Welcome to the Guardian’s weekly Brexit briefing, a summary of developments as Britain moves slowly – very slowly – towards the EU exit. If you’d like to receive it as a weekly email, do sign up here.
Producing the Guardian’s thoughtful, in-depth journalism is expensive – but supporting us isn’t. If you value our Brexit coverage, please become a Guardian supporter and help make our future more secure. Thank you.
The big picture
With the dust of the referendum earthquake settled, August all but over and Westminster and Brussels back from their summer breaks, the Brexit battle lines have suddenly become a lot clearer. It is going to be quite a fight.
In one camp are the get-on-with-it Brexiters like former cabinet minister Iain Duncan Smith, who told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme last week that the formal leaving procedure must be launched early in 2017 to provide focus and set a clear deadline for exit talks. Key cabinet figures backed this plan, he said:
I have spoken to them and I am certain that these characters – David Davis, Liam Fox and Boris Johnson, and the prime minister by the way – are very clear that they need to get on with triggering article 50 as soon as possible ... And I believe they are all very positive about the outcome: we will be out, and we will do incredibly well.
In his view, Duncan Smith said, Britain should not necessarily seek to remain in the EU’s single market because “that would entail putting yourself yet again under the rule of European law”.
In the opposing camp are much of the rest of the cabinet, including the chancellor, Philip Hammond, who reportedly wants to see Britain retain access to the single market, at least in specific sectors such as financial services, while also securing border controls for the UK.
Their position was ably summarised (also on Today) by Gus O’Donnell, the former civil service chief. While the government “needs to get on and implement the people’s decision”, he said, he really wouldn’t be in such a hurry.
The problem is that article 50 is “very strongly in favour of those who are staying, not the leaving party”, O’Donnell said. That means it would be madness to trigger it without having a “strategic plan to say ‘what kind of UK do we want, what’s our place in the world, what are we trying to achieve in these negotiations?’”
Whatever kind of Brexit it is, it will undoubtedly prove an “unprecedented challenge” for the government and for the civil service, he said – and particularly for the prime minister:
She’s got to corral all these different individuals, come up with precisely what version of Brexit we want, what works best for the British people, and then go about implementing it.
With those words ringing in her ears, Theresa May promptly announced a meeting of senior cabinet members at the prime minister’s country residence, Chequers, on Wednesday. Amid reports of a cabinet split over single market membership (which would very probably entail accepting freedom of movement), she has demanded they come armed with ideas about how Brexit could be a success.
May has reportedly also been told by government lawyers that she is not obliged to hold a parliamentary vote on the decision to leave the EU before triggering article 50. Half a dozen different lawsuits claiming the contrary are currently before the high court where they will be heard in October, with a supreme court hearing likely some time in December.
Barry Gardiner, the shadow trade secretary, echoed the feelings of many MPs on hearing that news, saying parliament cannot be sidelined from the greatest constitutional change the country has debated in 40 years:
The logic of saying the PM can trigger article 50 without first setting out to parliament the terms and basis upon which her government seeks to negotiate – indeed, without even indicating the red lines she will seek to protect – would be to diminish parliament and assume the arrogant powers of a Tudor monarch.
The view from Europe
Angela Merkel, at least, is prepared to be (relatively) patient. Mid-diplomatic marathon around assorted European capitals, the German chancellor said in Tallinn there was no point pushing Britain for progress until it had made up its mind what it wanted, and pointed out that the remaining 27 member states had plenty to sort out for themselves without the nitty-gritty of Brexit:
As long as Britain hasn’t submitted its application we can’t say what kind of a relationship we envision. [The EU-27] can allow Britain the time it takes to work out what relationship it wants with the EU. We have to think about what our priorities are, how we want to continue our work and where we want to make an effort in particular.
Her economy minister, Sigmar Gabriel, however, sounded a somewhat less conciliatory note, saying Britain should under no circumstances be allowed to have its cake and eat it in the wake of the referendum:
Brexit is bad, but it won’t hurt us as much economically as some fear – it’s more a psychological problem, and a huge problem politically. If we organise Brexit in the wrong way we’ll be in deep trouble, so now we need to make sure that we don’t allow Britain to keep the nice things, so to speak, related to Europe, while taking no responsibility.
Meanwhile, back in Westminster
The home secretary, Amber Rudd, looks like she may face a fight to keep Britain’s Le Touquet agreement with France. The deal in effect places the UK border in Calais, and has led to the emergence of the so-called Jungle migrant camp.
Rudd was set to tell her opposite number, Bernard Cazeneuve, that talk of tearing up the accord is “a non-starter”. The rightwing regional president, Xavier Bertrand, and presidential hopeful Nicolas Sarkozy have both called for it to be scrapped.
The former British ambassador to France, Sir Peter Ricketts, has warned that if a rightwing candidate wins the country’s presidential election next year, Britain “is going to have to deal with a pretty serious conversation” about the accord.
Meanwhile, in more indirect Brexit fallout, Labour’s leadership fight is getting increasingly nasty, with contender Owen Smith accusing his rival Jeremy Corbyn of lying about having voted to remain and being “happy about the result”. Smith said he would to stop May formally triggering Brexit unless she promises a referendum on the final deal, or calls a general election to approve it.
You should also know that:
- The NHS would collapse without its 57,000 workers who are non-British EU nationals who should be offered free British citizenship so they don’t leave, the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) said.
- Ministers are under pressure to let traders sell produce in pounds and ounces, according to the Telegraph.
-
UK passport applications from EU nationals rose 14% before the Brexit referendum, with uncertainty about the result sparking a jump in applications, but there was a dip in net migration.
- Swiss watch exports to the UK have soared as tourists make the most of the slide in sterling that has made Britain the cheapest luxury market in the world.
- The official remain campaign, Britain Stronger In Europe, has relaunched as a campaign group, Open Britain, but will not call for a second referendum.
- The EU will not relax its rules to preserve access for the City after Brexit, a leading German MP and Merkel ally has told Bloomberg.
- A return to economic growth in France and solid expansion in Germany have largely helped the eurozone shrug off the anticipated blow from Brexit.
Read these
The former economics editor of the Guardian, Will Hutton, responds to the current incumbent’s article last week about the absence of a Brexit armageddon, warning that unfortunately, the worst is still to come:
We have been plunged into a mess. The EU never obstructed the vital structural changes to the British investment and innovation ecosystem that had to be made, in or out. Now we have to deliver those reforms beset by the disastrous uncertainty of leaving the world’s greatest trading bloc ... Larry Elliott, the Guardian’s current economic editor, is upbeat about Brexit. I, a former one, am profoundly concerned. Readers in the years ahead will judge which of us was right.
In the Financial Times, lawyer and blogger David Allen Green argues that Brexit may of course happen, but it will not come about just because people say it will:
Brexit also needs to be capable of happening, and that requires a policy as well as resources. Instead of just asserting that Brexit “shall” happen, the government now needs to explain “how” it will happen. It seems not to have any idea.
The LSE’s professor of European political economy, Paul de Grauwe, argues that for its own sake, the EU can and must offer the UK only two options: a Norwegian-style model (accepting EU rules, allowing freedom of movement and paying into the budget), or leaving entirely and negotiating a free trade agreement à la Canada:
Clarity is essential for those who consider leaving the EU. This clarity can only be achieved by excluding a privileged trade agreement with the UK ... The century-old British strategy remains the same, ie to weaken the forces that can make Europe stronger. The UK can achieve this by insisting on a special deal whereby the UK maintains the benefits of the union while not sharing in the costs. Such a deal would signal to other member countries that by exiting, they can continue to enjoy the benefits of the union without the costs. Such a prospect would fatally weaken the European Union.
At the New Statesman, Ian Leslie has a light-hearted but actually fairly accurate sounding guide to the top 10 reasons why Brexit isn’t working – according, of course, to Brexiters (sabotage by Whitehall, remainers talking down the country, untrustworthy experts, EU bureaucrats, etc etc):
Over the next few years, it is likely that the economy will shrink, the entire government will be consumed by trade negotiations, and EU leaders will use their considerable negotiation advantages to theatrically screw us. As this unpretty story unfolds, those who argued confidently for Brexit, in parliament and in the press, will feel compelled to maintain that they were right, and that if it hadn’t been for some other impossible-to-foresee factor everything would be going splendidly.
Tweet of the week
The obvious silver lining? As the European commission rules that Ireland must recover up to €13bn in taxes from Apple:
Now that we have left the EU maybe we could tempt Apple to come to London.
— Gavin (@GavinHJackson) August 30, 2016
