May secures 'legally binding changes' in Strasbourg to Brexit deal [View all]
The package negotiated by Theresa May and Jean-Claude Juncker is expected to be in three parts:
A joint interpretative instrument – a legal add-on to the withdrawal agreement. It will give legal force to a letter from Juncker and Donald Tusk, the presidents of the commission and council, given to May in January which stated the EU’s intention to negotiate an alternative to the backstop so it would not be triggered or get out of it as swiftly as possible, if it was.
A unilateral statement from the UK. That is likely to seek to explain the British position that, if the backstop was to become permanent and talks were going nowhere on an alternative, the UK would seek to exit the arrangement.
Additional language in the political declaration to emphasise the urgency on both sides to negotiate an alternative to the backstop, and flesh out what a technological fix would look like. It is hoped this will be enough to persuade the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, to change his initial legal advice that the backstop could be in place indefinitely.
The problem: Very, very little of this is significantly new. The most substantive element is the joint interpretative instrument. But it falls well short of Cox’s demands over the last week for what amounted to a unilateral exit mechanism from the backstop...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/mar/11/brexit-latest-news-vote-tuesday-tories-suspect-may-could-pull-tuesdays-key-vote-after-talks-fail-to-deliver-progress-politics-live
= new reply since forum marked as read
