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 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/09/the-guardian-view-on-brexit-transition-mrs-may-must-stand-firm
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| The Guardian view on Brexit transition: Mrs May must stand firm | The Guardian view on Brexit transition: Mrs May must stand firm |
| (25 days later) | |
| Mon 9 Oct 2017 19.14 BST | Mon 9 Oct 2017 19.14 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 |
| There is no concealing divisions within the cabinet on Brexit but there is consensus that Theresa May’s speech in Florence three weeks ago is the basis from which talks should proceed. That is less impressive than it sounds, since there is no consensus on what Mrs May actually said in Italy. | There is no concealing divisions within the cabinet on Brexit but there is consensus that Theresa May’s speech in Florence three weeks ago is the basis from which talks should proceed. That is less impressive than it sounds, since there is no consensus on what Mrs May actually said in Italy. |
| The main point of confusion, made apparent at the Conservative party conference last week, is the form of an “implementation” phase to begin on 29 March 2019 – the day that Britain’s European Union membership formally expires. The prime minister was fairly precise in Florence. Or at least it seemed so at the time. Mrs May proposed a transition during which the EU and UK would enjoy “access to one another’s markets … on current terms”, following “the existing structure” of rules and regulations. That implies continuing membership of the single market and customs union beyond March 2019, with departure deferred until the point when the final status deal takes effect. | The main point of confusion, made apparent at the Conservative party conference last week, is the form of an “implementation” phase to begin on 29 March 2019 – the day that Britain’s European Union membership formally expires. The prime minister was fairly precise in Florence. Or at least it seemed so at the time. Mrs May proposed a transition during which the EU and UK would enjoy “access to one another’s markets … on current terms”, following “the existing structure” of rules and regulations. That implies continuing membership of the single market and customs union beyond March 2019, with departure deferred until the point when the final status deal takes effect. |
| Mrs May repeated her Florentine formula verbatim in the Commons on Monday. But, when questioned by MPs, she added that transition might not amount to “full membership” of the single market. That caveat is for the benefit of the faction within her party that angles for the most severe rupture from European ties and has, since Florence, been retrospectively rewriting Mrs May’s position. Liam Fox declared in his conference speech that the UK would be leaving the single market and the customs union in March 2019. Boris Johnson has indicated that new EU regulations and legal judgments should not apply in Britain after that landmark date. | Mrs May repeated her Florentine formula verbatim in the Commons on Monday. But, when questioned by MPs, she added that transition might not amount to “full membership” of the single market. That caveat is for the benefit of the faction within her party that angles for the most severe rupture from European ties and has, since Florence, been retrospectively rewriting Mrs May’s position. Liam Fox declared in his conference speech that the UK would be leaving the single market and the customs union in March 2019. Boris Johnson has indicated that new EU regulations and legal judgments should not apply in Britain after that landmark date. |
| As the EU side has repeatedly made clear, the option of being simultaneously inside and outside the rules does not exist. Yet that non-existent place is precisely the one indicated by the mixed messages now coming from the cabinet and the prime minister. No wonder the EU side is frustrated. At the point when it looked as if progress was being made, the lens was twisted and the British lines have been blurred all over again. | As the EU side has repeatedly made clear, the option of being simultaneously inside and outside the rules does not exist. Yet that non-existent place is precisely the one indicated by the mixed messages now coming from the cabinet and the prime minister. No wonder the EU side is frustrated. At the point when it looked as if progress was being made, the lens was twisted and the British lines have been blurred all over again. |
| Mr Johnson and Dr Fox have not misunderstood the prime minister. They are testing her authority, exploiting her weakness and trying to ratchet her into a position where transition resembling the status quo becomes unfeasible. This in turn increases the likelihood of talks breaking down without a deal – an outcome that the hardest Brexiters actively seek and that the Treasury considers potentially ruinous. | Mr Johnson and Dr Fox have not misunderstood the prime minister. They are testing her authority, exploiting her weakness and trying to ratchet her into a position where transition resembling the status quo becomes unfeasible. This in turn increases the likelihood of talks breaking down without a deal – an outcome that the hardest Brexiters actively seek and that the Treasury considers potentially ruinous. |
| The chancellor’s reluctance to countenance a wild economic experiment, dropping the country from the edge of its continental shelf and seeing what happens, has brought him into the sights of the hard-Brexit brigade. Backbenchers whisper that Philip Hammond should be sacked and that his preferred type of transition amounts to “Brexit in name only”; a betrayal of the referendum result. | The chancellor’s reluctance to countenance a wild economic experiment, dropping the country from the edge of its continental shelf and seeing what happens, has brought him into the sights of the hard-Brexit brigade. Backbenchers whisper that Philip Hammond should be sacked and that his preferred type of transition amounts to “Brexit in name only”; a betrayal of the referendum result. |
| Such is the paranoia typically born of insecurity. It expresses impatience for the most extreme Brexit because that is the least reversible kind. The hardliners suspect that a transition might nurture talk of return to the EU one day, either as full members or in some associate capacity. While some remainers find that prospect appealing, nothing in the current political climate indicates that it is likely. No one in government advocates it and the prime minister’s commitment to Brexit is well beyond question. | Such is the paranoia typically born of insecurity. It expresses impatience for the most extreme Brexit because that is the least reversible kind. The hardliners suspect that a transition might nurture talk of return to the EU one day, either as full members or in some associate capacity. While some remainers find that prospect appealing, nothing in the current political climate indicates that it is likely. No one in government advocates it and the prime minister’s commitment to Brexit is well beyond question. |
| Tory MPs’ restlessness betrays their awareness that Brexit is not going well and that the whole enterprise was mis-sold. They feel the need to sustain public support with conspiracy theories of Europhile sabotage. The very idea of a “no deal” Brexit has only become acceptable to leavers because a deal is proving harder to get than they used to claim. It signifies a retreat into abstract ideology by people whose past assertions have been crushed by concrete reality. They hate the prime minister’s implementation phase because it represents accommodation with that reality. | Tory MPs’ restlessness betrays their awareness that Brexit is not going well and that the whole enterprise was mis-sold. They feel the need to sustain public support with conspiracy theories of Europhile sabotage. The very idea of a “no deal” Brexit has only become acceptable to leavers because a deal is proving harder to get than they used to claim. It signifies a retreat into abstract ideology by people whose past assertions have been crushed by concrete reality. They hate the prime minister’s implementation phase because it represents accommodation with that reality. |
| Mrs May must not allow herself to be steered by that wrecking impulse. In parliament on Monday she spoke of her duty to enact the referendum result on behalf of the whole country. That doesn’t mean subordinating her judgment to the whim of one faction within her party. The proposition that Britain should leave the EU prevailed in the 2016 plebiscite. The reckless dogma that would drive us to a Brexit without a deal enjoys no majority in parliament or the country. It deserves no more indulgence by the prime minister. | Mrs May must not allow herself to be steered by that wrecking impulse. In parliament on Monday she spoke of her duty to enact the referendum result on behalf of the whole country. That doesn’t mean subordinating her judgment to the whim of one faction within her party. The proposition that Britain should leave the EU prevailed in the 2016 plebiscite. The reckless dogma that would drive us to a Brexit without a deal enjoys no majority in parliament or the country. It deserves no more indulgence by the prime minister. |
| Brexit | Brexit |
| Opinion | Opinion |
| Conservatives | Conservatives |
| Theresa May | Theresa May |
| Article 50 | Article 50 |
| European Union | European Union |
| Foreign policy | Foreign policy |
| 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 |