they do not represent their own countries, they are free to vote for their own self-interest of feeding at the trough of European taxpayers, in eachange for doing nothing useful to anyone.
http://www.ukpolitical.info/european-parliament-election-turnout.htm
3. The EU has a track record of broken promises and cannot even agree to implement and abide by its own Treaties and Agreements, notably the Schengen Agreement in 1985 (blindisided by Merkels granting of citzenship to 10 million MENA migrants) and the Maastricht Treaty of 1992 (3% deficit to GDP and 60% Government debt to GDP)
http://www.euro-sceptic.org/a-list-of-the-most-notable-treaties-in-regard-to-the-eu.html
Anyone that beleives that a deal is possible with Europe is living in cloud cuckoo land. Imagine a bank that you have invested 50 billion in, that decides that when you come to sell, the shares are worth nothing and in fact you owe another 60 billion AND leave all the assets with the company.
The EU will negotiate along traditional lines: those lines are the ones that the UK voted to consign to the dustbin of history.
John Ward is taking his own view on this , namely that the show is being steered to a sort of half exit – worth reading just to catch a few points even if you disagree
https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2017/03/31/brexit-exclusive-proof-that-march-31st-changes-are-for-real-ominous-signs-that-theresa-may-isnt/
International maritime convention favours Gibraltar/UK maritime boundary position, even Franco drew in the proper limits, and if you study detail you will find Gibraltar airport is within Gib/UK territory, but that Spain has extended a jetty of land into Gib. waters.
You cannot laugh at the idea of war, only stupid politicians don’t realise that there is a constant low level war going on, the cost it has on people, that if you don’t make a proper stance then it is ( erroneously) considered surrender, permission. This leads to eventual offence and sometimes open conflict. Put this into own perspective – what would you feel if neighbours walked through your garden , barricaded your exit, took potshots at you, read your mail in front of you ? You would pick up arms if no one helped resolve issues like that. The UK and Gibraltar are being very restrained with regard to Spain’s attitudes , and will remain so to the point of armed invasion, but there is no error in reminding Spain that the route it is taking is wrong.
No direct war. Just imagine UK version of IRA.
Stranger things happen.
Let’s hope not.
It took the better part of three months to assemble the British fleet and sail all the way to Argentina (for the Falkland islands).
Spain / Gilbraltar are just across the channel, and I seriously doubt the Spanish could put up as much fight as Argentina did. French exocet missiles might be more available, but then every night Paris is a handful of angry Algerians away from civil war — France would have to ask themselves if they want to turn Paris into the next Beruit just to help Spain make a point (they wouldn’t take Gilbraltar even with French help, just make a mess).
If there was a war over Gilbraltar, I think Paris would turn into the next Beruit within days. Spain would concede Gilbraltar after a couple weeks — but Paris would never return. And Paris knows it, which means Brussels will get it kicked into their drunk heads
Congratulations are in order. This is one of the most retarded comments ever posted here…
I know I got to you when you resort to name calling Tony… even if you change your ID
No direct war – least as the world is nowadays, and I don’t like to think of the sort of scenarios that would completely change that.
What is possible though is some live fire, people getting hurt, protests, anti-brit movement in Spain, civilians storming the border with Spanish authority allowing that, far left south American activists hitting Gib. etc. etc. …. hopefully none of that, it depends what goes on in Spain over the coming years more than anything, plus there are certain factions within factions in authority in Spain that would like to heat up and even start a little conflict going. This should all have been settled by now, and it is most definitely Spain that refuses to lay down a solid framework of understanding and stick to it, that refuses international resolution. Can’t force their view either really.
Spent some time with an eyes widen open Spaniard recently.
I was shocked by the amount of corruption they mentioned being endemic.
Came away with the impression it was true and not said to shock.
Spain is dysfunctional at various levels, but very united on certain themes ( sometimes with two opposing groups on that theme). Corruption is so entrenched that no one can think straight, even the courts can only pick off the occasional cases to make a point, they are inundated, no witness protection with stories of those reporting having their lives ruined etc…. nothing you could imagine. Good people around too at all levels, but never in a position to change much, plus the bureaucracies either work well sometimes or are a chaos, partisan, and sometimes completely misused for agenda.
Don’t get me wrong, there are Spanish people I know who are amongst the best, absolutely sincere on all matters, often with certain quirks – who’s perfect -, but almost all follow a slightly different light to our own, own world with different meanings and values.
I don’t laugh at the idea of war. I’m just puzzled as to what military the EU thinks would be battling against the UK on this. NATO? That idea DOES make me laugh! No other European nation with a decent enough military would back Spain because Spain owes them craploads of money.
It really is funny that the arrogant western Europeans created an economic union that collapsed faster than the eastern European economic union.
However, it is sad that the US might actually wind up being even stupider than western Europe.
2. Eurocrats want EUR60 billion “go away” money, just to be pr!cks
This divorce demand is uncollectable, and everyone knows it. If Theresa May finds a spare EUR60 billion hanging around, there are at least 1000 higher priority budget items within England. No member of Parliament is going to get re-elected by shafting British citizens to appease Brussels. And no one believes their is any debt owed to Brussels anyhow — Brussels is a burden, that’s why England is leaving.
“3. Parliament also warned the U.K. not to pursue any bilateral deals with EU countries or nations outside the bloc for as long as Britain remained a member.”
In other words, several EU member countries are already having bilateral discussions with England, and just waiting for a low key time to announce the agreements. Brussels is rightfully scared, because they know the deals are going to get signed and there isn’t a thing Brussels can do about it.
“4. The parliament also said the U.K. shouldn’t use cooperation in security and defense as a bargaining chip for trade relations.”
Europe’s “military” is a joke, as they proved in Bosnia and again in Libya. Without UK and US “assistance” Europe can’t even defend itself. The EU drunks know England can protect Gilbraltar at will, there isn’t a damn thing anyone in the EU can do about it.
“5. The UK must heed the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice”
So the Queen is going to be the British sovereign, but only as long as she obeys the EU clown court? Did anyone in Brussels really think that demand through?
Obviously the Brits are already negotiating bilateral trade deals with some EU member countries. Oh sure, the Schengan and Maastricht treaties are unbreakable laws, and so is this EU “demand”. What exactly would the EU parliament of drunks do if Netherlands or Poland decides to ink a bilateral deal with England??? About the same as they did when Greece told them to shove it. The EU can’t (is not able to) enforce anything on the countries that haven’t left (yet).
And the only military in Europe capable of projecting power abroad (England) is not going to give up Gilbraltar. One has to be both drunk and on serious hallucinogens to think the EU can do anything about it.
Brussels is scared. That is what their “negotiating” playbook said, loud and clear.
Just returned from a European trip. Won’t say where but the roads are fantastic, all EU funded. Perfect roads, infrastructure, hardly anyone on the highway. New buildings. EU flags all over the place advertising their ((our) funding.
There will be no deal. There will be some conflict. In various places.
Roads to nowhere, paid for with stolen (well, mostly borrowed) money
Could the same funds have been used to reduce Greek debts? Or get the ECB under control? Or fund German manufacturing centers in Poland?
Nope, the central planners in Brussels didn’t want to invest in Europe, they wanted to spend money to consolidate their unelected power
German jobs heading east too. Czech, Slovak etc. Big business loves it. Quick planning, subsidised development, cheap labour.
Alles gut?
Average German ALWAYS happy and does as told.
Very racist of you to say the Germans always do as they are told. I know… Hollywood told you to think that and its hard to go against 50 years of cultural programming.
I don’t know if sending jobs to Poland would have been in Germany’s best interest… just saying it would have been in Brussel’s (the EU’s) best interest to have a functioning economy and functioning tax base. Brussels doesn’t care what German citizens think
Roads to nowhere is just corruption and ultimately defeating to the EU — they wreck their own tax base while rewarding corruption.
Germans do as they are told, I’ve even heard that said by German commentators as a compliment to Germans.
I wasn’t in Poland recently, elsewhere, and the new roads didn’t go to nowhere they went to swanky new industrial sites but no one was on the roads.
Very impressive but under utilised currently. Paid for by net contributors to the budget and will ultimately compete with those contributors.
Germans, a race?
I have driven on EU funded through Poland and Ukraine, yet back here in the UK my car gets damaged everyday driving over pot holes and poor roads that are dangerous.
Not in south of Europe by the sound of it…that was the picture a decade ago in a lot of places…no longer, though some countries have managed to just about maintain what was built.
Just walk away, lower taxes and then wait for an EU response and follow it up with tit for tat. Britain is in charge and need to let the EU know it.
Was with you until the “wait for EU response”… why worry about getting a response? Do a few bilateral agreements and then move on to more important things. There won’t be an agreement later either.
If England “wins” a p!ssing contest with the Brussels drunks, what would that prove?
Best way to “win” a divorce is to just move on with your life
Practicality would be sensible. But given that the EU is more about ideology, they may well go to “war” against the UK. EU bureaucrats have nothing to lose and everything to gain by creating a big mess and chaos. The more mess and chaos, the more EU bureaucrats can expand their Fiefdoms and Powers to cope with the mess and chaos. In other words, it is in the self-interest of EU bureaucrats to make Brexit as messy, chaotic and unreasonable as possible.
“Deal” will not be in a traditional sense, but rather a set of “deals” evolving out of practice as both sides adjust to the UK reclaiming its sovereignty. This will be a process, which actually makes more sense than a deal in the grand sense. Seems ironic that after the UK’s former colonies regained their freedom, the UK gave up its freedom. Only belatedly to decide that the former colonies were right about the advantages of sovereignty.
Some real insight in this statement – “Seems ironic that after the UK’s former colonies regained their freedom, the UK gave up its freedom. Only belatedly to decide that the former colonies were right about the advantages of sovereignty.”
Sad to say the UK political class is lacking the vision, leadership, foresight and backbone. No one to rally around. Rudderless & Leaderless.
@Fish – “Sad to say the UK political class is lacking the vision, leadership, foresight and backbone. No one to rally around. Rudderless & Leaderless.”
The same can be said of the entire G7, not just England
The man now leading Brussels’ EU negotiating team is a 24-carat crook.
https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2017/04/05/brexiteers-take-note-the-man-now-leading-brussels-eu-negotiating-team-is-a-24-carat-crook/
Britain needs it’s sovereignty. It still has one but contaminated by the Treaty of Lisbon, clause 123 I think. This precludes it using its sovereign power to create money out of thin air so it makes it just a non sovereign state in that situation. It would have to buy Euros and e62 billion is a lot.. With sovereignty the UK could simply mark up numbers i a rev=levant account and buy euros with it, all off balance sheet naturally.
But I agree Option 2 is the way forward. It would sow plenty of trouble in Brussels. We could sit back and watch the spectacle.
Which German in the EU “parliament” is going to tell his nation’s car makers that they can’t sell cars in England because the EU wants to look tough?
In the end money wins. One can’t eat ideology. As long as the UK imports more from members of the EU than it exports, money wins. Spain won’t get the “Rock” back because it is against their financial interests. Germany will still sell cars to the UK under a new trade deal. Just as it will take decades for the Democrats to realize that Donald Trump actually won the presidential election, it will take decades for those hard core euro nannycrats to realize that the Uk has left the fold. I think the best negotiating for Ms May is to make the EU a offer they can’t refuse.
May needs to tread very carefully as she can be replaced. Don’t be too sure she survives as leader.
True enough, Ms May can’t blunder her way through this business. Given the number of problems that the UK must face it would be difficult to find a leader who would be immune to political infighting. Since 1880 England has always been a monarchy marching towards socialism and after WWII they finally got their wish, so to speak. The EU has sucked them even further into that swamp the British people will have to make some hard choices when it comes to survival as a nation and a culture. The opposition to Brexit may believe that the exit from the EU is an economic hardship/disaster, but what really drives them is the commitment to a globalist world order and the eventual destruction of the nation state. Orwell wasn’t too far off the mark.
The House of Lords EU Select Committee syas the UK has no legally enforceable liabilities to the EU
Conclusions
135.On the basis of the legal opinions we have considered we conclude that, as a matter of EU law, Article 50 TEU allows the UK to leave the EU without being liable for outstanding financial obligations under the EU budget and related financial instruments, unless a withdrawal agreement is concluded which resolves this issue.
https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldeucom/125/12507.htm
i dont understand the big fuss here regarding Brexit and war over Gibraltar.
remember when General Franco was running Spain
and the Spanish tried to force the issue over Gibraltar by having a blockade.
from what i understand, the local Gibraltarians remember that period as
the time of their lives.(at least to start with)
reminds me of the Berlin airlift of 1948.
British film industry also made light of that matter, by depicting it
in the comedy “a passport to Pimlico”
The very fact that the EU will make claims and requirements which are unacceptable and non-sense is why the UK should just leave and be rid of these fools and their European Court. When the UK decided to join the EU the monolith which has become Brussels was not apparent to most UK citizens; had it been we would never have joined in the first place.
Now we must get rid of the European Court and the rest of this mess asap before the EU implodes and the Eurozone costs are passed onto the UK.
There is no reason to prolong the agony, except perhaps out of a misguided sense of European solidarity, because if the UK simply leaves others will follow quickly.
Once Brussels, the Eurozone, the European Court and the silly parliament are a thing of the past; the UK can work with the countries of Europe to create a simple free trade area along the lines of ASEAN or indeed the original EFTA.