The New Year begins with expectations that British Prime Minister Theresa May will give some idea of her Brexit negotiation objectives in coming weeks, as the UK awaits the decision of the Supreme Court as to whether or not MPs and Lords must have the final say over triggering the ‘article 50’ exit clause.
Uncertainty over what negotiations will hold
So far all of the European institutions have refused to make any comment on what Britain can expect from Brexit including in terms of expat rights, although the EU’s lead negotiator, commissioner Michel Barnier, warned that talks may have to be wrapped up in just 18 months due to the short time-frame allowed by the article 50 rules.
That is to allow the European Council to discuss and set negotiation guidelines at the start, as well as time for both the European and UK parliaments to approve the resulting deal.
Once negotiations start, rights of expats in the EU and in the UK would be a priority, along with how much the UK owes the EU and vice versa and making arrangements for the departure of British MEPs and civil servants from Brussels. Agreeing the UK’s future trading position with the EU is likely to pose a greater problem and an attempt may be made to find a ‘transitional agreement’ while talks proceed separately on this.
Will Theresa May clarify her negotiation aims?
Mrs May is sticking to her position that the article 50 trigger – official notification to the EU of the UK’s departure – will happen ‘by the end of March’, though it remains to be seen if there are delays if it is necessary for a bill to go through both houses of parliament.
She is shortly expected to expand upon her negotiation plan – which so far has been summed up as ‘Brexit means Brexit’, a ‘red, white and blue Brexit’ and ‘the best deal for Britain’.
However, whatever she asks for will ultimately have to be approved by the other EU leaders, by a ‘qualified majority’, and in reality the UK will be going in blind to the negotiations in terms of knowing what it can expect to be offered in two years’ time. Having said which, EU chiefs have stated that the ‘four freedoms’ of the single market will be non-negotiable and retaining full access while restricting EU immigration will not be acceptable.
Britain’s ‘ambassador to the EU’ resigns
This comes as the UK government’s ‘ambassador to the EU’ (the informal title of the permanent representative to the EU), Sir Ivan Rogers, has resigned amid speculation that he faced pressures due to having reportedly told the government that Brexit might take 10 years to finalise. In a parting email to his staff he said his successor would need to be capable of challenging ‘muddled thinking’ and ‘speaking truth to power’.
The ‘ambassador’ leads a team in Brussels which explains British policies to the institutions of the EU.
His successor will be Sir Tim Barrow, a former British ambassador to Moscow and a past advisor to foreign secretaries, who Downing Street says is a “seasoned and tough negotiator” who will bring “energy” to the job. He is said to have views that are more euro-sceptical than Sir Ivan’s.
Speaking on Sky News after Sir Ivan’s resignation, former chief of staff to Tony Blair Jonathan Powell said it was vital to have an experienced person in the ‘ambassador’ role, because they are the UK’s “ears and eyes, telling you what’s possible and not possible”.
He said that if there is an expectation that the chosen person must have ‘sworn an oath of allegiance to Brexit’, this is a breach of the usual convention that civil servants are independent and politically neutral, adding: “The most worrying thing in his parting email was his statement that, as ambassador, he does not know what our negotiating objectives are, which we are going to trigger in two months’ time – and does not know if we’re going to stay in the single market or leave, stay in the customs union or leave, or if we are aiming for a transitional agreement or not.
“Unless Theresa May sets those out when she sets out her plan in the next few weeks, as she says she will – if we have more ‘Brexit means Brexit’ – we will be completely lost. Unless you are clear on what your objectives are and set those out publically, you will not succeed in the negotiations.”
Associate EU citizenship for Britons?
The proposal to give ‘associate EU citizenship’ to those Britons who want it and are willing to pay an annual fee is on hold as we await the expected article 50 trigger. Originally proposed by Luxembourg MEP Charles Goerens, it has now been taken up by the European Parliament’s lead negotiator Guy Verhofstadt, who says he will raise in it discussions at the parliament as soon as the article 50 starting gun is fired. He wants it to be part of a resolution that the parliament plans to make on its position with regard to Brexit, as well as being ‘on the table’ when the negotiations get under way.
Legal challenges
Apart from the imminent decision on the article 50 legal case, several other legal challenges are in the pipeline.
A group of four anonymous claimants have lodged a judicial review case at the High Court in London, seeking a ruling that the UK cannot leave the wider European Economic Area without an explicit decision of parliament. Arguably the UK joined this under a separate agreement to the treaty it signed to join the EU.
Staying in the EEA would mean the UK would still be in the single market, but not the customs union, meaning it could sign its own trade deals with countries outside the EU. It would also safeguard most expat rights (apart from rights to vote in local and EU elections or to stand as councillors).
This will bolster a similar case being brought by think tank British Influence, who say that the referendum gave no mandate to take the UK out of the EEA.
Another case in the High Court of Ireland is seeking a ruling on whether or not triggering article 50 is reversible if the final deal offered is unappealing to the UK.
Meanwhile, British writer Faris Nejad says he has gathered hundreds of supporters for a legal action which will seek to argue that the British government had no legal right to take away people’s EU citizenship without their consent.
