“Ce is not a dream, a vision. [...] It is a reality.” It was the 18 April 1988. There is an eternity. Under the rha of Lancaster House, a palace placed at the edge of Green Park, in London, Margaret Thatcher extolled the virtues of the single market. Under the same ors, and in the eyes of the european ambassadors, Theresa May, has brutally put an end Tuesday to this reality. The output of the single market, exit of the customs union, the release of the european Court of justice… The First british minister has chosen the hard line of the fiercest of the “brexiters”. In this context, immigration control takes precedence over the rest, including the economic prosperity of the country : “We get control of immigra tion from the EU”, she repeated.
“Trucks”. Nigel Farage kept wriggling. After being touted to have the ear of Donald Trump, this is the ex-leader of the europhobe Ukip all ébaubi to see that May has taken to his account all his requests. “I can hardly believe it !” has-t-he jubilee.
The United Kingdom is special, has explained, in substance, Theresa May, and, as such, it deserves a special status, made-to-measure, in its future relations with the EU. No question of a “partial participation in the EU, a status of associate member [...] half in or half out”. There is no question of“to adopt an already existing model for other countries”. Exit the models to the Norwegian or switzerland.
If May wants to get out of the single market and put an end to any financial contribution to the european budget, the final agreement could “to take into account a few elements of the single market in some sectors, such as export cars and trucks for example, or the freedom to provide financial services across national borders”. The United Kingdom could continue to “participation in certain european programmes and specific – and it will be up to us to decide – and in this case, an appropriate contribution would be reasonable”.
The First minister failed to secure the status of european citizens already present in the Uk – they would be at least 3 million – while claiming to want to resolve the matter as quickly as possible, in parallel with the status of the British installed in the EU. Far from being “remove from world”, released european channels, the Uk will be able to become “global “, signing free trade agreements with the world, said May. Before rengorger of the latest about Donald Trump in favor of a trade agreement fast with the United States. The EU welcomes 44 % of british exports, and the United States 16 %. Side imports, 53 % come from the EU and 8 % in the United States. These details have apparently not weighed in the equation.
Blackmail. The First minister has announced that it will submit to the vote of Parliament the final agreement from the EU, that it wishes to see successful at the end of the two years following the onset of the article 50 of the european treaty, expected at the end of march. Then, it calls “implementation”, allowing to amortize in the output. These two ads have reassured the markets, the british pound has rebounded. The CBI, the Confederation of british industry, praised the “clarification” of the government, while saying “concerned” of the output of the single market.
Scotland, which voted 62 % in favour of retaining within the EU, by contrast, roared and waved the probability “increased choice of a different future”, namely a new referendum on the independence of Scotland.
After having spent two-thirds of his speech to caress the Europeans in the direction of the hair, boasting a history and shared values, reiterating the firm commitment to continue to work together on matters of defence or security, May has suddenly changed her tone. It would be dishonest of lesVingt-Seven are considering a “agreement punitive” vis-à-vis the United Kingdom. “It would be an act awful to autopunition for the countries of Europe. And this would not be an act friendly”, , she warned. the “The United Kingdom could not accept such an approach. No agreement would be preferable to a bad agreement”, she said, before waving the threat of transforming the country into a tax haven. “Because we would always be able to trade with Europe. We would be free to sign trade agreements around the world. And we would have the freedom to decide tax rates competitive to attract the best companies and the biggest inv estors.” If this is not blackmail, it looks jolly. The main lines are drawn. Negotiations may begin.