Why is the EU not reacting to PM May’s blurring of red lines? A question that some are asking - and a short explainer on Art. 50 negotiations and one reason why things are not going well - thread
After setting down some very strong red lines early on in the Brexit process - no ECJ, no this, no that - lines have become more blurred in the PM’s speeches. Some are critical that the EU does not respond sufficiently. Why is that?
It leads us to an underappreciated document from way back when the Art. 50 negotiations started: The parties agreed how they would negotiate. Here’s the document assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…
Para 6 provides that negotiating texts for discussion should be shared one week in advance. What is the idea here?
The idea that the parties had is that negotiations happen on the basis of texts shared one week in advance. What is the consequence of that?
Parties expect negotiations to happen at the negotiation table. Not in speeches. The process of encoding secret messages into speeches hoping this will change everything at the table in Bruxelles is a bit pointless if that is not reflected in the proposals at the table.
The European Council has made it clear that its assumption is the original red lines, but that things would change were they to change. Para 6 of the guidelines attached consilium.europa.eu/media/33458/23…
I do not think we can expect much more unless things are made explicit.
