Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

France’s president may threaten ‘le Brexit dur’ to rid Europe of a troublesome UK – but he also wants to avoid another domestic backlash

Brexit has been blocked by the most head-banging of Brexiteers. Leavers are now hoping for a sweet paradox of their own. They are looking to President Emmanuel Macron, a remainer super-hero, to boot Britain out of the European Union next week.

Recent remarks made by the French president suggested that he might summon the spirit of Charles de Gaulle (vintage 1963 and 1967) and veto – come what May – extended British membership of the EU at the Brussels summit on 10 April.

Will he? Before a meeting with Irish taoiseach Leo Varadkar, on the steps of the Élysée Palace on Tuesday, Macron blew hot and cold. “Should the United Kingdom be unable … to propose a solution backed by a majority, they will de facto have chosen themselves to leave without a deal,” he said. “We cannot avoid failure for them.”

Le Brexit dur, then? No, not really. Macron went on to say that “credible justifications” for an article 50 extension did exist. They might include an election, another referendum or softer proposals for Britain’s future relationship with the EU. He and other EU leaders would be “open” to clear ideas if Theresa May would only put them forward at the emergency summit in Brussels next Wednesday.

Has Macron changed his mind? More likely he has changed his public tone, under pressure from Berlin and Dublin. It was never likely that the French president would defy the other 26 capitals and block an article 50 extension on his own. He remains, nonetheless, the leader of the impatient camp within the EU27.

May’s new plan – to seek a short delay until 22 May to push through a hybrid Labour-Tory Brexit – both simplifies and complicates life for Macron and the others. If she has a deal by 10 April, the short extension to 22 May will be signed off easily. If there is no internal UK deal, there will be huge reluctance to declare a no-deal Brexit, but also huge reluctance to extend the Brexit psychodrama.

In resolving this conundrum, Macron will play a pivotal role. He, like many other leaders, is opposed to giving May a blank cheque to find a solution in the next seven weeks. That may lead to Britain crashing out of the EU on the day before the European elections.

Other leaders could offer a longer delay, in return for a British commitment to organise European elections, and refrain from messing up EU decisions on a new commission president and a new five-year budget plan. Macron is viscerally doubtful about any such rollover – even though he has reasons of his own to fear a hard Brexit.
... ... ...

When you think of it, the current efforts to build a consensus over Brexit options among politicoes should have happened 2 years ago, before negotiating with the rest of the EU. But instead, it was party politics as usual. Their political system needs to raise to the challenge. Less gesticulation, more articulation.

The Brits don't need more grandiose, tragic xenophobia. It's exactly the kind of sentiment that led them to the edge of the cliff. Give them Adam Smith, not Shakespeare.

One could also add that things would likely have been better now had there been a consensus and referendum when the UK entered the EU (or the EEC as it was at the time).

The UK is in the midst of a Brexit crisis led by a government dictated by incompetence.

Given everything we now know - and the detrimental impact Brexit will have on the UK’s economy, job opportunities and people’s livelihoods, the priority must be bringing the issue back to the people in a people’s vote – with the option to remain on the ballot paper.

We are in agreement that there is no such thing as a good Brexit and that people across the UK face being worse off.

We have shown over the past three years we are willing to find a compromise position to end the impasse.

Time is fast running out and any compromise that is reached must be brought back to the people through a fresh referendum, and keep the option to revoke article 50 on the table to avoid a no-deal Brexit.

I still don't understand all the rather vitriolic political arguments in Britain over the virtues (or lack thereof) of various Brexit deals (over which they have only partial control) and the apparent (as far as I can see) absence of any action on the leave/remain question. It seems to be a strange combination.

I think this is simply because most UK politicians agree that the referendum is binding.

Liam Fox’s international trade department has faced further criticism for its lack of Brexit readiness after it emerged that the creation of the watchdog tasked with protecting UK companies from unfair global trading practices was behind schedule.

The government said on Wednesday that the Trade Remedies Authority (TRA) would not be established in time for a no-deal Brexit.

The organisation exists in shadow form only, as a part of the Department for International Trade, and is without a chairman after the person designated unexpectedly quit last week for personal reasons.

Answering the questions from the Commons trade committee on its plans to cope with a no-deal Brexit, George Hollingbery, a trade minister, said there was a team of staff ready to protect British companies’ interests, even in a no-deal scenario.

“They are up, they are running. The part of the department is fulfilling the job that the TRA would fulfil.”

However, he said: “We would much rather that this was the arms-length body we would wish to see in place.”
... ... ...