Category Archives: Brexit

Envy is an unworthy emotion, and yet I feel it. It first struck on Monday, as Joe Biden announced his top tier of cabinet appointments, naming a team of calm, competent, deeply experienced lieutenants that will contrast sharply with Britains cabinet of all the talentless. The green-eyed demon struck again on Thursday as I watched Biden issue a series of Thanksgiving messages with a warmth and humanity alien to the man he will succeed. Its clearer every day that in electing Biden and rejecting Donald Trump, Americans are moving to undo the great error they made in 2016. I envy that because we are still stuck with ours.

Of course Trumpism will live on in some form, but in January 2021 Americans will formally conclude the chapter that opened with Trumps victory four years ago. In the same month, we will start our Brexit story in earnest, leaving the European Union not just in name but in practice. As Americas encounter with the reality of 2016-vintage populist nationalism ends, so ours will begin.

Even with just weeks to go, its still not clear whether we will end the EU transition period on 1 January with a deal or without one: you can find signs pointing to both outcomes. But lets say a deal is done and ratified in these remaining 30-odd days. That will be greeted with relief, since a no deal crash-out remains the stuff of nightmares. And yet such relief must not obscure the fact that even an agreed exit will ravage our economy more deeply than the pandemic, which itself has shaken us to the core.

A study by Thomas Sampson of the London School of Economics finds that while the coronavirus has inflicted greater short-term pain, by 2035 its the scars of Brexit that we will be bearing. His estimate is that Covid-19 reduces future UK GDP by 2.1%, in present value terms, but Brexit shrinks it by nearly twice as much: 3.7%. And thats if we get a deal (the figure rises to 5.7% without one). Remember, this is not a disaster inflicted by nature or disease: we are doing this to ourselves.

I can hear the inevitable response from leavers and exhausted remainers alike: All right, all right but the debate is over. Britons voted for Brexit, again, by giving Boris Johnson an 80-seat majority in 2019. Its done. But there are two important replies.

The first is that Johnsons win was on the promise of an oven-ready deal that simply needed a thumbs-up from the voters. And yet here we are, almost a year later, with no agreement. The Brexit that won ratification last December was sold on a false prospectus, bogusly claiming a degree of resolution that was not there. As Naomi Smith of the Brexit-sceptical group Best for Britain puts it: what happens when voters discover that Johnsons oven-ready deal is uncooked and frozen in the middle? Such an outcome is highly likely. Even those most optimistic about a breakthrough suspect that any final agreement with Brussels will be thin in the extreme, covering only the barest necessities skinnier than a 90s supermodel, in the words of one EU watcher.

The second reply points to the obvious difference between December 2020 and December 2019: we are in the midst of a vicious and deadly pandemic. Wherever you stood on Brexit before, you can surely see that now in the depth of a winter wave of the virus, with most of the country in various degrees of lockdown and with businesses ailing and overwhelmed is the very worst time to be forcing a radical overhaul of supply chains and trading arrangements with our nearest neighbours.

If you doubt it, listen to the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry as it warns that supplies of crucial medicines, including any new vaccine against the coronavirus, could be disrupted by Brexit, whether of the no-deal or thin-deal variety. We dont need this extra red tape, extra complexity, extra cost and extra delay getting in the way of our supply chain at a time where were trying to deal with Covid, the group says.

The countrys food supply is imperilled too, according to Bloomberg, which reports that manufacturers and distributors already strained by Christmas and Covid are warning that the food supply chain is at capacity and cant cope with any further shocks. Unilever, producer of countless household brands, is pleading with the government to keep the ports and roads open, lest supermarket shelves go empty. And yet its at this very moment that the government is launching a new customs system for cross-border hauliers: the trial will be rolled out on 23 December, hours before Christmas and only eight days before the system becomes compulsory.

Its a kind of madness to be doing all this now, and yet the government will not be swayed. What of the opposition? If there is a last-minute deal, Labour will have a choice to make. It believes it cannot vote against an agreement, for that would be to countenance no deal. But the shadow cabinet is split between abstention and voting with the government. Im told that the shadow chancellor, Anneliese Dodds, Emily Thornberry and others want to abstain, while Lisa Nandy and Keir Starmer lean towards backing any agreement.

Abstention has obvious drawbacks. It looks like the very Brexit fence-sitting that cost Labour so dear a year ago. Abstaining on the biggest issue of the day? Very hard to explain that on the doorstep, says one shadow minister. And yet to vote with Boris Johnson is to dip Labours fingers in the Brexit blood, to share the blame when things go wrong. Starmer will be left arguing that when he voted yes, he was backing the principle of securing a deal, not endorsing this particular deal. That, too, may struggle to cut through. And lets not forget: the most immediate elections are in Scotland, where a Boris-backing Brexit vote will not exactly boost Labours chances.

It will be a tough call, but when Starmer makes it he might remember two things. First, Brexit was always a terrible idea, but its lunacy now, and he need not carry its taint. Second, he is the leader of the opposition and if anything cries out to be opposed, it is this.

Read the original:

As Americans fix their 2016 error, we in the UK are doubling down on ours: Brexit - The Guardian

Keir Starmer is preparing to risk a party rift by throwing Labours weight behind a Brexit deal if last-minute negotiations succeed in the coming days.

In what he hopes will be a signal to red wall voters that the party has heard them, multiple Labour sources said Starmer, and Cabinet Office shadow minister, Rachel Reeves who has been liaising with backbenchers on the issue are minded to impose a three-line whip in support of a deal, subject to the detail.

They have rejected the idea of abstaining or giving MPs a free vote, fearing it would suggest Labour has failed to absorb the lessons of the pasting it took in last Decembers general election.

Brexit deal negotiations are in their final, make-or-break few days, with EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier returning to London on Friday to resume face-to-face talks on Saturday despite his threat to pull out earlier in the week.

If a deal can be done, the prime minister is expected to bring it to parliament before Christmas, most likely by tabling the future relationship bill which the Cabinet Office has been working on for several months.

That could potentially allow Labour to signal its lack of enthusiasm by tabling amendments though these would stand little chance of passing.

Boris Johnsons majority of 80 means the deal would be highly likely to go through even if Labour abstained, but Starmer and his team believe the consequences of a no-deal exit from the transition period would be too dire for the party to stand on the sidelines.

If you want something to happen in parliament, the best way to go about it is to vote for it, said one shadow cabinet member with knowledge of Starmers thinking.

They are likely to avoid language such as supporting the deal, however. Starmer is also expected to make a speech setting out more details of how Labour sees Britains future place in the world.

Even many of those MPs who fought hard during the 2017-19 parliament for a peoples vote are expected to fall in behind the leadership, fearing the dire consequences of a no-deal exit on 1 January.

But some MPs say Starmers team, led by former former Darlington MP Jenny Chapman, is too focused on fighting the last war by aiming all their political messaging at disgruntled Brexit voters in the red wall.

They believe supporting a Johnson deal will leave Labour unable to hold the government to account for Brexits economic consequences, and damage the party in Scotland by allowing Nicola Sturgeon to lump the Westminster parties together on the issue. The SNP will be cock-a-hoop, said one Labour insider.

Starmers allies reject the idea that they will be blamed if Brexit is economically disastrous, however, pointing out that while Labour supported entering the European exchange rate mechanism (ERM) in 1990, it was the Tory government, and not John Smith or Gordon Brown, whom voters held responsible when the UK crashed out two years later.

A different concern is expressed by members of the Love Socialism, Hate Brexit group of MPs, who made the leftwing case for revisiting the 2016 referendum in the last parliament, and were recently addressed by Reeves in a zoom meeting.

Some of this caucus are worried about the idea that the deal will set the pattern for future trade deals for the next decade and beyond, triggering a race to the bottom on rights and regulations.

The Norwich South MP Clive Lewis, who resigned rather than vote for article 50, said: Its likely to be a framework deal, which means there will be massive holes in it. Thats in effect a near blank cheque, and it potentially ties Labours hands for 10-15 years.

Its not just about our relationship with Europe, its about regulatory realignment and whether we end up with a neoliberal US-type economy, on workers rights, on the environment, on food standards. For people like me, its a point of principle.

Several members of the group recently relaunched under the name Love Socialism, in recognition that the chance of stopping Brexit has passed have junior roles on Starmers frontbench including Alex Sobel and Rachael Maskell. It also includes Marsha De Cordova, who is in the shadow cabinet.

Meanwhile, the irony of Starmer, who systematically dismantled Theresa Mays Brexit deal with his six tests, now whipping MPs to back a deal that will put the UK outside the single market and the customs union, is not lost on some of his Labour colleagues.

One former red wall MP who lost their seat in 2019 said: Im thoroughly pissed off that the same group of people who were putting through clever technical bills a year ago are now the same people saying: Its very important that we support a deal. When we were advocating a much softer deal, we were basically hung out as Tory sympathisers.

There are also questions over whether Johnson would bring any deal to the House for a vote.

Brigid Fowler, a senior researcher at the Hansard Society said the government had the legal means to get around lengthy scrutiny of a document that could extend to 700 pages. It should allow parliament 21 days scrutiny under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

Unless parliament were to sit Fridays and Christmas, its too late for the UK to lay a deal before parliament for the 21-sitting-day scrutiny period under the Crag Act and still ratify it before 1 January, she said.

But, assuming the deal needs primary legislation to implement it, that legislation could just exempt the treaty from Crag. Or, the government could use section 22 of the Crag Act, which says the act does not apply to a treaty if a minister is of the opinion that, exceptionally, the treaty should be ratified without [its] requirements having been met.

Some believe the reaction of the ERG to the details on fishing and sovereignty will dictate the route Johnson takes. It will be a political question as to whether the government wants to bring it to a vote.

Barnier, before his return to London, briefed EU ambassadors that he was clear that things are entirely stuck, said an EU source.

Barniers travel plans appeared to be driven more by a wish at the highest levels of the European commission to negotiate until the bitter end than actual progress on the ground, the source added.

In turn, David Frost, who is leading the UKs negotiating team, offered his own downbeat assessment in a statement on social media, as both sides sought to extract a final deal-making concession.

Some people are asking me why we are still talking, Frost tweeted. My answer is that its my job to do my utmost to see if the conditions for a deal exist. It is late, but a deal is still possible, and I will continue to talk until its clear that it isnt.

This article was amended on 28 November 2020 to clarify that Marsha De Cordova is in the shadow cabinet, not in a junior role on the Labour frontbench as stated in an earlier version.

See the article here:

Starmer prepares to reopen old Labour wounds over Brexit deal vote - The Guardian

With its fruit-filled orchards, Kent has long prided itself on being the Garden of England. But now there is anger that a couple of rotten apples the boroughs of Swale and Thanet have plunged the whole county into tier 3 status when lockdown ends on Wednesday.

Last week, seven Conservative MPs from across Kent wrote to Matt Hancock, the health secretary, to attempt to break the tier system down along district or borough lines. Although Swale has Englands highest Covid infection rate at 530 per 100,000 people, the Tunbridge Wells rate is less than a quarter of that and is below the national average

Hancock rejected the appeal, but in Dover, which has less than half Swales rate, his decision was not welcomed. The tiers brought forth tears.

I cried when I heard the news, said Sandra Malho, the proprietor of La Salle Verte cafe on Cannon Street in the town centre. Standing outside her empty business, she was worried what effect it was going to have on the town in general and on her clientele in particular.

Dover is depressed, she said. The mental health is going down. Most of my customers are old and lonely. We call it a community cafe, somewhere people come to have a smile.

Alan Valentine, a customer, said he had relied on the cafe since his wife died. Its my social life, he said.

Gillian Campbell, a hairdresser, spray tan and nail technician, was also worried about the effect on small businesses like her own. This time of year, Im usually chock-a-block coming up to the party season, she said.

With its famed white cliffs and overlooked by a medieval castle, Dover would seem a handsome, even prosperous town. It is, after all, a major gateway to Europe, thanks to the ferries that dominate its giant harbour. But there are signs of economic hardship and a heavy atmosphere of isolation, compounded by signs of social friction.

Scumbags! barked Lyn Beckett on King Street, in answer to the question of what accounted for Dovers rapid rise in infection it has gone from 42 to 267 cases per 100,000 in a month.

She was referring, she explained unapologetically, to east Europeans, whom she blamed for the spread. Dover has a relatively small migrant population but several people expressed doubts about foreigners adhering to the rules, including Malho, who is originally from Portugal.

Other Doverians blamed schoolchildren outside school, shopkeepers not enforcing mask-wearing and alcohol drinkers mixing illicitly. Kevin Harris took me into his confidence. Between you and me, he said, it has been done deliberately by China.

Having jokingly advised his wife to watch her language, Becketts husband, Dennis, was mystified as to why Kent should be in tier 3. Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire are the only other places in southern England to be placed in the highest tier. They started off closing down Liverpool and these places, he complained, and now theyre closing down Kent. We havent done anything!

The potent mixture of exceptionalism and self-pity, often found at the root of xenophobia, was hard to ignore. Despite, or perhaps because of, being the closest point to continental Europe, Dover voted 62% in favour of leave in the referendum. If you wanted to find a town that embodied the apocryphal newspaper headline Fog in Channel, continent cut off, Dover wouldnt be a bad place to start.

Although a no-deal Brexit would lead to an estimated 2% shrinking in an already battered economy, few people expressed any reservations about that outcome.

But Dover can also feel itself to be apart from the rest of the UK. Its not much of a tourist destination, but somewhere people pass through on their way to somewhere else. Its an arrangement that appears to breed resentment and relief in equal measure.

Scientific evidence shows that areas next to those with a high Covid rate will see an increase in their own rates. But some still believe Dover could have been protected and saved from the harshest restrictions.

I feel there was an opportunity to create a barrier between Thanet and Medway and then leave the south and west of Kent open, said John Harrington, a semi-retired business adviser. Harrington advises on business survival, and he was understandably concerned that tier 3 might finish off some of them. However, he didnt see the approaching threat of a no-deal Brexit as anything to worry about. Like other locals he conveyed the impression that all such macroeconomic issues bypassed Dover, as if they came off the ferries and went straight through to the M2 or M20.

Erika Voiss, an inhabitant of some 25 years and originally from Germany, thought many of her fellow townspeople were dreading the lorry tailbacks and gridlock that Brexit was expected to unleash. But they dont regret the decision, she said, because it wasnt a rational decision. It was emotional.

The most evident emotion in Dover was anxious resignation, as if readied for a bleak winter. What was called for, argued Harrington, was some positive government PR. He thought there was too much talk about the Treasurys deficit as a result of the pandemic and not nearly enough about the benefit of not paying money to Europe.

I know the number on the bus was wrong but it must be a number that somebody knows, he said.

Perhaps someone does know, though whatever the number is, it wont begin to fill the vast hole in the governments coffers. But then again there might be blue pigs over the white cliffs of Dover tomorrow, just you wait and see.

The rest is here:

Fear and loathing in Dover, where Brexit and Covid meet - The Guardian

In just over five weeks, the UK will leave the EUs single market and customs union with or without a trade and security deal. Much of the 600-plus pages of legal text is complete, but three outstanding issues remain to be resolved. Such are the differences between the two sides that it is likely the politicians will have to take over from the negotiators, who are running out of track given their respective mandates.

Fishing

The issue was always likely to be a thorn in the side of the negotiators, as there will be clear winners and losers. The UK is leaving the common fisheries policy and taking back control of its exclusive economic zone: 200 nautical miles from the territorial sea baseline or to the halfway line in smaller stretches of water.

The UK is seeking annual negotiations with the EU on what European fishing fleets will be allowed to catch in its sovereign waters. A zonal attachment system would divide up species between the two sides according to where the fish reside rather than the current division based on fixed fishing patterns. The UK also has priority stocks where it expects to enjoy an increase in the amount its fleet can fish within its own waters.

The EU is resisting both zonal attachment and annual negotiations as it does not offer security to its coastal communities. It also wants to keep the British gains to around 15-18% of the fish caught by EU boats today. The UK is seeking a far higher windfall but has offered a three-year transition period to phase in the changes. The EU is seeking a longer transition period.

Standards and domestic subsidies

In the political declaration on the future relationship, both sides committed to uphold the common high standards in the UK and the EU at the end of the transition period in the areas of state aid, competition, social and employment standards, environment, climate change and relevant tax matters.

The UK has agreed to non-regression but it does not want EU law to be the baseline. That would introduce EU concepts and the European court of justice into the treaty. The two sides are therefore locked in talks about how to define their current common high standards.

The EU is also seeking a ratchet clause to ensure that as either side develops its standards over time, the other side faces consequences should it choose not to follow with equivalent regulations. The negotiators are working on a model where if one side raises standards, the other must consider adopting them. The EU then wants an independent panel to judge if one sides refusal to move in tandem is creating a competitive advantage. They would then set a remedy. The UK is resisting anything that amounts to Brussels having the right of prior approval on domestic legislation.

On domestic subsidies, or state aid, the two sides have agreed on principles which would be part of both sides regime. The UK will also have an independent regulator. But the EU wants a mechanism through which to swiftly sanction the UK if it believes the government or the new regulator has breached the principles set out in the treaty. Again, the UK is allergic to the suggestion that the EU will have any ex-ante oversight of government decisions.

Dispute resolution

Given that the UK unilaterally sought to rewrite the withdrawal agreement and break international law, there is particular onus being put on keeping the British government to the promises it makes in the treaty. The EU wants to be able to swiftly cross-retaliate if there is a breach of obligations in any part of the treaty. The UK wants to keep fisheries and security outside of the scope of the dispute resolution provisions.

Continue reading here:

Brexit talks: the sticking points - The Guardian

As the aviation industry grapples with the coronavirus crisis, its easy to forget that the small matter of Brexit is just a few weeks away.

And with the transition period ending at the close of the year and no trade deal yet in place there are big question marks over whether the future relationship agreement will cover aviation.

With talks still ongoing, there are hopes that aviation will be included but there is concern in the industry that time is running out to make any necessary preparations.

Here's what the end of the transition means for the sector.

Thats the killer question. Negotiations are ongoing to make sure that flights between the two dont just suddenly stop come January 1.

Without a new arrangement, in the new year the U.K. stops being a member of the European Common Aviation Area (ECAA) the world's largest liberalized aviation market. It encompasses all nine of the so-called freedoms of the air allowing carriers from one country full rights to operate, pick up and drop off passengers and cargo and fly wherever they want.

Outside of the ECAA, the U.K. faces much tighter limits. Without a deal, operating licenses of U.K. airlines will no longer be valid in the EU forcing them to move their principal place of business to the EU to keep operating in the bloc. All certificates, licenses and registrations covering pilots, parts and airplanes become invalid and would need to be validated again in an EU member country.

Britains Transport Minister Grant Shapps says he expects the EU to bring forward contingency measures which London would reciprocate but he says that the U.K. is holding out for some sensible additional flexibilities.

Despite the looming deadline, many airlines say theyre not too worried.They point to the no-deal contingency measures drawn up between London and Brussels in March 2019 that would have ensured connectivity in the event of no agreement.

The International Air Transport Associations Regional Vice President for Europe Rafael Schvartzman told a press briefing that this would be the preferred option. Otherwise, the U.K. will have to resort to bilateral agreements with each EU member country, which he said was a very dramatic situation that were not expecting to see.

There is unlikely to be much disruption to U.K. flights to non-EU destinations. The British government has gone some way to making alternative arrangements with 17 countries where air services are determined by EU-negotiated multilateral ones.

Last week, London finalized its deal with the U.S. a particularly important one for the Brits given that the New York-London route is one of the most lucrative in the world (although its not seeing much action at the moment, of course).

Theyre a bit more pessimistic.

With no agreement in place, U.K. operators will have to apply for permits each time they want to fly between EU member countries.

For example, if a U.K.-operated aircraft drops off cargo in Belgium and wants to pick up a new shipment and fly that to Germany, the operator would need to apply separately for Belgian and German landing permits which in some cases can take days to obtain.

Dave Edwards from the Air Charter Association said there is no clarity on how and if U.K. charter, cargo and business airlines will be able to operate flights between EU member countries.

That is a huge concern for the sector ... We remain hopeful of a deal, but at the same time realistic given the time remaining. Ultimately this could be a very disappointing position for U.K. operators, he said.

One of the most tangible consequences of Brexit is that Brits will have to join longer, and slower, lines to get through EU airports.

Reports in October suggested Prime Minister Boris Johnson wants continued access for British citizens to the automatic e-gates used by EU nationals at airports and Eurostar terminals.

Will that actually happen? Its a tough one. The Schengen Borders Code requires a manual check of non-EU nationals' passports that can only be performed by a border guard. That means swiping straight through e-gates is very unlikely for Brits.

To complicate things further, the EU is changing its rules from early 2022, moving away from manual checks to an automated IT system for registering non-EU nationals. The hope is that the queues for non-EU nationals reduces as airports move away from manually stamping passports (while the EU believes it will help detect people over-staying their visa in the bloc).

From the U.K. side, provision will be made to ensure that EU, EEA and Swiss citizens with biometric passports will still be able to use the quicker e-passport gates (which are also open to citizens of Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, the U.S., Singapore and South Korea) though the government says this will be kept under review.

This is a particular concern for some in the U.K. aviation industry, who worry flight training and mutual recognition of licenses will not be included in an agreement. They fear their flight training could become less competitive as pilot training in the U.K. may not be automatically accepted by EU countries.

It also means a likely increase in fees for flight training schools in Britain, which will have to decide whether to opt for an EU approval, by the blocs aviation safety regulator EASA, in addition to one from Britains Civil Aviation Authority.

According to Martin Robinson, CEO of the British branch of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, that means: This change is not likely to make the U.K. more competitive in the world for flight training."

There are some difficult decisions ahead for many: uncertain business volumes from next year, uncertain costs, overheads with no clear view of the future relationship between the EU and U.K.," he said. "This could all change by the end of the year, but for now the governments message is 'plan for the worst and hope for the best.'"

There are several potential models of what a potential deal could look like, spelled out by the Insitute for Government think tank.

Britain could rejoin the ECAA as a new member. That's what Bosnia and Herzegovina did recently, although this might prove to be tricky as it would require support from all 27 EU countries and Spain has made clear it won't wave through such an agreement due to concern over Gibraltar's airport.

The U.K. could also agree to a Switzerland-style deal that guarantees almost full access to the ECAA, although this would mean the continuing influence of the Court of Justice of the European Union a red line for the U.K. and again Spain would have qualms.

Otherwise, the U.K would have to strike individual agreements with EU countries to bypass these concerns, but that would be hugely time-consuming.

The EUs draft negotiating mandate says it would be open to a new open skies agreement with the U.K. but with level playing field obligations to ensure Britain maintained current standards on state aid, labor laws, the environment and competition something of a problem for London.

The other option would be to fall back on old international agreements like the 1944 Chicago Convention, which weren't designed for the modern aviation era. That would would still see U.K. licenses and registrations lose their validity post-Brexit.

Whatever the preferred deal, there is some frustration emanating from the sector on both sides of the Channel.

One European operator said: The big problem is we have no information from the European Commission. They have told us many times they were hoping to land a deal in the next few weeks. The lack of visibility is a huge problem.

See the rest here:

5 things to know about post-Brexit aviation - POLITICO.eu

The City of London is facing fresh Brexit uncertainty after Brussels raised doubts over access to the EU market being granted by the end of the year for firms in any of the 26 areas of the financial services sector awaiting decisions.

Diplomats for the EUs member states were told in a behind-closed-doors meeting in Brussels that the failure of the British government to offer assurances over regulatory changes after 1 January was holding up the so-called equivalence decisions.

A European commission official said it was unclear whether it was in the EUs interests to go any further in providing access to the European market for those working out of the UK given the uncertainty.

UK-based firms will lose automatic passporting rights at the end of the year which allow them to offer services across Europe. They will either need to establish bases in the EU or rely on the European commission to unilaterally find UK regulations to be equivalent to the Brussels rulebook in order to continue to serve EU customers.

The commission has agreed time-limited equivalence for clearing houses, and a decision was made in favour of continued access to the European market for UK-based central securities depositories on Wednesday owing to concerns over Europes financial stability.

But Paulina Dejmek-Hack, a senior member of the EU negotiating team led by Michel Barnier, told diplomats on Thursday that the commission was unsure that any of the outstanding equivalence decisions could or should be made before the end of the transition period.

That is unclear at this stage, she said. It is unclear what the UK sees as the way forward after 1 January. This is in essence the problem that dogs the entire equivalence process.

The official said the commission was concerned by not only the governments failure to provide assurances over the future regulatory outlook for the City of London but also the new range of regulators that would be established. Each and every regulator will decide the policy and that will make the UK system more opaque and complex, Dejmek-Hack said.

Last month the UK chancellor, Rishi Sunak, announced that the government was taking equivalence decisions intended to ensure that EU-based exchanges, clearing houses, auditing and credit rating agencies could be used by British customers.

But Brussels has so far refused to reciprocate. Dejmek-Hack said the UK was also looking out for its interests as the government had not granted equivalence in the derivatives and investment funds sectors.

She also noted that the future of the City of London had not featured as a big theme in the Brexit negotiations over the past year. Equivalence decisions are unilateral and outside of the scope of the trade and security talks but it was expected to be raised by the UK given the financial sectors importance to the British economy.

John Kerr, a former head of the diplomatic service, said he was concerned that the British government had failed to protect the City of London, which is responsible for 10% of all tax receipts earned by the Treasury, while battling to increase fish catches for an industry that accounts for just 0.1% of the UKs gross domestic product. On financial services not being trusted means were getting virtually nothing, he said.

Chris Chapman, a partner at the international law firm Mayer Brown, said that even if equivalence was granted, the EUs ability to unilaterally revoke it would be used as leverage in the future.

Although equivalence is often discussed as if its a right of access to the EU, thats not the case it is at the discretion of the EU, he said. Some commentators have described it as a protectionist mechanism. Its part of a regime that can be used to stop or limit the ability of foreign firms to compete in the EU. That seems to be what were seeing now: its being used as leverage in negotiations, and it is becoming clear that it could also be used in the same way on an ongoing basis.

Go here to see the original:

City of London faces Brexit uncertainty over access to EU markets - The Guardian

If theres one thing everyone in this country can still agree on, its that expecting us to agree on anything is doomed.

So when Theresa May unveiled her plans for a Festival of Brexit Britain, to be staged in 2022 in the vain hope of glueing a divided country back together again, she did so to near-universal derision. What the hell was Brexit culture, anyway? Spam fritters, Rule Britannia, and Nigel Farage leading a flotilla out from Dover to set fire to a few symbolic French fishing boats? Snarking about how impossibly lame Festival UK 2022 (as its officially known) was going to be on a par with one of those rip-off British winter wonderlands, which turns out to consist of a drunk Santa and some angry elves brawling in a muddy car park has been one of the few genuine joys of recent years. But now even that seems to have been taken away from us, with the horrible prospect that it might actually be ... not that bad?

I dont mean Brexit, obviously. That remains every bit as awful as it was always going to be; only this week the governor of the Bank of England noted that a no-deal scenario would be more damaging for the economy than Covid-19, and even the deal currently hanging in the balance is only marginally less awful. (For the pedants at the back, the immediate hit from Covid will be far deeper but hopefully temporary, while the Office for Budget Responsibility puts the long-term negative impact of a no-deal Brexit over the next 15 years or so at about 6% of GDP. And theres no vaccine for that on the horizon).

Id rather chew my arm off than celebrate Brexit itself, but something more interesting is going on beneath the surface of a project that this week unlocked another 29m of government money and has quietly made a point of hiring freelancers during a horrendously bleak year for the arts. And if it works, theres a useful lesson here for the left about telling a modern, upbeat, inclusive national story something any aspirant prime minister must learn to do without being either painfully jingoistic or embarrassingly naff.

It helps that the festivals chief creative officer Martin Green is adamant that this is not a festival of Brexit, it never has been. Rather, he says, its about delivering a bit of joy and hope and happiness to a country that was sorely in need of it even before the pandemic struck. Green previously ran Hulls City of Culture project, a brave, quirky attempt to breathe new life into a city desperately down on its luck and well, I think we can all see the parallels with the new gig.

Nor do his plans, as Id vaguely imagined, involve constructing some great glass palace in which to house sacred relics such as the towering pile of ring binders Michel Barnier brought to Brexit negotiations, while David Davis rocked up without so much as a dog-eared sheet of paper. Instead, the initial shortlist of creative teams published this month suggests something a bit like Hulls efforts but on a much bigger scale; mixing up the arts, science, tech and culture into a wild melee of creative grassroots projects popping up all over the country, aimed at creating feelgood moments and unexpectedly illuminating collaborations.

When asked what hes aiming for, Green used to cite the filmmaker Steve McQueens recent display at Tate Britain of primary school photographs from across London, an unexpectedly touching snapshot of a diverse city. Now his shortlisted hopefuls range from dance troupes and performance poets to an NHS project uncovering the reasons for poor health outcomes among deprived children in Bradford and a black activists collective from Staffordshire. One never knows, but Id be frankly amazed if most had voted to leave.

If it all sounds vaguely reminiscent of the London 2012 Olympics opening ceremony, which ended up somehow juggling thrilling hymns to the steel industry and to NHS nurses alongside Chelsea pensioners and the Spice Girls, thats not a coincidence. Green was also head of ceremonies on that gig, and while this one lacks the budget and the big names, the idea that there are as many different ways of telling the British national story as there are individual Britons lives on. (If anything, since the arts and those working in them tend to skew liberal, its harder for artistic celebrations of Britishness not to end up following suit.) Well see how well all this survives contact with leavers in government, of course. But the culture secretary Oliver Dowden, a rare surviving remainer in the current regime, has wisely so far allowed the project to slip through political hands into the control of some rather more interesting characters.

Is it going to heal all the wounds of the past four years? Dont be ridiculous; they are artists, not miracle workers. No festival could by itself reconcile impassioned remainers to this cataclysmic rupture, or uber-Brexiters to the fact that the deal wont be what they wanted (it never, ever is), or a nation to the loss of jobs and prospects. Only politicians can do those things, and the politician equal to that task is not yet in Downing Street; perhaps not even on the Westminster horizon.

But the last few years have been tough enough as it is, without heaping scorn on the efforts of well-intentioned people to dig through the rubble and find some grounds for hope. My hunch is that as a nation were going to be rubbishing the festival right up until the day it opens, and will then surprise ourselves by grudgingly quite enjoying it. If only the same could be said for Brexit.

Gaby Hinsliff is a Guardian columnist

Originally posted here:

Dont snark this Brexit festival may turn out to be just the tonic we need - The Guardian

The EU has thanked President-elect Joe Biden for his support after he warned Boris Johnson against his plans to rip up parts of his Brexit deal with Europe.

Charles Michel, the president of the European Council, spoke with Biden by phone on Monday, according to a readout provided by the EU.During the phone call, Michel "thanked the President-elect for his clear support of the Withdrawal Agreement the EU concluded with the UK last year."

"This agreement preserves peace and stability in Ireland and fully respects the Good Friday Agreement," the readout added.

The statement came after Johnson announced a plan to pass a piece of legislation, called the Internal Market Bill, which would disapply some parts of the provisional Brexit deal struck between the UK and the EU last year. Parts of the Internal Market Bill, which Johnson is still trying to push through parliament, relate to the passage of goods between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

Ministers admitted the plan would break international law because it would involve breaking an international treaty. Biden's tweet in October echoed the concerns of other senior Democrats, who warned that it could involve breaking the Good Friday Agreement, despite Downing Street's insistence that it would not.

However, Biden, who spoke to Johnson for the first time earlier this month, used his call to remind Johnson twice of his commitments to Brexit in relation to Northern Ireland, according to reports.

While President Trump was an ardent supporter of the UK's departure from the EU, Biden was firmly opposed to the idea. Antony Blinken, Biden's secretary of state pick, last year called Brexit a "total mess."

The president-elect in October also publicly warned Boris Johnson in October not to let the Good Friday Agreement become "a casualty of Brexit." He also said that a UK-US trade deal was off the table if the UK government undermined the Good Friday Agreement.

Our Brexit Insider Facebook group is the best place for up-to-date news and analysis about Britains departure from the EU, direct from Business Insiders political reporters. Join here.

Here is the original post:

The EU thanks Joe Biden for his 'clear support' in Brexit dispute with the UK - Business Insider - Business Insider

Nicola Sturgeon will declare Scotland a "nation on the cusp of making history" with independence in "clear sight" after several opinion polls suggested most Scots now want to break away from the rest of the UK.

Scotland's first minister will open her partys annual conference by saying she has "never been so certain" independence will be achieved.

More recently, a number of polls have also suggested a majority of Scots are in favour of separation.

But the SNP faces a major electoral test in the Scottish Parliament elections in May.

A clear victory would be a mandate for another independence referendum, the SNP argues.

But Prime Minister Boris Johnson has repeatedly ruled out another vote.

Senior Conservatives point to the 2014 referendum, designed to settle the question for a generation.

But many senior SNP figures argue that the UK Scots voted to remain a part of no longer exists, particularly after the 2016 Brexit decision.

On Thursday, Ms Sturgeon said a new referendum could be held "in the earlier part" of the next session of the Scottish Parliament.

She will tell her conference, taking place online because of coronavirus: "Scotland is now a nation on the cusp of making history.

"Independence is in clear sight and with unity of purpose, humility and hard work I have never been so certain that we will deliver it.

"The people of Scotland have the right to choose their future. Let's now focus all our efforts on making sure we bring about that better country they and future generations deserve."

The SNP leader will say support for independence among Scots has now "risen to become the sustained and majority view in public opinion".

She will tell delegates: While our primary focus must remain on eliminating Covid-19 from our shores, for which we have renewed hope, Scotland must be ready for what comes next.

She will urge her party faithful to "reach out to all of Scotland like never before".

Following controversy over so-called cybernats aggressively pushing independence online, she will say the SNP must "demonstrate with cool heads and with patient persuasion that Scotland is ready to take its place in the global family of independent nations".

But Ms Sturgeons opponents called on her to focus on the fight against Covid-19 instead.

Scottish Labour constitution spokesman Anas Sarwar said: "In the midst of a global pandemic, when people are losing their jobs and saying goodbye to loved ones, it is insulting that she wants to focus on independence."

Pamela Nash, chief executive of the pro-UK Scotland in Union group, said: "The next few years must be all about recovery from coronavirus, and that should be the entire focus for the Scottish government."

Read the original here:

Brexit news - live: Trade talks resume, as Sturgeon says Scotland has right to choose future - The Independent

First-year EU students who enrolled in UK universities this autumn but have been unable to move to the country due to the pandemic face an 800 Brexit bill shock if they dont set foot on British soil before 31 December, campaigners have warned.

The Home Office said they will not qualify for EU pre-settled status if they arrive after the end of the transition period, even though they have been unable to relocate because of Covid.

It potentially means tens of thousands of students will have to pay 348 in application fees for a visa with 470 a year in health charges, both new post-Brexit costs.

Mantas Gudelis, 19, who started a biochemistry degree at the University of Edinburgh in September but is studying at home in Vilnius, Lithuania, said: The university have told us quite a few times about this. It is sad for me because it is quite a financial hit. The health surcharge over four years is 2,000 and for my family that is a lot of money, especially as one of my parents was laid off because of the pandemic. The system should allow us to come because this is not our fault.

Luke Piper, a lawyer and head of policy at campaign group the3million, has raised concerns with the Home Office that many students face these costs and could miss out on benefits that come with pre-settled and settled status, such as long-term residency, employment and social benefits rights.

Its a really big issue. A lot of students have paid fees and have started their studies abroad so are actively studying at British universities. But when we spoke to the government they say they need to create a clear deadline to end freedom of movement on 31 December, he said.

They are students who have not been able to come to the UK through no fault of their own. We should be able to make an exception for this cohort. They could easily adapt the EU settlement scheme, otherwise these students will have to pay extortionate fees to the Home Office and potentially miss out on other opportunities.

Arguably students enrolling at British universities this year have done so under free movement laws, which allowed them to get home fees, so it doesnt seem right that they cant come and study here using those same rights, Piper added.

An estimated 150,000 students come to the UK from other countries in the EU and the European Economic Area, according to Universities UK (UUK), which is helping educational institutes advise their students.

All universities are working closely with the Home Office to ensure that currently enrolled EU students are aware of UK requirements for obtaining pre-settled status, and UUK has issued guidance to universities on the latest immigration rule changes, said a spokesperson.

One issue for EU students who have not started their education in the UK before the end of the transition period is that they cannot evidence their residency with rent receipts, utility bills or bank accounts.

Gudelis and the3million are pressing to know whether EU students would establish their right to pre-settled status if they came to the UK for just a few days before 31 December.

According to Home Office rules published on the government website, students only need to provide one document dated in the last six months in order to be granted pre-settled status, including a passport stamp confirming entry at the UK border or a used travel ticket confirming you entered the UK from another country.

In a section entitled evidence that covers shorter periods of time, the Home Office states: these documents count as evidence for one month if they have a single date on suggesting a short trip to the UK up to and including New Years Eve is enough to evince free movement rights.

The Home Office confirmed this was the case saying that to apply for pre-settled status, individuals only need to be here for a day before the deadline on 31 December. If an individual has arrived in the UK on 31 December they will still be eligible to apply for pre-settled status.

It gave no indication it would be addressing the exceptional circumstances affecting EU students who arrived after 31 December but had enrolled for classes in 2020.

We have been clear that students, like all other EEA and Swiss citizens, must be resident in the UK by 31 December 2020 to have rights under the Citizens Rights Agreements, said a spokesperson.

More here:

First-year EU students face 800 Brexit bill if not in UK before 2021 - The Guardian