This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/22/the-guardian-view-on-may-in-florence-a-small-step-towards-reality
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 4 | Version 5 |
|---|---|
| The Guardian view on May in Florence: a small step towards reality | The Guardian view on May in Florence: a small step towards reality |
| (5 days later) | |
| The prime minister’s attempt at visionary rhetoric conceals a surrender to pressure from the article 50 clock ticking down | The prime minister’s attempt at visionary rhetoric conceals a surrender to pressure from the article 50 clock ticking down |
| Fri 22 Sep 2017 17.12 BST | Fri 22 Sep 2017 17.12 BST |
| Last modified on Wed 14 Feb 2018 15.31 GMT | |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| View more sharing options | View more sharing options |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Close | Close |
| From the moment article 50 was triggered it was obvious to anyone prepared to engage with the practical side of the matter that the UK would need a transitional period to smooth the journey out of the EU. The two-year negotiating window stipulated by the Lisbon treaty was not long enough to carry out a total strategic, political and economic reorientation of the country. The clause was drafted with that deterrent in mind. | From the moment article 50 was triggered it was obvious to anyone prepared to engage with the practical side of the matter that the UK would need a transitional period to smooth the journey out of the EU. The two-year negotiating window stipulated by the Lisbon treaty was not long enough to carry out a total strategic, political and economic reorientation of the country. The clause was drafted with that deterrent in mind. |
| So Theresa May’s clearest statement to date that the UK does not countenance sudden severance on March 2019 was the most significant element of her speech in Italy. Ornamentally framed with flourishes on partnership and cultural kinship, there was an admission by the prime minister that the reality of Brexit is altogether more complicated and difficult to negotiate than was advertised during the referendum campaign. This was a surrender to the exigencies of the ticking clock, camouflaged as a statement of continental solidarity. | So Theresa May’s clearest statement to date that the UK does not countenance sudden severance on March 2019 was the most significant element of her speech in Italy. Ornamentally framed with flourishes on partnership and cultural kinship, there was an admission by the prime minister that the reality of Brexit is altogether more complicated and difficult to negotiate than was advertised during the referendum campaign. This was a surrender to the exigencies of the ticking clock, camouflaged as a statement of continental solidarity. |
| The passages about shared European destiny, tailored to the sensibilities of EU leaders made wary of British motive by nationalistic overtones in much post-referendum rhetoric, represent a welcome change in mood music. But they would have been more valuable a year ago as a preamble to talks, ideally accompanied by diplomatic initiative in the same spirit. (Instead Mrs May conspicuously aligned herself with Donald Trump, despite the US president’s record of speaking contemptuously of the EU.) | The passages about shared European destiny, tailored to the sensibilities of EU leaders made wary of British motive by nationalistic overtones in much post-referendum rhetoric, represent a welcome change in mood music. But they would have been more valuable a year ago as a preamble to talks, ideally accompanied by diplomatic initiative in the same spirit. (Instead Mrs May conspicuously aligned herself with Donald Trump, despite the US president’s record of speaking contemptuously of the EU.) |
| The time for gestures has passed; the negotiations have started and stalled. The obstacle is lack of detail from the UK side – a problem Mrs May aimed to remedy in Florence. But there was not a lot of clarity about a preferred final destination. The emphasis instead was on maximum continuity during the phase of “implementation”. Exit from the single market and customs union are deferred. Britain and the EU would, for up to two years, retain access to one another’s markets on “current terms”, meaning the UK would stay within “the existing structure of EU rules”. A crucial difference would be the requirement that EU citizens exercising their free movement rights register in anticipation of some undefined post-transition immigration regime. The vital question of what judicial framework would police the arrangement remains obscure. | The time for gestures has passed; the negotiations have started and stalled. The obstacle is lack of detail from the UK side – a problem Mrs May aimed to remedy in Florence. But there was not a lot of clarity about a preferred final destination. The emphasis instead was on maximum continuity during the phase of “implementation”. Exit from the single market and customs union are deferred. Britain and the EU would, for up to two years, retain access to one another’s markets on “current terms”, meaning the UK would stay within “the existing structure of EU rules”. A crucial difference would be the requirement that EU citizens exercising their free movement rights register in anticipation of some undefined post-transition immigration regime. The vital question of what judicial framework would police the arrangement remains obscure. |
| Mrs May hoped to procure goodwill in the talks with a financial pledge to “honour commitments” already made, so other EU states would not find their budget calculations sabotaged. | Mrs May hoped to procure goodwill in the talks with a financial pledge to “honour commitments” already made, so other EU states would not find their budget calculations sabotaged. |
| That intervention is meant to inspire new willingness on the part of the commision and EU leaders to advance talks beyond the current “divorce terms” phase on to Brexiters’ hallowed terrain of a long-term trade deal. A decision on whether “sufficient progress” has been made is due at a summit next month. Viewed from the continent, Mrs May’s method of negotiating from a podium is needlessly theatrical. The practical content of her speech might as easily have been conveyed over the phone. But this play was also aimed at a domestic audience. It was an attempt to rebut claims that Mrs May has lost control of the Brexit agenda and that her government is floundering. | That intervention is meant to inspire new willingness on the part of the commision and EU leaders to advance talks beyond the current “divorce terms” phase on to Brexiters’ hallowed terrain of a long-term trade deal. A decision on whether “sufficient progress” has been made is due at a summit next month. Viewed from the continent, Mrs May’s method of negotiating from a podium is needlessly theatrical. The practical content of her speech might as easily have been conveyed over the phone. But this play was also aimed at a domestic audience. It was an attempt to rebut claims that Mrs May has lost control of the Brexit agenda and that her government is floundering. |
| The speech was certainly the prime minister’s most detailed public engagement with Brexit challenges to date. But its practicality consisted of tacitly recognising that precious months have been wasted. The delay in seeking the kind of transition Mrs May described today is a result entirely of division within the Tory party. It is caused by advocates of the hardest possible Brexit refusing to countenance the kind of compromise that every realistic appraisal of the situation long ago saw as unavoidable. By persuading her cabinet to approve this text she might have bought respite from pressure on the domestic front, but every precedent suggests her most ardently Eurosceptic colleagues will resume harrying her before long. And nothing announced in Florence today stood as a persuasive argument to justify eventual separation from the single market, even if deferred. The sections on shared strategic interest and common continental tasks would not have been out of place in an argument for remaining in the EU. | The speech was certainly the prime minister’s most detailed public engagement with Brexit challenges to date. But its practicality consisted of tacitly recognising that precious months have been wasted. The delay in seeking the kind of transition Mrs May described today is a result entirely of division within the Tory party. It is caused by advocates of the hardest possible Brexit refusing to countenance the kind of compromise that every realistic appraisal of the situation long ago saw as unavoidable. By persuading her cabinet to approve this text she might have bought respite from pressure on the domestic front, but every precedent suggests her most ardently Eurosceptic colleagues will resume harrying her before long. And nothing announced in Florence today stood as a persuasive argument to justify eventual separation from the single market, even if deferred. The sections on shared strategic interest and common continental tasks would not have been out of place in an argument for remaining in the EU. |
| The prime minister grasped that the hard Brexit path signalled in her party conference speech last year can’t be travelled in the time allowed by article 50. She daren’t quite admit it, but talk of walking away without any deal has been exposed as a reckless, empty threat. The ultimate shape of Britain’s trading relations with the EU remains, in the prime minister’s exposition, vague and utopian – a retention of membership benefits without membership. Reality will bite into that proposition as deeply as it has bitten chunks out of the fantasy of an easy, clean break in March 2019. Mrs May took important steps towards a sober appraisal of Brexit’s difficulties today. She has further yet to travel. | The prime minister grasped that the hard Brexit path signalled in her party conference speech last year can’t be travelled in the time allowed by article 50. She daren’t quite admit it, but talk of walking away without any deal has been exposed as a reckless, empty threat. The ultimate shape of Britain’s trading relations with the EU remains, in the prime minister’s exposition, vague and utopian – a retention of membership benefits without membership. Reality will bite into that proposition as deeply as it has bitten chunks out of the fantasy of an easy, clean break in March 2019. Mrs May took important steps towards a sober appraisal of Brexit’s difficulties today. She has further yet to travel. |
| Brexit | Brexit |
| Opinion | Opinion |
| Article 50 | Article 50 |
| European Union | European Union |
| Foreign policy | Foreign policy |
| Theresa May | Theresa May |
| Conservatives | Conservatives |
| editorials | editorials |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |