Category Archives: Brexit

The Trade Minister has been meeting with officials in numerous US states in a bid to increase economic ties.The end goal appears to be the future signing of a free trade deal with the US, but the White House is currently hesitant about such a move.

During her cross-state visit, Ms Mordaunt has agreed to process memoranda of understanding with four states, according to City AM.

She was the first UK minister to visit Oklahoma, one of the states on this list.

The state is now also in discussion with Tees Valley following prompting from the Department for International Trade, the paper reports.

This follows the opening of a new freeport in Tees Valley late last month, hailed as a sign that the UK is maximising the opportunities of Brexit.

Similar agreements to process memoranda of understanding have also been achieved with Georgia, Tennessee and South Carolina.

In a speech at Atlanta last week, Ms Mordaunt said Brexit should be viewed by the US as a massive opportunity to anyone who believes in democracy and the power of trade as a force for good in the world.

She compared the UKs split from the EU to the American war of independence.

The minister said: When America set itself free, it was a small economy.

READ MORE: Covid LIVE: Boris poised to slap Britons with 8pm curfew

This has been seen as a snub from President Joe Biden, who has meanwhile offered to suspend tariffs on some imports from Japan and, more significantly, the EU.

There are currently no plans within the White House for tariffs, imposed while Donald Trump was president, to be removed for the UK.

While a free trade agreement may currently but out of sight, Ms Mordaunt has focussed her efforts on achieving growth at a local level.

On Friday she wrote in the Yorkshire Post: I am keen to make progress that will help drive investment, jobs and growth at local level.

As the two biggest exporters of services in the world I want to deepen our relationship with US states, to make it easier for professionals, such as engineers or lawyers to work on the other side of the Atlantic.

Ill also be looking at increasing co-operation in areas from digital to agriculture.

Read more:

Penny Mordaunt lands string of wins as UK and US progress towards post-Brexit trade deal - Daily Express

COVID-19 has continued to cause disruption during 2021, with on-again/off-again travel restrictions, different levels of lockdowns, and continued global economic uncertainty. But the tech sector has fared better than most, with exciting developments around the world; a new US Administration, Facebook's connectivity initiatives in Africa, huge leaps forward in APAC's cloud industry, Russia, Canada and the Netherlands all vying for the lead in AI, and the continued repercussions of Brexit.

Here's a reminder of our regional content from 2021:

Facebook's connectivity initiatives in Africa to deliver $57B

Is it time for an African mobile OS?

Why Africa's surge of digitalisation makes it a target for hackers

This is what US-China digital cold war means for Africa

Middle Easts critical infrastructure faces cyberattacks while digital transformation fuels data theft

How Antler East Africa is building early-stage startups with expert founders

MediaCity Mauritius: Developing the first integrated, international hub for the media and creative industries in Africa

How smart contracts and mobile technology is changing the insurance landscape in Africa

Is India on track to become a software product powerhouse?

India outside the big cities: will non-metro entrepreneurs seize the coming decade?

Vietnam - in pole position to be tech outsourcing leader

Indias data protection challenge

Asia-Pacific leapfrogs West into public cloud

Indian fintech takes an upward curve

Indian GCCs take on a more strategic role

Will Chinas single stack IPv6 plans give it an unassailable tech lead?

Southeast Asias digital economy goes from strength to strength

New European data initiative open to the world

Russias AI challenge

UK at risk without a national data strategy

Open banking regulations: EU versus UK

Brexit's FinTech compliance legacy

Northern Irelands tech sector set to grow, so it does

Norway powers up a clean data centre future for CIOs

Netherlands grows AI ambitions

Estonia tech sector further widens e-services scope

CIOs, keep a fashion eye on Eastern Europe

What lessons can the US learn from China to make their EV transition successful?

Facebook, Google and the Seven Eyes: implications for privacy

The next four years: where tech will stand with the Biden-Harris administration

Canada emerging as global hub for healthcare AI

Link:

Regional highlights 2021: Race for AI and the Brexit fallout - IDG Connect

There are limits as to how long people living in France with a five-year Brexit Withdrawal Agreement (WA) residency card should spend away from France.

Five-yearcartes de sjour to stay in France are issued to Britons with WA rights who are not able to show that they were living in France for at least five years before they applied for the card.

Britons able to show at least five years residency obtain a permanent residency card valid for 10 years.

The five-year cards give you the right to go on living in France and benefiting from the same rights while accruing a five-year period.

Diocese in Europe

Once you can show that you have been in France for five years since the date you gave in your original application for your installation in France, you have the right to apply for a permanent residency card, which will have a 10-year validity date (renewable after that with minimal formalities).

As the focus so far has been on everyone obtaining their first card, the Interior Ministry has not publicised detailed advice on swapping a five-year card for a 10-year one, however as the dedicated WA residency cards website has now closed this would be done by an application to your prefecture.

We have asked the ministry and one of the prefectures in an area known for its British population if more information is now available and will provide updates if received.

According to the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement in order to maintain your rights while accruing the five years the standard rule is as follows: You should not be absent from France for more than six months a year, however absences of up to a maximum of 12 consecutive months for important reasons including pregnancy and childbirth, serious illness, study or vocational training, or a posting abroad.

With regard to these rules the WA refers to an EU directive of 2004 concerning permanent residency rights of EU citizens, which sets these out at article 16. The European Commission interprets the reference to 'six months a year' as relating to 365-day periods starting from when the person moved to France (eg. if a person moved to France on March 6, the first 'year' would end on March 5 the following year).

Once you have the permanent card, rights to live in France are strongly protected and can only be lost through being away from French territory for more than five years.

Read more: How long can Brexit carte de sjour holder spend in the UK?

However this residency right does not include the right to live in another country of the EU.

Note that there are a few situations in which people can qualify for a permanent residency card after fewer than five years in France. According to the Withdrawal Agreement these are:

We note however that a French ministerial circular to prefectures about Britons residency cards, states that these categories above benefit from the right to a permanent residency card without needing to prove a specific length of stay in France.

12 situations in which Britons may be asked for a carte de sjour

Still waiting for French residency card

Follow this link:

Brexit: We recap the rules for five-year residency cards in France - The Connexion

Both Germany and France have been left in the dust as the Digital Minister said the UK has been creating a $1billion unicorn every fortnight. It comes after British technology firms raised a total of 29.4billion this year, more than double last years figure, according to data compiled by analysts Dealroom. It compares to 11.5billion raised in 2020.

This year, technology companies outside of London and the South East alone raised 9billion.

Digital Minister Chris Philp said 29 companies this year have reached the so-called unicorn status - being worth more than $1billion (750million).

And they are said to be the envy of the rest of Europe.

The 26billion raised is nearly double Germany's 13.5billion and three times the amount raised in France, at 8.6billion.

While some had predicted an exodus away from the UK technology scene in the wake of the Brexit vote, five years on start-ups have raised nearly four times as much in 2021 as they did in 2016.

Mr Philp said technology investors were expecting a whole load of Spacs (special purpose acquisition companies after regulators loosened rules around the funding mechanism.

And he said there was now a need for longer-term British investors, such as pension fund managers.

He added: "Pension funds are hugely under-allocated to pre-IPO tech. There is a massive opportunity there for UK pension funds to invest in UK venture capital.

READ MORE:Omicron 'largely evades' two jabs or past infection immunity protection as low at 19%

In his budget, Chancellor of the exchequer Rishi Sunak, announced that the Government will ramp research and development (R&D) spending up to 22 billion per year by 2026.

It is two weeks later than originally planned.

But it means that, in five years time, public spending would be around 5billion higher than 2021.

Read the rest here:

Science superpower! Brexit Britain crushes EU rivals with 29.4bn record tech funding year - Daily Express

Despite a 3bn pledge to help developing countries meet climate targets, NGOs claim the tax-funded aid plan is failing 'global south' meet their green goals

NGOs and trade union leaders have attacked Liz Truss' rebranded global investment plan as politicking in Britain's interest, despite clear commitments to spend between '1.5 - 2 billion' to finance 'infrastructure and enterprise' in 'developing' economies.

The Commonwealth Development Corporation (CDC) is being renamed British International Investment (BII) and signifies the 'increased breadth of what the organisation already does and highlights its role as part of the UK Governments international financing offer, working to bring not just capital, but the highest levels of ethics, standards and transparency to its investments.'

Global Justice Now development finance activist, said:

There is a clear role for UK aid to play in supporting the global south during the pandemic and against climate change, but instead the government is chasing colonial post-Brexit fantasies.

This comes following a pledge by the CDC, soon-to-be BII, to spend 3bn to help emerging nations meet climate change targets.

TUC general secretary Frances O'Grady claimed:

After being left in the dark on plans for British International Investment, its time for ministers to consult with unions and other civil society groups so that we can ensure decent jobs and poverty reduction are at the heart of the institutions work.

Earlier this year the Government committed to cutting the UK's overall aid budget from 0.7 per cent of GDP to 0.5 per cent, as the UK's domestic spending sky-rocketed during the pandemic.

Read the original post:

UK's tax-funded 2bn aid strategy attacked as 'colonial post-Brexit' fantasy by unions and charities - GB News

Qatar has planned to invest 85m into the UK's nuclear power sector. Foreign Secretary Liz Truss today tweeted: "Great to see Qatars new 85m investment in the UK. The Qatar Investment Authority is supporting Rolls-Royce to build mini nuclear reactors, which will:

"Boost a great UK business.

"Create British jobs.

"Help the UK reach its net-zero target."

Mr Mansoor bin Ebrahim Al-Mahmoud, Chief Executive Officer of the Qatar Investment Authority (QIA) spoke of the opportunities of helping the Rolls-Royce Group contribute to low carbon electricity generation.

The QIA claims that it is committed to "sustainable investment".

Mr Mansoor said: QIA is investing in the energy transition and funding the technologies that enable low carbon electricity generation.

"We will continue to seek out investments that align with our mandate to deliver long-term value for future generations through responsible sustainable investments.

In a statement, Rolls-Royce Group described reaching an agreement with Qatar Investment Authority (QIA) "to invest 85 million in Rolls-Royce SMR Limited (Rolls-Royce SMR).

JUST IN:Tories declare Frost 'not irreplaceable' for Boris after surprise exit

"We have successfully raised the capital we need to establish Rolls-Royce SMR and it is encouraging to confirm that the business is now set up to succeed.

The Government's Business and Energy Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng was quick to draw attention to the deal with the Qatari group.

He said: This investment is a clear vote of confidence in the UKs global leadership in nuclear innovation and follows the 210 million of government investment in the development in Small Modular Reactors.

It represents a huge step forward in our plan to deploy more home-grown, affordable clean energy - ensuring greater energy independence for the UK, highly skilled jobs and bringing cheaper, cleaner electricity to peoples homes.

The rest is here:

'Great to see!' Truss hails Qatar's massive 85m investment in key Brexit Britain industry - Express

UK withdrawal from the European Union

Brexit (;[1] a portmanteau of "British exit") was the withdrawal of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU) at 23:00 GMT on 31 January 2020 (00:00 CET).[note 1] The UK is the first and so far only member state to have left the EU, after 47 years of having been a part of the union the EU and its predecessor the European Communities (EC), which included the European Economic Community since 1 January 1973.[note 2] Following Brexit, EU law and the Court of Justice of the European Union no longer had primacy over British laws, except in select areas in relation to Northern Ireland.[2] The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 retains relevant EU law as domestic law, which the UK can now amend or repeal. Under the terms of the Brexit withdrawal agreement, Northern Ireland continues to participate in the European Single Market in relation to goods, and to be a de facto member of the EU Customs Union.[3][4]

The European Union and its institutions have developed gradually since their establishment and during the 47 years of British membership, and grew to be of significant economic and political importance to the UK. Throughout the period of British membership Eurosceptic groups had existed, opposing aspects of the Union and its predecessors. The Labour prime minister Harold Wilson's pro-EC government held a referendum on continued EC membership in 1975, in which voters chose to stay within the bloc with 67.2 per cent of the vote share, but no further referendums were held as European Integration continued and became "ever closer" in the subsequent Maastricht Treaty and the Treaty of Lisbon. As part of a campaign pledge to win votes from Eurosceptics,[5] the Conservative prime minister David Cameron promised to hold a referendum if his government was re-elected. His (pro-EU) government subsequently held a referendum on continued EU membership in 2016, in which voters chose to leave the EU with 51.9 per cent of the vote share. This led to his resignation, his replacement by Theresa May, and four years of negotiations with the EU on the terms of departure and on future relations. This process was both politically challenging and deeply divisive within the UK, with one deal rejected by the British parliament, general elections held in 2017 and 2019, and two new prime ministers in that time, both Conservative. Under Boris Johnson's majority government, the UK left the EU on 31 January 2020; trade deal negotiations continued within days of the scheduled end of the transition period on 31 December 2020. The British government postponed the implementation of import controls for goods entering the UK from the EU until 2022 in order to reduce supply issues during the COVID-19 pandemic. Custom controls only applied to British goods entering the EU during this period.

The effects of Brexit will in part be determined by the EUUK Trade and Cooperation Agreement signed on 30 December 2020, which was provisionally applied from 1 January 2021 when the Brexit transition period ended, and which formally came into force on 1 May 2021 after ratification processes on both sides were completed.[6] The broad consensus among economists is that it is likely to harm the UK's economy and reduce its real per capita income in the long term, and that the referendum itself damaged the economy.[a] It is likely to reduce immigration from countries in the European Economic Area (EEA) to the UK,[citation needed] and poses challenges for British higher education, academic research and security.[citation needed]

Following a UK-wide referendum on 23 June 2016, in which 51.89 per cent voted in favour of leaving the EU and 48.11 per cent voted to remain a member, Prime Minister David Cameron resigned. On 29 March 2017, the new British government led by Theresa May formally notified the EU of the country's intention to withdraw, beginning the process of Brexit negotiations. The withdrawal, originally scheduled for 29 March 2019, was delayed by deadlock in the British parliament after the June 2017 general election, which resulted in a hung parliament in which the Conservatives lost their majority but remained the largest party. This deadlock led to three extensions of the UK's Article 50 process.

The deadlock was resolved after a subsequent general election was held in December 2019. In that election, Conservatives who campaigned in support of a "revised" withdrawal agreement led by Boris Johnson won an overall majority of 80 seats. After the December 2019 election, the British parliament finally ratified the withdrawal agreement with the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020. The UK left the EU at the end of 31 January 2020 CET (11p.m. GMT). This began a transition period that ended on 31 December 2020 CET (11p.m. GMT), during which the UK and EU negotiated their future relationship.[20] During the transition, the UK remained subject to EU law and remained part of the European Union Customs Union and the European Single Market. However, it was no longer part of the EU's political bodies or institutions.[21][22]

Withdrawal had been advocated by hard Eurosceptics and opposed by pro-Europeanists and soft Eurosceptics, with both sides of the argument spanning the political spectrum. In 1973, the UK joined the European Communities (EC) principally the European Economic Community (EEC), and its continued membership was endorsed in the 1975 membership referendum. In the 1970s and 1980s, withdrawal from the EC was advocated mainly by the political left, e.g. in the Labour Party's 1983 election manifesto. The 1992 Maastricht Treaty, which founded the EU, was ratified by the British parliament in 1993 but was not put to a referendum. The Eurosceptic wing of the Conservative Party led a rebellion over ratification of the treaty and, with the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and the cross-party People's Pledge campaign, then led a collective campaign, particularly after the Treaty of Lisbon was also ratified by the European Union (Amendment) Act 2008 without being put to a referendum following a previous promise to hold a referendum on ratifying the abandoned European Constitution, which was never held. After promising to hold a second membership referendum if his government was elected, Conservative prime minister David Cameron held this referendum in 2016. Cameron, who had campaigned to remain, resigned after the result and was succeeded by Theresa May.

On 29 March 2017, the British government formally began the withdrawal process by invoking Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union with permission from Parliament. May called a snap general election in June 2017, which resulted in a Conservative minority government supported by the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). UKEU withdrawal negotiations began later that month. The UK negotiated to leave the EU customs union and single market. This resulted in the November 2018 withdrawal agreement, but the British parliament voted against ratifying it three times. The Labour Party wanted any agreement to maintain a customs union, while many Conservatives opposed the agreement's financial settlement, as well as the "Irish backstop" designed to prevent border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. The Liberal Democrats, Scottish National Party (SNP), and others sought to reverse Brexit through a proposed second referendum.

On 14 March 2019, the British parliament voted for May to ask the EU to delay Brexit until June, and then later October.[23] Having failed to get her agreement approved, May resigned as Prime Minister in July and was succeeded by Boris Johnson. He sought to replace parts of the agreement and vowed to leave the EU by the new deadline. On 17 October 2019, the British Government and the EU agreed on a revised withdrawal agreement, with new arrangements for Northern Ireland.[24][25] Parliament approved the agreement for further scrutiny, but rejected passing it into law before the 31 October deadline, and forced the government (through the "Benn Act") to ask for a third Brexit delay. An early general election was then held on 12 December. The Conservatives won a large majority in that election, with Johnson declaring that the UK would leave the EU in early 2020.[26] The withdrawal agreement was ratified by the UK on 23 January and by the EU on 30 January; it came into force on 31 January 2020.[27][28][29]

Following the referendum of 23 June 2016, many new pieces of Brexit-related jargon entered popular use.[30][31]

The "Inner Six" European countries signed the Treaty of Paris in 1951, establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). The 1955 Messina Conference deemed that the ECSC was a success, and resolved to extend the concept further, thereby leading to the 1957 Treaties of Rome establishing the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom). In 1967, these became known as the European Communities (EC). The UK attempted to join in 1963 and 1967, but these applications were vetoed by the President of France, Charles de Gaulle.[32]

EC Members

Some time after de Gaulle resigned in 1969, the UK successfully applied for EC membership, and the Conservative prime minister Edward Heath signed the Treaty of Accession in 1972.[33] Parliament passed the European Communities Act later that year[34] and the UK joined Denmark and Ireland in becoming a member on 1 January 1973, without referendum.[35]

During the 1970s and 1980s, the Labour Party was the more Eurosceptic of the two major parties, and the Conservatives the more Europhile. The 1983 Labour Party manifesto would even pledge to leave the then European Economic Community. Earlier on, Labour had won the February 1974 general election without a majority and then contested the subsequent October 1974 general election with a commitment to renegotiate Britain's terms of membership of the EC, believing them to be unfavourable, and then hold a referendum on whether to remain in the EC on the new terms.[36] Labour again won the election (this time with a small majority), and in 1975 the UK held its first ever national referendum, asking whether the UK should remain in the EC. Despite significant division within the ruling Labour Party,[37] all major political parties and the mainstream press supported continuing membership of the EC. On 5 June 1975, 67.2% of the electorate and all but two[38] British counties and regions voted to stay in;[39] support for the UK to leave the EC in 1975 appears unrelated to the support for Leave in the 2016 referendum.[40]

The Labour Party campaigned in the 1983 general election on a commitment to withdraw from the EC without a referendum. After their heavy defeat in that election, Labour changed its policy. In 1985, the second Margaret Thatcher government ratified the Single European Actthe first major revision to the Treaty of Romewithout a referendum.[citation needed]

In October 1990, under pressure from senior ministers and despite Thatcher's deep reservations, the UK joined the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM), with the pound sterling pegged to the deutschmark. Thatcher resigned as Prime Minister the following month, amid Conservative Party divisions arising partly from her increasingly Eurosceptic views. The UK and Italy were forced to withdraw from the ERM in September 1992, after the pound sterling and the lira came under pressure from currency speculation ("Black Wednesday").[42] Italy would soon rejoin but on a different band whilst the UK did not seek re entry and remained outside the ERM.

On 1 November 1993, after the UK and the other eleven member states had ratified, the EC became the EU under the Maastricht Treaty[43] compromise in a post Cold War and German reunification between member states seeking deeper integration and those wishing to retain greater national control in the economic and political union.[44] Denmark, France, and Ireland held referendums to ratify the Maastricht Treaty. In accordance with Constitution of the United Kingdom, specifically that of parliamentary sovereignty, ratification in the UK was not subject to approval by referendum. Despite this, British constitutional historian Vernon Bogdanor wrote that there was "a clear constitutional rationale for requiring a referendum" because although MPs are entrusted with legislative power by the electorate, they are not given authority to transfer that power (the UK's previous three referendums all concerned this). Further, as the ratification of the treaty was in the manifestos of the three major political parties, voters opposed to ratification had no way to express it. For Bogdanor, while the ratification by the House of Commons might be legal, it would not be legitimatewhich requires popular consent. The way in which the treaty was ratified, he judged, was "likely to have fundamental consequences both for British politics and for Britain's relationship with the [EC]."[45][46] This perceived democratic deficit, later, directly led to the formation of the Referendum Party and the UK Independence Party.[citation needed]

Thatcher, who had previously supported the common market and the Single European Act, in the Bruges speech of 1988 warned against "a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels". She influenced Daniel Hannan, who in 1990 founded the Oxford Campaign for Independent Britain; "With hindsight, some see this as the start of the campaign for Brexit", the Financial Times later wrote.[47] In 1994, Sir James Goldsmith formed the Referendum Party to contest the 1997 general election on a platform of providing a referendum on the nature of the UK's relationship with the rest of the EU.[48][49] The party fielded candidates in 547 constituencies at that election, and won 810,860 votes2.6% of the total votes cast[50]but failed to win a parliamentary seat because the vote was spread across the country. The Referendum Party disbanded after Goldsmith's death in 1997.[citation needed]

The UK Independence Party (UKIP), a Eurosceptic political party, was formed in 1993. It achieved third place in the UK during the 2004 European elections, second place in the 2009 European elections and first place in the 2014 European elections, with 27.5% of the total vote. This was the first time since the 1910 general election that any party other than Labour or the Conservatives had taken the largest share of the vote in a nationwide election.[51] UKIP's electoral success in the 2014 European election is documented as the strongest correlate of the support for the Leave campaign in the 2016 referendum.[52]

UKIP won two by-elections (triggered by defecting Conservative MPs) in 2014; in the 2015 general election, the party took 12.6% of the total vote and held one of the two seats won in 2014.[53]

Both pro- and anti-EU views had majority support at different times from 1977 to 2015.[54] In the EC membership referendum of 1975, two-thirds of British voters favoured continued EC membership. Over the decades of UK-EU membership, Euroscepticism existed on both the left and right of British politics.[55][56][57]

According to a statistical analysis published in April 2016 by Professor John Curtice of Strathclyde University, surveys showed an increase in Euroscepticism (defined as a wish to sever or reduce the powers of the EU) from 38% in 1993 to 65% in 2015. The BSA survey for the period of JulyNovember 2015 showed that 60% backed the option to continue as a member and 30% backed withdrawal.[58]

In 2012, Prime Minister David Cameron initially rejected calls for a referendum on the UK's EU membership,[59] but then suggested the possibility of a future referendum to endorse his proposed renegotiation of Britain's relationship with the rest of the EU.[60] According to the BBC, "The prime minister acknowledged the need to ensure the UK's [renegotiated] position within the [EU] had 'the full-hearted support of the British people' but they needed to show 'tactical and strategic patience'."[61] On 23 January 2013, under pressure from many of his MPs and from the rise of UKIP, Cameron promised in his Bloomberg speech that a Conservative government would hold an in-or-out referendum on EU membership before the end of 2017, on a renegotiated package, if elected in the 7 May 2015 general election.[62] This was included in the Conservative Party manifesto for the election.[63][64]

The Conservative Party won the election with a majority. Soon afterwards, the European Union Referendum Act 2015 was introduced into Parliament to enable the referendum. Cameron favoured remaining in a reformed EU, and sought to renegotiate on four key points: protection of the single market for non-eurozone countries, reduction of "red tape", exempting Britain from "ever-closer union", and restricting immigration from the rest of the EU.[65]

In December 2015, opinion polls showed a clear majority in favour of remaining in the EU; they also showed support would drop if Cameron did not negotiate adequate safeguards[definition needed] for non-eurozone member states, and restrictions on benefits for non-UK EU citizens.[66]

The outcome of the renegotiations was revealed in February 2016. Some limits to in-work benefits for new EU immigrants were agreed, but before they could be applied, a member state such as the UK would have to get permission from the European Commission and then from the European Council, which is composed of the heads of government of every member state.[67]

In a speech to the House of Commons on 22 February 2016, Cameron announced a referendum date of 23 June 2016, and commented on the renegotiation settlement.[68] He spoke of an intention to trigger the Article 50 process immediately following a Leave vote and of the "two-year time period to negotiate the arrangements for exit."[69]

After the original wording for the referendum question was challenged,[70] the government agreed to change the official referendum question to "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

In the referendum 51.89% voted in favour of leaving the EU (Leave), and 48.11% voted in favour of remaining a member of the EU (Remain).[71][72] After this result, Cameron resigned on 13 July 2016, with Theresa May becoming Prime Minister after a leadership contest. A petition calling for a second referendum attracted more than four million signatures,[73][74] but was rejected by the government on 9 July.[75]

Leave

Remain

A 2017 study published in Economic Policy showed that the Leave vote tended to be greater in areas which had lower incomes and high unemployment, a strong tradition of manufacturing employment, and in which the population had fewer qualifications. It also tended to be greater where there was a large flow of Eastern European migrants (mainly low-skilled workers) into areas with a large share of native low-skilled workers.[77] Those in lower social grades (especially the working class) were more likely to vote Leave, while those in higher social grades (especially the upper middle class) more likely to vote Remain.[78][79][80] Studies found that the Leave vote tended to be higher in areas affected by economic decline,[81] high rates of suicides and drug-related deaths,[82] and austerity reforms introduced in 2010.[83]

Studies suggest that older people were more likely to vote Leave, and younger people more likely to vote Remain.[84] According to Thomas Sampson, an economist at the London School of Economics, "Older and less-educated voters were more likely to vote 'leave' [...] A majority of white voters wanted to leave, but only 33% of Asian voters and 27% of black voters chose leave. There was no gender split in the vote [...] Leaving the European Union received support from across the political spectrum [...] Voting to leave the European Union was strongly associated with holding socially conservative political beliefs, opposing cosmopolitanism, and thinking life in Britain is getting worse."[8]

Opinion polls found that Leave voters believed leaving the EU was "more likely to bring about a better immigration system, improved border controls, a fairer welfare system, better quality of life, and the ability to control our own laws", while Remain voters believed EU membership "would be better for the economy, international investment, and the UK's influence in the world." Polls found that the main reasons people voted Leave were "the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK", and that leaving "offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders." The main reason people voted Remain was that "the risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices."[85]

Following the referendum, a series of irregularities related to campaign spending were investigated by the Electoral Commission, which subsequently issued a large number of fines. In February 2017, the main campaign group for the "Leave" vote, Leave.EU, was fined 50,000 for sending marketing messages without permission.[86] In December 2017, the Electoral Commission fined two pro-EU groups, the Liberal Democrats (18,000) and Open Britain (1,250), for breaches of campaign finance rules during the referendum campaign.[87] In May 2018, the Electoral Commission fined Leave.EU 70,000 for unlawfully overspending and inaccurately reporting loans from Arron Banks totalling 6million.[88] Smaller fines were levelled against the pro-EU campaign group Best for Our Future and two trade union donors for inaccurate reporting.[89] In July 2018 Vote Leave was fined 61,000 for overspending, not declaring finances shared with BeLeave, and failing to comply with investigators.[90]

In November 2017, the Electoral Commission launched a probe into claims that Russia had attempted to sway public opinion over the referendum using social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook.[91]

In February 2019, the parliamentary Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee called for an inquiry into "foreign influence, disinformation, funding, voter manipulation, and the sharing of data" in the Brexit vote.[92]

In July 2020, Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament published a report which accused the UK government of actively avoiding investigating whether Russia interfered with public opinion. The report did not pass judgement over whether Russian information operations had an impact on the result.[93]

Withdrawal from the European Union is governed by Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. It was originally drafted by Lord Kerr of Kinlochard,[94] and introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon at the insistence of the United Kingdom.[citation needed] The article states that any member state can withdraw "in accordance with its own constitutional requirements" by notifying the European Council of its intention to do so.[95] The notification triggers a two-year negotiation period, in which the EU must "negotiate and conclude an agreement with [the leaving] State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the [European] Union".[96] If no agreement is reached within the two years, the membership ends without an agreement, unless an extension is unanimously agreed among all EU states, including the withdrawing state.[96] On the EU side, the agreement needs to be ratified by qualified majority in the European Council, and by the European Parliament.[96]

The 2015 Referendum Act did not expressly require Article 50 to be invoked,[96] but prior to the referendum, the British government said it would respect the result.[97] When Cameron resigned following the referendum, he said that it would be for the incoming prime minister to invoke Article 50.[98][99] The new prime minister, Theresa May, said she would wait until 2017 to invoke the article, in order to prepare for the negotiations.[100] In October 2016, she said Britain would trigger Article 50 in March 2017,[101] and in December she gained the support of MP's for her timetable.[102]

In January 2017, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ruled in the Miller case that government could only invoke Article 50 if authorised by an act of parliament to do so.[103] The government subsequently introduced a bill for that purpose, and it was passed into law on 16 March as the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.[104] On 29 March, Theresa May triggered Article 50 when Tim Barrow, the British ambassador to the EU, delivered the invocation letter to European Council President Donald Tusk. This made 29 March 2019 the expected date that UK would leave EU.[105][106]

In April 2017, Theresa May called a snap general election, held on 8 June, in an attempt to "strengthen [her] hand" in the negotiations;[107] The Conservative Party, Labour and UKIP made manifesto pledges to implement the referendum, the Labour manifesto differing in its approach to Brexit negotiations, such as unilaterally offering permanent residence to EU immigrants.[108][109][110][111] The Liberal Democrat Party and the Green Party manifestos proposed a policy of remaining in the EU via a second referendum.[112][113][114] The Scottish National Party (SNP) manifesto proposed a policy of waiting for the outcome of the Brexit negotiations and then holding a referendum on Scottish independence.[115][116]

The result produced an unexpected hung parliament, the governing Conservatives gained votes (but nevertheless lost seats and their majority in the House of Commons) and remained the largest party. Labour gained significantly on votes and seats, retaining its position as the second-largest party. The Liberal Democrats gained six seats despite a slight decrease in vote share compared with 2015. The Green Party kept its single MP while also losing national vote share. Losing votes and seats were the SNP, which lost 21 MPs, and UKIP, which suffered a 10.8% swing and lost its only MP. The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Sinn Fin also made gains in votes and seats.[117]

On 26 June 2017, Conservatives and the DUP reached a confidence and supply agreement whereby the DUP would back the Conservatives in key votes in the House of Commons over the course of the parliament. The agreement included additional funding of 1billion for Northern Ireland, highlighted mutual support for Brexit and national security, expressed commitment to the Good Friday Agreement, and indicated that policies such as the state pension triple lock and Winter Fuel Payments would be maintained.[118][119]

Prior to the negotiations, May said that the British government would not seek permanent single market membership, would end ECJ jurisdiction, seek a new trade agreement, end free movement of people and maintain the Common Travel Area with Ireland.[120] The EU had adopted its negotiating directives in May,[121] and appointed Michel Barnier as Chief Negotiator.[122] The EU wished to perform the negotiations in two phases: first the UK would agree to a financial commitment and to lifelong benefits for EU citizens in Britain, and then negotiations on a future relationship could begin.[123] In the first phase, the member states would demand that the UK pay a "divorce bill", initially estimated as amounting to 52billion.[124] EU negotiators said that an agreement must be reached between UK and the EU by October 2018.[125]

Negotiations commenced on 19 June 2017.[126] Negotiating groups were established for three topics: the rights of EU citizens living in Britain and vice versa; Britain's outstanding financial obligations to the EU; and the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.[127][128][129] In December 2017, a partial agreement was reached. It ensured that there would be no hard border in Ireland, protected the rights of UK citizens in EU and EU citizens in Britain, and estimated the financial settlement to be 3539billion.[130] May stressed that "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed".[131] Following this partial agreement, EU leaders agreed to move on to the second phase in the negotiations: discussion of the future relationship, a transition period and a possible trade deal.[132]

In March 2018, a 21-month transition period and the terms for it were provisionally agreed.[133] In June 2018, Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar said that there had been little progress on the Irish border questionon which the EU proposed a backstop, to come into effect if no overall trade deal had been reached by the end of the transition periodand that it was unlikely that there would be a solution before October, when the whole deal was to be agreed.[134] In July 2018, the British government published the Chequers plan, its aims for the future relationship to be determined in the negotiations. The plan sought to keep British access to the single market for goods, but not necessarily for services, while allowing for an independent trade policy.[135] The plan caused cabinet resignations, including Brexit Secretary David Davis[136] and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson.[137]

On 13 November 2018, UK and EU negotiators agreed the text of a draft withdrawal agreement,[138] and May secured her cabinet's backing of the deal the following day,[139] though Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab resigned over "fatal flaws" in the agreement.[140] It was expected that ratification in the British parliament would be difficult.[141][142][143] On 25 November, all 27 leaders of the remaining EU countries endorsed the agreement.[141][142]

On 10 December 2018, the Prime Minister postponed the vote in the House of Commons on her Brexit deal. This came minutes after the Prime Minister's Office confirmed the vote would be going ahead.[144] Faced with the prospect of a defeat in the House of Commons, this option gave May more time to negotiate with Conservative backbenchers and the EU, even though they had ruled out further discussions.[145] The decision was met with calls from many Welsh Labour MPs for a motion of no confidence in the Government.[146]

Also on 10 December 2018, the European Court of Justice(ECJ) ruled that the UK could unilaterally revoke its notification of withdrawal, as long as it was still a member and had not agreed a withdrawal agreement. The decision to do so should be "unequivocal and unconditional" and "follow a democratic process".[147] If the British revoked their notification, they would remain a member of the EU under their current membership terms. The case was launched by Scottish politicians, and referred to the ECJ by the Scottish Court of Session.[148]

The European Research Group (ERG), a research support group of Eurosceptic Conservative MPs, opposed the Prime Minister's proposed Withdrawal Agreement treaty. Its members objected strongly to the Withdrawal Agreement's inclusion of the Irish backstop.[149][150] ERG members also objected to the proposed 39billion financial settlement with the EU and stated that the agreement would result in the UK's agreement to continuing to follow EU regulations in major policy areas; and to the continuing jurisdiction of the ECJ over interpretation of the agreement and of European law still applicable to the UK.[151][152]

On 15 January 2019, the House of Commons voted 432 to 202 against the deal, which was the largest majority ever against a United Kingdom government.[153][154] Soon after, a motion of no confidence in Her Majesty's Government was tabled by the opposition,[155] which was rejected by 325 votes to 306.[156]

On 24 February, Prime Minister May proposed that the next vote on the withdrawal agreement would be on 12 March 2019, 17 days away from the Brexit date.[157] On 12 March, the proposal was defeated by 391 votes to 242a loss by 149 votes, down from 230 from when the deal had been proposed in January.[158]

On 18 March 2019, the Speaker informed the House of Commons that a third meaningful vote could be held only on a motion that was significantly different from the previous one, citing parliamentary precedents going back to 1604.[159]

The Withdrawal Agreement was brought back to the House without the attached understandings on 29 March.[160] The Government's motion of support for the Withdrawal Agreement was defeated by 344 votes to 286a loss by 58 votes, down from 149 when the deal had been proposed on 12 March.[161]

On 20 March 2019, the Prime Minister wrote to European Council President Tusk requesting that Brexit be postponed until 30 June 2019.[162] On 21 March 2019, May presented her case to a European Council summit meeting in Brussels. After May left the meeting, a discussion amongst the remaining EU leaders resulted in the rejection of 30 June date and offered instead a choice of two new alternative Brexit dates. On 22 March 2019, the extension options were agreed between the British government and the European Council.[163] The first alternative offered was that if MPs rejected May's deal in the next week, Brexit would be due to occur by 12 April 2019, with, or without, a dealor alternatively another extension be asked for and a commitment to participate in the 2019 European Parliament elections given. The second alternative offered was that if MPs approved May's deal, Brexit would be due to occur on 22 May 2019. The later date was the day before the start of European Parliament elections.[164] After the government deemed unwarranted the concerns over the legality of the proposed change (because it contained two possible exit dates) the previous day,[165][166] on 27 March 2019 both the Lords (without a vote)[167] and the Commons (by 441 to 105) approved the statutory instrument changing the exit date to 22 May 2019 if a withdrawal deal is approved, or 12 April 2019 if it is not.[168] The amendment was then signed into law at 12:40p.m. the next day.[163]

Following the failure of the British Parliament to approve the Withdrawal Agreement by 29 March, the UK was required to leave the EU on 12 April 2019. On 10 April 2019, late-night talks in Brussels resulted in a further extension, to 31 October 2019; Theresa May had again requested an extension only until 30 June. Under the terms of this new extension, if the Withdrawal Agreement were to be passed before October, Brexit would occur on the first day of the subsequent month. The UK would then be obligated to hold European Parliament elections in May, or leave the EU on 1 June without a deal.[169][170]

In granting the Article 50 extensions, the EU adopted a stance of refusing to "reopen" (that is, renegotiate) the Withdrawal Agreement.[171] After Boris Johnson became prime minister on 24 July 2019 and met with EU leaders, the EU changed its stance. On 17 October 2019, following "tunnel talks" between UK and EU,[172] a revised withdrawal agreement was agreed on negotiators level, and endorsed by the British government and the EU Commission.[173] The revised deal contained a new Northern Ireland Protocol, as well as technical modifications to related articles.[24] In addition, the Political Declaration was also revised.[174] The revised deal and the political declaration was endorsed by the European Council later that day.[175] To come into effect, it needed to be ratified by the European Parliament and the Parliament of the United Kingdom.[176]

The British Parliament passed the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019, which received Royal Assent on 9 September 2019, obliging the Prime Minister to seek a third extension if no agreement has been reached at the next European Council meeting in October 2019.[177] In order for such an extension to be granted if it is requested by the Prime Minister, it would be necessary for there to be unanimous agreement by all other heads of EU governments.[178] On 28 October 2019, the third extension was agreed to by the EU, with a new withdrawal deadline of 31 January 2020.[179] 'Exit day' in British law was then amended to this new date by statutory instrument on 30 October 2019.[180]

After Johnson was unable to induce Parliament to approve a revised version of the withdrawal agreement by the end of October, he chose to call for a snap election. Due to the fact three motions for a early general election under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 failed to achieve the necessary two-thirds super majority for it to pass so instead in a highly unusual and rare direct showing of parliamentary sovereignty in order to circumvent the existing law the Government introduced a election bill which only needed a simple majority of MPs to vote in favour into the House of Commons which was passed by 43820, setting the election date for Thursday 12 December.[181] Opinion polls up to polling day showed a firm lead for the Conservatives against Labour throughout the campaign.[182]

In the run-up to the general election on 12 December 2019 the Conservative Party pledged to leave the EU with the withdrawal agreement negotiated in October 2019. Labour promised to renegotiate aforementioned deal and hold a referendum, letting voters choose between the renegotiated deal and remain. The Liberal Democrats vowed to revoke Article 50, while the SNP intended to hold a second referendum, however, revoking Article 50 if the alternative was a no-deal exit. The DUP supported Brexit, but would seek to change parts related to Northern Ireland it was dissatisfied with. Plaid Cymru and the Green Party backed a second referendum, believing the UK should stay in the EU. The Brexit Party was the only major party running for election which wanted the UK to leave the EU without a deal.[183]

The election produced a decisive result for Boris Johnson with the Conservatives winning 365 seats (gaining 47 seats) and a overall majority of 80 seats with Labour suffering their worst election defeat since 1935 after losing 60 seats to leave them with 202 seats and only a single seat in Scotland. The Liberal Democrats won just 11 seats with their leader Jo Swinson losing her own seat. The Scottish National Party won 48 seats after gaining 14 seats in Scotland.

The result broke the deadlock in the UK Parliament and ended the possibility of a referendum being held on the withdrawal agreement and ensured that the United Kingdom would leave the European Union on 31 January 2020.

Subsequently, the government introduced a bill to ratify the withdrawal agreement. It passed its second reading in the House of Commons in a 358234 vote on 20 December 2019,[184] and became law on 23 January 2020 as the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020.[185]

The withdrawal agreement received the backing of the constitutional committee in the European Parliament on 23 January 2020, setting expectation that the entire parliament would approve it in a later vote.[186][187][188] On the following day, Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel signed the withdrawal agreement in Brussels, and it was sent to London where Boris Johnson signed it.[27] The European Parliament gave its consent to ratification on 29 January by 621 votes to 49.[189][28] Immediately after voting approval, members of the European Parliament joined hands and sang Auld Lang Syne.[190] The Council of the European Union concluded EU ratification the following day.[191]

On 31 January 2020 at 11 p.m. GMT, the United Kingdom's membership of the European Union ended 47 years after it joined.[29]

Following the British exit on 31 January 2020 the UK entered a Transition Period for the rest of 2020. Trade, travel and freedom of movement remain largely unchanged during this period.[192]

The Withdrawal Agreement still applies after this date.[193] This agreement provides free access of goods between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, provided checks are made to goods entering Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK. The British Government attempted to back out of this commitment[194] by passing the Internal Market Bill: domestic legislation in the British Parliament. In September, Northern Ireland secretary Brandon Lewis said:

I would say to my hon. Friend that yes, this does break international law in a very specific and limited way.[195]

leading to the resignation of Sir Jonathan Jones, permanent secretary to the Government Legal Department[196] and Lord Keen, the law officer for Scotland.[197] The European Commission started legal action.[193]

During the transition period, David Frost and Michel Barnier continued to negotiate a permanent trade agreement.[198] On 24 December 2020 both parties announced that a deal had been reached.[199] The deal was passed by both houses of the British parliament on 30 December and given Royal Assent in the early hours of the next day. In the House of Commons, the governing Conservatives and main opposition Labour voted in favour of the agreement whilst all other opposition parties voted against it.[200] The transition period concluded under its terms the following evening.[201] After the UK said it would unilaterally extend a grace period limiting checks on trade between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, the European Parliament postponed setting a date to ratify the agreement.[202] The vote was later scheduled for 27 April when it passed with an overwhelming majority of votes.[203][204]

There was a customs transitional arrangement in place until 1 July 2021. During this time period, traders importing standard goods from the EU to the UK could defer submitting their customs declarations and paying import duties to HMRC for up to six months. This arrangement simplified and avoided most import controls during the early months of the new situation and was designed to facilitate inward trade during the COVID-19 health crisis and to avoid major disruptions in domestic supply chains in the short term.[205] Following reports that the border infrastructure was not ready, the UK government further postponed import checks from the EU to the UK until the end of the year in order to avoid supply issues during the ongoing Covid crisis.[206] This was again followed by another delay of import controls, in the context of truck driver shortages, which are scheduled to be phased in during 2022.[207]

In October 2016, Theresa May promised a "Great Repeal Bill", which would repeal the European Communities Act 1972 and restate in British law all enactments previously in force under EU law. Subsequently renamed the European Union (Withdrawal) bill, it was introduced to the House of Commons on 13 July 2017.[208]

On 12 September 2017, the bill passed its first vote and second reading by a margin of 326 votes to 290 votes in the House of Commons.[209] The bill was further amended on a series of votes in both Houses. After the Act became law on 26 June 2018, the European Council decided on 29 June to renew its call on Member States and European Union institutions to step up their work on preparedness at all levels and for all outcomes.[210]

The Withdrawal Act fixed the period ending 21 January 2019 for the government to decide on how to proceed if the negotiations had not reached agreement in principle on both the withdrawal arrangements and the framework for the future relationship between the UK and EU; while, alternatively, making future ratification of the withdrawal agreement as a treaty between the UK and EU depend upon the prior enactment of another act of Parliament for approving the final terms of withdrawal when the Brexit negotiations were completed. In any event, the act did not alter the two-year period for negotiating allowed by Article 50 that ended at the latest on 29 March 2019 if the UK had not by then ratified a withdrawal agreement or agreed a prolongation of the negotiating period.[211]

The Withdrawal Act which became law in June 2018 allowed for various outcomes including no negotiated settlement. It authorises the government to bring into force, by order made under section 25, the provisions that fixed "exit day" and the repeal of the European Communities Act 1972, but exit day must be the same day and time as when the EU Treaties ceased to apply to the UK.[212]

Exit day was the end of 31 January 2020 CET (11.00 p.m. GMT).[180] The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (as amended by a British Statutory Instrument on 11 April 2019), in section 20 (1), defined 'exit day' as 11:00p.m. on 31 October 2019.[163] Originally, 'exit day' was defined as 11:00p.m. on 29 March 2019 GMT (UTC+0).[211][213][214][215][216]

A report published in March 2017 by the Institute for Government commented that, in addition to the European Union (Withdrawal) bill, primary and secondary legislation will be needed to cover the gaps in policy areas such as customs, immigration and agriculture.[217] The report also commented that the role of the devolved legislatures was unclear, and could cause problems, and as many as 15 new additional Brexit Bills may be required, which would involve strict prioritisation and limiting Parliamentary time for in-depth examination of new legislation.[218]

In 2016 and 2017, the House of Lords published a series of reports on Brexit-related subjects, including:

The Nuclear Safeguards Act 2018, relating to withdrawal from Euratom, was presented to Parliament in October 2017. The act makes provision about nuclear safeguards, and for connectedpurposes. The Secretary of State may by regulations ("nuclear safeguards regulations") make provision for the purpose of (a) ensuring that qualifying nuclear material, facilities orequipment are available only for use for civil activities (whether in the UK or elsewhere), or (b) giving effect to provisions of a relevant international agreement.[219]

This section needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. Last update: October 2019 (March 2020)

Opinion polling overall showed an initial fall in support for Brexit from the referendum to late 2016, when responses were split evenly between support and opposition. Support rose again to a plurality, which held until the 2017 general election. Since then, opinion polls tended to show a plurality of support for remaining in the EU or for the view that Brexit was a mistake, with the estimated margin increasing until a small decrease in 2019 (to 53% Remain: 47% Leave, as of October2019[update]).[220] This seems to be largely due to a preference for remaining in the EU among those who did not vote in 2016's referendum (an estimated 2.5 million of whom, as of October2019[update], were too young to vote at the time).[221][222] Other reasons suggested include slightly more Leave voters than Remain voters (14% and 12% of each, respectively, as of October2019[update])[223] changing how they would vote (particularly in Labour areas) and the deaths of older voters,[220] most of whom voted to leave the EU.One estimate of demographic changes (ignoring other effects) implies that had an EU referendum taken place in October 2019,[update] there would have been between 800,000 and 900,000 fewer Leave voters and between 600,000 and 700,000 more Remain voters, resulting in a Remain majority.[221]

In March 2019, a petition submitted to the British Parliament petitions website, calling on the government to revoke Article 50 and stay in the EU, reached a record-level of more than 6.1million signatures.[224][225]

Opinion polling on whether the UK was right or wrong to vote to leave the EU

Opinion polling on whether the UK should leave or remain in the EU, including "Neither" responses

Opinion polling on whether the UK should leave or remain in the EU, excluding "Neither" responses and normalised

After the Brexit referendum, the Scottish Government led by the Scottish National Party (SNP) planned another independence referendum because Scotland voted to remain in the EU while England and Wales voted to leave.[226] It had suggested this before the Brexit referendum.[227] The First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, requested a referendum be held before the UK's withdrawal, but the British Prime Minister rejected this timing.[228] At the referendum in 2014, 55% of voters had decided to remain in the UK, but the referendum on Britain's withdrawal from the EU was held in 2016, with 62% of Scottish voters against it. In 2017, if Northern Ireland remained associated with the EU for example, by remaining in the Customs Union, some analysts argued Scotland would also insist on special treatment.[229] However, in the event, the only part of the United Kingdom which received unique treatment was Northern Ireland.[230]

On 21 March 2018, the Scottish Parliament passed the Scottish Continuity Bill.[231] This was passed by stalling negotiations between the Scottish Government and the British Government on where powers within devolved policy areas should lie after Brexit. The Act allows for all devolved policy areas to remain within the remit of the Scottish Parliament and reduces the executive power upon exit day that the UK Withdrawal Bill provides for Ministers of the Crown.[232] The bill was referred to the Supreme Court, which found that it could not come into force as the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, which received royal assent between the Scottish Parliament passing its bill and the Supreme Court's judgement, designated itself under Schedule4 of the Scotland Act 1998 as unamendable by the Scottish Parliament.[233] The bill has therefore not received royal assent.[234]

On 19 December 2018, the EU Commission revealed its "no-deal" Contingency Action Plan in specific sectors, in respect of the UK leaving the EU "in 100 days' time."[235]

In the wake of the United Kingdom's vote to leave the European Union, the Department for International Trade (DIT) for reaching and extending trade agreements between the UK and non-EU states was created by Prime Minister May, shortly after she took office on 13 July 2016.[236] By 2017, it employed about 200 trade negotiators[237] and was overseen by then Secretary of State for International Trade Liam Fox. In March 2019, the British government announced that it would cut many import tariffs to zero, in the event of a no-deal Brexit.[238] The Confederation of British Industry said the move would be a "sledgehammer for our economy",[239][240][241] and the National Farmer's Union was also highly critical.[242] Additionally, the plan appeared to breach standard WTO rules.[243][239][244][245][246][247]

On 2 June 2020, Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel stated that the European Union must prepare for the possible failure of Brexit trade talks with the UK. She added that negotiations were being accelerated to try and reach a deal that could be ratified by the end of the year. Her warning came as the deadline for extending talks passed, with negotiations expected to end on 31 December with or without a deal.[248]

There has been litigation to explore the constitutional footings on which Brexit stands after R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (simply known as the "Miller case") and the 2017 Notification Act:

Parliament, and in particular the House of Commons as the democratically elected representatives of the people, has a right to have a voice in how that change comes about is indisputable.

Many effects of Brexit depended on whether the UK left with a withdrawal agreement, or before an agreement was ratified ("no-deal" Brexit).[258] In 2017, the Financial Times said that there were approximately 759 international agreements, spanning 168 non-EU countries, that the UK would no longer be a party to upon leaving the EU.[259]

Economists expect that Brexit will have damaging immediate and longer term effects on the economies of the UK and at least part of the EU27. In particular, there is a broad consensus among economists and in the economic literature that Brexit will likely reduce the UK's real per capita income in the medium and long term, and that the Brexit referendum itself damaged the economy.[b][260][261][262] Studies found that Brexit-induced uncertainty reduced British GDP, British national income, investment by business, employment and British international trade from June 2016 onwards.[263][264][265][266][267][268]

A 2019 analysis found that British firms substantially increased offshoring to the EU after the Brexit referendum, whereas European firms reduced new investments in the UK.[269][270] The British government's own Brexit analysis, leaked in January 2018, showed that British economic growth would be stunted by 28% over the 15 years following Brexit, the amount depending on the leave scenario.[271][272] Economists warned that London's future as an international financial centre depended on passport agreements with the EU.[273][274] Pro-Brexit activists and politicians have argued for negotiating trade and migration agreements with the "CANZUK" countriesthose of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom[275][276]but economists have said that trade deals with those countries would be far less valuable to the UK than EU membership.[277][278][279] Studies project that Brexit will exacerbate regional economic inequality in the UK, by hitting already-struggling regions the hardest.[280]

The potential impact on the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland has been a contentious issue. Since 2005, the border has been essentially invisible.[281] After Brexit, it became the only UKEU land border[282] (not counting the land borders EU states, Spain and Cyprus, have with British Overseas Territories). All involved parties agreed a hard border should be avoided,[283] as it might compromise the Good Friday Agreement that ended the Northern Ireland conflict.[284][285][286] To forestall this, the EU proposed a "backstop agreement" (the Northern Ireland Protocol) that would have kept the UK in the Customs Union and kept Northern Ireland in some aspects of the Single Market also, until a lasting solution was found.[287] The backstop was part of the withdrawal agreement, but was replaced in the revised agreement.[176]

Brexit caused the European Union to lose its second-largest economy, its third-most populous country,[288] and the second-largest net contributor to the EU budget.[289] Brexit will result in an additional financial burden for the remaining net contributors, unless the budget is reduced accordingly. The UK will no longer be a shareholder in the European Investment Bank, where it has 16% of the shares.[290] Analyses indicate that the departure of the relatively economically liberal UK will reduce the ability of remaining economically liberal countries to block measures in the Council of the EU.[291][292] In 2019, ahead of Brexit, the European Medicines Agency and European Banking Authority moved their headquarters from London to Amsterdam and Paris, respectively.[293][294][295]

After Brexit, the UK will leave the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP),[296] which provides government financial support to farmers in the EU.[297] The UK receives much less than it contributes.[297] Brexit allows the UK to develop its own agriculture policy.[298] The current UK government has committed to maintaining the same payments to farmers until the end of the current parliament, even without a withdrawal agreement.[296] The Agriculture Bill is intended to replace the CAP with a new system.[298] The UK will also leave the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)[299] that lets all EU countries fish within 12 nautical miles of the British coast[300] and lets the EU set catch quotas.[301] The combined EU fishing fleets land about six million tonnes of fish per year,[302] about half of which are from British waters.[303] By leaving the CFP, the UK could develop its own fisheries policy.[301] The UK will also leave the London Fisheries Convention that lets Irish, French, Belgian, Dutch and German vessels fish within six nautical miles of the UK's coast.[304]

Gibraltar, a British Overseas Territory bordering Spain, will be affected by Brexit. Spain asserts a territorial claim on Gibraltar. After the referendum, Spain's Foreign Minister renewed calls for joint SpanishBritish control.[305] In late 2018, the British and Spanish governments agreed that any dispute over Gibraltar would not affect Brexit negotiations,[306] and the British government agreed that UKEU treaties made after Brexit would not automatically apply to Gibraltar.[307]

Read the original:

Brexit - Wikipedia

The French government has called on Boris Johnson to use David Frosts resignation as Brexit minister to rebuild trust with the EU amid uncertainty over the prime ministers approach in the new year.

Clment Beaune, Frances EU affairs minister, who had a series of run-ins with the prime ministers pugnacious minister, suggested that Downing Street should use the moment to reset the troubled relationship.

He said: We had difficult relations but we always continued the dialogue. I send my best with respect to David Frost after his resignation. It is time for the British government to rebuild a climate of trust with France and the EU in the interest of all.

The announcement that Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, would take on responsibility for EU affairs has done little to clarify how the prime minister will approach various ongoing issues.

A remain voter before the campaign, Truss switched to become one of the most vocal backers of Brexit, notably avoiding even mention of the EU in recent speeches about the countrys foreign policy.

In recent weeks, the UK government softened its approach to the post-Brexit arrangements for Northern Ireland, with the two sides brokering a Christmas truce in the talks on a relatively positive note. But Truss, who regularly comes out top in surveys of the Conservative memberships favourite cabinet ministers, has pushed a tough line towards Brussels in the past.

One EU diplomat said of Lord Frosts resignation: Hopefully the new negotiator will be more pragmatic, making good relations with the EU and its member states relations a priority over the pursuit of a pure, antagonistic Brexit were not holding our breath.

Frost was recognised in Brussels as having both the prime ministers ear and standing among the most vocal Brexiters in the Tory party. His apparent buy-in to a notable change of tone and policy in recent weeks was seen as a positive.

While the EU has not wholly embraced the change of approach, insisting that Downing Street was still seeking to renege on its past agreements, the UK had been offering to focus on issues around trade friction rather than pursue a more thorough going rewrite of the protocol.

But while there are some concerns about the future, few tears will be shed in Brussels over Frosts departure from the scene. He had a willingness to push negotiations to the edge, even on the sensitive issue of the Irish border.

Frost inherited and finished the negotiations on the so-called Northern Ireland protocol in the withdrawal agreement, a compromise that guarantees that there is no border on the island of Ireland. But the minister had been scathing about the arrangement, which in effect keeps Northern Ireland in the EUs single market for goods and draws a customs border down the Irish Sea.

His command paper of July emphasised that this outcome had been forced on the Johnson administration due to errors under the previous prime minister.

Frost sought to unpick much of that deal, with his most contentious demand being that the European court of justice (ECJ) should not be the arbiter of disputes over the implementation of the law in Northern Ireland.

In recent days, there has been a shift to accept that the ECJ will play a role, albeit merely as a reference point on EU law for an independent arbitration panel. Frost privately insisted this was not a new position, but other British officials have indicated that it was a shift, hinting at difficult conversations within government.

Diplomats and officials in Brussels were not generous in their assessment of the minister, known to the prime minister as the Great Frost.

Lord Frost never got Brexit done; he actually made sure it endured using the Northern Ireland protocol to get his way, one senior EU diplomat said. But one year on from the deal he negotiated, what did it bring the UK? Apart from mistrust and deteriorated relationships with most member states?

The diplomat added: Frost seemed to have a very ideological idea of what Brexit meant and that didnt make for good neighbourly relations. For now the European court of justice was a bridge too far for Downing Street, but it will depend on his successor whether we indeed see a more pragmatic line emerge.

A further major issue that will require the attention of Truss is fisheries, where the French government continues to insist that it has been hard done by in terms of licences for vessels operating in British waters.

Frost has also voiced his frustration that the UK has not been provided with access to Horizon Europe, the EUs research and innovation programme. Two months ago, the veteran MP Bill Cash, chair of the Commons European scrutiny committee, claimed British scientists were being frozen out of the 80bn flagship research programme because of the ongoing dispute over Northern Ireland.

Follow this link:

France urges Johnson to use Frosts exit to rebuild trust with EU - The Guardian

An uneasy Christmas truce has been called over the post-Brexit arrangements for Northern Ireland, even as the EU said it would not negotiate over a key British demand in the rancorous talks.

Maro efovi, the EU Brexit commissioner, said there was momentum behind discussions after a major British U-turn, but refused to offer quid pro quo concessions.

Downing Street has conceded in recent weeks that it will prioritise removing barriers to trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland over other constitutional issues that have bedevilled the talks. Talks will be suspended until after Christmas.

But in a blow to the British government, the commissioner on Friday refused even to engage with its demand for any renegotiation over the role of the European court of justice (ECJ) in the enforcement of EU law in Northern Ireland, despite a UK concession that the court could retain a role in the protocol.

It was not disputed at all until the summer of this year and therefore the topic we are not ready to include in our discussions, said efovi, the EU commissioner in charge of UK relations.

Under a protocol of the withdrawal agreement, Northern Ireland in effect remains within the EUs single market and the blocs customs border is drawn down the Irish sea. The EU court is the final arbiter of disputes.

The British government, however, wants an independent arbitration system rather than giving the ECJ the last say, although in recent days it has accepted the court in Luxembourg will resolve questions about EU law if issues come to arbitration.

A potential solution exists in the post-Brexit trade agreement and the EUs deal with Switzerland. But the European Commission said on Friday that this model was not feasible yet.

A senior EU official said the protocol was completely different to the EU trade agreement with Switzerland, because the Northern Ireland agreement was based on the direct application of reams of EU legislation, rather than elements of EU law, which are referred to or paraphrased as in the deal with Berne. It was judged that this arbitral solution was not sufficient, and that you needed the full powers of the court of justice, the official said.

Another barrier is that the commission refuses to reopen an agreement that was signed by Boris Johnson little more than two years ago.

There is agreement to extend a standstill arrangement beyond 1 January to avoid the full implementation of customs on meat and agricultural imports.

But Brussels remains mistrustful of the British government. The fundamental stumbling block is that we need the UK to move back into a logic of the implementation of an agreement that it negotiated, signed and ratified, said a senior official.

The two sides are also at odds over the process of the talks. While British officials have spoken of a staged approach, where issues are agreed one by one, the EU would like a single agreement.

Customs and health checks remain a major stumbling block in the talks. While the EU considers it has made a generous offer to cut red tape, the UK argues that its claims to remove 50% of customs checks and 80% of health checks do not stand up.

The EU announced on Friday it would rewrite its rules on medicines to ensure life-saving treatments and everyday drugs remained available in Northern Ireland, after threats to supply emerged. Without a change to the rules or grace period, medicine manufacturers based in Great Britain had warned they could cease supplying products to Northern Ireland, because of the extra costs imposed by red tape.

Hundreds of medicines used by the NHS in Northern Ireland were at risk. The commission has now proposed that new medicines for Northern Ireland can be authorised by the UK, even if they have yet to be approved by the EU regulator.

Under the proposals, quality control checks, so called batch testing, would not need to be repeated in Northern Ireland, if they had already been carried out in Great Britain or the EU. The proposals have to be agreed by EU lawmakers and ministers before coming into force.

Meanwhile, the French EU minister Clment Beaune said Paris would in the coming days begin proceedings against the UK over fishing licences it said Britain still owed a small number of French boats to allow them to operate in British waters.

The next step will be to ask the commission in the coming days to convene the partnership council, as provided for under the Brexit trade deal to settle a problem, Beaune said, adding that the procedure would target the most urgent cases.

See the original post here:

Brexit: EU and UK at odds over Northern Ireland renegotiation - The Guardian

She commented: Pleased to be taking on responsibility for the EU negotiations and wider relationship with the excellent Chris Heaton-Harris.

The surprise news has caught the EU off balance, with one EU official summing up the anxiety by telling the Guardian: Hopefully the new negotiator will be more pragmatic, making good relations with the EU and its member states relations a priority over the pursuit of a pure, antagonistic Brexit - were not holding our breath.

David Bannerman, ex-Conservative MEP for the East of England, said of the appointment: "Dont expect any weakening of line on Protocol. Article 16 beckons."

Former Brexit Party MEP Ben Habib was in little doubt who should carry the can, pointing the finger at Prime Minister Boris Johnson himself.

He toldExpress.co.uk: Instead of leaving the regulatory nightmare that is the EU he has gilded the lily and made the UK an indebted bloated public sector dominated economy with the highest taxes since the Post War period. But the person who really needs to leave office is the Prime Minister himself."

FollowExpress.co.ukfor live Brexit updates:

Additional reporting byCiaran McGrath

Follow this link:

Brexit LIVE: Article 16 beckons! Truss to square up to Brussels over hated EU deal - Daily Express