‘EU is falling apart’ Brussels economist says Merkel’s utopian vision of Europe ‘has died'

16
16 Comments
Lol, it's in the express it must be true!
123432149 m ago

Lol, it's in the express it must be true!


Yeh the express have always been experts at doctored video interviews and statements, I hear it was them that filmed the moon landing too
So he says that the prospect of an ever closer union is over and The Express spin that as the EU is falling apart.

Wonder where their bias lies.....
Time for a supra-EU , twice as expensive and half as efficient, come on Barnier!
"May 28, 2017"

Welcome to August 01, 2017.
Edited by: ".MUFC." 1st Aug 2017
shauneco

"May 28, 2017"Welcome to August 01, 2017.



How do people even see articles this old without specifically googling "EU falling apart"?
Anyone who sees a headline "On the buses" a slogan" EU is falling apart", do ask questions and do some academic quality research yourself.
Estimated time needed for a reasonable level of analysis so as to sort out the truth from the lies and semi truth is 400 research hours.
Edited by: "splender" 1st Aug 2017
joegidds

So he says that the prospect of an ever closer union is over and The … So he says that the prospect of an ever closer union is over and The Express spin that as the EU is falling apart.Wonder where their bias lies.....


The first test model on logic is to test the truth of this story's priniples against the ever closer union or not of the United Kingdom.
davewave

Time for a supra-EU , twice as expensive and half as efficient, come on … Time for a supra-EU , twice as expensive and half as efficient, come on Barnier!


We are ok with a single country EU as long as we adopt the German welfare system, economic system, pay and taxation , job opportunity, engineering technology...afterall, if you look around your typical house and business properties and on the road, if engineered products are not German they are from the Far East. They are efficient and cost effective, what's there not to believe.
splender

We are ok with a single country EU as long as we adopt the German welfare … We are ok with a single country EU as long as we adopt the German welfare system, economic system, pay and taxation , job opportunity, engineering technology...afterall, if you look around your typical house and business properties and on the road, if engineered products are not German they are from the Far East. They are efficient and cost effective, what's there not to believe.


if 'products are from Far East' and usually branded otherwise, UK, US, German (or other EU) or another country...nothing remotely supporting the argument for an EU-like state, its a bogus second tier government which works for its MEPs and cronies, utterly useless bureaucratic machinery, as sophisticated and effective as our local councils but with a budget of EUR143 billion.
still doing a better job than the current UK government. it's almost like they're doing it on purpose hoping brexit will fail.

ft.com/con…a3c

Senior officials involved in Britain’s withdrawal from the EU have accused Theresa May of wasting the past year, claiming that the prime minister’s “control freak” regime has stifled arguments over policy and alienated other EU countries.

Current and former senior civil servants speak of extreme frustration within Whitehall at Mrs May’s handling of Brexit negotiations in the period between last year’s EU referendum and the UK general election in June.

They say that Mrs May tied the hands of Britain’s negotiators with policies devised without proper cabinet consultation, while her inner circle in Downing Street shielded her from “difficult” news from Brussels.

“It has been a completely wasted year while the Tories negotiated with themselves,” said John Kerr, a crossbench peer and former head of the Foreign Office. “There has been a sort of policy paralysis where Number 10 imposed a control freak freeze.”

Nicholas Macpherson, a crossbench peer who was the top official at the Treasury until last year, said: “All too frequently in the last year the national interest has been subordinated to party interest.”

Philip Hammond, the chancellor, admitted last month that ministers were designing policies from square one after the Conservatives lost their parliamentary majority in the general election.

“Five weeks ago the idea of a transition period was quite a new concept,” he told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show. “I think now you’d find that pretty much everybody round the cabinet table accepts that there will be some kind of transition.”

But some government insiders say Mrs May’s approach in the months after the Brexit vote meant that the UK was not even “starting from scratch”.

“It’s worse than that,” said one senior official working on Brexit.

“There has been a failure of diplomacy,” the official added. “We have had the prime minister talking about no deal being better than a bad deal and [foreign secretary] Boris Johnson suggesting we aren’t bothered about getting a deal. The mood on the other side of the Channel is awful.”

Another leading Whitehall figure said: “There should one day be a parliamentary inquiry into what went wrong in the first year. At this point in the negotiation, the [European] Commission and the [EU] Council are significantly ahead of us, and frankly they are astonished.”

Much of the criticism in Whitehall is aimed at Mrs May’s former co-chiefs of staff, Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill, who reportedly took many of the key Brexit decisions in the months following the EU referendum. Whitehall insiders say that Mr Timothy and Ms Hill, who resigned following the general election, often made decisions with little or no consultation with the cabinet.

Ministers point to last year’s Conservative party conference, saying there was little discussion about Mrs May’s conference pledge to trigger Article 50 by the end of March 2017 — even though it was unclear at that stage what kind of Brexit deal Mrs May wanted.

Ministers say they were also not consulted on Mrs May’s conference promise that ending European Court of Justice jurisdiction would be a “red line” in Brexit negotiations — despite the pledge having far-reaching consequences for future EU regulatory co-operation. Mr Timothy is understood to have added the “red line” commitment to Mrs May’s speech.

Some civil servants say Jeremy Heywood, the cabinet secretary, should have done more to challenge the secretive and tightly held decision-making structure. “Jeremy Heywood has achieved a lot but he placed the value of getting into the room with the PM above the need to deliver tough messages,” said one senior Whitehall figure. “If the cabinet secretary doesn’t turn and fight, then the rest of the civil service won’t either.”

But Downing Street officials and those working closely with Mrs May and Sir Jeremy have fiercely rejected such accusations. One official close to the prime minister said it was “extraordinary self-flagellation or politically motivated criticism to suggest that we have wasted a year”.

David Jones, who was a junior minister in the Department for Exiting the EU until he was sacked following the election, said the government had admirably built an exit strategy from nothing after David Cameron, the former prime minister, had said there should be no official Brexit preparations before the EU referendum.

Mr Jones said Mr Cameron’s strategy had led to the subsequent scramble to devise an exit strategy: “If there was any wasted time, it was that.”

A Number 10 spokesman said: “This characterisation is completely misleading. We’ll make no apologies for doing the necessary preparation for triggering Article 50 so we could start the negotiations in the best possible position.

“In the last year we have made real progress towards delivering the outcome of the EU referendum and setting out how we will grasp the opportunities of Brexit.”

Allies point to the government’s publication of a white paper setting out its overall Brexit strategy, as well as the Article 50 bill, which passed through parliament. Officials are now working on eight parliamentary bills to enact Brexit, and Sir Jeremy is credited with overseeing the creation of two Whitehall departments — the Department for Exiting the EU and the Department for International Trade — shortly after last year’s Brexit vote.

Even critics admit that Britain’s negotiating team in Brussels, comprising 100 civil servants, has been relatively well prepared, despite an awkward recent photograph that appeared to show Brexit secretary David Davis without briefing notes.

But complaints continue to reverberate around Whitehall, with one veteran civil servant saying that circumstances had not improved since the election. “We have moved from a massively intolerant centre to a situation of anarchy,” he said. “We have gone from having a captain on the bridge to having no captain at all.”

Lord Macpherson said that while there were “signs of progress in recent weeks”, the “absence of realism in the government’s approach makes ‘no deal’ an evens chance”. He added, however, that despite the discord he did not think the situation irretrievable.

“Historically, Britain has always stared into the abyss, only to pull back,” he said. “My hope is that someone will get a grip before it’s too late.”
wow, even the times has got the knives out. as have the mail. only the express left in loony land

The Times, 29 July:
thetimes.co.uk/art…x92
The Conservatives are criminally incompetent
Matthew Parris
If you’ve a moment, research “Mike the headless chicken” (April 20, 1945 to March 17, 1947). Mike passed away 70 years ago but had managed to live headless (sort of) for 18 months, staggering pointlessly around to the amazement and horror of spectators in many fairgrounds, before finally choking.
Returning to Britain on Thursday I had been wondering what our Conservative government now reminds me of, when a friend told me of Mike’s sad story.
Can this really be Britain? Or has my homecoming ferry re-routed itself to a Central American banana republic where the congreso nacional has packed up for the summer holidays, the foreign minister has gone cavorting in Australia, the stop-gap president has departed to walk in Switzerland, the hairy Marxist resistance leader has started wrestling his own comandantes and the lugubrious Don Felipe, minister of finance, is staging a slow-motion coup?
Humour, though, is no longer a refuge from the disgrace. What have we come to? Like some dark moon below the horizon, a rogue force is wrenching us from our orbit, and nobody knows what to do. But if you think the purpose of this column is to lament that crazy Brexit decision, you are wrong. Brexit or no Brexit, I have a different focus. A more precise focus than the scattergun commentary which has interested itself in “Britain’s” embarrassment, “the government’s” incompetence, “Whitehall’s” ill-preparedness, “the prime minister’s” inadequacy, “Labour’s” disunity or even “Europe’s” aggressiveness.
There is a main culprit here, and it isn’t any of these candidates. Labour didn’t cause this mess. Whitehall didn’t frame the task, even if it is ill-equipped for its execution. Theresa May may not be up to the job but it’s a job into which she has been forced. And “the government”? The government is a collection of individuals. Where do these individuals come from? Who nominated them? Who keeps them in their jobs? Search for the key word in the following text.
We live in a parliamentary democracy in which voters elect representatives attached to parties. The party as an institution has form, and voice, and policies. The party chooses a leader. The winning party’s leader asks the monarch for authority to govern and if she is satisfied that the party can support its leader in commanding the Commons, she gives it. The leader then chooses every minister from the party’s ranks, and leads a cabinet drawn, too, from the party. And if the party loses confidence in its leader or government, it can, by withdrawing support, dismiss both. The word that keeps appearing in this passage is hard to miss: an entity, a real thing, the thing that’s now in charge of Britain’s direction. It’s called a party. It’s the Conservative Party. Do the voters even begin to understand how this mess is entirely of the Conservative Party’s creation?
The Tories are turning Brexit into a humiliating shambles. They called a referendum when they didn’t have to, they accepted the result, they willed Brexit, they promised Brexit, and now they’re comprehensively failing to organise it. You can’t blame the voters, who quite reasonably assumed that the Tories would never have offered a referendum if they hadn’t thought leaving Europe could be arranged. The fingerprints for this crime of mismanagement are Tory fingerprints.
Thirteen months since the referendum and the Conservatives still can’t decide even the broadest outline of the terms on which we hope to leave. The difference between a soft and a hard exit is greater than the difference between staying in and a soft exit, yet the prime minister is still insisting that government policy is for a hard exit, while the chancellor (in her absence) says the opposite.
Nobody really knows what the foreign secretary thinks and I doubt he knows himself. The Brexit secretary, meanwhile, seems to be trying to play it by ear, but with no guidance as to the melody at all. And the trade secretary seems recently to have reconciled himself to three (or, if the chancellor is to be believed, as many as four) further years without any job at all. Some ministers say we’ll be taking back control of immigration when we leave in 2019, others that we will not.
And almost everybody has started to talk of a “transitional” period after leaving, without any hint of a consensus on what we would be transitioning to.
Every Conservative MP bar Kenneth Clarke voted in February for the triggering of Article 50. It now appears they and their leader started the countdown to Britain’s expulsion without even the vaguest plan for what we’d be aiming to achieve, let alone realistically likely to achieve. Worse, they pulled the trigger knowing very well that “Brexit” still meant different things to different members of the party and its government, and there was no reason to hope that divergent aims were ever likely to converge.
I call this criminal: irresponsible to the point of culpable recklessness towards their country’s future. The Conservative Party just thought they’d give it a whirl and all but one of them voted for the adventure. Even in bad times, even when we Tories messed up, I used to feel a pride in the party to which I owe so much. Often too slow, sometimes too rash, sometimes wrong, sometimes mildly corrupt, often missing the public mood, occasionally cowardly, it was still possible to trace through the party’s long history a line of worldly common sense, a distrust of extremism, and a deep sense of duty to the nation. There was a certain steadiness there. Has this deserted us? Do we yet understand, has it yet been born in on us, that it is we and we alone who have led the whole country into the predicament it now finds itself in?
How shall I look in the eye those householders through whose doors I’ve been dropping Tory leaflets all these years: years that will be seen as a permanent stain on the Conservative Party’s reputation?
The prime minister has gone away. “Ladybird, ladybird,” we might cry, “fly away home! Your house is on fire, your children are gone!” Except that we’re better off without her flapping around, spouting implausibilities. Perhaps reality in the shape of Philip Hammond may gradually bear down upon fantasy; perhaps forlorn hopes may steal silently away and various fools, while not repenting of their folly, allow it to slip their recollection.
I hope so. I left Spain feeling ashamed to be British. I return to England ashamed to be a Conservative.
Since when do we listen to the 'experts'?
It's an Express HEADLINE with a block capital word in it to help dumb it down further.
OMG NEW BREXIT EXCLUSIVE FOR THE DAILY EXPRESS

THIS JUST HOT OFF THE PRESS:

Psychic healer Simone Simmons believes she still speaks to the princess from her grave almost 20 years after her tragic death.

Ms Simmons would speak to Diana for up to 10 hours on the phone when the late royal was alive and says she still hears her voice speaking to her about everything from world events, family life and even Brexit.


express.co.uk/new…kle
upset.brown.pant1 h, 35 m ago

OMG NEW BREXIT EXCLUSIVE FOR THE DAILY EXPRESSTHIS JUST HOT OFF THE …OMG NEW BREXIT EXCLUSIVE FOR THE DAILY EXPRESSTHIS JUST HOT OFF THE PRESS:Psychic healer Simone Simmons believes she still speaks to the princess from her grave almost 20 years after her tragic death. Ms Simmons would speak to Diana for up to 10 hours on the phone when the late royal was alive and says she still hears her voice speaking to her about everything from world events, family life and even Brexit. http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/836123/Princess-diana-death-Kate-Middleton-Meghan-Markle


Next week: if we weren't in the EU then the McCanns might have chosen somewhere else to holiday!
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Top Discussions

    Top Discussions

    Top Merchants