LONDON (Reuters) - When Donald Trump visits Britain next week, Prime Minister Theresa May will have to face a harsh reality: Brexit makes Britain more dependent than ever on an alliance with the most unpredictable U.S. president in living memory. Sandwiched between a NATO meeting and a summit with Russiaâs Vladimir Putin, Trumpâs first visit to Britain as president comes at one of the most important junctures for Europe and the West since the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union. From challenging Western assumptions about the EU and free trade to courting the Kremlin and North Koreaâs leader, Trump has delivered on his promise of an âunpredictableâ U.S. foreign policy. That leaves May, who held hands with Trump at the White House during her visit after his inauguration, in a difficult position as she seeks closer trade ties with the United States to offset the disruption of leaving the EU on March 29, 2019. âThe irony is that by leaving the EU, the United Kingdom will be less useful to Washington as an ally but it will also need the United States much more,â said Jeffrey A. Stacey, a former State Department official in Obamaâs administration. âSo May has been thrown into the arms of the most unpredictable U.S. president in living memory,â Stacey said. Over 50,000 people have signed up for a protest on Trafalgar Square in central London against the Trump visit, which will include a meeting with Queen Elizabeth and possibly even a round of golf at his Turnberry course in Scotland. Even taking account of Trumpâs penchant for deal making, the visit is likely to be heavy on rhetoric about an increasingly lopsided âspecial relationshipâ and short on specifics such as the details of a post-Brexit trade deal. For supporters, Trump and Brexit offer the prospect of breaking free from what they see as obsolete institutions and rules that have weakened the United States and its allies relative to competitors such as China. But for many British diplomats, Brexit marks the collapse of a 70-year British strategy of trying to balance European integration with a U.S. alliance based on blood, trade and intelligence sharing. âMayâs rushed diplomacy with Trump has been foolish: what has she actually got out of the relationship so far?â said one senior European diplomat in London, who spoke on condition of anonymity. âYou Brits are leaving Europe but do you really want to jump into the arms of Donald Trumpâs America? And more importantly, do you have a choice?â the diplomat asked. HOLDING HANDSTrumpâs victory in the 2016 presidential election shocked British diplomats in Washington and relations between May, a vicarâs daughter, and Trump have been strained at times. The enduring image of Mayâs visit to the White House in January 2017, when she became the first foreign leader to meet the president after he took office, was Trump taking Mayâs hand to help her down the steps of a White House colonnade. But any good vibrations from that moment soon dissipated when Trump, the same day, announced plans to ban migrants from seven Muslim-majority countries - a decision that drew fierce international criticism and appeared to blindside May. Days later, thousands marched on parliament to protest the decision to offer a Trump full state visit to Britain, and 1.8 million people signed a petition saying the invitation should be cancelled because he might embarrass the Queen. Trump has repeatedly thwarted British and other European diplomatic overtures, withdrawing from multilateral agreements on climate change, human rights, and a treasured deal to curb Iranâs nuclear ambitions in exchange for lifting sanctions. Officials around May insist that Britain still has the capability to influence Trump, outlining a handling strategy that involves appealing to his self interest, âplanting the seedâ of an idea and allowing him time to consider its merits. But, much will rest on the personal dynamic between May, a staid, career politician who prides herself on careful decision-making, and Trump, the brash, often-bellicose, former reality TV star who declared last month he would know within a minute whether a deal could be struck with North Koreaâs Kim Jong Un âWe talk about Trump and Macron because it seems interesting with some upsides. We talk about Trump and Angela Merkel because itâs âdifficultââ said Leslie Vinjamuri, head of the U.S. and Americas programme at the Chatham House think tank. âTheresa May gets a bit lost in all of that. She has neither been strong nor weak, there doesnât seem to be any special affection.â Asked at last monthâs G7 meeting in Canada whether Trump was a âgood friendâ to Britain, May said: âThe United States and the United Kingdom are good friends. President Trump and I work together.â But just hours after the meeting concluded he tore up a joint communique on trade, equality and the environment that May and other G7 leaders had laboured late into the night to agree. Therein lies the difficulty for May. âWhen heâs here, heâll give, but I think when he walks away he will very quickly forget what the visit was about,â Vinjamuri said. Editing by Angus MacSwan
0 Comments
Your usage has been flagged as a violation of our terms of service. For inquiries related to this message please contact support. For sales inquiries, please visit http://www.bloomberg.com/professional/request-demo If you believe this to be in error, please confirm below that you are not a robot by clicking "I'm not a robot" below.Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review the Terms of Service and Cookie Policy.Block reference ID:Read again No Way Out of Brexit, But One Way Forward : https://ift.tt/2MK70h6
Prime Minister May is reportedly planning to steer the United Kingdom towards retaining close customs ties with the European Union, when the Cabinet meet at her official retreat in Chequers on Friday. May's shift is designed to unlock Brexit negotiations, which are currently stalled over the issue of customs checks on the Northern Ireland border. However, any shift towards maintaining close customs ties with the EU would leave Fox, who has promised to sign dozens of new trade deals with countries around the world once the UK leaves the EU, with a significantly diminished role. One source within the trade department told Business Insider that Fox, who is one of the leading Brexiteers in May's government, could resign if he is not handed a totally independent trade policy. "I imagine he would [resign] for the sole reason that the Department is defunct if there's a Customs Union," the source said. He would [resign] for the sole reason that the Department is defunct if there's a Customs Union One industry analyst echoed this sentiment, telling BI: "I know at DIT are obviously concerned about it playing out that way, and indeed you have to wonder whether Fox could stay in Cabinet under those circumstances." In a meeting with her ministers on Friday, May is set to unveil a post-Brexit customs policy described as a "new customs partnership," in which the UK would collect EU tariffs on the bloc's behalf, according to multiple reports. However, the EU does not like the proposal, as it would involve outsourcing its customs collections to a non-EU member state, and is likely to try and push the UK into accepting something much closer to the existing customs union. Because of this stand-off, UK government officials believe May could surrender an independent trade policy in order to get a Brexit deal, stripping Fox of his job to sign new trade deals. Fox's role would be "symbolic"
Other well-placed sources downplayed the possibility of a resignation, with one of Fox's former colleagues telling BI that doing so would scupper his long-term ambition of replacing Boris Johnson as Foreign Secretary.</span> Trade department insiders and industry analysts BI spoke to were united in predicting that Fox's department could be downgraded to a mere "promotional" role. A former senior government official told BI: "It'll be kept. Symbolic, promotional. We'll still have to do trade policy, but without trade agreements." This viewpoint was repeated by current staffers of DIT, who maintained a Department for International Trade is largely unworkable within a customs union. This was supported by Alex Stojanovic of the Institute for Government, who told BI: "There will still be a role for trade policy in Government but it will be diminished. Where it sits is up for question. "Countries like Canada and New Zealand don’t have a separate department for trade even with a fully autonomous trade policy." A spokesperson for the trade department declined to comment. A spokesperson for the prime minister told BI: "We are leaving the customs union, and the Prime Minister will be publishing a white paper on it next week." Our Brexit Insider Facebook group is the best place for up-to-date news and analysis about Britain’s departure from the EU, direct from Business Insider’s political reporters. Join here. Read again Liam Fox's future in doubt as Theresa May prepares for the 'softest possible' Brexit : https://ift.tt/2MRtFsf
Brits are sick and tired of Brexit
Britain's biggest auto manufacturer is warning that a bad Brexit would blow a hole in the company's profit and put a huge amount of its spending in the country at risk.Jaguar Land Rover said Thursday that if the United Kingdom leaves the European Union without maintaining a smooth trading relationship with the bloc, it would wipe out more than £1.2 billion ($1.6 billion) of the company's profit a year. "We urgently need greater certainty to continue to invest heavily in the UK and safeguard our suppliers, customers and 40,000 British-based employees," CEO Ralf Speth said in a statement. He said the company plans to spend £80 billion ($106 billion) in the country over the next five years but cautioned that "this would be in jeopardy should we be faced with the wrong outcome." Jaguar Land Rover, which is owned by India's Tata Motors (TTM), is the latest major company to warn about the potential economic damage from a messy Brexit. European planemaker Airbus said last month that a UK exit without a deal on trading arrangements with the EU would be "catastrophic," throwing its production into chaos and threatening its future in the country. Related: Airbus says Brexit chaos threatens its future in UK Car manufacturers, which rely on complex international supply chains, are worried that Brexit will lead to new trade barriers and delays at the borders. "Jaguar Land Rover's heart and soul is in the UK," Speth said. "However we, and our partners in the supply chain, face an unpredictable future if the Brexit negotiations do not maintain free and frictionless trade with the EU and unrestricted access to the single market." Investment in the UK auto industry plunged in the first half of this year because of concerns that Brexit could cripple carmakers and force them to close factories. "If the UK automotive industry is to remain globally competitive and protect 300,000 jobs in Jaguar Land Rover and our supply chain, we must retain tariff and customs-free access to trade and talent with no change to current EU regulations," Speth said. Related: Brexit is killing investment in UK car industry The head of Britain's top business lobby group said last month that the country's car industry could be wiped out. "If we do not have a customs union, there are sectors of manufacturing society in the UK which risk becoming extinct," said Paul Drechsler, president of the Confederation of British Industry. "That is the reality." The EU's single market and customs union allow the bloc's 28 member states to function as a single trading area with no tariffs or border checks. A spokesman for British Prime Minister Theresa May said last month that the government is confident of securing a good Brexit deal that "ensures that trade is as free and frictionless as possible." Read again Jaguar Land Rover: Brexit threatens plan to spend $100 billion in UK : https://ift.tt/2KLkvQpDowning Street has set out some detail for how customs could be handled after Brexit. No 10 says its plan - dubbed the "facilitated customs arrangement" - offers "the best of both worlds". The details come as Theresa May and Angela Merkel prepare to discuss the progress of Brexit negotiations when they hold talks in Berlin later. The UK prime minister is facing calls from the EU to clarify the UK's position. According to Number 10, the new plan would allow the UK the freedom to set its own tariffs on goods arriving into the country. Technology would be used to determine beforehand where they will ultimately end up - and therefore whether UK or EU tariffs should be paid. Downing Street says it's confident the arrangement would be partly in place by the end of the proposed transition period in December 2020 - with the system being fully operational by the next general election. On regulations, it's understood that the UK would closely mirror the EU's rules - but parliament would be able to decide where to deviate. However, the arrangement has not yet been explained in full - and it is not clear whether the cabinet will back the plan, or whether the EU would sign up to it. A source close to Brexit Secretary David Davis refused to comment on a Daily Telegraph report that he had already told Theresa May the plan is unworkable. Mr Davis and Mrs May are "working closely on what will be presented on Friday", the source said. Please upgrade your browser Your guide to Brexit jargonThe UK is leaving the EU in March 2019, but has yet to agree how it will trade with the remaining EU members - who are part of a single market and a customs union. In particular, a solution is needed to avoid new border checks between Northern Ireland and the Republic when the UK is outside the customs union. Eurosceptic MPs have warned Mrs May against tying the UK to the EU after it leaves, saying this will prevent it from striking its own trade deals with other countries. After two models for customs were criticised, Downing Street has come up with a "third way" solution, to be presented to the cabinet when it gathers at Chequers on Friday. After Friday's meeting, the government is expected to publish a White Paper setting out its plans in detail. Will Merkel be sympathetic?BBC Berlin correspondent Jenny Hill Mrs May is on a mission to reassure her European allies. But talks earlier this week with the Dutch prime minister did little to allay concern over the slow pace of Brexit negotiations. And few in Berlin expect much more from today's meeting with Angela Merkel. German business and industry leaders are particularly worried about the impact of an important trading partner leaving the EU with no deal in place. It's thought Mrs May might run an as-yet unpublished proposal for a post-Brexit customs arrangement past Mrs Merkel before it's discussed at a meeting of British ministers on Friday. She might not find the German chancellor on sympathetic form. Mrs Merkel - herself preoccupied with a domestic row over migration - has repeatedly warned Britain it can't cherry pick the terms of its exit. Speaking on the BBC's Daily Politics on Wednesday, leading Conservative Eurosceptic Jacob Rees-Mogg hit out at suggestions the new arrangement could, in a bid to ensure smooth trading, involve a single market on goods with the EU and close alignment with its regulations. Mr Rees-Mogg, who leads the pro-Brexit European Research Group of Tory MPs, said this would be a "really foolish policy" and "would not be a sensible way to run our economy after we've left the EU", adding: "I won't be reassured until I know the details of what comes out of Friday one way or the other." In an attempt to address concerns, Mrs May said at Prime Minister's Questions the government would ensure "we are out of the customs union, that we are out of the single market, that we are out of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, we are out of the Common Agricultural Policy, we are out of the Common Fisheries Policy, we bring an end to free movement, we take control of our borders, we have an independent trade policy". Read again Downing Street sets out some details of new Brexit customs plan : https://ift.tt/2KRiajX[unable to retrieve full-text content] LONDON – In the beginning, British Prime Minister Theresa May had a plan: “Brexit means Brexit.” The idea was to withdraw the United Kingdom from the European Union so fast that voters would not realize they had been sold a bill of goods during the EU referendum campaign and should therefore not punish the Conservative Party for having lied to them. The plan was to pretend that whatever deal was negotiated with the EU would be a “bespoke” and “best possible” Brexit, allowing Britain to quit the bloc while retaining unfettered access to the European market. In strictly partisan political terms, the plan made sense right up until the snap election last June, when May lost her parliamentary majority. To be sure, May recently scored a victory when she faced down Tory Europhiles in the House of Commons. But it hardly matters. Since last June, British politics has been spinning around the same conundrum: how to avoid the sudden destruction of much of British manufacturing – which depends on European just-in-time supply chains – without also accepting the “Norway model” of obeying EU rules without having any say in making them. To help the May government stave off disaster for British manufacturing, the European Commission has graciously agreed to a 21-month “implementation period” that will follow the UK’s official exit on March 29, 2019. The idea was that this period should be used to settle most of the details of the future relationship. Yet May has already squandered the opportunity by continuing to insist on so-called red lines, which include rejection of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). While May is trying to replicate the benefits of frictionless trade within the European single market, her red lines make this impossible for the Commission to accept. As a result, the Brexit negotiations have gone nowhere, and reaching a final agreement in time for “Brexit day” has become virtually impossible. Moreover, even with the “implementation period” delaying “economic Brexit” until 2021, there simply is not enough time to restructure British manufacturing so that it can survive the introduction of the normal border controls that operate outside the EU. Foreseeing disaster, pro-Europeans in May’s government have proposed a “Jersey model,” whereby British manufacturing alone would remain in the EU customs union, single market, and common value-added-tax area, while free movement of labor and services would be curtailed. But this is a non-starter for the EU, which insists on the inseparability of the “four freedoms” (free movement of goods, capital, services, and labor). Subscribe now
h4 { text-align: center; }
Exclusive explainers, thematic deep dives, interviews with world leaders, and our Year Ahead magazine. Choose an On Point experience that’s right for you.Learn More Nor can the vexing question of the Irish border be resolved within the confines of May’s red lines. In December, May agreed that there would be no physical or economic border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, which will remain an EU member state. But she has also conceded to the Ulster Protestants that there will be no border between Northern Ireland and mainland Britain. These two promises cannot be reconciled, given that there is to be a hard border on the English Channel. May’s only way out, then, is to avoid a hard border with continental Europe by accepting the four freedoms (which also requires accepting ECJ jurisdiction). Whether or not the Commission or the May government yet realizes it, the contradiction between their goals is absolute. The British want the EU to abandon its founding principles in exchange for €40 billion ($46 billion) and no hard border in Ireland. But, given that the UK has already committed to those concessions, the EU has no reason to listen to its special pleading. Were the May government to renege on the commitments it made in December, it would confront a “no-deal Brexit.” The UK would crash out of the EU, and many sectors of the British economy would be decimated. Three possible outcomes remain, two simple and one complicated. In the first scenario, Britain would abandon its “red lines” and adopt a “Norway-plus model,” remaining not just in the single market, but also in the customs union. In the second scenario, the UK would accept an economic border in the Irish Sea and maintain its red lines for mainland Britain, by entering into a free-trade agreement with the EU. Paradoxically, both the European Commission and hardline Brexiteers could agree on this outcome for mainland Britain, except that the latter refuse to accept a border between the mainland and Northern Ireland. The larger problem is that neither of these “simple” solutions will be agreed by May before the fall deadline. And the second outcome would spell disaster for British manufacturing, unless the transition period was extended by many years to give businesses time to restructure their operations. The only way out, then, is through a political crisis. Such a crisis may well occur within Europe, as a result of conflicts between major member states or US President Donald Trump’s attempts to undermine the EU. But a European crisis would not come in time for May to secure a “Jersey model” for the UK as a whole. It is far more likely that before then, Britain itself will experience a crisis as the public grows increasingly aware of the massive economic and social costs of a looming no-deal Brexit. Once the crisis erupts and British red lines begin to dissolve, any number of possible outcomes could follow. The transition period could be extended to, say, 2025, to be followed by a free-trade agreement and an economic border in the Irish Sea. Or Brexit itself could be delayed for a number of years, with the “Norway plus” model serving as the ultimate goal. Then again, either scenario might lead to a second referendum and a reversal of Brexit altogether. In any event, it is clear that Brexit, as the British side currently conceives it, is simply impossible. If it happens at all, it will not look like anything May has proposed so far. Read again The Decline and Fall of Brexit : https://ift.tt/2KNZx3gOn Brexit, Itâs Decision Time for Theresa May (and for Her Critics)LONDON â âBrexitâ hard-liners have been compared to frogs being boiled alive, unaware that the water is being heated gradually to lethal temperatures. The flames will be licking the sides of the pot this Friday for a critical meeting of Britainâs bitterly divided cabinet, and the question is whether the frogs will finally realize their plight and leap. The chief frog to watch will be the foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, perhaps the most overtly disloyal member of the rancorous cabinet. The meeting is being billed as a moment of truth for Prime Minister Theresa May, though one of many that have come and gone over the past year or so. At her official country residence, Chequers, she is expected to present her latest plan to soften the economic impact of Britainâs rupture with the European Union, known as Brexit. Most analysts think Mrs. Mayâs proposal would keep Britain closely aligned to Europeâs rules on manufactured goods, avoiding customs and other checks at frontiers, while services would be further removed, allowing Britain to strike non-European trade deals in these areas. In significant ways, this would make Britain a ârule taker not a rule maker,â and could require the country to accept other obligations â perhaps including contributions to the blocâs budget. That is hardly the Brexit that the hard-liners envisioned and sold to voters. And so, this Friday, the dilemma for the hard-liners becomes acute: Should they continue the fight from inside, but risk facilitating a plan they despise; or should they quit and try to overthrow Mrs. May, but with no certainty of success? âThe water is getting hotter and hotter, so do they jump out?â said Andrew Gimson, author of âBoris, The Adventures of Boris Johnson.â âIf so, do they endanger the whole thing and enrage some of their more middle-of-the-road colleagues?â The pressure is on. With nine months until Britainâs scheduled departure, Mrs. May needs to present a credible plan to the European Union; talks in Brussels could face collapse if her proposal is another cop-out. Perhaps the big surprise, however, is that Mr. Johnson is still at the cabinet table at all, after months of semipublic rebellion. In comments that leaked in recent weeks, he unfavorably compared Mrs. Mayâs negotiating style with President Trumpâs and suggested that her government lacked âguts.â In another conversation, he dismissed the growing concerns of business about Brexit with a four-letter expletive. When the Conservative lawmaker Jacob Rees-Mogg, a hard-line Brexiteer, wrote an article in The Daily Telegraph that many interpreted as an implicit threat to Mrs. Mayâs leadership, Mr. Johnson defended him. Mrs. Mayâs hold on power has been in doubt since the Conservative Party lost its parliamentary majority in elections last year. Yet, none of her potential challengers can be sure they could successfully unseat her, nor can they be assured that they would benefit personally if they managed to do so. Mr. Johnsonâs prospects of taking over are falling, not rising, with fresher contenders emerging, including the new home secretary, Sajid Javid, who, as the son of an immigrant bus driver, might broaden the partyâs appeal. But for all the talk of her political weakness, Mrs. May could be surprisingly hard to dislodge. Brexiteers are confident they have the necessary 48 votes to set off the challenge. But in the confidence vote that would follow, Mrs. May would need to win the support of only a simple majority of the 316 Conservative members of Parliament. If she were to lose that, then Conservative lawmakers would choose two candidates, with the final vote going to party members (who tend to be older, more right-wing and pro-Brexit). But getting rid of Mrs. May would be âextremely hard,â said Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London. âIf you were to say to Conservative members of Parliament, âWould you like two months of leadership contests, exposing all the divisions in the party in full public gaze in the middle of the most vital negotiations in recent times?ââ said Mr. Bale, âI think most would rather say âNo.ââ On top of that, because a full-blown leadership contest would be likely to yield a Brexit hard-liner like Mr. Johnson, lawmakers who want a pragmatic Brexit would probably side with Mrs. May. Brexit enthusiasts might fear that a candidate who is more pro-Europe than Mrs. May could sneak through. Even if Mrs. May were pushed out, Mr. Johnson would have to worry not just about Mr. Javid but also about rival hard-line Brexit supporters, including Mr. Rees-Mogg and Michael Gove, the environment secretary, as well as more moderate contenders (perhaps as many as 20, according to the London Sunday Times.) This range of options presents another dilemma for the Conservative Party: Replace Mrs. May now with someone who might be a tougher Brexit negotiator, or wait and choose someone with a better chance of winning the next election, scheduled for 2022. âYou might feel that Gove is up for negotiating a much better deal, but if you did that itâs hard not to keep him for the next election and there is no evidence that he will capture the hearts and minds of voters,â said Mr. Gimson, who noted that Mr. Johnsonâs fortunes are currently in âeclipse.â Mr. Johnsonâs performance as foreign secretary has been widely criticized, while the legacy of his divisive campaign for Brexit in the 2016 referendum hovers over him like a dark cloud. âHeâs been terribly badly damaged by his time as foreign secretary,â Mr. Bale, said, adding, âbecause he made promises on Brexit that do not seem realizable, because the Brexit negotiations have not gone well and because of his disloyalty to the prime minister.â Mr. Johnsonâs reputation took another recent hit over the governmentâs plans to expand Heathrow Airport; many voters in his parliamentary constituency, which is in the vicinity of the airport, oppose the plans. He once promised to lie down in front of the bulldozers to stop construction, Mr. Johnson provoked ridicule when he traveled to Afghanistan â ostensibly on official business, but also to avoid having to vote for the proposal. An endgame is now approaching for Brexit, however, and tensions are rising. Getting the Brexit faction to work together is difficult, Mr. Gimson said, since there is little trust and no agreement about who should take over from Mrs. May. Mr. Johnson, he added, is âonly a team player if heâs the captain.â Nevertheless, pushing Brexit supporters too far on Friday would be a risk. In volatile political times, Mr. Gimson said, there is âalways the risk of provoking an avalanche.â Related CoverageTheresa May has been warned by a leading Eurosceptic that accepting EU trade rules and regulations would be "the worst option" for Brexit. "It's hard to think of a worse idea," Jacob Rees-Mogg said. He was speaking after about 50 Tory Brexiteers met the Conservative chief whip amid mounting unease about the Prime Minister's new plan for customs after Brexit. It was described as a tense meeting, the BBC's Norman Smith said. Mrs May is trying to find an arrangement to unite her cabinet when ministers gather at her country retreat, Chequers, on Friday. The UK is leaving the EU in March 2019, but has yet to agree how it will trade with the remaining EU members - who are part of a single market and a customs union - in years to come. Some former Remain campaigners want the government to pursue close ties to the EU to avoid barriers to trade with Europe - but Eurosceptics say the UK needs freedom to set its own independent trade policy. After two alternative models for customs were criticised, Downing Street has come up with what it calls a "third way" solution to be presented on Friday, claiming it will offer "the best of both worlds" - frictionless trade with Europe and the freedom to strike international trade deals. But speaking on the BBC's Daily Politics, Mr Rees-Mogg hit out at suggestions the new arrangement could, in a bid to ensure smooth trading, involve a single market on goods with the EU and close alignment with its regulations. Mr Rees-Mogg, who leads the pro-Brexit European Research Group of Tory MPs, said this would be a "really foolish policy" and "would not be a sensible way to run our economy after we've left the EU", adding: "I won't be reassured until I know the details of what comes out of Friday one way or the other." In an attempt to address concerns, Mrs May said at Prime Minister's Questions the government would ensure "we are out of the customs union, that we are out of the single market, that we are out of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, we are out of the Common Agricultural Policy, we are out of the Common Fisheries Policy, we bring an end to free movement, we take control of our borders, we have an independent trade policy". Read again Brexit 'worst option' warning for May on customs : https://ift.tt/2IQOUba[unable to retrieve full-text content] |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2018
Categories |