Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Brexit architect refuses money accrued while serving as an MEP for 20 years

Nigel Farage “will not take a penny” of the £153,000 windfall he could claim for his 20-year stint as a member of the European parliament, his spokesman has said, as the UK’s 73 MEPs are set to be told on Monday night about any cash payouts they are due.

Farage could leave the EU on 31 January with a pre-tax golden goodbye worth €178,657 (£152,992) under a European parliament “transition allowance” for ex-MEPs, a calculation based on his 20 complete years since 1999.

Asked about the transition allowance, a spokesman for Farage said: “He won’t take a penny.”

In 2017, Farage told Sky News he would “probably” take the money, but did not expect the parliament to give it to him.

The UK’s 73 MEPs were due to be informed about their exit arrangements at a special meeting at the European parliament in Strasbourg on Monday night. It is the third such briefing, reflecting the shifting Brexit date, from 29 March 2019, to 31 October and now 31 January 2020.

Most of Farage’s Brexit party MEPs, such as Annunziata Rees-Mogg and Richard Tice, will quit the EU stage without any prospect of an EU golden goodbye, as they have been MEPs for less than a year and so are not entitled to the allowance.

Former MEPs are entitled to one month of salary, for every year they have been an MEP, for a maximum of 20 months. But as many British MEPs were newly elected in May 2019, they have not served long enough.

MEPs are not entitled to the funds if they are elected to another parliament or take public sector work. Parliament sources said there was nothing to stop MEPs from claiming the transition allowance while taking a job with the private or charity sector.

Farage, a former City of London metals trader, joined the European parliament in 1999, when leaving the EU was an eccentric project for the little-known Ukip. In one of his first speeches, attacking the EU for its ban on British beef, Farage urged the UK government to “leave this club and get into the real trading world”. After two decades as an MEP, his rhetoric has become Conservative party orthodoxy.

Farage became one of the European parliament’s highest earning MEPs for second jobs, although he has been overtaken by new Brexit party MEPs such as property fund manager Ben Habib and former Tory minister turned reality TV star Ann Widdecombe. In 2019 Farage earned €360,000 (£319,000) a year from his Thorn in the Side media company, making him the seventh best paid out of 227 MEPs with second jobs.

At the meeting scheduled for Monday night, MEPs were to be told that they have to clear out of their Brussels office by 7 February, although they have to vacate their Strasbourg bureau by Thursday, the last day of their final meeting in the French city.

The departing British MEPs will have to return access passes, special EU “laissez-passer” cards, voting cards, office keys, iPads and laptops, as well as passes allowing free travel on the Belgian railway network SNCB.

Many British MEPs may feel they don’t need to attend the briefing, as similar gatherings were arranged before earlier Brexit days of 31 October and 29 March. But the Liberal Democrats and Brexit party succeeded in getting large numbers of first-time MEPs elected.

On leaving the parliament, MEPs can apply to join the Former Members Association, which has the aim of “harness[ing] the experience of former members with a view to strengthening parliamentary democracy”, according to an internal document. The MEPs are also to be informed about arrangements for their staff: Brussels-based staff are to quit by 31 January, while staff based in the UK could stay on longer.

Parliament officials confirmed on Wednesday that MEPs would vote on the Brexit withdrawal agreement on Wednesday 29 January. The result was seen as a foregone conclusion paving the way for Britain’s exit on 31 January.

Officials are still weighing how to mark Brexit day, but nothing has been fixed. “It’s nothing to celebrate,” said one EU source.

Juste un autre débile... C'est à se demander où ils les trouvent. Y'a une usine à cons quelque part au Texas?

Officials feared ‘reputational impact’ of error in which details of crimes by foreigners were not passed on

The UK has failed to pass on the details of 75,000 convictions of foreign criminals to their home EU countries and concealed the scandal for fear of damaging Britain’s reputation in Europe’s capitals, the Guardian can reveal.

The police national computer error went undetected for five years, meaning that one in three alerts on offenders – potentially including murderers and rapists – were not sent to EU member states.

Authorities in EU countries were not informed of the crimes committed, the sentences given to their nationals by UK courts or the risk the convicted criminals posed to the public.

Because the details were not passed on, dangerous offenders could have travelled back to their home countries without the normal notification to local authorities of their presence.

Such is the scale of the scandal that the Home Office initially chose to conceal the embarrassing failure from EU partners.

Minutes of an ACRO criminal records meeting last May state: “There is a nervousness from Home Office around sending the historical notifications out dating back to 2012 due to the reputational impact this could have.”

A minute of a meeting held the following month said: “There is still uncertainty whether historical DAFs [daily activity file], received from the Home Office, are going to be sent out to counties (sic) as there is a reputational risk to the UK.”

Asked if the Home Office had resolved the problem in the seven months since the second meeting, a spokesman said: “Work is already underway with the police to resolve this issue as quickly as possible.”

The revelation comes ahead of crucial negotiations with the EU over the future security relationship with the UK, with Britain’s reputation as a trustworthy partner already under serious question.

This month, the European parliament’s justice and home affairs committee was given evidence of “deliberate violations and abuse” by the UK of the Schengen Information System, an EU database used by police and border guards across the border-free Schengen zone.

The British authorities had made “unlawful” full or partial copies of the database that were said by an EU report to pose “serious and immediate risks to the integrity and security of SIS data”.

In an earlier blow to Britain’s reputation, Belgian prosecutors concluded in 2018 that British spies working for GCHQ are likely to have hacked into Belgium’s biggest telecommunications operator for at least a two-year period on the instruction of UK ministers.

During the negotiation with the EU over the post-Brexit relationship, the government will seek to convince Brussels that there should be continued data exchange with British authorities, operational cooperation between law enforcement authorities and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.

The UK will no longer be a member of Europol and its police and security services will lose access to key EU databases at the end of the transition period in December 2020.

Sophie in ’t Veld, a Dutch MEP on the European parliament’s committee on civil liberties, justice and home affairs, told the Guardian there was a wealth of evidence that the UK could not be trusted.

“This is yet another scandal that casts a very dark shadow over security and law enforcement cooperation,” she said.

“After the revelations of deliberate abuse of the Schengen Information System, and earlier scandals like the hack of [the Belgian telecoms provider] Proximus by GCHQ, it is clear that the principle of ‘mutual trust’ will not work.

“This revelation of the failure to alert authorities on criminals and the cover up afterwards casts serious doubts on the UK as a reliable partner.

“The purpose of information exchange is enhancing security. If one side fails to deliver, security gains are zero and cooperation pointless. The UK government has to consider very carefully how it intends to restore trust, bearing in mind negotiations have to be concluded by autumn of this year.”

Officials believe the failure to alert EU partners is down to the police national computer, a database containing information on millions of convicted criminals and their jail records.

It generates daily activity files of the latest updates, and any relating to foreign offenders are meant to be forwarded to the European Criminal Records Information Exchange System (ECRIS) by a body known as ACRO Criminal Records Office, responsible for international police data sharing.

ACRO’s annual report showed there were 35,881 “notifications out” sent about foreign nationals convicted in the UK during 2018-19, of which 31,022 were handed to EU states. Back in 2015-16, the notifications out figure was far higher at 46,210.

Last year, ACRO realised that a large number of the alerts that should have been given to foreign countries had been missed, many of which covered convictions of criminals who had dual nationality.

ACRO’s strategic management board was briefed last May about the “ongoing issue dating back to 2015 regarding notifications out for foreign nationals and that the current DAF reports are missing about 30% of foreign nationals”.

The board was warned that an estimated 75,000 checks had not been done over the years.

A spokesman for ACRO said: “ACRO relies on the daily activity files from the police national computer to send notification messages to other countries in relation to cases where one of their nationals has been convicted in the UK.

“The issue arose when it was noticed that not all relevant DAFs were sent to ACRO, for example in cases where the subject had dual nationality.

“As a result, a software script has been developed at Hendon, the PNC headquarters, and is due to be released in the next software update schedule (the date of which is yet to be confirmed).

“We can only provide an estimation of the numbers, though we believe it’s now more than 75,000.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “Work is already under way with the police to resolve this issue as quickly as possible. Last year, the UK sent over 30,000 conviction notifications through ECRIS to EU member states and received over 16,000 from the EU, helping ensure serious criminals were brought to justice.”

What he said: a trade deal before 31 December was “epically likely”, the prime minister said when pushed during the interview. Yet he added that it was only common sense to budget for a “complete failure”. This is a significant step away from his typical “do or die” style language when talking about the the EU and he may be laying the groundwork for diminished expectations.

What he didn’t say: with 100% certainty whether Britain will get a trade deal with the EU by the end of December 2020.

European parliament says mixed messages have caused ‘unhelpful uncertainty’

The European parliament has said EU citizens living in the UK after it leaves the bloc risk discrimination in jobs and housing, because the government will not issue physical documents under the settled-status scheme.

In a resolution backed by a resounding majority of MEPs in Strasbourg, the parliament said the British government’s “conflicting announcements” about special status had caused “unhelpful uncertainty and anxiety” for EU nationals who had made the UK their home.

EU fears have mounted since the Home Office minister Brandon Lewis told a German newspaper last October that EU nationals risk being deported if they fail to apply for special status, the scheme to secure their rights as UK residents, by the end of 2020.

MEPs are especially worried about the design of settled status, an e-registration system, which does not provide EU27 nationals with papers or ID cards. The absence of documents, the resolution said, increased the risk of discrimination against EU27 nationals by prospective employers or landlords “who may want to avoid the extra administrative burden of online verification or erroneously fear they might place themselves in an unlawful situation”.

One parliament source said the absence of physical documents, “spells complete Windrush trouble for citizens’ rights”, a reference to the scandal that saw Commonwealth-born citizens denied work, healthcare, benefits and even deported to countries they hardly knew, despite decades as tax-paying legal residents of the UK.

The EU is also concerned about a decision by Boris Johnson’s government to change the design of the independent monitoring authority, which is being created under the withdrawal agreement to safeguard the rights of EU citizens.

The parliament said the government needed to ensure that the authority would be “truly independent” and up and running on the first day after the UK leaves the transition period.

The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, told MEPs on Tuesday that the European commission would be “particularly alert” to difficulties obtaining the new resident status. “I have and will continue to insist in particular on the importance of the UK putting into place a strong independent monitoring authority,” he said. “An authority that must be able to act rapidly and fairly when faced with complaints of [European]Union citizens and their families.”

The resolution was passed with 610 votes, including those of British Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green MEPs. Only 29 MEPs voted against, mostly members of Nigel Farage’s Brexit party. A further 68 MEPs abstained, including British Conservative MEPs.

The government, which has launched a multi-million pound advertising blitz intended to show the ease of securing settled status, had received nearly 2.6m applications by the end of November. More than 2.3m of those cases had been concluded, with 59% granted settled status and 41% granted pre-settled status, a category that applies to EU nationals who have lived in the UK for under five years.

Pre-settled status gives people the same rights to live and work in the UK, but means they must reapply for settled status and maintain continuous residence. Only five applicants were turned down for any form of status.

UK government sources argue the scheme has been unfairly criticised: they have highlighted the contrast between the cost-free UK process, with the three-figure charges facing UK nationals trying to secure their rights in some EU member states.

The withdrawal agreement does not require the UK government to give papers or ID cards to EU27 nationals and government sources say discrimination by employers or landlords would be illegal.

The European parliament also pledged to monitor the situation for 1.2 million British residents in the EU. Many face a slew of bureaucratic hurdles, such as minimum income requirements for self-employed people, costs and charges of getting documents, as well as uncertainty about their status, because of delays after applications.

Barnier said the commission would do its “utmost to ensure that the rights of 1 million British citizens living in the 27 member states are guaranteed: that each and everyone of them is properly informed and supported”.

The MEPs have also urged EU leaders to explore “how to mitigate” UK citizens’ loss of EU citizenship rights. Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament’s Brexit point-man, has previously urged a special EU citizenship scheme for British nationals, but the idea has been dismissed by decision-makers as a political and constitutional non-starter.

A Scottish National party MEP, French-born Christian Allard, who has lived in Scotland for more than 35 years, said the government should scrap the application process, so EU citizens’ rights were automatically protected. He said: “Myself and countless others are being required to apply for settled status in order to live in the country we have chosen to call home.”

M20 barriers removed as Operation Brock system is taken apart before 31 January

The £30m no-deal Brexit traffic management system operating on the main roads to Dover is being fully dismantled before the UK’s exit from the EU on 31 January.

The steel barriers in place to allow for a contraflow system on the M20 to mitigate against lorry gridlock on the way to the port are being removed after 11 months.

The operation to remove the barriers, close gaps in the central reservation system for emergency access, and repaint the roads will take two weeks of overnight work. The roads would be back to normal on 1 February, the day after Brexit, Highways England said.

This is the third time the anti-congestion system, known as Operation Brock, has been deactivated but the first time all the barriers are to be removed. They were first put in place for the original Brexit day, 29 March last year. Operation Brock also included a 30mph speed limit for trucks.

The contraflow part of the system and a 50mph speed limit for cars was deactivated in April following the first extension to article 50 but were put in place again on 25 October before another potential no-deal crash out on 31 October. Boris Johnson had declared he would rather die in a ditch than ask the EU for another extension.

They were deactivated again on 29 October when the EU agreed to a further extension until 31 January, but the barriers remained in place to allow Operation Brock to be quickly reactivated if necessary.

Following parliament’s decision to approve the withdrawal agreement, Highways England decided it was safe to remove the barriers too.

The barrier was in place on a 15-mile section of the M20 between Maidstone and Ashford since March 2019.

About 1,500 metres of barrier have been removed every night since Monday.

The operation will continue until 28 January when the last restrictions will be removed before the road is back to normal on 1 February.

Bill requires regular monitoring of supplies and shift from CAP-style subsidies but no gate on lower quality imports

The UK’s food security is to be regularly assessed by parliament to ensure minimal disruption to supplies after the country leaves the EU and while new trade deals are sought.

The commitment will be part of the biggest shakeup of British agriculture in 40 years and requires a regular report to MPs outlining supply sources and household expenditure on food, as well as consumer confidence in food safety.

The move reflects concerns over potential disruptions post-Brexit, as more than a quarter of Britain’s food comes from the EU and nearly a fifth from other countries.

The revision is one of a handful to the agriculture bill, introduced to parliament on Thursday more than a year after the previous government was forced to abandon the legislation amid Brexit turmoil.

Other changes include a stronger emphasis on the soil, at risk from overuse, erosion and nutrient loss; farmers are to receive help maintaining healthy soils, as well as with improvements to the tracing of livestock movements between farms. There will be powers to regulate fertiliser use and organic farming after Brexit.

Missing from the bill is a binding commitment to prevent trade deals allowing the import of food produced to lower standards than those to which British farmers must adhere. This has been a key demand of farmers concerned that after Brexit they will be undercut by cheap imports from the US and Asia, with lower food safety and animal welfare regulations.

Theresa Villiers, secretary of state for the environment, food and rural affairs, called the revised bill “one of the most important environmental reforms for many years” and said it would protect nature and biodiversity and help meet goals on the climate crisis.

“[This] will transform British farming, enabling a balance between food production and the environment which will safeguard our countryside and farming communities for the future,” she said. “We will move away from the EU’s bureaucratic common agricultural policy and towards a fairer system which rewards our hard-working farmers for delivering public goods, celebrating their world-leading environmental work and innovative, modern, approach to food production.”

At the heart of the bill is a shift away from the EU system, where farmers receive subsidies based on the amount of land they farm, to a process whereby farmers are paid for the public goods provided, including clean water, clean air, healthy soils and habitats for wildlife.

There will be a seven-year transition period for farmers to move from the current regulations under CAP, the EU’s common agricultural policy, to a system of environmental land management contracts. Under these contracts, individual farmers will agree with the government a tailor-made set of goals with details on the measures they will take to manage their land and protect the environment.

For the duration of the current parliament, subsidies at the same rate as the EU – about £3bn a year – will be paid to farmers from taxpayer funds, but some of the richest farmers who benefit most from the system can expect to lose out when the new contracts are phased in.

Farming leaders were disappointed at the lack of a legal commitment to ensure trade deals did not allow entry to cheap, low quality, imports.
[...]
Organic farmers were also concerned, saying the bill did not go far enough in supporting farmers to tackle climate and ecological emergencies.
... ... ...

The European commission has confirmed that it will not be ready to open talks with the UK on a future trade deal until the end of February at the earliest. The commission’s chief spokesman, Eric Mamer, told journalists this morning:
The commission can adopt its proposal for the negotiation directives only once the UK has actually withdrawn from the EU.

But then there is still an institutional process for these to be adopted by the [European] council.

This we know will take some time, which is why we have said we will start negotiations as quickly as we can, but it will certainly not be before the end of February, beginning of March.

This is not a slowing down or speeding up of the process. This is simply the nature of the institutional process and the consultations that need to take place before the negotiation directives can be formally adopted.

Boris Johnson has ruled out extending the post-Brexit transition period, and this timetable means that the UK and the EU will have just 10 months in practice to agree and ratify an agreement on their future partnership.

Downing Street wants the talks to start soon, and has not ruled out opening talks with Washington on a UK-US deal before talks with Brussels get going.

A Brexit Party MEP has prompted derision after complaining that Britain will have no representation at EU level after it leaves.

June Mummery, one of the party's 29 representatives elected to the European Parliament last year, suggested the loss of MEPs would make it hard to hold Brussels to account.

"The big question now is, who will be here to hold these people to account while they still control Britain’s waters, but the UK has no representation?" she tweeted.

Britain will lose its MEPs, EU commissioner, and seats on the EU council after Brexit – leaving it with no control over the bloc's polices or political direction.

However, because of the EU's dominant position in international trade, its policies are expected to have a significant impact on the UK even after Brexit.

The UK will also be directly bound to EU rules during the transition period until 2021, while Brussels has said any trade agreement will likely require some level of permanent alignment on Britain's part.

Ms Mummery's comments prompted an immediate reaction from across the political spectrum.

"If only somebody hadn’t lied and said there was no accountability, maybe people would have voted differently," said SNP MP Peter Grant.

Dr Charles Tannock, a former Conservative MEP from the party's pro-EU wing, joked: "Surely our British fish under UK sovereign control swimming in UK exclusive economic zone will respect true Brexit and stay out of EU common fisheries policy waters so all will be well?"

Lib Dem MEP Jane Brophy said: "It took a long time but finally a Brexit MEP realised what Brexit means. I fear for our country and all the people that are in for a big shock."