Theresa May ainda acredita no Pai Natal …
OVOODOCORVO
Theresa May awaits a Brexmas miracle
The prime minister delayed a vote on her Brexit deal until
the week of January 14.
By CHARLIE
COOPER 12/17/18, 9:23 PM CET
Updated 12/18/18, 4:07 AM CET
LONDON — Many in Westminster think it will take a miracle to
save Theresa May’s Brexit deal — but this U.K. prime minister is still a
believer.
As frustrated MPs were told they will not get the chance to
vote on the deal until after Christmas, May insisted she would carry on with a
negotiation with the EU that few believe will deliver results and which, as far
as the other side is concerned, is not even taking place.
Opposition parties and many of her own MPs expressed
disbelief that with barely 100 days left of the U.K.’s EU membership, and with
no clear majority for her deal, May would not get the apparently doomed vote
out of the way. They want the Brexit limbo to end so that MPs on all sides can
start debating the alternatives.
In response, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn submitted a motion
of no confidence in the prime minister — a largely symbolic move which, as
currently worded, does not have the legal force to topple the government, but
is the latest sign of the pressure on May from all sides.
Even former Cabinet minister Nicky Morgan, a pro-EU
Conservative who nevertheless is one of the minority indicating they will vote
for May’s deal, questioned the wisdom of withholding the vote until the week of
January 14.
May said she would continue to push for further
"assurances" from the EU on the most controversial element of her
deal.
“I honestly do not think our businesses, our employers and
our constituents will understand why this house is going on holiday for two
weeks when we should be having the meaningful vote this week,” she said in a
debate following May's statement to MPs on last week's European Council summit.
A spokesperson for the European Commission confirmed on
Monday that "no further meetings are foreseen" with U.K. officials
following the statement agreed by EU leaders last week.
And yet, the prime minister persisted.
Determinedly or stubbornly, depending on your point of view,
May said she would continue to push for further "assurances" from the
EU on the most controversial element of her deal — the backstop insurance
policy for avoiding a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of
Ireland.
Nigel Dodds, Westminster leader of the Northern Irish
Democratic Unionist Party, which props up May’s government and is fiercely
opposed to the backstop, spoke for many when he queried what “exactly and
precisely … she is asking for” from the EU. He got a vague answer.
No-deal escalation
May’s plan to continue talking for another month drew
accusations from MPs that she was seeking to “run down the clock,” and
“intimidate” MPs into voting at the eleventh hour for either her deal or risk
leaving the EU with no deal.
The U.K. is legally committed to leaving on March 29, 2019,
and May has insisted that this would be the default setting if MPs reject her
deal.
Her Cabinet will meet on Tuesday to discuss what she called
“the next phase” of contingency planning for such an outcome, and Chancellor
Philip Hammond is expected to imminently announce where £2 billion of
government spending on Brexit preparations will be spent.
The prime minister admitted that a no-deal scenario would
lead to “disruption” at ports in the short term and would “risk the jobs,
services and security” of British people.
But she repeated that the choice facing MPs was her deal, no
deal, or reversing Brexit altogether — and reaffirmed her opposition to the
latter, which would require a second referendum on the U.K.’s EU membership.
The problem for May is that this is one of the things that
the EU, in solidarity with Ireland, will never give.
She warned former Remainers pushing for a so-called People’s
Vote to be careful what they wished for and not to “underestimate the character
of the British people,” who, she predicted, would probably “vote in greater
numbers” for Leave at a second time of asking.
There were some glimmers of optimism for the prime minister.
Conservative Brexiteers, who last week attempted to oust her
through an internal party vote of no confidence, were muted in their
criticisms. May has spent nearly 20 hours at the despatch box of the House of
Commons since the deal was struck with Brussels in November, and this was the
quietest they have been in all that time.
Jacob Rees-Mogg, chair of the Euroskeptic European Research
Group of backbenchers, who last week called for May to resign even after she
won the confidence vote, this week pledged his personal confidence and offered
her some moral support in her vehement opposition to a second referendum.
Veteran Brexiteer Edward Leigh went further, offering what
he called an “unfashionably supportive view of the prime minister.”
He pledged that some of his allies, thus far opposed to her
deal, might be “persuaded” if she can secure “legally-binding” commitments that
the U.K. could unilaterally withdraw from the backstop arrangement — which if
triggered would bind the country to the EU’s customs rules and create new
economic barriers between Northern Ireland and the rest of the U.K.
The problem for May is that this is one of the things that
the EU, in solidarity with Ireland, will never give.
Which leaves her waiting on that Christmas miracle.
Sherlock Holmes and the Brexit mystery
Finding a solution is far from elementary — but one outcome
looks increasingly likely.
By PAUL
TAYLOR 12/18/18, 4:01 AM CET Updated
12/18/18, 6:00 AM CET
PARIS — How would Sherlock Holmes have solved the Brexit
mystery?
“When you have eliminated the impossible,” Britain’s most
loved fictional detective famously said, “whatever remains, however improbable,
must be the truth.”
After another week of melodrama in London and Brussels, the
array of plausible outcomes to the longest-running soap opera in European
politics may be narrowing, but probably not sufficiently yet to allow for a
definitive Holmesian deduction.
Pleading for parliamentary support, Prime Minister Theresa
May boiled the conundrum over the U.K.’s future relationship with the European
Union down to just three options: “my deal, no deal, or no Brexit at all.”
Actually, there are more alternatives that cannot be ruled
out. But if May were right, the prospect of either of the first two solutions
coming to pass looks increasingly unlikely.
You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to deduce that with
barely more than 100 days left, a reversal of Brexit before the deadline is all
but impossible.
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair invoked Holmes’ method at
the weekend to argue for a second referendum on staying in the EU after all.
“It's the old Sherlock Holmes thing: When you exclude the
impossible whatever remains, however improbable, is the answer and I don't
think it's possible to get any of these other options through parliament,"
he told Sky News.
May’s chances of parliament approving the Withdrawal
Agreement she negotiated last month seem close to nil after she postponed the
vote last week and rushed to Brussels to request further legal assurances on
the temporary nature of fallback provisions concerning Northern Ireland. She
was sent home with a statement of reassurance but a blunt refusal by EU leaders
to reopen the treaty negotiations or to set a binding time limit for clinching
a future trade deal with the U.K.
May said she would keep working to secure extra guarantees
but few officials in London, Brussels or European capitals believe she can get
something that will placate enough of the 117 rebels in her Conservative party
who cast a no-confidence vote in her leadership last week, and who deeply
distrust the EU. Without most of those votes, she cannot win ratification of
the accord, since the opposition Labour party is committed to rejecting the
deal.
May pretends to believe she can still get her deal over the
line. The EU27 pretended to believe her, but put the ball back in her court.
Over Niagara Falls
London and the other 27 EU capitals say they are determined
to avoid a no-deal Brexit on March 29 when Britain’s two-year notice to leave
expires, even though all sides are stepping up precautionary preparations. A
clear majority in the House of Commons also opposes no deal, fearing economic
disaster for the U.K. Lawmakers have asserted the right to give the government
instructions to avoid such an outcome if no agreement is forthcoming by January
21.
So if May’s deal seems impossible, no alternative deal is on
offer, and almost no one wants to go over Niagara Falls in a barrel just to see
what happens, that should logically leave no Brexit as the remaining solution,
however improbable. But it’s not quite so elementary, my dear Watson.
For starters, Brexit is what 51.9 percent of the electorate
voted for in June 2016. Any attempt to go back on that decision would be
branded a Great Betrayal by the elites of the will of the people. Public
opinion is still split, although polls suggest Remain now has a small advantage
over Leave. But surveys showed a comfortable pro-EU majority before the
referendum. That’s not how it turned out.
Both May and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn are against a
second referendum. May wants to enter the history books as the prime minister
who delivered a smooth Brexit. Corbyn cares only about getting into power,
holding his party together and avoiding blame over Brexit.
Behind their backs, or possibly with their knowledge, May’s
right-hand men and Labour MPs have reportedly held exploratory talks about a
possible “people’s vote” — the euphemism for a second referendum.
There are daunting hurdles to such a vote, not least around
the framing of a question or options, and the voting system.
EU leaders are rightly wary of potential British attempts to
spin out the process and use salami tactics to extort more concessions on the
Irish backstop
Several steps may have to come first to save political face
on both sides — a parliamentary defeat of the Withdrawal Agreement, then
perhaps an unsuccessful opposition no-confidence motion, and most likely a run
on sterling and a stock market meltdown.
We’re not there yet. Having defeated a Conservative revolt
against her leadership, May may well cling to hope that with more defiant
grandstanding in Brussels after Christmas and a final warning to mutinous
backbenchers that the only choice is between her deal and no Brexit, she can
still get the Withdrawal Agreement approved in mid-January.
If she fails, or gives up, a no-deal Brexit remains the
default setting unless the U.K. rescinds its notice to withdraw under Article
50 of the EU treaty, which the European Court of Justice ruled last week London
could do unilaterally, staying in the bloc on its existing terms.
Or unless someone stops the clock.
Race against time
You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to deduce that with
barely more than 100 days left, a reversal of Brexit before the deadline is all
but impossible. Parliament will not dare overturn the stated will of the
electorate without consulting voters again, and there isn’t time to hold
another referendum before March 29. So the government would have no
constitutional basis to renounce Article 50.
It looks increasingly as if the only course left once all
impossible avenues are eliminated is to hit the pause button.
May cannot extend the notice period unilaterally. The EU27
would have to agree unanimously to a British request for extra time. And they
would need some convincing reason.
Since EU leaders have ruled out any reopening of
negotiations on the withdrawal treaty, the only plausible grounds for granting
an extension would be to enable the U.K. to hold a second referendum or a
general election that might provide a basis for staying in the EU.
EU leaders are rightly wary of potential British attempts to
spin out the process and use salami tactics to extort more concessions on the
Irish backstop. Some in Brussels fear the precedent of a country using a
withdrawal threat and brinkmanship to secure preferential membership terms, as
the U.K. has repeatedly done since its first renegotiation in 1974 — just a
year after it joined.
There is also the inconvenient timing of May's European
Parliament election, in which 27 of the 73 British seats have been reallocated
to other countries and the rest put in reserve for future enlargements. If the
U.K. has not left by the time of the vote, that could create legal
complications.
But many European officials say the strategic prize of
having the first member state ever to vote to leave come crawling back, begging
to stay after having peered into the abyss, would outweigh all drawbacks.
None of the seemingly impossible alternatives is yet
sufficiently dead to permit a definitive Holmesian deduction. The crime scene
is littered with twitching corpses.
But it looks increasingly as if Brexit is heading for extra
time.
Paul Taylor, contributing editor at POLITICO, writes the
Europe At Large column.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário