We need to talk about David Davis, what the alignment of carrots has to do with Brexit and the mystery of the missing impact assessments. Apparently, Davis may also have a different Brexit bill in mind.
Advertisement
On Monday morning, UK Brexit minister David Davis lifted the lid on the big secret of negotiations over Britain's looming divorce from the EU in an interview with London talk radio LBC. What qualities does a Brexit minister need, the presenter asked cheekily. A somewhat flippant Davis replied: "You don't have to be clever. You don't have to know too much detail." All one had to do was keep calm during negotiations. Well, that explains everything. Why the divorce talks in Brussels dragged on for eight months, why the way was peppered with red lines and U-turns and why still nobody understands what on earth is going on with the Irish border. And why Davis once again put his foot in it during a Sunday BBC talk show.
The alignment of carrots
Presenter Andrew Marr did his best to understand what Davis and Prime Minister Theresa May had agreed to with the EU over the last week. The main sticking point had been Ireland and avoiding a hard border between the North and the Republic after Brexit. Britain conceded it would be ready to implement regulatory alignment if necessary. That would mean no barriers along the invisible frontier through the island of Ireland. Everything can go on as before.
But didn't the government want to leave the customs union and the single market, an incredulous Marr asked his guest. Of course, Davis said, the whole point is to take back control. But how is that possible if at the same time we have regulatory alignment? "Will our carrots be like their carrots?" Marr asked. No, said Davis, "we will not keep their regulation, it's about product standards." So, different carrots after all? Clear as mud.
As he got comfortable in his chair, Davis inadvertently dropped another bomb shell. The promised billions for the Brexit bill, the reassurances on citizens' rights and the guarantee for the Irish border, indeed the whole divorce agreement, would depend on the final deal. "If there is no deal, we will not pay the money." In other words, Davis thinks the UK is not legally bound to fulfill its commitments.
The Empire strikes back
Little cries of fury could be heard in Brussels. Why had they given lunch to Theresa May on Monday, then granted her three additional days and finally offered her breakfast on Friday, just to reach this point if none of it had any meaning?
European Commission spokesman Margaritis Schinas was the first to react: The divorce deal was a "gentleman's agreement" which Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and May had shaken hands on. But as legal experts pointed out, those types of agreements bind the politicians who shake on them and not the countries they represent. So the Brexit minister was in fact right and May could just walk away from everything if she suddenly changed her mind.
And it's exactly for cases like this that the EU has lawyers. They quickly added a paragraph, that phase II of Brexit talks "can only progress as long as all commitments undertaken during the first phase are respected in full and translated faithfully in legal terms as quickly as possible." The empire cannot be messed with, it strikes back.
The mystery of the Brexit impact assessments
The battle about the Brexit impact assessment has been raging for weeks. The Brexit Select Committee, made up of prominent British MPs, kept demanding their publication after Davis had said in November that studies had been carried out for 56 economic sectors in "excruciating detail." Parliament wanted to read them but the government didn't budge. Ultimately it took a rule dating back to the 18th Century to force a response. We can't publish the studies, that would undermine our negotiating position, was the answer. A private reading room with a mobile phone ban was proposed. In the end the committee had had enough and demanded Davis appear for questioning.
The chairman was not going to make it easy for him. He wanted an answers. But Davis was evasive.
"Has the government undertaken any impact assessments about the implications of leaving the EU of different sectors of the economy?" asked Hilary Benn.
"Ahem, there is no, there is no…"
"So there isn't one for the automotive sector?"
"No…"
"For aerospace? For financial services?"
"No, for all of them…"
Gasps were heard from the committee. The impact assessments which had caused so much trouble don't exist after all?
The chairman was incredulous. "Isn't it strange that a government that undertakes impact assessments on all sorts of things … about the most fundamental change we're facing as a country, you're telling us has not undertaken any impact assessment at all?"
Well, studies had been done about several economic sectors in order to understand the hurdles with regard to regulations, Davis said in an attempt to explain the inexplicable. And besides, "I am not a friend of economic models because they have all been proven wrong." Exactly. If you believe in Brexit you don't need any impact assessments. It's like children who believe in Father Christmas.
'Tis the season to be jolly
At Theresa May's first day in Parliament after the deal in Brussels, Christmas cheer was already in the air. Brexiteers celebrated the result in the most smarmy terms and even Remainers seemed quite pleased. "This is good news for people who voted for leave, that were worried … that it was never going to happen, and it is good news for people who voted remain, who were worried that we would crash out without a deal," said May. There was a new sense of optimism. It was as if her speech was accompanied by choirs of angels. However, for the first time next week the prime minister will sit down with her cabinet and talk about what they really want to achieve from Brexit. A discussion that will surely silence those angels.
Brexit timeline: Charting Britain's turbulent exodus from Europe
Britain shocked the world when it voted to leave the European Union on June 24, 2016. DW traces the major events that have defined Brexit so far.
Image: picture-alliance/empics/Y. Mok
June 2016: 'The will of the British people'
After a shrill referendum campaign, nearly 52% of British voters opted to leave the EU on June 23. Polls had shown a close race before the vote with a slight lead for those favoring remaining in the EU. Conservative British Prime Minister David Cameron, who had campaigned for Britain to stay, acknowledged the "will of the British people" and resigned the following morning.
Image: picture-alliance/dpa/A. Rain
July 2016: 'Brexit means Brexit'
Former Home Secretary Theresa May replaced David Cameron as prime minister on July 11 and promised the country that "Brexit means Brexit." May had quietly supported the Remain campaign before the referendum. She did not initially say when her government would trigger Article 50 of the EU treaty to start the two-year talks leading to Britain's formal exit.
Image: Reuters/D. Lipinski
March 2017: 'We already miss you'
May eventually signed a diplomatic letter over six months later on March 29, 2017 to trigger Article 50. Hours later, Britain's ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow, handed the note to European Council President Donald Tusk. Britain's exit was officially set for March 29, 2019. Tusk ended his brief statement on the decision with: "We already miss you. Thank you and goodbye."
Image: picture alliance / Photoshot
June 2017: And they're off!
British Brexit Secretary David Davis and the EU's chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, kicked off talks in Brussels on June 19. The first round ended with Britain reluctantly agreeing to follow the EU's timeline for the rest of the negotiations. The timeline split talks into two phases. The first would settle the terms of Britain's exit, and the second the terms of the EU-UK relationship post-Brexit.
Image: picture alliance/ZUMAPRESS.com/W. Daboski
July-October 2017: Money, rights and Ireland
The second round of talks in mid-July began with an unflattering photo of a seemingly unprepared British team. It and subsequent rounds ended with little progress on three phase one issues: How much Britain still needed to pay into the EU budget after it leaves, the post-Brexit rights of EU and British citizens and whether Britain could keep an open border between Ireland and Northern Ireland.
Image: Getty Images/T.Charlier
December 2017: Go-ahead for phase 2
Leaders of the remaining 27 EU members formally agreed that "sufficient progress" had been made to move on to phase two issues: the post-Brexit transition period and the future UK-EU trading relationship. While Prime Minister Theresa May expressed her delight at the decision, European Council President Tusk ominously warned that the second stage of talks would be "dramatically difficult."
Image: picture-alliance/AP Photo/dpa/O. Matthys
July 2018: Johnson, Davis resign
British ministers appeared to back a Brexit plan at May's Chequers residence on July 6. The proposal would have kept Britain in a "combined customs territory" with the EU and signed up to a "common rulebook" on all goods. That went too far for British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson and Brexit Secretary David Davis, who resigned a few days later. May replaced them with Jeremy Hunt and Dominic Raab.
Image: picture-alliance/empics/G. Fuller
September 2018: No cherries for Britain
May's Chequers proposal did not go down well with EU leaders, who told her at a summit in Salzburg in late September that it was unacceptable. EU Council President Tusk trolled May on Instagram, captioning a picture of himself and May looking at cakes with the line: "A piece of cake perhaps? Sorry, no cherries." The gag echoed previous EU accusations of British cherry-picking.
Image: Reuters/P. Nicholls
November 2018: Breakthrough in Brussels
EU leaders endorsed a 585-page draft divorce deal and political declaration on post-Brexit ties in late November. The draft had been widely condemned by pro- and anti-Brexit lawmakers in the British Parliament only weeks earlier. Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab resigned along with several other ministers, and dozens of Conservative Party members tried to trigger a no-confidence vote in May.
Image: Getty Images/AFP/E. Dunand
December 2018: May survives rebellion
In the face of unrelenting opposition, May postponed a parliamentary vote on the deal on December 10. The next day, she met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel to seek reassurances that would, she hoped, be enough to convince skeptical lawmakers to back the deal. But while she was away, hard-line Conservative lawmakers triggered a no-confidence vote. May won the vote a day later.
Image: Getty Images/S. Gallup
January 2019: Agreement voted down
The UK Parliament voted 432 to 202 against May's Brexit deal on January 16. In response to the result, European Council President Donald Tusk suggested the only solution was for the UK to stay in the EU. Meanwhile, Britain's Labour Party called for a no-confidence vote in the prime minister, her second leadership challenge in as many months.
Image: Reuters
March 2019: Second defeat for May's deal
May tried to get legal changes to the deal's so-called Irish backstop in the weeks that followed. She eventually got assurances that the UK could suspend the backstop under certain circumstances. But on March 12, Parliament voted against the revised Brexit deal by 391 to 242. EU leaders warned the vote increased the likelihood of a no-deal Brexit. Two days later, MPs voted to delay Brexit.
Image: picture alliance/AP Photo/T. Ireland
March 2019: Extension after second defeat
Following the second defeat of May's divorce deal, the European Council met in Brussels on March 21 to decide what to do next. EU leaders gave May two options: delay Brexit until May 22 if MPs vote for the withdrawal deal or delay it until April 12 if they vote against the deal. If the deal were to fail again in Parliament, May could ask for a long extension.
Image: picture-alliance/AP Photo/F. Augstein
March 2019: Brexit deal rejected a third time
On March 29, the day that the UK was supposed to leave the EU, British lawmakers voted for a third time against May's deal — rejecting it this time with a vote of 344 to 286. Following the latest defeat, May approached the main opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn in an attempt to find a compromise, angering hardline Brexiteers in her own Conservative party.
Image: picture-alliance/AP Photo/House of Commons/M. Duffy
April 2019: Brexit delayed until Halloween
With the April 12 deadline looming after the third defeat of May's deal, EU leaders met again in Brussels to discuss a second delay. The only question was how long should it be? In the end, the UK and EU agreed to a "flexible" extension until October 31 — which can end sooner if the Brexit deal is approved. The UK had to take part in EU elections in May because their exit wasn't secured in time.
Image: Reuters/E. Plevier
May 2019: Prime Minister Theresa May resigns
Weeks of talks between Prime Minister Theresa May and the Labour party to reach a deal proved unsuccessful and further eroded her political capital. She triggered an angry backlash from her party after she tried to put the option of a second referendum on the table. The series of failures led May to announce her resignation, effective June 7, in an emotional address.
Image: Reuters/H. McKay
June 2019: Search for a new prime minister
After Theresa May announced on June 7 that she would leave office, other members of her Conservative party began clamoring for the top job. Within a month, the leadership battle came down to Jeremy Hunt (left), an EU proponent who fears a no-deal scenario, and Boris Johnson (right), one of the main proponents of Brexit.
July 2019: Prime Minister Boris Johnson
At the end of July 2019, Johnson was officially named Theresa May's successor as British prime minister. "We are going to energize the country, we are going to get Brexit done by October 31," he said after he was elected leader of the Conservative Party.
Image: Imago Images/Zuma/G. C. Wright
September 2019: Johnson's election threat
Conservative rebels and opposition MPs backed efforts to delay an October 31 Brexit deadline in fear of a no-deal departure. In response, Johnson called for a general election, saying his government cannot rule without a mandate after he stripped 21 rebel MPs of their Conservative status. The Labour Party said it would not back elections until legislation to block a no-deal Brexit was in place.
In late September, Britain's highest court ruled that Johnson's decision to suspend Parliament ahead of the UK's planned exit was unlawful. "This was not a normal prorogation in the run-up to a Queen's Speech," said the Supreme Court. Political rivals immediately called on Johnson to leave his post. Johnson said he would abide by the court ruling, though said he "strongly" disagreed.
Image: Reuters/H. Nicholls
October 2019: A new deal
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson managed to secure a deal with European negotiators that would allow the UK to leave the EU in an orderly manner. The deal received unanimous backing from the leaders of 27 other member states. But an attempt to get the UK Parliament to sign off on the deal failed. Instead, Parliament pushed for the Brexit deadline to be extended until the end of January 2020.
Image: picture-alliance/AP Photo/F. Augstein
December 2019: Lawmakers vote for Johnson's Withdrawal Bill
On December 22, UK lawmakers vote for Prime Minister Johnson's European Union withdrawal bill, which will see a leave date of January 31 2020 enshrined in law. Getting a majority to vote to pass the bill in the lower house has proven a major sticking point for the PM, but following a general election Johnson's Conservative party won control of the house and the bill passed with a 124 majority.
Image: picture-alliance/empics/House of Commons
December 2020: EU, UK 'finally' reach trade deal
After months of disagreements over fishing rights and future business rules, the EU and UK clinched a post-Brexit trade deal on Christmas Eve. Prime Minister Boris Johnson hailed the deal, saying the UK has "taken back control of our laws and our destiny." The deal will allow the UK and the EU to trade without tariffs, but also impose limitations on free movement and financial services.