Michel barnier

Since Chequers, the UK has been making a big diplomatic push to try and move the Brexit talks along. As I say in The Sun this morning, this has had some success. Inside government, the view is that the chances of a deal are inching up. There is also cautious optimism that the British message on the Irish backstop, that a customs border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom is unacceptable, has finally been understood. But Mrs May hasn’t had a breakthrough yet. There is no sign of the European Commission moving away from its position that the four freedoms of the single market can’t be

Ever since Theresa May declared that ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’ she has seemed to be drifting towards the ‘bad deal’ option. The government has put forward numerous constructive proposals, only for them to be shot down by Michel Barnier — who goes on to warn of ticking clocks and the need for Britain to cede ever more ground. His strategy is logical and amply rewarded: every time he rejects a British plan, more concessions are offered. All along, Barnier’s approach has been to portray a post-Brexit trade deal as if it were a favour to Britain rather than an agreement of mutual interest. Britain, he has

So what happens now Michel Barnier has laid into Theresa May’s customs plan? That’s the question I try and answer in my Sun column this morning. Those close to May are trying to downplay Barnier’s criticisms. One Cabinet Minister remarks, ‘It is not a great surprise. He’s been saying no all along’. This Minister’s view is that it is now ‘up to the member states’ what happens next. But they aren’t likely to come to the rescue of May’s plan: I understand that only a handful of them are interested in it. Barnier’s real aim, as May has told the Brexit inner Cabinet, is to keep Britain in a customs

From the flurry of joint op-eds from Cabinet Ministers today, you might be forgiven for thinking that the Chequers deal is the deal. But, of course, it is not. Rather, it is the UK’s government opening position in the negotiation on the future relationship. So, logically, you would expect the government to have to make more concessions. The problem for the ministerial Brexiteers is that what the EU is likely to demand will make the deal much more difficult to defend. Take, for instance, parliament’s role in having to pass any changes to the so-called ‘common rulebook’ between the UK and the EU. Number 10 likes to talk about this

If Brexit was going to be as easy as some of its advocates had believed, we would not have had weeks such as this one. It’s hard to interpret the recent agreement over the transition period as anything other than a capitulation to EU demands. Theresa May has quietly scrubbed out her ‘red line’ on the rights of EU citizens and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Nationals of other EU countries will be free to move to Britain, seek work here and have their rights protected by the court until 31 December 2020. Moreover, she has agreed to UK waters being open to EU trawlers until that

There’s an unwritten law governing Boris Johnson in Westminster: every-thing he says or does is a gaffe, or can be portrayed as one. Yet actually Johnson has an uncanny knack for conjuring similes which sum up the political situation precisely. So it was for his much-ridiculed remark, in response to a question about the Irish border, that there are no border posts between London boroughs even though they have different business rates and policies on various other things. His phrasing was careless but the point stands: it is nonsense to claim that different regimes must mean border patrols. There are significant tax and excise differences on either side of the

The Commons Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport recently investigated claims of Russian interference in the UK electoral process. The committee might soon be forced to go one further and investigate EU interference in our political system.  How remarkable that today’s ‘legally-binding’ document from Michel Barnier, which tries to keep Northern Ireland in a customs union with the EU comes just 48 hours after Jeremy Corbyn made a speech changing Labour’s policy in order to commit the UK as a whole to remain within the customs union. I am not party to any conversations Jeremy Corbyn might have had with Michel Barnier or his team, but the Labour leader

David Davis’s decision to describe a leaked EU paper suggesting Brussels could impose sanctions on Britain in a transition period as ‘discourteous’ had repercussions in Brussels today. In a solo press conference on Britain’s transition period, Michel Barnier cut a prickly figure as he warned that a transition period immediately after Brexit in 2019 is ‘not a given’. Issuing Britain with a gentle ticking off, Barnier insisted that he was not being ‘vindictive’ as he raised concerns over May’s position. He said he has planned an update on the future relationship but this could not take place due to timetable constraints ‘on the UK side’. The EU’s chief negotiator did at

If Michel Barnier and David Davis, in their regular dialogue of the deaf, seem to be inhabiting different mental universes, that is because they are. The British and French have often found each other particularly difficult to negotiate with. Of course, Barnier represents not France but the EU, and he has a negotiating position, the notorious European Council Guidelines, on which the veteran British diplomat Sir Peter Marshall has recently commented that ‘I have never seen, nor heard tell of, a text as antipathetic to the principle of give and take which is generally assumed to be at the heart of negotiation among like-minded democracies’. But, as a senior German

For all the talk of a new ‘momentum’ to the Brexit talks since Theresa May’s Florence speech, today’s press conference between Michel Barnier and David Davis certainly had a whiff of déjà vu to it. The EU’s chief negotiator spoke severely of his concerns over a lack of ‘progress’ while the ever-optimistic Brexit secretary played up all the ‘progress’ that had been made. Despite that ‘progress’, Barnier confirmed – as expected – that he would not be recommending to the EU Council meeting next week that talks move to the second stage, of talking about a ‘future relationship’. However, he did suggest that he hoped this recommendation would come within

When this magazine endorsed Brexit, it did so in typically trenchant and elegant fashion. ‘Out and into the world’ we said. The central thesis of The Spectator’s case for Leave was that the European Union has become a parody of itself, a sclerotic, irredeemably unreformable, set of institutions that are, at some core, fundamental, level intrinsically incompatible with this country’s instincts, traditions, and future. Even so, that case, forceful though it was and certainly hardly without merit, still suffered from the wishful thinking that has, alas, been so typical of so many Brexiteers. Britain’s departure would, we wrote, ‘show reform-minded Europeans that theirs is not a lost cause’ though how

There is a growing perception that Britain is floundering in its EU negotiations, with a professional team from Brussels running rings around our bumbling amateurs. It is an idea that is being put about by the EU’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, who this week appealed for Britain to begin ‘negotiating seriously’. As he has found out, the strange dynamic of British public debate at present means that EU spin is repeated uncritically by those hostile to Brexit. It can seem, at times, as if we are in the grip of hysteria normally seen during the final days of an election campaign. This is not to say that the British side

It’s summertime and the living is easy… unless you’re a civil servant working on Brexit. Whitehall has recognised that the UK needs to step up its preparations for leaving the EU and to offer greater certainty about the country’s immediate future. A big speech is planned for September, probably by the Prime Minister, which will set out more of the government’s thinking on the issue. One aspect of Brexit that urgently needs clarity is how Britain will leave the European Union. Theresa May has long been open to a transitional period or, as she terms it, an implementation phase. But since the election, the government’s enthusiasm for this has become

 Frankfurt ‘This is not about punishing Great Britain,’ declared Sigmar Gabriel, Germany’s interim foreign secretary, on his recent visit to London. I fell about laughing, because this is precisely what’s going on. It is as obvious to us Germans as it is to the Brits: the EU cannot tolerate the thought of a successful United Kingdom outside the Brussels sphere of influence because, if that were allowed to happen, others might dare to start thinking about leaving the club too. Everything we hear from Brussels flows from this. The EU presents itself as a champion of free trade, especially when its leaders are attacking Donald Trump, yet it does all

The Guardian has a very significant story on its front page tomorrow. It has obtained notes of a meeting that Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, had with senior MEPs this week. These notes show that Barnier told them that he wanted a ‘special’ deal that would guarantee access for the EU firms and countries to the City of London’s financial markets. Interestingly, Barnier also said—according to The Guardian’s account—that ‘There will need to be work outside of the negotiation box … in order to avoid financial instability.” This suggests that Barnier shares Mark Carney’s view that there are financial stability risks for Europe if the EU cuts itself off

Michel Barnier, the Commission’s Brexit negotiator, has been giving a running commentary on Brexit this morning. Barnier, striking a predictably tough stance before the negotiations start, said that he wants the divorce aspects of the Article 50 deal concluded by October 2018, to give sufficient time for ratification. This, essentially, means that there’ll be one year of negotiations from after the German elections next autumn. But Barnier’s position is that only once this deal has been agreed, can talks move on to what the future relationship between the UK and the EU will be. In other words, no talks on trade until the exit process has been agreed. He emphasised