[ad_1]
The agreement that seals the divorce between Great Britain and the European Union as finally wrenched by Theresa May was signed by the 27 member countries of the European Union. More than 600 pages which mark the exit of Great Britain from the European Union and which regulate the relations between the British kingdom and the continent.
So, of course, the British Prime Minister still needs ratification by her Parliament. Not easy, because the supporters of a hard Brexit (hard Brexit) will not let go as easily. As for those who opposed the divorce (the remainers), they are obviously disappointed by an agreement that will inevitably frustrate everyone, but they consider that for now, the worst will be avoided.
Theresa May's deal with her conservative friends does not appeal to anyone, but at least it has the merit of proposing conditions that save the fundamentals of the economic system. For the government or what's left of it, that was it or the chaos.
For many observers, especially the world of economics and finance, a divorce without agreement would have endangered the British economy, thus the employment, activity and level or lifestyle of the British. A "hard Brexit" could also challenge the unity of the kingdom because neither Ireland nor Scotland could accept the prospect of being removed from the European Union.
The hard Brexiters who, from the beginning, fought hard for a clear divorce did so with such a demagogy, but also such a clumsiness in the concrete presentation of their project, that some of their supporters were scared and discouraged. The supporters of the hard Brexit, Boris Johnson in the lead, have deserted the political scene in the open countryside leaving Theresa May fend for herself or almost face the Brussels Commission very united and the majority of his party completely disoriented.
The act of divorce avoids the risks of plunging into the unknown, but can not satisfy anyone. Britain will officially leave the European Union on March 29, 2019, but Theresa May has managed to secure Britain's continued access to the large European market. The 27 Member States have obviously imposed their conditions, namely that reciprocity be respected and above all, that Great Britain respects the norms and rules of the European Union. The four great freedoms that are in the DNA of the European Union will therefore be protected: the freedom of movement of products, services, capital and men. In conditions of fair tax and social competition with what is being done on the continent.
Great Britain will continue to benefit from the single market, but it will also have to respect rules on which it will no longer be able to intervene or negotiate.
In addition, litigation and proceedings will continue to fall under the jurisdiction of the European justice institutions, over which they will no longer have power.
Concretely, the constraints and rules that the hard Brexiters wanted to get rid of will continue to apply if Great Britain continues its trade with the European Union.
In short, Boris Johnson had promised the English "butter and buttery money" but they will have neither one nor the other.
The negotiations made the negotiators aware that the closer we approached the technical modalities, the more we realized that the two economies, the British economy and the European economy were tremendously intertwined and it seemed impossible to unravel these relations without deeply disrupting the systems.. The entire automotive, aeronautical, military and pharmaceutical industries would have been deeply disorganized. Air and sea transport. The whole system of consumption would have itself been upset since 60% of what the English consume today comes from the continent, from Brittany, from the south of France or from Southern Europe. Let's not talk about the human and social consequences on the populations of foreign residents whose status would have changed profoundly.
So, of course, the situation is not yet fully resolved because Theresa May, who wrested from her government this agreement, has yet to find a majority to adopt the text.
That being said, it is difficult for parliament to refuse it because without agreement, it's the promise of a brutal divorce or another referendum.
Nobody dares to imagine what would happen with a sudden closure of the Eurotunnel, the stopping of maritime transport by Brittany Ferries or the suspension of air shuttles. Unthinkable. As for the prospect of a new referendum, it would plunge Great Britain into a new period of uncertainty and disorder.
This case is historically incredible. For the future of Europe and democracy. It shows that a democratic decision can be legitimate if it is technically feasible with full knowledge of the facts. And the English people, obviously, did not know the probable effects of Brexit. The English people discovered them after the referendum.
Brexit supporters carry a heavy responsibility for not having communicated all the elements of the file. Unless they were motivated by the only cynical preoccupation with taking power, and in a democracy, all means are good, since "The promises are binding only those who listen to them". Machiavelli added, moreover, that people who believe unachievable promises always pay him dearly. "Princes who govern or who want to gain power have an absolute duty of truth".
Theresa May succeeded in constructing a wobbly compromise between the political interests that required her to leave the European Union and an economic constraint that forced her to remain in the single market. Britain will have invented a new form of international cooperation.
The next European elections will be played without the English. The new parliament and the new Brussels Commission will produce rules and laws that will apply to all, including the English, but which will no longer have the means to amend them. Not sure that the democracy so dear to the British people is growing.
[ad_2]
Source link
