BREXIT CANCELLED

'Last night prominent Brexiteers piled pressure on Mrs May, telling her to prepare for a “no deal” if the EU does not open trade talks by December. The eight signatories, including former Cabinet minister Owen Paterson and ex-Brexit minister David Jones, raised fears over whether the UK would accept EU rules in a transition.

         The letter calls for Mrs May to revert to World Trade Organisation rules if the EU will not negotiate a trade deal quickly. The move reflects concern among Tory hardliners over the approach laid out in her speech – including an “implementation period”, effectively keeping the UK in the EU for two years after 2019, and insisting Britain would pay the Brexit bill.

         EU diplomats said they expect Mrs May to make more concessions after the Tory Party conference, believing her hands are currently tied by fears of a Brexiteer revolt. They added: “May's Florence speech was actually full of concessions … that's why we have this change of mood.'

– from an article in Saturday's Daily Mail

There are now stories that the EU might be prepared to begin discussions on a future trading relationship by Christmas.

The problem with the contents of the above quote is that it misrepresents the surrender that May issued in her Florence speech. What May effectively did, was to cancel Brexit – a Brexit as nearly all Leave voters would understand it. The so-called Tory hardliners should be in full revolt.

The Florence speech was clear about what the government was doing, and May was correct in saying that it represented the implementation of what she has been saying for some time. Key to understanding the May Government's approach, is to recognise that they are not even trying to leave the EU:

'We want to work hand in hand with the European Union, rather than as part of the European Union. That is why in my speech at Lancaster House I said that the United Kingdom would seek to secure a new, deep and special partnership with the European Union.'

It is this pursuit of a 'deep and special partnership' that is government policy – not leaving the EU. Indeed, the government in practice is committed to staying in the EU until this new partnership can be negotiated:

'If we adopt this vision of a deep and special partnership, the question is then how we get there: how we build a bridge from where we are now to where we want to be.'

The speech set out what May understands as Brexit:

'The United Kingdom will cease to be a member of the European Union on 29th March 2019. We will no longer sit at the European Council table or in the Council of Ministers, and we will no longer have Members of the European Parliament.'

However (italics the English Rights Campaign's own emphasis):

'As I said in my speech at Lancaster House a period of implementation would be in our mutual interest. That is why I am proposing that there should be such a period after the UK leaves the EU … during the implementation period access to one another’s markets should continue on current terms.'

It has been reported that May has set a two-year limit on her proposed implementation period (there are reports that Boris Johnson has claimed privately that it was only at his insistence that the period had not been set at five years). That is untrue (italics the English Rights Campaign's own emphasis):

'The framework for this strictly time-limited period, which can be agreed under Article 50, would be the existing structure of EU rules and regulations. How long the period is should be determined simply by how long it will take to prepare and implement the new processes and new systems that will underpin that future partnership.

         For example, it will take time to put in place the new immigration system required to re-take control of the UK’s borders. So during the implementation period, people will continue to be able to come and live and work in the UK; but there will be a registration system – an essential preparation for the new regime.

         As of today, these considerations point to an implementation period of around two years.'

It should noted that during the implementation period, Britain would remain under full EU rule. Furthermore, payments to the EU would continue:

'I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave. The UK will honour commitments we have made during the period of our membership.

         And as we move forwards, we will also want to continue working together in ways that promote the long-term economic development of our continent. This includes continuing to take part in those specific policies and programmes which are greatly to the UK and the EU’s joint advantage, such as those that promote science, education and culture – and those that promote our mutual security.

         And as I set out in my speech at Lancaster House, in doing so, we would want to make an ongoing contribution to cover our fair share of the costs involved.'

In fact Britain has made no 'commitments' to fund the EU and their demands for a divorce bill have no legal force. Britain is not legally obliged to make any such payments.

May further committed to a similar regulatory regime post-Brexit: 'When we differ from the EU in our regulatory choices, it won’t be to try and attain an unfair competitive advantage, it will be because we want rules that are right for Britain’s particular situation.' May ended her speech once again emphasising her policy of establishing a new partnership with the EU: 'A partnership of interests, a partnership of values; a partnership of ambition for a shared future: the UK and the EU side by side delivering prosperity and opportunity for all our people.'

The EU diplomats were understating things when they said that the Florence speech was 'full of concessions' and one dreads to think what other concessions they are expecting once the Tory conference is over. The speech is a total surrender.

May has defined Brexit as being no more than abolishing the MEPs and ceasing to have representation at the Council of Ministers. She stated, in very plain language, that unlimited mass immigration will continue, the payments to the EU will continue, and Britain will remain under EU rule and European Court of Justice control. There will be no restoration of sovereignty, nor any border controls, nor will Britain stop giving the EU money.

This is not a genuine Brexit. British democracy has been abandoned. The referendum vote has been ignored. Brexit has been cancelled.