[ad_1]
Von der Leyen and Johnson telephoned for more than an hour Monday, then hit the line with a joint statement. “The conditions for an agreement have not yet been met due to differences on key points,” he said. “We ask our chief negotiators to prepare a summary of the remaining differences so that they can be discussed personally in the coming days.”
Negotiators have been arguing for months on the same points: fishing, fair competition and rules to sanction violations of the agreement.
Video: ORF correspondent Peter Fritz reported on the current status of the Brexit negotiations.
On Monday morning, EU negotiator Michel Barnier, diplomats and parliamentarians assessed the prospects for a deal bleak. However, both parties signaled even before Johnson and von der Leyen’s phone call that they were ready for further talks.
Ursula von der Leyen, President of the EU Commission Image: Reuters
Less than four weeks before the end of the Brexit transition phase, the pressure of time is enormous. Without a trade agreement, there is the risk of tariffs and other trade barriers between the two parties at the turn of the year, which have so far been closely intertwined in the common domestic market and deliver goods worth several hundred billion euros a year back and forth. If the negotiations fail, many British products will become more expensive in the EU. Delays at the border could lead to bottlenecks and disrupt supply chains. Tens of thousands of jobs would be at risk. The UK is concerned about shortages of gasoline and certain foods.
Barnier sees “little progress”
Barnier informed EU ambassadors and Brexit specialists in the European Parliament on Monday morning that there has been little progress in the most recent round of negotiations since Sunday. But apparently neither side wants to be the first to give up and take responsibility for the misery of a no-deal Brexit. “The EU is ready to make the last effort to achieve a fair, sustainable and balanced agreement for the citizens of the EU and the UK,” said an EU diplomat. “Now it is up to the UK to choose between such a positive outcome and a no-deal.”
The German federal government stated that there must be a willingness to compromise on both sides, not just London. But there are also red lines on both sides. German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas (SPD) stressed that in the EU it was clear that there would be no agreement at any price. “But we definitely want to reach an agreement.”
Deal or no deal?
Barnier and his British colleague David Frost have been testing so-called landing zones centimeter by inch for months, so now there is hardly a surprise solution that no one has thought of. It should be decisive if both parties give each other a political jolt. And that, in turn, depends on the calculation of whether a weak, rushed, or crooked contract could bring more long-term disadvantages than a no-deal contract.
The EU has offered the UK free trade in goods without tariffs or quantity restrictions. In return, however, it demands the same environmental or social standards and subsidy rules. This lies behind the point of fair competitive conditions – in “level playing field” bargaining lingo.
The problem: Britain would like to have as few EU guidelines as possible. “Sovereignty” and “control” over your own rules is the main objective of Brexit from London’s point of view. The EU, on the other hand, does not want its market to be opened up to companies that have to meet lower standards and can therefore produce cheaper. Protecting the EU’s internal market is the top priority for the 27 states, it is said in Brussels.
The second controversial issue of fisheries is particularly important to coastal states, especially France. Negotiators are haggling over the amounts that EU fishermen can catch in UK waters. We are talking about quotas and a clause to review the regulation after a specified period, the so-called review clause. Both parties denied an alleged advance in fish.
The third point, “the application of the treaty”, is also important for the EU due to a maneuver of the Johnson administration that caused outrage in Brussels: British legal clauses that would partially annul the agreement to leave the EU that was already in force at beginning of the year. These are passages that should avoid a hard border between British Northern Ireland and the EU state, Ireland, and a resurgence of conflict there.
The Johnson administration fears that the special rules agreed by the treaty for Northern Ireland could delink the country from the UK’s domestic market and become a gateway for EU state aid guidelines.
Is the British government ready to give in?
But the British government indicated on Monday that it was willing to compromise. It is willing to remove or deactivate the controversial clauses of the bill. The prerequisite is an agreement in the joint committee that is responsible for the implementation of the Northern Ireland provisions of the Withdrawal Treaty. “The talks are ongoing and final decisions are expected in the coming days,” the government said in a statement. So here we also have to wait for a decision.
European Minister Karoline Edtstadler (ÖVP) believes that an agreement with Great Britain is still possible. “The time for this is very short, but I still think that it is possible to reach an agreement,” he said before the consultations of the EU ministers for Europe.
