Forum Topic

There's an interesting analysis by Andrew Byrne (in today's Sunday Times) of exactly why Salzburg turned out to be such a disaster for May - and it was all her own fault.It's at https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/salzburg-ambush-was-provoked-by-cherry-picker-may-3tbfmgkj0 but to save accessing it, this is what Byrne says:Salzburg ‘ambush’ was provoked by cherry-picker MayIf it was an ambush, it wasn’t a very discreet one. The road to Salzburg had been lined with warnings. The summit agenda wasn’t even focused primarily on Brexit, but rather on migration. Yet the British pressed on regardless.So when the EU 27 leaders did get around to discussing Brexit in Theresa May’s absence, they were not in a giving mood.They had turned up in Mozart’s birthplace prepared to offer her warm words if little else. Accounts of their private lunch on Thursday, however, reveal that by then their alarm at the UK’s approach had hit a sullen note.“People around the table can see what the UK is trying to do,” said one negotiator. “It’s very transparent and it won’t work.”Leaders believe May has not listened to their objections to Chequers and that she is instead focused on pointless efforts to divide them and undermine their negotiator, Michel Barnier.“How many times do we have to tell them that cherry-picking isn’t going to work?,” a top-level negotiator vented.The summit started off well enough. People familiar with May’s comments to the EU 27 over dinner on Wednesday said other leaders appreciated her tone.“She seemed sincere — she said she understood why they distrusted her ideas and then tried to tackle the objections one by one,” said one person watching the dinner closely.But things quickly declined. Reports emerged on Thursday that Liam Fox was planning to slash food standards to give UK producers an advantage, setting EU diplomats’ teeth on edge.Officials began to sense an unexpected hardness in the UK position — and as the summit went on they decided that May needed a reality check.An even bigger misstep came on Thursday morning, when May bluntly told the Irish taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, there would be no solution for the northern Irish backstop protocol — the essential pre-condition for a divorce agreement — by the next summit in October.EU diplomats have always feared the UK would defer and delay new proposals on the Irish backstop until the last minute, increasing pressure for the EU to concede on parts of the future relationship.Time and again, they say, they have been promised specific, new proposals by the UK, only to be later disappointed. May’s comments on Thursday sounded like yet more procrastination.Even worse, she appeared to try once more to separate the border question from the main talks and sideline Barnier’s officials.“Can we not sit down together and have our officials work this out directly?” she had asked Varadkar on previous occasions, according to one person familiar with the encounters. Now she tried again.If Salzburg had a turning point, this was it. Varadkar and Emmanuel Macron, the French president, met directly after the exchange and discussed the troubling picture that was emerging. A stronger message would have to be sent.Perhaps most unhelpful was the comment on Thursday morning by Viktor Orban, the Hungarian prime minister, that the EU was split in two camps over Brexit and that he led a “good cop” faction that wanted a “fair Brexit”.Orban had laid it on thick on Wednesday night, bowing and kissing May’s hand at dinner. But behind closed doors, in the lunch discussion among the EU 27 on Thursday, he did not say a word. There was no internal dissent. The only effect of his public comments was to sharpen the 27’s resolve to put on a firm, united front.At the lunch, they had their first chance to compare notes on the UK government’s strategy. What emerged was a picture of British attempts to sideline Barnier and appeal above his head to national capitals.“The UK needs to stop going around all the capitals of Europe and start spending more time negotiating in Brussels,” said a participant.“This strategy of going around Barnier has really backfired,” said one person familiar with the discussion. “The leaders respect him, he keeps in contact with all the capitals, he keeps their officials updated.”Experienced leaders warned they had been burnt by British negotiators before. One prime minister recalled the time spent crafting the doomed agreement on free movement for David Cameron that involved late night negotiations and ultimately ended in failure.They could not afford to let the UK run down the clock and then force through a hastily drafted agreement that might not even work, several leaders argued.One person familiar with the discussion said: “This is a legal treaty — you can’t just rush it out at midnight.”Now, both sides have a shortened calendar to bring forward new proposals. “Things will move very quickly after [the Tory] conference,” said one negotiator. An emergency November summit is in the offing, but only if good progress is made in October. Time is running out.

Richard Carter ● 2493d

Ms HammondGood to see a serious comment from you.'So we now need to hear from the EU what the real issues are and what their alternative is so that we can discuss them. Until we do, we cannot make progress'.Are you (as you say Mrs May also is) really claiming that after two years of negotiations we still do not know what the EU's objections are to our proposal to leave ?How come the finest minds of the Conservative Cabinet at the time did not manage to elicit these facts ?What were  David Davies the Brexit Minister, a big man (geddit !) and leader of the Tooting SAS (albeit recognised by most as being a bit lazy and thick) and Boris Johnson the Foreign Secretary, an even bigger man (geddit, geddit !) as well as a congenital liar, adulterer (and Mrs Blake Milton, someone whose marriage actually has failed and is not just rumoured to be failing) doing all this time ?Hoodwinked and out maneuvered by that pesky frog Garnier and the deceitful polak Tusk ?Not our brightest and best surely ??But seriously (forgive me for having lapsed into a Hammondesqe style when you are now trying to be sensible) why is it in the interest of the EU not to come clean over their objections ?Do you really think they believe they can stop Brexit ?And why would they risk a 'no deal' if as you say, it would be so bad for them ?What they are doing is to protect their interests as they see them.And these can be summed up as protecting its single market based on its 'four freedoms', integrated fundamental principles which seek to guarantee the free movement of goods, capital, services, and labour, overseen by the European Court of Justice.Everyone knew this even before the Referendum. Britain does not want to sign up to all of this and I am sure in recent negotiations the EU have explained this in detail and have suggested where they can accept some compromise without allowing British cherry picking to give them an advantage over other members and wreck, as they see it, the single market.Whatever the UK jingo press says.Might I suggest you read today's Observer column by Andrew Rawnsley probably the best non-ideological political commentator we have ?Here is a taster -  'Donald Tusk, the European council president, said it clearly: the Chequers plan for selective participation in the single market “will not work” because it would undermine the integrity of the EU. This was not a new position. EU officials have been telling the British at all levels of engagement that Mrs May’s notion of a “common rulebook” for trade in goods is not viable and for a multiplicity of reasons. The EU has been saying this, just a bit more diplomatically than at Salzburg, for weeks. The only difference made by Mr Tusk was to spell it out in blunt language.This exposed another persistent fantasy of the British government: that the EU does not really mean it when it says its “four freedoms” are non-negotiable. The EU has always been consistent in saying that it can’t compromise on this and for good reason. The single market (a British invention, incidentally) will start to unravel if members are allowed to cherry pick bits they like and leave aside those that don’t suit them so well. Even more would this be the case if a non-member, which is what Britain will be, was allowed to opt in and out as it pleased.All of this has been clear since Britain embarked down this peril-strewn path. None of this should have been as large a shock as it was to Mrs May'. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/23/salzburg-debacle-makes-choice-starker-for-mrs-may-and-mr-corbyn 

John Hawkes ● 2493d

Very strange that Mrs May attacks the EU so vehemently for not accepting her Chequers plan when in fact its biggest opponents who will actually stop it being implemented are in her own Party and even her own Cabinet !It is so depressing that when a once great country like Britain does not get its own way (cake and eat it) it rolls around on the floor like a xenophobic 2 year old and blames that nasty little boy called Johnny Foreigner.Let's go back to basics here.Britain wants to leave the EU which in turn can't stop it.Simplest way of doing this is to pay its dues, then diplomatically and legally withdraw from any treaties and obligations and then start drawing up new treaties/trade agreements with individual countries and even the EU itself.But Mrs May will not do that as she knows in her heart of hearts what everyone knows - namely that certainly in the short term (and I mean years not a couple of days) this will have dramatic negative effects on the country in all manner of ways.For as she is finding out now the EU will negotiate in such circumstances strongly to protect its own interests in any new arrangements.And so will the US when we start dealing with them. 'America First' means UK second. Just ask China.Britain says it wants to leave a club.The club says OK; pay your dues and go.We say no, we actually want to partly stay in the club but on our terms.The club says no; not on better terms than all the other members agree to; but on new terms we are willing to give you.Accept them or please go quietly and close the door after you.And in the midst of the biggest political and potentially economic crisis since the war, created unnecessarily and totally mismanaged by the Conservative Party, all people like Ms Hammond can do is make childish, petulant comments about the situation and deliver, with Ms Blake Milton, churlish and ignorant personal attacks on foreign politicians. 

John Hawkes ● 2494d

“The Idea is the important thing. The implementation is just a secondary task, apparently.”Isn’t that more true of the European Union though?  Let’s create the Euro even though it will cause economic devastation, let’s create the single market even though, linked to the euro it will cause issues linking together club med economies with Germany’s, let’s create free movement of people even though it may create resentment in communities which are affected by uncustomed large emigration/ immigrationLet’s let Germany invite millions of people from different cultures to move to Germany and effectively access schengen nations and call propel racist if they raise concernsLet’s create large transfers of funds from one country to another even though that may cause some resentmentLet’s create the common fisheries policy even though it may devastate some communities which arbitrarily have their livelihoods taken awayLet’s create the European constitution and when France votes against it lets rebadge it is the Lisbon treaty and force the Irish to vote again when they reject itLet’s move ever more powers towards Brussels and the European Commission and away from locally elected parliamentary democracies And above all:-Let’s continue our project to create a United States of Europe without popular consentIt’s not just in the U.K. that there is a backlash against the “more Europe” mantra.  The have the idea of a European state, but looking at it currently the implementation isn’t going as well as they may have hoped.  Always easier to have an idea than to implement it, even when it’s such a transparent universal good as the European Union!

Mike Warman ● 2494d