Those Brexit talks again

It was Brexit day again in the Commons yesterday. The EU continued its  miserable commentary. Earlier this week it talked up talks  with Mr Corbyn in the hope that would split the UK. Yesterday they decided to reject the PM’ s friendly offer.

Prime Minister set out where we are with the talks. Good progress is being made on issues including healthcare, the Irish border and the rights of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in EU countries. There is no meeting of minds on money, and no agreement yet from the EU side to talk about the future relationship.  From the UK’s point of view there is nothing to be gained from the so called divorce, and every reason to discuss all relevant matters about the future as soon as possible. We would not need any implementation period if we  used the remaining eighteen months before exit intelligently.

The Prime Minister is right to remain optimistic, positive and friendly, offering a good future partnership on trade and security to the other EU states. She is also right to plan for No Deal, as she stressed she is, just in case the EU continues to overplay its hand by resisting talks about the future relationship in good time. Showing No Deal can work  is not only  prudent in case the talks fail, but also sensible as it reminds the EU that an Agreement is only worth having if it is better than No Deal.

It never ceases to amaze me just how much the media make of no news on talks. There could  be months more of this shadow boxing. We may not know for a year whether there is going to be a deal or not. We must use this time to show business how trucks will move through ports, planes will fly, financial services will be traded and laws will be enforced after 30 March 2019 without a deal. There is no cliff edge. The rest of the world trades with the EU without belonging to it. The UK can transfer its trade account from Brussels to Geneva and to the WTO where we will be welcomed as an advocate of free trade, and can use the various agreements and protocols of that organisation to ensure smooth trade.

I have spent the last three weeks with Parliament in recess talking to various business audiences  and in meetings to hear the worries of traders. No new issues have emerged above the ones we have often discussed on this site.  It is a pity the EU cannot put in place a proper mandate for its negotiators soon, as there are good ways of improving on No Deal that would help both sides. The issue the EU has to get round to answering is how many barriers and tariffs do they wish to place on their trade with us, bearing in mind they are limited in what they can do by world trade rules. It is bizarre that both sides say they support free trade and prosperous commerce, and both agree they have a good basis for trade at the moment. So does one side, the EU side, really want to damage it?  If they do they will find they do more damage to themselves than to the UK, given the big imbalance in trade and the nature of the goods and services traded.

Meanwhile as the PM reminded Parliament voted to take back control of our money , our laws and our borders. The government has  to deliver that as soon as possible. Its such a pity the EU overplays its weak hand, which takes the EU closer to facing self imposed barriers on its access to our lucrative market.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

227 Comments

  1. Peter VAN LEEUWEN
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 5:47 am | Permalink

    Such a pity that the German car manufacturers don’t act in the way that Mr. Redwood predicted they would. Why don’t they value the UK’s “lucrative market”?

    • Peter Wood
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:24 am | Permalink

      Good Morning Peter,

      The answer is because they are supporting the “Deutschland Uber Ales” plan for Europe. The long game is for Germany to take control of Europe, they can see that it is essential to keep a strong, united political body in Germany, so that the EU puppets will know where to run when they need help. It will then be game over for the weakened European nations. I hope you are ready…..

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

        @Peter Wood
        I believe the answer is slightly different from yours: because the.se car manufacturers believe that European unity will eventually be better for their business than just the UK market. There have been several interviews you might still find the videos of on internet that express this. Distinctly different from “Deutschland über Alles”.

        P.S. there are too many reactions on my contribution this time. I’ll just pick one or two to react to.

        • libertarian
          Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

          That would be the German car industry that foisted dirty diesel on us? Or the German car industry that cheats on its emissions?

          Who cares, I own 3 German cars currently, all due for renewal in the next 18 months. I can/will replace with a Tesla, a Jaguar and range rover …cheers bye bye German car makers

    • oldtimer
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:31 am | Permalink

      Perhaps it is because Diesel gate, and accusations of collusion, has put them all on the back foot in making their views known. Perhaps it is also because many of the senior corporate and government affairs staff are themselves senior ex politicians hired because of their insider connections and ready to toe the government line.

      • oldtimer
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:53 am | Permalink

        PS They also appear to be arguing among themselves. It is reported that Porsche is seeking compensation from Audi (both members of the VAG Group) of 200 million euros for the supply by Audi of 3 litre V6 diesel engines equipped with defeat devices intended to circumvent emission regulations. This is one example of the navel gazing which currently preoccupies the German car manufacturers. The other is their scramble to “electrify” their products having fallen behind, according to Mrs merkel, in the race to do so.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted October 10, 2017 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

          Very sensible to fall behind and wait until electric only car technology becomes sensible – it is not for most people yet. It is expensive and very limited. Just a virtue signalling second city car for a few wealthy people with somewhere to park and charge it. Who for some idiotic reason get tax breaks.

    • Nig l
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:36 am | Permalink

      That’s simple and the same as the EU politicians. In the U.K. we have a phrase.

      Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

      • Michael O'Sullivan
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

        Nig 1.. exactly, politics trumps economics every time when it comes to the EU- it has nothing at all to do with plain common sense and above all it is not a game, as Barnier has pointed out.

        • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
          Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

          @Michael O’Sullivan:
          The EU IS a political project – so politics trumps economics indeed.

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:07 am | Permalink

      I think they will soon find it’s not so lucrative in any case. Certainly I would think very hard now before stumping up for a German car. Why buy French wine when there’s so much other wine available? I’d willingly pay the 40% tariff for NZ butter in the expectation that that tariff won’t apply on 30/3/2019. The EU is slowly but surely screwing up the trade its member states have with the UK anyway, because perhaps two thirds of people out here in the country can see the way this is going, even if Mrs May has patience-a-plenty.

      • Miss Brandreth-Jones
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

        If we are blocked from trading in any way , the sales reps and other country firms are going to get good bonuses as we reach further afield.
        The media always follows on these days and like Chinese whispers there is change from the actual t0 the reported. They need a story, they have even to decide which is a lead story and subsequently play safe.
        I have been on to twitter John to listen to your recent interviews and interventions .The sound would not work. Once upon a time we could access these interventions through your website / This is now impossible.

    • ChrisS
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:07 am | Permalink

      They do and they will.

      Shareholders will soon start pressurising the management boards when they finally realise there is a the real possibility of no deal.

      • alan jutson
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

        ChrisS

        Agree, just wait another 6-9 months and the sound will become obvious from the german Unions.

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:33 pm | Permalink

        @ChrisS: Could indeed still happen, but so far it hasn’t and the comments are clearly to just support their government’s policy

    • JJE
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:08 am | Permalink

      Perhaps the German car firms have become diverted by their legal problems concerning diesel emissions and are not able to call on Mrs Merkel for help quite as easily as in the past.

    • Bob
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:33 am | Permalink

      If the EU decides on WTO it would provide a great boost for the Japanese and Korean manufacturers especially once the FTAs are signed.

      Australian, New Zealand and American wine producers would also see a boost the their UK exports. 🙂

      • Kevin Lohse
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

        There are also some very passable wines coming out of South America, easily the equal of European dinner wine. I’m not a fan of such African wines, but for those who like them, they will also be available more easily.

        • Kevin Lohse
          Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

          South African wines…..

          • getahead
            Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

            Pinotage is excellent – and inexpensive.
            A mon avis.

    • formula57
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:34 am | Permalink

      They probably are so acting – it is the German government that cares more for not trespassing upon Commission foolery than looking after its own motor industry.

      But some are helping themselves in other ways. I am confident that even now secret negotiations are well advanced by Daimler Benz to locate a manufacturing plant in England or Wales.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:35 am | Permalink

      Unlike the UK, the EU realises that united we stand, divided we fall.

      If the UK would just unite behind the need to get the best deal rather than fighting ourselves, the EU might be forced to properly come to the table.

      As of now, as with Greece, the EU can let its disciples and paid subordinates within the UK fight its position for it.

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

        @Narrow Shoulders:
        I agree there will be an element of “united we stand” in this attitude.

    • sm
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:41 am | Permalink

      Perhaps because the directors of major enterprises, whether manufacturing or financial or retailing, are not always infallible?

      I think of the recent Tesco accounting scandal, or the way Marks&Spencer was nearly brought to its knees by a well-intentioned Chief Executive….and in order to be polite, of course I won’t mention the German car manufacturers’ emissions scandal, cough, cough.

    • Bert Young
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:51 am | Permalink

      PvL . The German car manufacturers are bewailing the lack of a Government form and until Merkel is able to stitch one together they are playing their cards with great delicacy . This goes for German industry as a whole .

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

        @Bert Young:
        I doubt it. Germans simply value EU unity I believe as being in their longer term interest.

    • agricola
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:00 am | Permalink

      You are obviously not a German car worker and therefore exceedingly blasé. Roughly one in seven German made cars are sold in the UK. Only exceeded by what they sell in the USA. A market that the Donald seems intent on making difficult for Germany. So you are happy that Germany loses out by around Euros 22 Billion or 14% of the cars they make. Your sentiments will go down a bomb in Munich and the other car producing towns of Germany. Worry about the cheese, flowers and market garden products of what I suspect is your own country which will shortly suffer competition from sources worldwide in the UK market place, particularly if they have a tariff loading.

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

        @agricola:
        I only witness what the German car industry itself has stated.

    • Hope
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:02 am | Permalink

      JR, your last paragraph is not true. The UK will remain under ECJ and EU rules during any transition phase. This is not what we voted for and May doe not have a mandate for it. Moreover, Hammond and co must be laughing that we remain in the EU for at least another two years and with an election it could be forever. Shame on Johnson and Gove for supporting it.

      Your dementia tax saw May’s popularity plummet followed by the atrocities by no border controls and mass immigration. The cuts became a focal point because she had to use the army because she cut police numbers by 20,000.

      If the UK remains under ECJ and EU rules past March 2019 the. She has lied to the public and it will cause your party immeasurable harm. As you say, there is plenty of time to adjust until this date.

      Now May is back on her equality babble today. How about implementation of the Casey report? Always one way with May, a misguided New Labour candidate in the wrong party.

      • Tad Davison
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

        Agreed! Good points!

        Tad

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:46 pm | Permalink

        Dear Hope–Yes–May never ceases to amaze me and yet another manifestation of immigration–What she is doing in the Conservative Party at all leave alone as its leader is beyond me–She gives Hammond a run for his money in terms of who should be thrown out first and the answer must be that they should both go.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:16 am | Permalink

      They are acting in exactly the way John predicted – where are you getting your news from ? Maybe read a wider range of newspapers including German ones.

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

        @Roy Grainger:
        If you go back to before the referendum, you’ll find such predictions (i.e. on this website, not in the media)

    • Richard1
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:27 am | Permalink

      We don’t yet know how they will react. Perhaps they will watch the EU start a trade war with the UK without complaining, but it seems unlikely.

      • Richard1
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:46 am | Permalink

        The German car companies themselves as I understand are in any event relaxed as they will be able to supply the UK tariff-free from plants in Mexico, following an expected UK-US trade deal. The unions and German politicians representing the car production areas of Germany however, should be more concerned.

        • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
          Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

          I think that German car manufacturers want a united EU.

    • cargill55
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:34 am | Permalink

      They will when it’s gone.

    • Know-Dice
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:44 am | Permalink

      Peter,

      Wait until the German auto industry realises that it will need to downsize by 10%, then lets see how political dogma works.

      It’s not over until the “fat lady sings”…oops…

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:43 pm | Permalink

        @Know-Dice: such calculations, if true, will already have been made

    • Auto Ban
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:51 am | Permalink

      Why on earth would anyone wish a German car? It has been proven globally they are certainly not what is written on the tin. Even at that, they are only commercially competitive if they are built for example by a Czech in the Czech Republic who works for four times less than a German worker and makes a better job of it, probably.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

        Used cars are best in general, far simpler and thus far more reliable and very cheap too. £2,000 can buy you a far better, cheaper to maintain and more flexible car than most £30k + new ones.

    • Edward2
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:57 am | Permalink

      They have probably worked out that a worst case scenario is a 10% tariff on their vehicles.
      And they will have heard the UK offering a free trade deal should Germany wish to accept it.

    • Anonymous
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:02 am | Permalink

      Known as Fantasy Island to car makers – for the mark ups they can achieve.

    • Dame Rita Webb
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:23 am | Permalink

      If a tariff war breaks out and the Porsche, Quandt and Piech families see the value of their shareholdings drop you will soon see the action that JR predicts. The first visible signs being Juncker and Merkel warned that if they want to hold on to their jobs they need to change things around quickly.

    • a-tracy
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:40 am | Permalink

      Such a pity the German car manufacturers aren’t seeing the impact of their messages on people that usually buy their cars!

    • Mike Wilson
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:04 am | Permalink

      Why do you think they don’t value the UK’s lucrative market. Unlike you I have not put ‘lucrative market’ in quotation marks – implying it is not a ‘lucrative’ market – because, actually, it is a very lucrative market for BMW, Audi, Volkswagen and Mercedes. The UK represents one third of Ford’s market in Europe. The Fiesta is the UK’s biggest selling car every month – and has been for years. The Focus is usually the third biggest selling car. The Golf is in the top 10. There is an Audi in the top 10 too.

      So, why do you think they don’t value the UK market. When workers are being laid off at factories throughout Germany and France (a LOT of Citroens, Peugeots and Renaults are sold here) are going to be very angry with politicians who have sacrificed their jobs on the altar of teaching us a lesson.

      Meanwhile, we’ll have to scrape by buying more UK made cars from Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Land Rover, Jaguar etc. – oh and I dare say Lexus sales will go up too.

      There will be no deal. The EU does not want a deal. We shouldn’t waste any time or resources pretending there will be. We should plan for life outside the EU.

    • Dennis Zoff
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:15 am | Permalink

      Have BMW/VW/Mercedes et al, suggested they wish to stop trading in the lucrative UK market?

      Peter, please stop talking sophistic nonsense, it is boorish!

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:04 am | Permalink

      They certainly do but they are not in charge of the negotiation as you might have noticed.

    • NickC
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:05 am | Permalink

      PvL, So you are saying “the German car manufacturers” don’t value the UK’s lucrative market? I’d like to see your evidence from the German car manufacturers, please.

    • Turboterrier.
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:19 am | Permalink

      @PVL

      Get a life Peter have you never heard of the saying:

      You don’t know what you get until you lose it. Thankfully for the UK there are other manufacturers out there for us to deal with, anyone with a half pence of understanding regarding Customer Service Loyalty will tell you that you work 12 times harder to get a new customer on board with both loyalty and respect than to meet and exceed the expectations of your existing customers.

    • Ajay Gajree
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

      How do you know they aren’t lobbying their Govts?

    • Tony Henry
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

      The EU is behaving entirely as expected. What the EU hasn’t bargained for however is that the UK has the b*lls to walk away. In spite of her unconvincing leaderships skills, Mrs May is very well advised by the leavers around her who will fight for the British interest. In spite of their best efforts, the EU will discover that they cannot bully Britain. I am confident in the long run, Britain will get a very good deal.

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

        Dear Tony–I cannot grasp why we don’t talk in the here and now, rather than two three Xmases or whatever hence–We just have to say, If you want to talk then do so, If not not. What could be more reasonable than that? In case of doubt, we should of course reject any idea of their unilaterally deciding sequencing or anything else for that matter.

        • Tony Henry
          Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:31 pm | Permalink

          Dear Leslie.
          I agree with you entirely. We should take a very firm line.

    • Peter Parsons
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

      I would think that the German car manufacturers do value the UK market, but perhaps are not that concerned. Maybe their view is that buyers of new Porsche 911s, BMW X5s, S-class Mercedes and the like are not especially price sensitive, so potential tariffs are not that much of a concern as much of their market will still be there anyway.

      Compare that with the Nissan plant in Sunderland, where 75% of its output goes to the EU27 (compared to the 14% of German car output). Is the average buyer of a Nissan likely to be more or less price sensitive than the buyer of a 911, an X5 or an S-class? I would be much more worried about no deal if I was a Nissan worker in Sunderland than if I worked for BMW, Mercedes or Porsche.

    • Lindsay McDougall
      Posted October 11, 2017 at 2:25 am | Permalink

      Because German car manufacturers are parroting the Angela Merkel line. Possibly the fact that they are relying on Mrs Merkel to save them from the consequences of their diesel fraud has something to do with it.

      All the leading players in the EU are telling us that we either have to pay a King’s ransom or remain in the EU. They are clearly closing their eyes to reality or negotiating in bad faith – or both.

      Guy Westerhoft: The British have changed their minds!!!!!
      Jean Claude Juncker: Full steam ahead to a Federal Europe with a united Presidency and a German (sorry, European) army
      Michel Barnier: More clarity, please. What part of “That’s your lot.” does he not understand?
      Emmanuel Macron: The UK can join a reformed EU. Such as the one you failed to offer Mr Cameron?
      Angela Merkel: The UK must continue making annual payments to the EU. In exchange for what, Mrs Merkel?

      The EU is not Hotel California. Before I sign off, a question for Mr Redwood: Why has the Government asked for a two year implementation period, which is unnecessary and against out interests?

  2. alan jutson
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 5:50 am | Permalink

    Keep up the pressure JR, we simply cannot afford to lose out because we are too timid to stand our ground.

    Pleased Mrs May is now seeing the EU for what it really is, which is a self serving entity for the elite, which cares little for those outside, and even less for own members people.

    • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:29 am | Permalink

      @alan jutson: Interesting – I have the impression that the EU cares much more about UK citizens in the EU27 and EU citizens in the UK. It is also more concerned about the Good Friday agreement and preventing any hard border in Ireland. How is the UK going to guarantee that in the no-deal option it seems to currently pursue and which is promoted in this website?

      Reply The UK has set out an easy border for NI. Once again the ball is in the EU’s court.

      • Know-Dice
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

        PvL at least this Government cares for both EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in Europe vs. Corbyn who seems to want to throw UK citizens in Europe to the wind…

      • graham1946
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

        They do not care for the citizens as you suggest. They were offered a reciprocal deal last October and said a flat ‘no’ as they wanted to use it as a bargaining chip.
        We were wrong (and still are) in not shaming the EU by giving a unilateral guarantee, although our govt. has always said EU citizens here are welcome in any event. Anyone living here for 5 years, regardless of the EU has the right to remain.People’s lives should not be used as bargaining tools and I deplore it, but the EU started it.

      • rose
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

        Dear Peter

        If the EU cared about the reciprocal rights of citizens of the EU and subjects of the UK it would not have vetoed the agreement Mrs May came to with over 20 countries on this last year. But oh no, instead of being merciful to all those families, they insisted on not talking till formal negotiations began, and then interposing impossible conditions. Some concern. They have added black propaganda to that, saying EU citizens get beaten to death in our country, and generally unsettling the continentals here. I know the Guardian and BBC etc have fed them in this but they should have checked their facts.

        On the Northern Irish border, they are clearly trying to break up the Union with Great Britain, out of spite and vindictiveness, as they would like to do with Scotland. There is no difficulty about the border. All we need is a grown up agreement to trade freely as I am sure we would have with Holland were she not shackled to the EU. There is, besides, no sense in talking about the Northern Irish border before settling what the trading arrangements are going to be. So, besides trying to stir up trouble, the EU is also obstructing the talks on trade by insisting the border be settled first.

      • NickC
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

        PvL, Impressions aren’t facts. There is no reason why EU citizens in the UK should have their rights overseen by the EU/ECJ any more than Americans should be protected by their constitution and courts when visiting the UK – or, indeed visiting the EU.

        When we have left the fascist oligarchy that is the EU, people coming to these shores will enjoy one of the best legal protections in the world. If that isn’t good enough, then don’t come.

      • alan jutson
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

        Peter

        Immigration/emmigration is voluntary, agreed ?

        We are offering those EU migrants who want to stay, exactly the same rights as any of our own UK citizens.

        A simple logical and fair offer.

        Likewise I would expect the UK citizens abroad, to accept the same rights of any host Country where they choose and want to reside.

        To have foreign immigrants working under anything else, is an absolute nonsense.

      • Roy Grainger
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

        The EU have said nothing at all about the rights of UK citizens living in the EU27 other than suggesting they won’t be allowed to go and live in other EU countries – as this is a massive reduction in their current rights (with no reciprocal reduction in the rights of EU citizens in UK being offered) I’d say we need to insist that the UK Supreme Court will have the power to protect the rights of our EU-resident citizens overruling ECJ law.

      • Nig l
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

        And the stupid EU are saying the border should be the Irish Sea, which means ‘annexation’ of Northern Ireland, de facto, one country. Peter do you understand in any way the pain and suffering before the Good Friday agreement and the efforts needed to achieve it.

        Do what your masters want and civil war will break out again. Of course for Junket Drunkers and his cohorts, Who cares as long as they keep their precious political project on track.

        I regret to say it but I think your one eyed approach has let you down big time on this one.

      • Alexis
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

        They care about retaining the jurisdiction of the ECJ. The citizens are a useful conduit for that.

        That is how much they ‘care’ about citizens of the EU and UK.

        Mrs May made an immediate and generous offer regarding EU citizens in this country. This was not reciprocated.

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 11, 2017 at 4:33 am | Permalink

        Reply to reply: the UK has not provided a solution for Ireland which would work in any Brexit outcome. If the UK makes (as now) the solution for Ireland dependent on the future deal it is introducing an element of blackmail which obviously would never be acceptable. May good to remember that it isn’t the EU which wants a Brexit or has called for a divorce. The onus is 100% on the UK.

        • NickC
          Posted October 11, 2017 at 10:02 am | Permalink

          PvL, No it is the EU that is engaging in blackmail. The EU says that any trade deal discussion is dependent on: a NI border deal; imposing the ECJ on the UK (“citizens rights”); and a cash bribe. All the UK has said is that trade should be discussed at the same time because the issues are interdependent.

          Moreover the border between NI and Eire is a matter for our two countries and none of the EU’s business. The EU, and you, seem to be under the illusion you can continue to dictate to us even though we are about to become independent.

    • Hope
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:57 am | Permalink

      No she is not. She is keeping us the EU for as long as possible. If she loses the next election a mechanism will be found to reverse our decision and we would not have left in any regard.

      JR, Did Gove and Grayling make announcements about diesel cars off their own back or from an EU directive? You will recall other EU countries were making similar announcements at the time.Will this not continue during any transition and will it not harm our economy while the UK is legally bound to follow EU rules and ECJ?

  3. Richard1
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 5:55 am | Permalink

    Thank Goodness the Govt are now clearly planning for no Deal. Only in this way is there any chance of a decent deal, or probably of any deal, in the end. As with all EU negotiations (and in fact most negotiations) it is likely to come together in a hurry at 5 mins to midnight. In the meantime it’s essential to make the practical preparations needed for no Deal and get Business and the Country as comfortable as possible with that outcome.

    What is your view on Patrick Minfords idea of a declaration of unilateral free trade?

    • Peter Wood
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:42 am | Permalink

      R1, exactly right, as the PM said yesterday we may not have a deal until 28-3-19. This is not acceptable to business, they need to know what to plan for. We need an earlier cut-off date, say 31-12-17, by which time the destination, a sensible trade deal or WTO terms is known.

    • Iain Moore
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:14 am | Permalink

      Are they? So far Mrs May has conceded the transition/implementation period , and not laid down any time limit to it. She has conceded to pay the EU £10 billion per year for this nonspecific transition. She has conceded on free movement during this period as well. Yesterday she made us subordinate to the ECJ . So Mrs May has given ground on money, on borders , and our laws . I am struggling to see the difference between EU membership and Brexit and it seems to me rather than planning for a no deal , Mrs May is planning for our continued EU membership, for what she says and what she does are two totally different things.

      • getahead
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

        Well said Iain.

      • graham1946
        Posted October 11, 2017 at 5:49 am | Permalink

        She was asked on radio yesterday if she would vote for Brexit or not if the referendum was held today. She could not say, so the Great Ditherer continues her non leadership. Why the Tories don’t lance this boil and get rid of her can only be because they have nothing else to offer and intend sabotaging Brexit as many of us have said all along. If she gets any where near the next election, Corbyn will get in, but I suspect the Tories will knife her next summer after the negotiations and blame the non Brexit on her.

    • Mockbeggar
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:22 am | Permalink

      Quite right. The complexities of the ‘deal’ are that:

      1. The EU Negotiators have been handed a ridiculously silly brief to start the negotiations and will have to persuade the Commission (and the 27 members) to alter this in order to let the real negotiation to begin. The Commission and some of its members are being bone-headed about this though more sensible heads of government such as the Danish PM are beginning to stand up.
      2. DD and co. have to keep public opinion (and Remainers generally) at bay while they hold their line to break the EU-created deadlock.
      3. Once things start moving they will progress very slowly to the eleventh hour (and will that be March 19 or two years later?) when, with luck, a sensible deal will be struck.
      4. The EU negotiators will then have to sell the deal to the lunatic European Parliament (virtually all second rate politicians who couldn’t make it in their own countries), which won’t be easy.
      5. Our government will have to sell the deal to a wayward parliament, the press and Remainers generally.

      I’m not at all sure that it will happen, so we need to be prepared for ‘No Deal’.

    • Hope
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:58 am | Permalink

      Boris Johnson’s red line lasted two weeks! Hammond/Rudd won to keep us in the EU for an undeclared period of time. Disgraceful. Election please.

    • NickC
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:08 am | Permalink

      Richard, If the government’s plans for a “No Deal” (actually the WTO deal) are as comprehensive as their plans for an EU deal, then there is no plan.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:00 am | Permalink

      Dear Richard–Cannot speak for JR but a Declaration of Unilateral Free Trade sounds like ‘and with one bound Jack was free’ to me.

  4. Roy Grainger
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 5:58 am | Permalink

    I doubt the EU will ever agree anything on a “divorce” bill. I wonder how much Mr Corbyn would agree to pay ? Can’t imagine he’d want to pay 100bn either – seems like electoral suicide.

    • Helen Taylor
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:51 am | Permalink

      Judging by how many times the Labour MP asked if article 50 can be revoked in yesterdays discussions I dont think they would pay. They would just reverse it. Look how many of their MEPs voted against talks moving forward in the EU parliament vote last week.

      • rose
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

        I am not so sure. I think the plan is to let the conservatives do the difficult bit and then Corbyn and McDonnell will reap the reward, coming to office on the back of a gullible remainiac vote.

        • Miss Brandreth-Jones
          Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:18 pm | Permalink

          That is the usual ploy.

        • Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

          Of course that is the plan. And it is working because thoughtless politicians like J Redwood and J Rees Mogg are undermining Mrs May at every step with their silly claims we owe no money. They are letting Corbyn in with their silly games about money

          • rose
            Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:16 pm | Permalink

            It is Hammond, Mrs Rudd, and Heywood, with the people under them who are letting Corbyn in – with their deadly serious games. Brexit is not complicated but these obstructionists are making it so in order to derail it. They would apparently prefer a Corbyn goververnment to getting out of the EU.

            We owe no money. Not silly claims but facts, established by experts and lawyers on both sides.

    • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:58 am | Permalink

      @Roy Grainger: I doubt that the amount of the divorce will be a deciding factor in the end.
      All the same I notice that Brexit is much more an internal topic in the UK than in e.g. the Netherlands. Having delegated this stage of the negotiations to Barnier, we have time to look at internal matters like a new Dutch government.

      • Know-Dice
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:14 pm | Permalink

        ” new Dutch government”

        What haven’t you even sorted that one out yet…tisk…tisk…15th March!!!

        Oh, and then there is the New German Government – how long will that take?

      • rose
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:23 pm | Permalink

        Dear Peter

        Do tell us how the formation of the new government is getting on. Our BBC etc are not interested in the Continent, only in America, and we never hear any serious news of it outside elections.

      • Beecee
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

        Not again?

      • James Matthews
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:50 pm | Permalink

        Glad to learn that your compatriots are ignoring Brexit and concentration on internal affairs like establishing a government (though not sure why you want one one, you seem to be doing OK without). No chance of you doing the same I guess?

      • Timaction
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 4:31 pm | Permalink

        Is there such a thing as a Dutch Government when most of the competences have been passed to the EU crats, and the rest will follow shortly when you become a small region of the United States of Europe. Goodbye Holland, hello region 10 of the EU!

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:05 am | Permalink

        PvL–“Like a new Dutch Government”?–Omit “New”

    • formula57
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:28 am | Permalink

      Now Mr. Corbyn is not paying a similar sum to retire all the student loans he might think the monies are available for a divorce bill settlement.

    • NickC
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:28 am | Permalink

      Roy, Because the government would not state the principal that the UK has decided to be independent, and our independence is not negotiable, they have got us into the present mess.

      The EU thinks it has got Mrs May (ie: us) on the run. It has. What the government and civil service see as overtures of friendly compromise, the EU sees as weakness. The EU exploits such pusillanimity with glee.

    • Ajay Gajree
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 12:16 pm | Permalink

      He’d rather spend £100 bln on rich students.

  5. Peter
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:04 am | Permalink

    It is still a big worry. On our side you wonder who is in the ascendency, true Brexiteers or those who want a fudge. Trying to work out the various scenarios and power grabs is a fruitless task.

    There are two points you make that I query.

    1. ‘The Prime Minister is right to remain optimistic, positive and friendly’ I suggest that seems to be getting us absolutely nowhere. The EU seem to see that as a sign of weakness. They respond by digging their heels in, making further demands and conceding nothing on trade – or even the possibility of discussing it.

    Yes it is essential to plan for ‘No Deal’ . However, the idea that is to be done in secret so as not to change the mood of talks alarms me. I do not trust our side to deliver. I want to see evidence of progress on this. I also suggest that this would show the EU we really mean business. Failure to do so will lead both the EU and the public to believe we are simply bluffing.

    2. ‘It never ceases to amaze me just how much the media make of no news on talks’. I disagree. Ordinary voters look at how long since we voted leave and ask why so little has been achieved. Then we hear talk of two years ‘transition’. Worse still we hear that two years may be extended. It seems as though our choice to leave is being kicked into the long grass in the hope that remainers will think up a cunning plan to thwart it.

  6. Sakara Gold
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:25 am | Permalink

    This government seems to be making a complete hash of the Brecit negotiations. As is usual with Conservative politicians, they are more interested in playing politics with each other than agreeing a common position and getting down to negotiating the best deal for the UK. Our prospects in the future begin to fill me with gloom when I sook at the antics of our negotiators

  7. Caterpillar
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:26 am | Permalink

    Agreed, intelligent use of next 18 months is needed to be prepared for clean Brexit. I hope that we can have confidence that sufficient resource is being so directed and not distracted by the, so called, negotiations.

    • getahead
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

      While Hammond is Chancellor of the Exchequer, there will be no clean Brexit. May does everything he tells her. She has no mind of her own. The extension period Hammond has proposed is without end. Unless the EU refuses to budge over the next 18 months there will be no Brexit.
      I despair.

  8. Lifelogic
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:29 am | Permalink

    All true and very well put.

    It is indeed “such a pity the EU overplays its weak hand, which takes the EU closer to facing self imposed barriers on its access to our lucrative market”. But then EU bureaucrats rarely do act in the interests of EU citizens. They are far more likely to act in the interest of EU bureaucrats or big business lobby & pressure groups to give them an unfair competitive advantage, through red tape -usually at a large cost to the end consumer.

    We can anyway just switch production to the home or other overseas markets, use EU subsidiaries or partners if there is money to be made a way round the EU’s vandalism and deliberate wrecking will be found.

    Had (low tax at heart but never in practice Cast Iron) done his job competently we would have given notice the day after the vote and would have already prepared for the no deal option before the referendum result was counted. What competent company director would not prepare for both fairly equally likely outcomes?

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

      Well he seems to have reaped a job with a US Corporate.
      What on earth will he be doing though?
      He couldn’t be let anywhere near anything with judgement involved or making promises. Imagine negotiating with him!!

      Counting paperclips perhaps?

  9. Lifelogic
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:44 am | Permalink

    It seems the second (doubtless another tax increasing) Budget this year is to be on 22nd Nov. Assuming Hammond is still Chancellor he should cut the absurd 15% stamp duty rates, finally keep the £1M IHT each threshold promised by the appalling George Osborne many moons ago. Also he should abolish the moronic taxation of landlord’s “non profits and back track on his misguided attacks on the gig economy.

    There is even a legal case being brought to try to get foster parents legally defined as employees with sick time, holiday pay, sick cover, employment rights any the likes!

    Should he fails to do this, at the very least, he must surely be fired for being an economic illiterate. Then again we know he is one so just fire him now and have a sensible budget. But then T May has her I am Mr Corbyn but not quite as bad agenda so perhaps they should both go together.

  10. James Doran
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:51 am | Permalink

    So you’ve spent the last three weeks talking to various business audiences and hearing the concerns of traders. Any chance you might bring yourself to talk to some ordinary voters?

  11. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:57 am | Permalink

    The Prime Minister is right to plan for no deal although the greatest threat to a reasonable accord being reached is those who seek to undermine the negotiators by claiming we must stay in the single market and abide by EU law.

    Let the country unite for the negotiations so no barriers are introduced.

  12. Tom Rogers
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:57 am | Permalink

    I’m now completely confused about what the government’s position is. Will we have left the EU by 30 March 2019 or not?

    And why is this government so bad at negotiating? Just tell the EU that we are leaving. If that does not bring the EU round to our position, then leave.

    • getahead
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:03 pm | Permalink

      Tom, vested interests that have ear of the Chancellor do not want to leave the EU.
      Our bargaining position is also weakened by our Remainer majority in parliament. Not to mention never-ending “transition” periods.

  13. MikeP
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:05 am | Permalink

    It is unhelpful to label or even consider the EU as a Free Trade Area, apparently the largest in the world according to arch-Remainers:
    – if you’re in the EU there is a substantial GDP-related fee to pay. You hope to get some of that back but the richer countries will always be net contributors, not least to pay for the huge Brussels infrastructure
    – if you’re outside the EU significant tariffs apply to your goods and making your often cheaper/better products more expensive than inferior ones offered by the protectionist zone of the EU.
    It would be far more helpful to label the EU as a Protectionist Trade Zone to help the public understand how it really operates. There’s nothing wrong in principle with protecting industry “on home soil”, providing we all understand how the big multi-nationals and less efficient farmers exploit it to shut out innovation and new entrants, but let’s just be honest about it.

  14. Gary C
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:06 am | Permalink

    Is it really a glimmer of hope from the light at the end of the tunnel or are we being led into the darkness by a candle about to be extinguished ?

    Our lacklustre method of negotiating have left me wanting to hear more before thinking we are heading in the right direction.

  15. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:09 am | Permalink

    “The UK can transfer its trade account from Brussels to Geneva and to the WTO”
    Just do it already!

  16. Monza 71
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:12 am | Permalink

    If I were Mrs May, I would instruct Davis Davis to tell Barnier today that if they don’t start serious talks about a trade deal by December, we will end discussions, there will be no £20bn for a transition period and not one Euro will be paid after March 2019. The law is on our side over this.

    The trade talks will need to be continuous and we will keep progress under review We will continue to plan for No Deal and if we judge that they are not serious, we will abandon the talks at any time and proceed under WTO terms.

    At the same time, Mrs May should make another speech but this time in London.

    She needs to speak directly to people and businesses across the whole of Europe ( and our own voters ) and tell them that the UK has offered to continue full and unfettered free trade, we would like citizens of the 27 to remain in the UK and that it is the EU that is prevaricating.

    She should say that the 27 needs come out with a clear and unequivocal statement at the end of the next EU summit as to whether they intend to accept or decline this generous offer.

    No more pussyfooting around with Barnier. We need to start setting the agenda.

    What on earth is wrong with the reCAPTCHA this morning ? Infuriating

  17. Bob
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:13 am | Permalink

    If you don’t start your negotiation from the default position of “no deal”, you’re an idiot.
    Mr Cameron proved that with his “reform” deal.

    • Soft Brexit
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

      If you really think no deal is a good idea, like our esteemed host, you’re even more of an idiot.

      • Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:04 pm | Permalink

        Soft Brexit. You talk sense. but you voted leave and you empowered extremists like redwood. How do you feel?

  18. Oggy
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:14 am | Permalink

    I saw you yesterday morning on TV fending off an overly excited interviewer who doesn’t understand anything about the EU and was just relaying questions from her earpiece.

    Yanis Varoufakis predictions about the EU negotiating stance are spot on. Glad to see Mrs May is now preparing for a no deal scenario. But what was all that noise from the opposite benches about yesterday afternoon regarding whether Article 50 is revocable or not – what are they plotting ?

  19. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:15 am | Permalink

    The problem is that the government is being emollient to appease remoaners, when it should be forthright. This is being misread as weakness. That’s why Mrs M is no Mrs T.

  20. Nig l
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:16 am | Permalink

    The one eyed pro EU Financial Times is at again commenting that a decline in a London based property company’s profits for the second year is due to uncertainties over Brexit. Nothing to do with George Osborne’s tax rises, then?

  21. formula57
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:23 am | Permalink

    “The Prime Minister is right to remain optimistic, positive and friendly, offering a good future partnership on trade and security to the other EU states. “ – if we accept taking 9 + 24 months to leave at a net cost of some £28 billion is a good thing (which we had better, since that is now a sunk cost) and if we accept the Evil Empire is actually rational and interested in seeking mutual advantage which is by no means clear at all.

    Also, I am happy to confirm I will do nothing whatsoever to assist in preserving the security of our Evil Empire enemies so “Mad dog” Fallon can save the postage on his call-up papers.

  22. Lifelogic
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:29 am | Permalink

    So Theresa will announce a new Government website being launched today that will publish a vast range of official data auditing the differences in life outcomes for people from different racial and other groups. The Ethnicity Facts and Figures website containing thousands of statistics covering more than 130 topics in areas including health, education, employment and the criminal justice system.

    What possible good will come from this expensive, government, grievance creating, chip on the shoulder, lunacy? Tell T May do one hundred lines: “I must not be a statistical and numerical ignoramus by assuming that correlation is causation and I mustn’t incubate pointless and damaging grievances in sections of the community (at public expense) as no good and much harm will come of it.”

    Will Sir David Norgrove put her right? I rather doubt it he seems to prefer to quite wrongly attack Boris. Then again it seems he is a history graduate rather than a mathematician so perhaps he does not even understand statistics.

    What about the dreadful imbalance in the numbers of men and women in jail – is this proof of discrimination too?

  23. stred
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:31 am | Permalink

    Mrs May assured the Commons that during her 2 year extension of the EU law and restrictions, we would be introducing a registration scheme in order to know who is coming in and perhaps where they will be staying. She forgot to mention that this is already done in other EU countries and that, as Home Secretary, she had forgotten to register migrants for some reason. Perhaps a record of their NI number could be kept along with the registration card. “2years = an extra 700,000 people to be housed and cared for by the NHS, among other services. How many extra council houses are going to be built? Was it 25,000 or 35,000?

  24. Annette
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:33 am | Permalink

    It is clear now that unless we leave with no deal, we will not have left the EU on 29th March 2019.

    If we do not have full control of our laws, our borders, our territory, our governance & our economy on 30th March 2019, then we have not left the EU. We will not be an independent & sovereign State. There must be a breach of law there somewhere.  That implies that May is lying when she says that we will leave. How can she make such a statement & then say that we will continue to fully acquiesce to EU laws & regulations in an unnecessary ‘transition’ period. She was also worryingly vague about fishing territory & rights. She didn’t leave much else to surrender after Florence, but she seemingly intends more concessions. What have the EU conceded? They haven’t even conceded their demand to control ‘their’ citizens in a foreign country.

    I think that May has just killed off the Conservative party. Apart from a handful of true conservatives, the party has sold this country down the river. They only had one job – get us out of the EU. They appear to be failing miserably…

  25. agricola
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:41 am | Permalink

    Were I a producer of French cheese or wine, or a Spanish fruit and vegetable producer, or a Dutch or Danish producer of dairy products or pork, or an Italian or German producer of vehicles I would be beginning to get a bit worried at the quality of negotiation from my EU politicians.

    There must come a point if it continues as it is that we say enough is enough and declare a reversion to WTO rules as of 29th March 2019. It would save us a great deal of money during what appears to be a paid for implementation time after the above date. If a dependent nation decides to leave, of which there are at least twenty, would the EU continue to pay them for an implementation period.

    One point needs clarification. For worldwide UK trade agreements are we proposing to commence after March 2019 or after March 2021.

  26. Norman
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    Spot-on. The EU, as an institution, is showing its true colours – as are all its many apologists. The Government’s position (on this issue) as stated by the PM yesterday is exactly right. I was also pleased to see Owen Patterson MP doing a good job over at the 5 October Heritage Foundation meeting in Washington DC. In answer to questions from the audience, he said his meetings at grass roots level in Germany showed a keenness to get on with a deal, but that Mrs Merkel’s now weakened position meant the elite would be slow to concede for financial reasons. Given the fundamental ethos of the EU, its behaviour is hardly surprising. A transcript of Owen’s speech is posted on-line by ‘Economists for Free Trade’, and the Q & A session video appeared on yesterday’s Breitbart News.

  27. Jason Wells
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:01 am | Permalink

    It’s too late now for JR’s recriminations, A50 has been activated, we are leaving , deal or no deal? – we have to meet EU requirements for exit before any talks about a future will be allowed..

    We should remember we are the ones leaving the EU and not the other way round- the ball will be always in our court until we exit- there were never any promises or guarantees made from the EU side about a transition deal or a future deal- so we should forget about it- So lets look instead at some of the promises made by our own side- we’re taking back control according to JR, going to make new deals with countries overseas and far away according to Liam Fox and then getting away from the ECJ according to Jacob R-M. So add in 350 million extra pw for the NHS a la Boris, and – “the people have had enough of experts”- from M Gove and then the german car workers will twist the minds of the EU set according to IDS- you see where I’m going- so then it looks like it’ll be – ‘No Deal’- then bring it on.

  28. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    It was revealing during the debate how many Labour MPs were only interested in knowing if the government had received legal advice about reversing Article 50. Shows what contempt they have for the views of the people expressed in the referendum.
    As I recall the Gina Miller legal case proceeded on the basis that Article 50 was irreversible.

    • Iain Moore
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

      It does seem odd, the Supreme Court made the ruling that A50 had to be voted on in Parliament because it was irrevocable, now the Remainers are seeking to revisit that judgment. Clearly the Gina Miller case as just an attempt to put some hurdles in the way of Brexit, When that failed they now seek to scrub out the ruling on A50 that they established and try to trip up the A50 route to Brexit another way.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

      Exactly, but judges almost never rule according to the law. The law is a bit like a large religious tome. So they generally decide on the outcome they want to then and then look for the the bits of the law that help them justify that outcome. They will happily drop the irreversible bit if it suits them for the next case!

      Look at the judgement in the tribunal fees case for example. The religion of rights can be used to justify changes to almost any law they want to modify or overrule.

  29. Bert Young
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:09 am | Permalink

    The EU has a quandary , it wants and needs our money and it knows it cannot manage without it . It will play its cards to prolong the negotiation process as long as possible , meanwhile it will strive to keep some unity with the remaining 27 . Revolt from the Poles and the level of dissension with the Eastern bloc countries as a whole is a real thorn in its side ; add to this is the coming election in Austria with the far righters looking dominant ; the current disillusion of the French with Macron also contributes to its mess .

    Power positioning is also a factor of the key figures within the EU . Juncker has failed and others are steeling themselves for identity ; Barnier is a runner and many other contenders will try to take the focus away from him . Negotiations with us will suffer and more delays will occur .

  30. majorfrustration
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:17 am | Permalink

    Surely at this point the UK should withdraw from talks and make the point that our efforts are being concentrated on WTO come 2019. If between now and then the EU comes to us with a “deal” we would be plsed to look at it.

  31. Nigel
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:23 am | Permalink

    Mrs May is being badgered by big business bosses to go for an implementation period etc. These people are paid huge salaries and bonuses. An important part of their responsibilities is to manage change. It is now time for them to step up to the plate and earn their corn.

    • NickC
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

      Nigel, A lot of corporate bosses love imposing “change” on other people, but squeal when change is forced on them.

  32. Helena
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    You write “We must use this time to show business how trucks will move through ports, planes will fly, financial services will be traded and laws will be enforced after 30 March 2019 without a deal”. Well, kindly go ahead and show us, Mr Redwood. Trucks move through ports in the EU and round the world thanks to deals, planes fly in the EU and round the world thanks to deals, financial services are traded in the EU and round the world thanks to deals. But you imagine we can do all this without a deal. Explain.

    Reply As set out in yesterday’s Customs and Trade papers from HMG

    • Helena
      Posted October 11, 2017 at 4:52 am | Permalink

      Oh dear, you haven’t actually read those HMG papers, have you? They argue for the desperate need for deals – the very opposite of what you claim!

      Reply Not true

  33. Taigh
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:42 am | Permalink

    You are desperately confused, Mr Redwood. Everyone (except you) knows perfectly well that the barriers and tariffs the EU will place on their trade with the UK will be the exact same ones they place on their trade with any third country. The WTO requires that. It is not the EU that has converted the UK into a third country. It is the UK’s choice.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

      And a very wise choice indeed.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:21 am | Permalink

      Dear Taigh–You use “Third Country” as if it meant “Third World Country”, any tinge of which would be complete nonsense–Try and grasp that to become a Third Country is 100% precisely what so many of us want. In any event I for one am getting fed up listening to mere Trade consequences, which though important are not that important.

  34. Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:45 am | Permalink

    I was surprised to hear the PM say that she wouldn’t be levying import duties. Is she aware of the amount of money that this would bring into the treasury and the amount it would cost us if we had to pay WTO tariffs to the EU?

    Surely such an undertaking should be dependent on a reciprocal agreement???

    • graham1946
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

      We don’t have to pay any duties to the EU via WTO. The importers in the EU do that. It may impact our exports a bit, but it is unlikely to be much considering the pound sterling is now more competitive. For exclusive products as against competing products it hardly matters at all.

      Any duty on imports to the UK is payable by our importers and ultimately the public, so of no import duties are levied here the public will save money and we don’t have to pay the membership fee of 10 billion plus. The government must also give free trade to the rest of the world as well and if that is the case, food prices for instance will decline by 20 percent meaning more money is available to be spent in the economy, thereby negating any loss of Customs Duties.

  35. oldtimer
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    The PM’s statement is a clear win for the EU’s negotiating position. It will encourage the EU to continue to play hard ball right through the process in the belief that the May government will, in the final analysis, buckle to its will. If she remains in office throughout this process then the UK’s negotiating position will continue to be eroded and the referendum vote will be betrayed.

    Obviously the UK government must, in the absence of a positive response to the position the PM has outlined, prepare for the full implementation of third country status. It should not hang on throughout 2018 hoping for something to turn up. It will not. The UK will again be strung along by the EU negotiators whose clear objective is to frustrate Brexit and, failing that, to inflict as much damage on the UK as possible. In this objective the EU is being actively supported by key members of the opposition parties, the House of Lords, the civil service and the news media.

  36. Kenneth
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:58 am | Permalink

    The 2 year implementation period is not a good idea in my opinion as the Prime Minister states that this may entail our following rules governed by the European Court of Justice.

    I am sorry but it would be intolerable for our country to have such a one-sided trade arrangement where we are subject to final rulings from the party we have the trade deal with.

    Please ask Mrs May to withdraw this idea.

  37. Shieldsman
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:58 am | Permalink

    LEAVING THE EUROPEAN COMMON AVIATION AREA
    The triggering of Article 50 is notification to the European Union that the United Kingdom will cease to be part of the European Common Aviation Area, in which the Commission negotiates bi-lateral Air Service Agreements on behalf of the member States. EU external aviation policy briefing May 2016, EPRS_ BRI(2016) 582021_EN is relevant.

    Article 1 of the Chicago Convention mentions that ‘The contracting States recognize that every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory’, while Article 6 on scheduled air services states that, ‘No scheduled international air service may be operated over or into the territory of a contracting State, except with the special permission or other authorization of that State, and in accordance with the terms of such permission or authorization’.

    The United Kingdom has such sovereignty, and therefore on leaving the EU has exclusive rights to negotiate bi-lateral air service agreements under the Chicago Convention.

    So on leaving the EU The Brussels Commission will no longer be responsible for negotiating our bi-lateral air service agreements.
    The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs appears to be responsible for negotiating bi-lateral air service agreements. He must therefore confirm that the five freedoms negotiated with the EU’s so called third Countries are still valid after 29th March 2017.

    The United Kingdoms proposal for a replacement air service agreement are set out in CBP-7633.
    The Chief Executive of the CAA, Andrew Haines, set out the UK’s options on access to the ECAA
    One being staying in the European Common Aviation Area (i.e. UK airline treated as if part of the EU, with full access – in many ways highly desirable for both sides in this negotiation). But Aviation is likely to be caught in the crossfire. This is not to be recommended, membership of the ECAA effectively requires acceptance of EU aviation law across all areas, so where the UK might want to move away from current EU rules with which it is not entirely satisfied (e.g. state aid or compensation). Compromise would be required, leading to a ransom and any final agreement involving Community Law and jurisdiction of the ECJ.
    The areas of EU aviation law and regulation that the UK would have to submit to, as part of the ECAA, are extensive. They include market access, safety, security, air traffic management, Ownership, the environment, social (labour) issues, consumer rights and the economic regulation of airports. The EU’s new Aviation Strategy proposes changes in many of these areas, but only EU member states have a say on such developments. Non-EU participants in the ECAA have to take it or leave it”.

    Best to be free, keep it simple with the quid pro quo of a bi-lateral, which was the way we operated before ECAA. The EU cannot refuse to negotiate the ICAO 5 Freedoms of the Air with the UK. Not to do so would deny the 27 members Airlines, entry into and over the UK’s airspace.

    The UK will remain a member of Eurocontrol. Through NATS the privately run National Air Traffic Service which provides an ATM and the United Kingdom Government controls all air traffic in its airspace extending out over the Atlantic seaboard. European air traffic is controlled by Eurocontrol, which is an intergovernmental organisation composed of European Council members, not European Union members. Eurocontrol has 41 members, as far flung as Armenia and Georgia. London Centre is the busiest air traffic control centre in Europe; the vast majority of transatlantic air traffic is co-ordinated from Prestwick in Ayrshire. The UK will continue to be an integral part of European air space.

    The UK Civil Aviation Authority will remain a member of EASA a joint venture agency which replaced the JAA and the UK Air Registration Board.
    The UK will remain a members of European Civil Aviation Conference, SESAR, and OECD.

  38. Viva Corbyn Viva!
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    Mr Corbyn in the House yesterday chided Mrs May for offering post Brexit deals to non-EU nations where “she might as well give them photocopies of the present trading agreement” Yes, it seems they are being asked as a quick and easy measure in the first instance to carry on with the UK with more or less the same criteria of trade. It seems Mr Corbyn thinks the present trade deals are bad deals. He should have voted Leave. I bet he did actually, given his 30-year hatred of everything EU 🙂

  39. A.Sedgwick
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:10 am | Permalink

    Apologies for writing the same comment, but there will be no deal. JRM with his usual logic rightly said being subject to the ECJ after 29/03/19 means we have not left the EU, so why is Mrs. May talking about possibly accepting their rules in a so called transition period. I have absolutely no idea what her strategy is. She should close down the talks for six months and make her mind up whether 23/06/16 mattered for our democracy, forget the Conservative Party winning elections, does she want to be remembered as denying the electorate. She may find then her rating goes up.

  40. Tad Davison
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    ‘We must use this time to show business how trucks will move through ports, planes will fly, financial services will be traded and laws will be enforced after 30 March 2019 without a deal. There is no cliff edge. The rest of the world trades with the EU without belonging to it.’

    People need to see the BBC’s Newsnight for Monday 9th October and the part where a panel talked about the day’s proceedings. Not a proper Brexiteer amongst them, and thus they were allowed to get away with spouting all sorts of bilge without being sufficiently challenged. Well deserving a complaint or two for outright biased journalism.

    They’re about as bad and as arrogant at some who post negative things on these pages, as if we who campaigned to leave had no right to do so and were heretics. Copernicus was once denounced as a heretic too by the brainwashed who hadn’t the capacity to see things properly, but he turned out to be right all along.

    Tad Davison

    Cambridge

  41. Duncan
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    Why is the 5th most powerful nation on earth pandering to Juncker, Merkel and all the other scheming EU apparatchiks who seek to undermine and damage my country?

    Any chance of having a proper UK government who can perform the ultimate sovereign function of protecting the UK’s national interest or do we have to tolerate this farce of a so called Conservative govt?

    This govt’s been given its orders by the British people so just get on with it and stop playing for time because it’s becoming tiresome and tedious

  42. Peter VAN LEEUWEN
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    “They (the EU) haven’t been prepared to talk to us about anything that really matters” – closing words by Mr. Redwood in a SKY interview.
    So the life-long rights for EU27 citizens and UK citizens don’t really matter???
    Nor does the Irish border???
    I’m left dumbfounded!

    Reply We agree re the border and citizens!

    • David Price
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

      The PM raised these issues last year seeking to resolve things and avoid undue stress for UK and EU citizens but was rebuffed by your “caring” EU.

      These issues were identified specifically in the UK’s Article 50 letter (items 2 and 5) to the EU in March this year

      Are you so naive as to assert that the EU initiated discussion on these topics or even that they really care.

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

      Peter

      It’s easy, 5-year old stuff:

      People living in the EU abide by EU rules, those in the UK abide by UK rules.
      A free trade agreement between EU and UK means an open Irish border to trade. Additionally there’s always been a fr4ee border for Irish to N Ireland and vice versa, which we’re willing to keep, but you’re not and you offer no counter proposals

      THE BALL IS IN YOUR COURT.

      We have offered both. It is the EU which has refused to reply and thereby risks disintegration.

    • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
      Posted October 11, 2017 at 4:29 am | Permalink

      Reply to reply: If you agree “regarding the border and citizens”, then maybe your choice of words was unfortunate and the UK will still come with e.g. a solution for Ireland that would work under ANY deal or no-deal outcome. This week will probably show that further talks on citizen’s rights are still required to make enough progress on the divorce issues.

  43. Epikouros
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    The EU strategy is obvious they are exploiting the divisions between those in the UK who wish to leave and those who wish to remain. They believe and they may be right that they do not have to enter into constructive negotiations as our infighting will negate the need. The only problem they have is that if they have miscalculated and the UK decides to pull out without a deal then they will have shot themselves in the foot as they will suffer the severe damage that not having secured a sensible deal will create. It will be the EU not the UK that will fall off a cliff edge. The UK will merely tumble down the slope a bit pick herself up dust off and carry on.

  44. am
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    If taking back control is what she does then good. But sceptism now abounds on what May speak really means: Just anything for an audience for a day for things in the future. Now, action is what is needed and a more forthright and public assessment of the ecu chicanery.

  45. Fed Up and Angry
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    John, let’s assume an agreement is reached along the lines of what the PM appears to be pushing for; do you believe that a 2 year transitional agreement, which keeps the UK paying into the EU, continues to give the ECJ supremacy, doesn’t return control to our borders and waters, and prevents us completing alternative trade deals is better than no deal? Presumably not, but you won’t be able to stop it since the opposition would vote with the PM.

    No doubt this 2 year transition deal would have the option to be be extended in the ‘unlikely’ event that trade talks still hadn’t been concluded by 2021.

    Finally – how do you think this scenario would go down with the voting public?

    Reply The PM has made clear transition is not to have more talks, but is only for implementation of an Agreement. I will judge any final package against No Deal when we know what it is.

  46. woodsy42
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    If the EU is going behind the back of the UK government and talking to Corbyn I see no reason why the government should not treat the EU exactly the same way. Why not have direct talks with the more friendly EU countries about future free trade on specific items important to them and us and by-pass the EU process? It would be interesting to know the EU reaction if an EU country were prepared to defy the rules and trade irrespective of the EU.

  47. Ian Wragg
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    The commission rejects……… the siren song of the EU.
    Nothing will advance until we agree to pay £billions. This of course would be a suicide note for the government and indeed the opposition if they agreed.
    Having inland customs posts is sensible and exactly what we did before the EU.
    There were express lanes for customs cleared vehicles at the ports and airports ensuring a free flow of goods.
    The majority of Remainiacs won’t know that as we did nothing before the EU.
    I see PvL is getting very shirty now we look like having no deal.
    It’s good to see the Brussels view on your blog.

  48. rose
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    You have as ever written a very positive and ecouraging piece. Thank you.

    Now what about this answer by the PM to the question on the ECJ? It seems mad to me to be handing them a weapon like that. They have chosen to act as a hostile power and they will use it against us in the two or however many years it is. And think how many cases You Know Who will be able to bring against us in that time?

  49. Mick
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:22 am | Permalink

    I thought Mrs May won the day yesterday on Brexit, until I thought someone had turned my tv over to a comedy show when corbyn said he and his team are ready to take over talks on Brexit best a laugh I’ve had for ages it would be like putting a alcoholic in charge of a pub muppets, then there’s the bias BBC still spouting there bile about Brexit and doing there very best to use the job losses at BAE down to Brexit , how much longer do we have to put up with all this negativity on Brexit

  50. Dennis Zoff
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:29 am | Permalink

    Has Mrs. May all of a sudden realised this could be her Waterloo and has finally decided the best defense to her premiership is to go on the offensive and seriously rebluff the EU?

    She can turn her very public negative credibility around if she takes a hard stance towards the EU wolves, something run away Cameron never did!

    • Mitchel
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

      Will the Prussians come to her aid at the last minute or will Marshal Grouchy’s (fifth!) column march toward the sound of the guns and finish her off?

  51. Doug Powell
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    Laugh of the day folks!

    Have just heard a BBC EU grovelling presenter discussing the PM’s Commons Brexit speech with an OB reporter.

    Presenter (with intense indignation and a tear in his eye): But the EU believes that talk of a “No Deal” amounts to bullying!

    • Know-Dice
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

      It’s only “bullying” if we wont let them have the ball, the one that is in their court now 🙂

  52. J.White
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    Very disappointed and upset that Mrs May could even think two years let alone longer! of being out of the EU in name only and still subject to the ECJ is going to be acceptable to leave voters. This is obviously Phillip Hammond and Amber Rudd pushing on transitional arrangements. The government will pay at the ballot box for this betrayal. Soveignty, money and control of our borders is what we voted for and expect to be delivered. I hope now that there will be a no deal then we will be out. It is obvious that Labour would give the EU everything they ask for and no doubt said so in their talks with the EU, they are traitors. Please ask the cabinet to think again about the two year transitional deal especially how much control the ECJ will have or I fear at the next election at best you would be in a coalition at worst in opposition watching Labour ruin this country.

  53. NickC
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:56 am | Permalink

    Theresa May’s statement to the HoC 9th Oct 2017 is a threadbare. She claims we want: “… a new, deep and special partnership with the European Union which spans both a new economic relationship and a new security relationship.” No, we don’t. And, of course “new” can mean anything and nothing.

    Economic Partnership: although we will leave the SM and CU (she says) we will have a “… unique economic partnership [which] will enable the UK and the EU to work side by side …” – this sounds like EU-lite to me, and covers up a continuing role for the CJEU.

    Security Partnership: A new treaty with the EU which covers “… diplomacy, defence and security, and development …”. In other words, locked in to the EU’s foreign policy and military expansions by treaty.

    Implementation: “The framework for this [transition] period, which can be agreed under Article 50, would be the existing structure of EU rules and regulations.” Or, two (or more) years of EU rule as usual because the government just can’t be bothered to implement the systems and arrangements needed now. That takes us to at least 2021.

    In my opinion this is capitulation by the Conservative government backed up by the Labour, LibDem, and SNP opposition. In policy areas where the UK is not directly locked into the EU again, we will be tied to the EU in a “deep” partnership. We are being betrayed.

    • Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:49 pm | Permalink

      NickC, it is a relief to read your comment. I feel a sickening sense of betrayal. We will scarcely be able to describe ourselves as an independent, sovereign nation.

    • Richard
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 4:23 pm | Permalink

      This was basically my interpretation.

  54. NickC
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:01 am | Permalink

    DUPLICATE WARNING
    JR, My apologies for my duplicated comment beginning: “Theresa May’s statement to the HoC . . .”

  55. Qubus
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    What worries me, and I admit that I don’t fully understand all the ins-and-outs of all the Brexit problems, in fact life is too short to read all about it, is what happens if there is a No Deal. Clearly, there will be pain on both sides, and I am aware that the UK has a trade deficit with the EU. However, in the UK’s case, all the pain will be borne by one country, in the EU’s case, the pain will be spread between 27 countries. So, shouldn’t we suffer disproportionately?

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:34 am | Permalink

      Dear Qubus–They net export to us–Suppose as a thought experiment the 27 were to split in to 54, what difference, apart from in your logic, would that make?

  56. J.White
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:22 am | Permalink

    Very disappointed and upset that Mrs May could even think two years let alone longer! of being out of the EU in name only and still subject to the ECJ is going to be acceptable to leave voters. This is obviously Phillip Hammond and Amber Rudd pushing on transitional arrangements. The government will pay at the ballot box for this betrayal. Soveignty, money and control of our borders is what we voted for and expect to be delivered. I hope now that there will be a no deal then we will be out. It is obvious that Labour would give the EU everything they ask for and no doubt said so in their talks with the EU, they are traitors. Please keep up pressure and ask the cabinet to think again about the two year transitional deal especially how much control the ECJ will have.

  57. ian
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    Look like treasury have it all tied up with others, I see the treasury is pushing ahead with the nine areas with mayors for more integration with the EU. It looks like the politicians are just playing good cop bad cop with the media and making fake news while the big players around the world are doing a deal behind closed doors. I don’t think there is any more you can do except get ready for retirement john.

  58. Newmania
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 12:02 pm | Permalink

    No new issues have emerged above the ones we have often discussed on this site.

    These would be the ones you do not understand and have provided no solution to. It does no good to say the have”often been discussed” if that discussion consists of nonsense.

    Reply I have set out ways forward – more importantly so now has the UK govt.

    • sm
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

      Newmania, you don’t discuss, you hurl abuse and scorn.

  59. Atlas
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    Yes John,

    I want to see:
    (i) No ECJ interference in UK matters;
    (ii) The UK having it own standards for what it makes for UK and the rest-of-the-world sales;
    (iii) No preposterous EU telling us what we can or cannot manufacture;
    (iv) Low tariffs on goods from the rest of the world;
    (v) Controlling our own Borders;
    (vi) Determining our own Laws;
    (vii) Making clear that NI is an integral part of the UK.

  60. Dave Andrews
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Can anyone tell me why, under WTO rules, a major motor manufacturer would want to set up in the UK and face export tariffs to an EU market place of 500 million, as opposed to setting up the EU and face the same rate to a UK market place of only 60 million?

    Reply At current exchange rates the UK is much more competitive than the Euro area

    • Know-Dice
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

      And how many of that 500 million are potential customers for UK goods?

      Bearing in mind that most if not all of the former eastern European countries have wage rates running at a fraction of those in northern Europe…

    • Helena
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:17 pm | Permalink

      Great answer, John! So exchange rates never change, is that your position?

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:38 am | Permalink

        Dear Helena–And you know which way they are going to go, is that yours? Donnez nous un break

    • David Price
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

      Perhaps because after Germany we are the second biggest new vehicle market in the EU … the UK acounts for approx 18% of new vehicle registrations in the EU (2016 FY figures from ACEA) – 3.1m motor vehicles, 500K more than France.

  61. ian
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    The new world order has the UK under control. If the EU falls so do plans for an NWO with 28 counties under it control in Europe and expanding all the time, with other countries around the world ie USA, Canada and so on. One currency, one religion, one gov, one people. Globalist, that what this country is suffering from, may a globalist with most other MPs with goldman, clintons, blare and so on running the show.

    • Mitchel
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

      Relax!The Chinese and Russians have already spoiled their game.The only thing you have to worry about is systemic implosion in the west or WWIII as the globalists confront the Eurasianists in a desperate attempt to prevent the former.

    • rose
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

      Well, this race audit, coming out at a time when we are told our sex will no longer be recorded, is going to divide us, stirring up grievance and creating a whole new industry of grievance mongers. What a deeply unpleasant woman we seem to have “leading “us: first she attacked and demoralised her party in public; then the police; and now her whole country. Yet foreigners think it is the most generous, tolerant, fair, and unprejudiced country in the world, which is why so many of them want to live here.

      • Norman
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

        This is the problem we now have, even before Brexit is delivered. I don’t know what you call it (Progressive Liberalism?) but whatever it is, it’s as damaging as the controlling spirit of the EU.

  62. James Neill
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

    Today I read of plans that the UK may apply for NAFTA – north american free trade association

    Wow! we really are all over the shop– just think about it taking orders from trump instead of junker? I’m sure the EU side are shaking in their boots with laughter. Idiotic nonsense

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:41 am | Permalink

      Dear James–Rather Trump than Juncker any day of any week

  63. Shelagh Sneddon
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

    The European Commission’s ‘Research and Innovation’ website now has, as I feared, a warning that British members of Horizon 2020 projects may have EU funds withdrawn from them on 1/4/19 if Britain insists on leaving the EU without an agreement. It does seem to leave open the possibility that they could continue to participate without EU funding. As you have long said that leaving abruptly in this way will have no ill effect, I assume that the government will be prepared to underwrite this funding, so that these projects can continue to their conclusion?

    • Know-Dice
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

      Lets get it straight…so it’s Ok for the EU to withdraw committed funding, but not Ok for the UK refuse to pay for future commitments [committed by EU QMV] it apparently made, even thought there is no future benefit for the UK?

      • Shelagh Sneddon
        Posted October 11, 2017 at 7:39 am | Permalink

        I don’t see why there would be no future benefit to the UK? These are international research projects, mostly scientific – their discoveries benefit everybody. The idea that nation competes with nation in a sort of scientific cold war is a deeply depressing one.

        • Know-Dice
          Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

          Agreed over the scientific research and no reason why some of the repatriated monies cannot be used for that…but, the EU finances many more projects, like moving Transit to Turkey, €40 million to finance construct 524 energy efficient rented social housing units in Navarra, Spain etc. etc. that have no direct benefit to the UK.

        • David Price
          Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

          Benefits from research are in the form of intellectual property rights ownership and access and it is a fact of life that nation does compete with nation, company with company and university with university to establish valuable IPR portfolios.

          • Shelagh Sneddon
            Posted October 11, 2017 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

            But as the projects the EU funds tend to involve co-operation between a number of universities in different countries, intellectual property rights will in this case not be being split along national lines.

          • David Price
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:53 am | Permalink

            What you describe is not the case, being in a collaborative project does not guarantee all IPR will be shared The IPR belongs to the institution that generates it unless there are other agreements or it is not clear who exactly originated the idea. The usual caveat is that partners must have “reasonable” access albeit at a “reasonable” levy

          • Shelagh Sneddon
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:24 am | Permalink

            Yes, you are right. I was thinking in terms of the IPR as belonging to a university, rather than a country. I don’t know anyone who thinks of these things in national terms.

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

      Equally the benefits of these projects should no longer accrue to the EU.
      Please look at both sides of the coin, not just the one facing up.
      If projects are deemed worth pursuing, I am certain that the UK would fund them, if not, not.

      • Shelagh Sneddon
        Posted October 11, 2017 at 7:53 am | Permalink

        So your idea is that medical research, say, that could be of great benefit to humanity, should just be abandoned because we, having committed to the current EU funding round, are now, in the glorious tradition of Perfidious Albion, welching on that agreement? The EU will have more sense than that – and our universities and researchers are not irreplaceable.

    • David Price
      Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

      In July 2016, before the Article 50 letter, it was reported that the EU had dropped UK applicants from projects and new funding opportunites from HGorizon 2020 were being closed off to the UK.

      In any R&D activity a key element is assignment and access to intellectual property, why should we put money in when our people are discriminated against, possibly in breach of the EU treaty obligations, and it is not clear what access we would have if any to IPR

      • Shelagh Sneddon
        Posted October 11, 2017 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

        I have heard this – however, from what I see actually happening in the university where I work, this has not been the case, but we are still very much part of current and new projects.

        • David Price
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:07 am | Permalink

          How would you know if you are not invited ..

          After we leave there will clearly have to be a new agreement for UK involvement in any collaborative projects, how funding and IPR would work.

          However if as the reports suggest the EU have demonstrated an untrustworthy and discriminatory attitude, why should we take the risk of collaborating if we cannot trust them?

          • Shelagh Sneddon
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:28 am | Permalink

            I know because the project I work on is actively continuing collaboration with no hindrance, and because I see others doing the same.

  64. Prigger
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

    I see the Speaker,Mr Speaker, had something to say to Ms Leadsom Leader of the House of Commons today. He has too many somethings to say. It is in excess of minus one.

  65. Prigger
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

    Damian Green, First Secretary of State gave his take on the “Race Disparity Audit” in the House today. The research flies in the face of say the errors of pseudo-scientific statistics outlined by Edward de Bono on Statistics long ago. But Government has never let facts and proper scientific analysis stand in the way of their daft pronouncements.
    MPs and others really do believe that anyone who theoretically could get their paper qualifications and what is heralded as good qualifications has “therefore” under achieved.
    MPs believe that without an aspiration to be a look-a-like-think-alike clone of themselves they are wanting. Next time MPs wish their wheelie bin emptied they should ask the next available MP to get round to their house and shove the wheelie bin where it rightfully belongs, right into their aspirations and fake notions of grandeur.

  66. ian
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

    The way I see it, you need the votes in parliament to get a no deal through and I don’t think the Brexit side has the votes to get it through on a free vote in parliament, other than that you need Mrs May to push a no deal through on her own with the cabinet and I cannot see that happening, just too many court cases with that option. So when you had a vote in parliament which MPs have agreed to have with a final deal with the EU, at the moment it would be a vote for no deal or carry on talking, and if EU decides not move on the talks, MPs will vote for carrying on talking so there is no need for the EU to do anything till the UK has the votes in parliament on a no deal option, the EU holds all the cards because of your own MPs in parliament, you have not got any no deal options

  67. James Matthews
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

    You have to be an optimist Mr Redwood, but with the prospect of a (needless) two year extension, on top of a year’s delay in triggering Article 50, continued oversight by the ECJ, continued budget contributions and continued free movement it looks to many of us as though all these concessions and all this prevarication is softening us up for a betrayal.

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

      This is the suspicion.
      We’ve had no actual reason as to why triggering A50 took 9 months, when Cameron on behalf of Mr Redwood’s party promised it the next day. It just shouldn’t take that long to write a letter. Why wasn’t preparation for no deal being enacted June 24 2016?
      Now we have more equivocation than promises about “transition” periods, which could become “extension” periods… and so on.

  68. Dennis Zoff
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    Clearly, this is all bluff, counter-bluff and counter/treble bluff! That’s how negotiations work?

    Though, however, it is rather tedious reading all this puerile sophistry from both sides of the table! Thank God they do not run businesses, otherwise, they would be bankrupt within a year!

    It further illiterates the ineptitude and mendacious behaviour of our ruling classes, with their penchant for talking (at our expense) and childish kindergarten theatrics with little “noteworthy substance” to show for it!

    We are not quite there yet, but one has the feeling the business end of these amateur dramatics is coming to a semi-closure!

  69. Christopher Harris
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    Tony Blair agreed a reduction in our rebate from the EU, negotiated by Margaret Thatcher, in return for a promise that the Common Agricultural Policy would be reformed. As far as I am aware this reform never happened.

    Shouldn’t we be claiming this money back?

  70. MikeP
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    Dear John, in a piece today on what a No Deal would look like, BBC News is claiming that David Davies has confirmed that a detailed assessment of such a no deal outcome has not yet been done. I find this extraordinary. How can he determine if a negotiated deal is better or worse than no deal if the latter hasn’t been benchmarked? At the very least – surely – we should know by now how much each of our industrial segments needs supporting to create the equivalence of EU trading membership and what the net cost or benefit of tariffs would be in those segments.

  71. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 5:08 pm | Permalink

    The ditherer’s ditherer:

    May: “I voted Remain for good reasons at the time, but circumstances move on… You’re asking me to say how would I vote in a vote now against a different background, a different international background, a different economic background…”
    Dale: “You can’t tell me that you would now vote Leave in a referendum?”
    May: “I.. Because… I think… Iain… I could sit here and I could say oh I’d still vote Remain or I’d vote Leave just to give you an answer to that question. I’m being open and honest with you. What I did last time round was I looked at everything and came to a judgement and I’d do exactly the same this time round.”

    • rose
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

      As she says, open and honest. Emily Thornberry could have done better.

      • Sir Joe Soap
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:36 pm | Permalink

        Perhaps honest, actually. She just doesn’t know. She admits she could change her mind from one “background” to the next, i.e. on an almost daily basis, perhaps. Wavering, dithering, indecisive. No core beliefs. A follower, not a leader. Nice enough, and a functionary, but you just can’t lead a country with this mentality.

      • miami.mode
        Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:25 pm | Permalink

        Mrs May looked very uncomfortable whilst saying this and it seems plain that her heart is not really in Brexit, but she is simply going through the motions. She could at least have said that she is eagerly looking forward to the UK forging a fresh path in the world. It almost appears to be a chore for her.

        • rose
          Posted October 11, 2017 at 9:52 am | Permalink

          She should have had the wisdom to see that Brexit is a major undertaking. It is like fighting a war. She should have taken in Brexiteers from across the House and formed a war cabinet. Instead she filled the government with remainiacs from her own party and only put in the minimum of Brexiteers, marginalising and briefing against them much of the time.

          What a foolish person, thinking she could abolish slavery across the world, carry through a quasi socialist revolution at home, reinstate grammar schools…and do Brexit without passionately wanting to.

          She just wanted to be PM. She has no principles, no intelligence, only burning ambition. But we are stuck with her for now because it would derail Brexit altogether to have a contest.

  72. Tabulazero
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

    Such a pity that what the U.K. call preparations for a hard Brexit are just principles and lofty goals.

    Where are the compulsory purchase orders around Dover ? Where is the tender for the custom office new IT software ? Where is the recruitment drive for the Home Office ?

    Nowhere in sight. I am sure Brussels must be quacking in its boots.

    • miami.mode
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:37 pm | Permalink

      Tab. Brussels full of quacks? On-line definition “a person who dishonestly claims to have a special knowledge and skill in some field”!

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 11, 2017 at 8:54 am | Permalink

      Love it Tab. Quacking??? I thought that was what ducks did.

  73. nigel seymour
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

    Autumn Re-Shuffle – Amendment 1

    Chancellor – Boris Johnson
    First Sec – Damian Greene
    Home Sec – Michael Gove
    Foreign Sec – Michael Fallon
    Defence Sec – Dominic Raab
    Health Sec – Jeremy Hunt
    Education Sec – Priti Patel
    Justice Sec – David Lidington
    Work & Pen Sec – David Gauke
    Transport Sec – Amber Rudd or Anna Soubry!
    Culture MS Sec – Karen Bradley
    Local Comm Sec – Chris Grayling
    Business Energy Sec – Mark Harper
    International Dev Sec – Alistair Burt
    Dept EFRA Sec – George Eustice
    Dept Exiting EU Sec – David Davis
    International Trade Sec – Liam Fox
    Scottish Sec – David Mundell
    Welsh Sec – Alun Cairns
    NI Sec – James Brokenshire
    Chief Sec Treasury – Philip Hammond or Nicky Morgan!
    Leader HC – Nigel Evans (error made on my initial post – not Adams)
    Leader HL – Earl Howe
    Chief Whip – Gavin Williamson
    Att Gen – Robert Buckland
    Party Chairman – Sir William Cash

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 10:37 pm | Permalink

      PM?

      • rose
        Posted October 11, 2017 at 9:56 am | Permalink

        The clue is in the word “reshuffle.”

      • nigel seymour
        Posted October 11, 2017 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

        TM of course. Perhaps I’m playing the devils advocate when I dare to mention Morgan or Soubry. Would either of them jump at the chance to get one of the top job’s back?

  74. Billyg
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

    Mr Barnier is right about one thing though- it is not a game-

    We are leaving the EU bloc now because the EU chiefs have had enough of british bad manners, complaining and insults over the years, so even today if we tried to reverse the decision to leave it would not be possible- we are not going to be helped either in any way to a new deal by a basis of cherry picking or having our cake and eating it as some think, so out we’ll go march 2019. All sense of friendship, of collegiality, of partnership, of collaboration, of pretense between us has gone, there is no hope of reconcilliation now. It’s only time for exit talks and bye bye

    • rose
      Posted October 10, 2017 at 11:32 pm | Permalink

      Is it bad manners to be unhappy in a Protection Racket and finally decide to leave?

  75. Simon Coleman
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:14 pm | Permalink

    The EU have to talk to Labour because a minority Tory administration, divided and chaotic, could collapse within the next two years, or earlier. Any attempt by the EU to look after its own interests you interpret as a threat. It looks to me as if M. Barnier and the 27 are just as bewildered about the UK government’s approach as most of the British people – Remain and Leave – are. Your jingoism is tiresome and ridiculous.

  76. Max walker
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

    The UK spend for the ‘No Deal’ alternative is not an optional cost.

    The money is the cost of the insurance policy required to deliver the WTO alternative regardless of whether we use it to its full capacity or not.

    If we cannot deliver a ‘no deal’ alternative we will be slaughtered in the final frenzy of negotiation between the heads of government. No alternative would permit the EU to suddenly shift the goalposts and force us to agree to almost anything.

    The UK government must announce its plans on 21st Oct 17 regardless of what come out of the EU council meeting. We have to prevent the EU governments or Parliament from any attempt at blackmail.

  77. ian
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

    The only way I can see that a no deal can come about or for the Eu to start talking about trade/ is for local people in their areas to go down to their local party office and recall their remainer MPs and replace them with no deal MPs, then the EU will sit up and take notice because they no longer have the numbers in the UK parliament to win a vote in the EU favour.
    You the people shoot yourselves in the foot at the last GE by voting to many remainers into parliament again, your supporting tinpot parties instead of supporting yourselves for Brexit.

  78. Peter
    Posted October 10, 2017 at 8:33 pm | Permalink

    It is still a big worry. On our side you wonder who is in the ascendency, true Brexiteers or those who want a fudge. Trying to work out the various scenarios and power grabs is a fruitless task.

    There are two points you make that I query.

    1. ‘The Prime Minister is right to remain optimistic, positive and friendly’ I suggest that seems to be getting us absolutely nowhere. The EU seem to see that as a sign of weakness. They respond by digging their heels in, making further demands and conceding nothing on trade – or even the possibility of discussing it.

    Yes it is essential to plan for ‘No Deal’ . However, the idea that is to be done in secret so as not to change the mood of talks alarms me. I do not trust our side to deliver. I want to see evidence of progress on this. I also suggest that this would show the EU we really mean business. Failure to do so will lead both the EU and the public to believe we are simply bluffing.

    2. ‘It never ceases to amaze me just how much the media make of no news on talks’. I disagree. Ordinary voters look at how long since we voted leave and ask why so little has been achieved. Then we hear talk of two years ‘transition’. Worse still we hear that two years may be extended. It seems as though our choice to leave is being kicked into the long grass in the hope that remainers will think up a cunning plan to thwart it.

    This might not suit the censor on here, but that is the way many will view it.

  79. Posted October 11, 2017 at 11:42 pm | Permalink

    John you and a great number of other people including the Government seem to be under a very serious misapprehension concerning Article 50. Article 50 exists for the purpose of preparing a Withdrawal Agreement. That is it. The mandate given to Barnier also includes the exceptional horizontal competence to agree a “transitional period” based on nothing more than a continuation of EU membership on its full terms (less representation, MEPs etc).

    Trade and the future is no part of the Article 50 process at all. Trade (and all other bilateral matters) need to be done under Article 218 (TFEU I think). (This fact itself is made plain within Art 50 which refers to it). Different thing entirely. A process which not only has not started but can’t start and won’t start at all in the Barnier talks. And when it does start it is a process which will take many years. The first two stages alone being scoping followed by EU 27 wide impact assessment. Probably against a different EU team led maybe by Sabine Weyand.

    It is an absolute nonsense promulgated by May and Davis that “our deal” consists of one singular agreement which can be reached within two years. It can not. Nor will it.

    So if and when we persuade the EU to talk about the future Barnier will still go no further than transition – and transition almost identical to current membership at that.

    In short the entire Govt position, the debates in Parliament, the understanding of the MSM – and through them the general public – of the Brexit process, is based on what one might call a lie plain and simple. If you do not believe me – then read the relevant papers. It is all made quite clear. The Prime Minister when asked about this by Ms Soubry in the Commons a day or so ago; hedged her evasive answer by referring to the framework. But the framework is not a treaty of any kind. Far from it. It has a very limited meaning in international trade negotiations or anywhere else.

    No future trade or other treaty is going to be possible in the time available – or I suggest in the proposed 2 year “interim implementation” (LOL) period either. So keep on blogging and good luck. But time will tell who is right.

    Reply THis is a negotiation. Art 50 would allow the kind of agreement the PM seeks if the EU wants to. That is their call. I and many other Leave voters will be happy with No Deal, but am supportive that the PM tries to improve on it.

    • Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:52 am | Permalink

      If you want to inform yourself of the real position as to Article 50 and transition arrangements, as opposed to your agenda driven; overly simplistic assertions, then here is an interesting piece by Martin Howe QC. I was incidentally unaware of this piece when I posted my statement here.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*
*

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, He graduated from Magdalen College Oxford, has a DPhil and is a fellow of All Souls College. A businessman by background, he has been a director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page