Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
IT’S A DAY that has been coming for months.
This morning, UK Prime Minister Theresa May finally outlined just exactly how she plans to extract the UK from the EU following last year’s Brexit referendum. Sort of. Kinda.
That May was seeking a so-called ‘hard’ Brexit – ie one which would see Britain exit the single market amongst other things – was no secret. But just how hard a hard Brexit are we talking? And when will it happen?
Here’s how it all went down.
Theresa May has been effectively avoiding questions as to just what kind of Brexit her government favours.
A strong train of thought is that the main reason for this is that the UK government has been floundering with indecision in the face of an economic catastrophe they never believed could actually happen.
But, as Theresa is so fond of telling us, will Brexit really mean Brexit?
Sky News is reporting that May is set to outline a truly clean break via a 12-point plan for Brexit.
“The people voted for a new path. It is up to this government to deliver it,” says May.
No specifics as yet. May wants Britain to be a “truly global country” and to be “a friend to all countries”.
“The British people voted for change,” she says. “We are a European country, but we are also a country that has always looked beyond our borders towards the wider world.”
23 June was not the moment that Britain chose to step back from the world. It was the moment we chose to become a truly global Britain.
“It remains overwhelmingly in Britain’s interests for the EU to succeed,” says May.
Now the Prime Minister is setting out Britain’s reasons for leaving the EU.
“Unlike other EU nations we have no written constitution,” she says.
She admits that it’s true Britain has “often looked like an awkward member state” of the EU.
“I believe there is a lesson from Brexit, not just for us but for Europe also.”
There are different ways of dealing with different interests.
Our vote to leave the EU was no rejection of the values that we share or do harm to the EU itself.
We do not want to turn back the clock to times when Europe was less peaceful.
“We will continue to be friends and partners. You will still be welcome in this country,” May adds.
“We do not seek to be an associated member of the European Union. Not a member of bits of the European Union. We are leaving the EU.”
Now we’re getting down to the nuts and bolts. May is about to outline her 12-point plan for Brexit.
Objective One – “We will provide certainty wherever we can. This will compromises on both sides, and not everyone will know everything at all times,” says May.
“I can confirm that the government will put the final deal to a vote before both houses of Parliament.”
Objective Two – Britain will be taking charge of its own laws.
A mention for Northern Ireland’s currently fraught political situation:
“I hope the spirit of unity will apply in Northern Ireland and the main parties there will form a government as soon as possible,” says Theresa May.
“Nobody wants to return to the borders of the past,” the prime minister says of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.
Objective Three – A fairer Britain. This means immigration.
“We will continue to attract the brightest and the best to work and study in Britain,” says May.
But that must be done properly so our immigration controls serve the national interest.
Now, what does that mean?
“In the last decade we’ve seen record levels of net immigration. This has put a downward pressure on working class people,” says May.
You cannot control immigration from Europe while a member of the EU.
Now we’re talking Free Trade.
“We will pursue a bold and ambitious free trade agreement with the European Union,” says May.
But I want to be clear. That does not mean membership of the free market.
So, ‘hard’ Brexit it is.
Leaving the single market will mean no longer having to make “vast contributions” to the EU’s budget says Theresa May.
“It is time for Britain to rediscover its role as a great global trading nation,” says May.
There is little indication of how this is to be achieved mind you. So far seems pretty aspirational.
“President-Elect Trump says Britain is not at the back of the queue when it comes to trade, rather it is at the front of the line,” she says.
That may be the first mention of the soon-to-be inaugurated US president.
Interesting.
“We will welcome agreement to continue to collaborate with our European partners on major science and technology initiatives.”
Now we’re onto defence.
“With threats to common security becoming more serious, we need to work together more, not less,” says May.
I am proud of the role Britain has played in promoting Europe’s security.
“We do not seek some kind of unlimited transitional status.”
Well, we’re glad that’s cleared up so. For a while there it looked like you did Theresa.
So, it is to be a ‘hard Brexit’, albeit with a free trade agreement. That sounds a bit like Britain having its cake and eating it?
“This is a fair and comprehensive plan,” says the Prime Minister.
Those who urge us to reveal more, such as the blow by blow of our negotiation strategy, will not be acting in the national interest.
So, don’t be asking questions basically, we know what we’re doing, nothing to see here.
So, the 12 points of Brexit, in case you missed them:
Theresa May does not want a “punitive Brexit deal” for Britain.
That would not be the act of a friend. Britain could not and would not accept such a deal.
So, the speech has ended, we have our 12 points for Brexit, pretty much no details of how they’ll be achieved, and now it’s time for a Q&A.
Will EU nationals be treated the exact same way as non-EU nationals post-Brexit asks a London Times journalist?
“We do recognise the importance of immigration, we recognise the contribution of those who have come here and who are still her, but our immigration policy will follow the plan which I have set out,” is the reply.
So, maybe, is the answer.
If Parliament rejects the deal, will Britain still be in the EU?
“Today is about coming together and analysing the opportunities available to us across the world, and then bringing them home,” is May’s answer.
The British Parliament has made it very clear it wants us to get on with it, and that is what we are doing.
A Spanish journalist, from El Pais, asks if migration is completely off the table.
“This is not about a confrontation,” is May’s reply. “This is about what is right for the EU, I mean the UK.”
That’s quite the Freudian slip, Theresa.
I want to work out what is to our mutual benefit. Thank you.
And with that, like Keyser Soze, Theresa May is gone.
So, what have we learned? Well:
The Irish Government has issued a statement in the wake of May’s speech:
“The Government has noted the contents of Prime Minister May’s speech today and welcomes the fact that it provides greater clarity on the proposed approach of the British Government to the Brexit negotiation process,” it reads.
For Ireland, the priorities for the negotiation process that lies ahead are unchanged: our economic and trading arrangements, the Northern Ireland Peace Process including border issues, the common travel area, and the future of the European Union.
In her speech, Prime Minister May highlighted the specific and historic relationship between Britain and Ireland. In this context, she made clear that her priorities include maintaining the common travel area and avoiding a return to a hard border with Northern Ireland, both of which are welcome.
That statement continues:
The Government notes that the British approach is now firmly that of a country which will have left the EU but which seeks to negotiate a new, close relationship with it. While this will inevitably be seen by many as a “hard exit”, the analysis across Government has covered all possible models for the future UK relationship with the EU.
So… is it a hard exit or isn’t it? Does anyone know?
The Government’s preparation (for Brexit) is extensive. Important organisational changes have been implemented in Government Departments and Agencies, with additional resources provided in key areas. Preparation to date includes the contingency work done before the UK referendum, intensified analysis and scenario planning carried out across all key sectors since, and extensive stakeholder consultation and engagement including through the all-island Civic Dialogue process.
So, we have it all in hand. Nothing to worry about.
And that, for now, is your lot. Not a huge amount has been revealed, but it should relieve some of the pressure on the UK PM. For a few days at least.
For now, we have Theresa’s 12 points of Brexit to pick over.
Thanks for being with us, we’ll be back later with analysis of the British Prime Minister’s speech. Bye.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The war has begun……
Don’t be slaves to Fine Gael style austerity…
I think those Labour Party TD’s should read the article before making such I’ll informed comments. As I understand it the eight Fine Gael members talked only about the higher paid Public Servants which would exclude Gardai Nurses and Teachers.
Don’t forget labour is the party of the public elite , these are largely champagne socialist that will wilfully allow the eviseration of public services rather than cut the pay of higher grade public sector workers
hopefully they’re gone before Feb so they don’t get their full ministerial pensions.
Sadly Kevin,that is all Gilmore is waiting for.to be eligible for his pension.Expect a Labour fuss to be kicked up after the Feb.
Just listened to howlin on radio and talk about dodging the questions he cant give a straight answer he is starting to sound like the ffs god help us.
No labour… these 8 TD’s are in the real world… paying increments is crazy in this climate. Pay increases just for staying in employment.
So nobody in the private sector is getting an incremental salary for “staying in work”? Not a single soul?
The PS in this country are the people who man your A&E’s, your hospitals, schools, emergency services, the ones who put up with your consistent belittling that some of the most qualified, and hard working people in this country might earn a better living than you. Those of us who work for the PS don’t do so for the pay, the quality of life, or heaven forbid the respect of the people they serve diligently, and consistently, they do so for the love of their work and the feeling of doing a good, hard days work.
You follow a frontline PS worker for 24 hours, and see what you think – if you can stay awake that long.
You really are commenting on every medical thing here. Do some work!
The same could be retorted to yourself. I’m just as entitled to have an evening off every now and again, contrary to the belief of very many people here.
@Michael with the odd exception the vast majority of commentators have questioned the elite of the PS on 80k plus a year,how is that justified when effectively their employer the state is bust.You question the private sector these wages are paid from generated profits not taxes and if a private sector employer is bust their work force joins the dole queue.
@micheal….. We’re not paying the private sectors wages……
Michael I’m with ya all the way but sometimes the more someone jumps on things here the less valid they’re point comes across.
For the other guys I’m gonna try explain myself without fuelling the fires anymore.
There is an awful lot of blame heaped on the public sector for cash crisis when nobody in the public sector cost anyone a job.
Jobs were cut due to greed by private banks, developers, insurance companies and some other companies.
The negative effect of this was doubled as these Newley unemployed Paye workers not only weren’t contributing to the public funds they are now relying on them for support ( which they are one hundred percent entitled to do)
The popular theory is to slash wages across the whole sector by reason of they’re costs are not my fault and why should I pay tax to support them.
Well the private sector collapse wasn’t my fault so why should my family get less because of someone else’s greed?
If the idea was to slash private sector wages to increase cash flow in small and medium companies and allow them to employ more people would it still be so acceptable?
I’m not looking to have any more arguments but look at your logic as though it was bieng applied to yourself.
Michael no one I know in the private sector get the pay rises which are what the increments are. pay rises/increments in the private sector are either performance related or profit making. the public sector is bankrupt and should be put into receivorship.
The “elite” who earn over 80K are the ones who work an average 80 hour week. They do a days work, cover the night call, followed by a 2nd days work. 36hour shifts. Anyone on the private sector doing them? Or turning up in work to be asked what they are being paid to comfort patients and their families when they are most vulnerable (nurses), or educate our children (teachers), or decide on which RTC victim gets treated on scene first (paramedic), or which window to break to assist escape from a burning building (fireman). Those jobs might very well seem trivial to one and all here, but there isn’t a single day that goes by when those that work for you (as you pay our wages – lest we forget of course that nobody in the PS pays tax), put their lives in severe danger. There are not many in the PS who earn over 100,000 – 6,900 last year, and of them, the majority were consultants and NCHD’s. I don’t need to remind you that we are bleeding these people left, right and centre, along with nurses – who could throw a dart at a map and find better serving employment, with better conditions, better lifestyle, better physical conditions to here. And yet, they stay to be treated like waste washed up on a beach.
Put the public sector into receivership, certainly – you’ll find out what a real waiting list looks like, Angola’s health system will look positively attractive by comparison.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” Upton Sinclair. No point in discussing anything with Michael, he thinks “public” money falls out of the sky.
With increased increments comes increased responsibility, at lest in nursing, taking charge at night and in the evening, assisting junior staff, and staying back, without pay, to hand over the changes to the next shift, not that I’m complaining , that’s what I signed on for, including increments
Everybody here seems to forget, it’s not just the private sector who pay tax. I pay tax, the majority of people who work for the PS pay tax, and if they don’t, they’re not earning enough to do so – same as the private sector.
I am fully aware of where “public” money comes from – it comes from taxes, but of course, what do I know about such a thing – a lowly, money grabbing, tax dodging public servant like myself.
I, and others like me, may well be called a servant to the public, you certainly don’t need to take it literally.
@Michael. Are you in the medical section of the PS because those drugs are influencing your judgement. You arguments for the people on massive salaries just shows me you live in wonderland. Talking about so called hard working people on 80k+ a year?????????? I know people earning 25 k a year doing all kinds of long hours and flexibility and they are the real heroes not the over paid cream at the top. Cop on. Its all the one anyway we are all more informed and this little arrangement will eventually be toppled. Ye are basically “Not worth it” to paraphrase Loreal.
Labour TD’s need to grow a set of balls, accept that we can’t afford the PS they feel obliged to protect… step up to the plate – do what’s right for your country, not the party and the unions…
Oh that’s fine, the PS can go take a hike, yeah?
No Mike, the PS can become streamlined and efficient like the private sector where everybody – gladly to keep their job – is doing much more for less.
Over 70% of health budget goes on salaries. There nothing more the gov can do to cut costs other than payroll. Or alternatively, tax the bejasus out of the rest of us so this discriminatory deal can be protected…
The thing is that those whom you are referring to are already doing much, much more for a lot, lot less.
I work in the public sector (higher education) , work morning, noon, and night for less than the industrial average and have zero job security, please show me how to be more efficient so I can spend time with my family
Tensions seem to be increasing in the coalition!!!
They will still put a positive spin on things.
They have to wait a few months more to get their pensions, can’t see them lasting another year.
Labour aren’t just heading down the same path the Greens went…they’re at the end of it already. When they lied their way into office the publics expectations of what they and FG were going to do were immense. Therefore when they showed themselves for what they are they did to their party what it took the Greens 3 years to do. They’re looking at decimation in the next election and it’s their own fault.
All defenders of Croke Park always trot out the line Gardai,Nurses and Teachers,yet commentators everywhere even here mention the elite.Those earning 80 to a 100k plus.
i think that’s not at all apparent from comments when such a story comes up.
This story appears to be one of the first where the correct people in the PS are implied.
I can’t understand why people continuously refer to the answer as being to run the public sector like the private sector. It’s like comparing chalk and cheese and shows that there is a serious lack of understanding out there.
The anecdotes that people pull out are all but useless also, given they usually are used to turn a discussion a certain direction over the experiences (usually extreme) of one person.
Even the term “productivity” being used to describe higher work load in the public service is a bit of a joke and highlights a significant chunk of the difference. Private sector is generally producing product; the public sector is providing services. It’s a lot easier to measure a product than a service (or at least, more difficult to put balanced measures on a service)
Tony, the private sector is flexible and can adobt to changes in enviorment, the public sector staff go up in arms over a slight change in duties. they can’t adopt. this is where a lot of the hostility comes from.
the fact is an increment is a pay rise, the people of Ireland were told that there was a pay freeze on because the public sectors employers are broke, smashed, borrowing money to pay wages. etc.
the world and its mother knows an increment is a pay rise. so the people of Ireland have been blatantly lied to but the public sector kerp denying it.
Brian, to a large extent I would agree however, I would point out that once again your comment suggests that this is true throughout the public service. If we were to ask people to comment on their experience as a frontline worker I’m sure 2 things would happen:
Frontline worker states the major changes that have occurred followed by…..
Several private sector people saying “yeah right”.
I know the distinction between frontline and pencil pusher staff is implied a lot in the comments here but personally I think it should be stated explicitly.
In terms of change (or rather resistance to it) I can give an example of where public and private have been pitted against each other. If it wasn’t so devious, you could describe it as artful…..
The Junior Cert reforms have been publicly seen as a great move forward. In my opinion they are overall a positive change however the unions have voiced opposition to the changes. In this case it is not a case of opposition for the sake of it. There really is a massive question around the integrity of results, whether you see that as teachers not being trustworthy or as a parent who is within their right to wonder – it’s a massive question which could undermine the worth of the JC in its entirety.
Now, I’ll be honest, I’m a teacher (currently subbing by the way and expect to be doing so for years). I earned more in the private service before redundancy and going back to college. Now I don’t have job certainty in any way (I had a permanent contract when in private sector).
My point is that as a new entrant to public service it irks me (and I’m sure many like me) to listen to blanket public v private discussions. And certainly, going from private unionised work to public unionised work I see both the benefits and pitfalls of unions. I am in no way a big fan of them simply because they stand up for everything and anything which completely devalues the support or criticism of truly important issues when they do come up.
I agree though, there are always improvements to be made in any organisation and they should be flexible enough to move with what is needed. The difference though between public and private should be recognised.
I’m asking santa for a Christmas election this year
Pierce your a clever guy what bunch of muppets do you see waiting to take over from the present incumbants
As much as I dislike this current mob an election would be disaster for this country at the moment -an expensive way to vote in another group of numbskull’s who would continue with the same relentless policies that are crucifying ordinary people but making sure the rich stay rich
An election box
And yet the eight TD’s said they only wanted this to apply to those public servants on €80,000 or more. I don’t think many guards, nurses and teachers would be in that category.
Also no mention by Nash and Nolan regarding two Labour TD’s and one MEP who made their own statement today.
Increments are not pay rises. They are set out scales based on experience. People are underplayed for their job until they reach a certain level of experience. Stopping increments would only effect the younger lower paid, as the higher paid older staff already have all their increments. Cutting increments is not a fair way to make cuts. The highest paid should pay more, not less!!
I disagree with the notion it’s only Junior staff who gets increments as only this week the government said they were not going to stop increments going to staff on more than 100k.
An increment (and I used to get them in a previous company – not PS) is a payrise. The amount of remuneration received increased, how can it not be?
I was lucky enough to not have had a payrise in the last 5 years so haven’t had a pay cut, so far but of course I have as inflation has eaten into my salary not to mention all the other factors diesel, food, etc. My employer is still paying me and I would happily take a cut to keep that going. The fact that the government can’t lay off any of the PS staff makes their complaining -to me at least- unreasonable. As other commentators have said its the 80k+ mob most of us are aggrieved at but if the employer hasn’t got any money then they have to makes cuts to their spending.
Increments are a nonsense, especially now. When you’re in a hole, stop digging.
Fair play to Labour TDs on this one. With Fine Gael’s anti-public service agenda, they’ll use the excuse of going after the high earners… but most increments are paid to low to middle income earners!
If they were serious about going after high earners they’d introduce a third rate of income tax as Labour TDs are proposing along with a Wealth and Financial Transaction Tax… go after all high incomes, not just those in the public sector! Would generate a lot more money too…
They should cut their salaries as a precedent first
Ye see! Should have voted Fianna Fail.
Bye bye fg and lab… You can sit in hell and swap stories with ff/greens and pd’s.
You think the last shower got a kicking… ya aint seen nothing yet.
Clinton if you think the next Government will include Sinn Fein or anyone from the La La Party..sorry ULA you need to stop smoking that stuff before it does you real harm.
Rodgers,I never mentioned either of those parties did I ??.
Maybe you should kick whatever you are putting into your complan.
Anarchy it is so….
@Paddy get used to it. Sinn Fein will get into power and the likes of you will have to grin and bear it. They will do a hell of a lot more positive work than the shower of losers in power now. Bye bye gael and labour. You can meet the greens and set up a support group for useless former td’s.
well said Mike. I for one can’t wait to see them ejected.
If Mr. Nash is so concerned about the effects an un-ravelling of the CPA will have on the public sector, then why hasn’t he come out and said anything about the emergence of a two-tier sector which is a result of that same Agreement, This disparity will most certainly have an un-ravelling effect on the CPA reform agenda once new entrants to the public sector form a unified grouping.
I think it’s time everyone earning under €50,000 demanded a pay rise!
The PS unions don’t give a shiny shite about lower paid PS. They only need them to march to protect the higher paid. How could those union bosses justify their own 100k + salaries if there werent a myriad of PS fat cats on the same or higher wages
Get a real login!
Well done Ged Nash. That’s exactly what you got elected to do. Support the backbone of our society, the hardworking public servants who are taking all the flack and will be there in our citizens time of crisis.
One third of public spending goes on public sector pay,and another one third on social welfare. 80% of health spending goes on pay. So those who defend the status quo while bemoaning their opponents as pro-austerity are the truth austerites, because by fencing off pay from the solution to the deficit they force the govt tocut back on services.
Labour is out of sync with the electorate. CPA is not a sacred cow.
Anyone who knows the Public Sector knows the massive amount of directionless highly paid pencil pushers with lofty titles needing to be culled. Most particularly in the HSE.
Have to respect FG on this one. Putting the CPA sacred cow on the butcher’s table; meanwhile, gutlessly, Labour whines, trying to appease all voters at once.
Funny how Shortall chickened out rather than stay in office through tough cuts and a budget. Labour really are softbellied cowards when times are tough.
Roisin went on Principle. Big difference between “chickened out” and principles.
Someone should tell Gerald Nash the only people in danger of becoming caricatures belong to the labour party. Vote yes to everything and watch one of your own resign on a matter of principle with no comment. What a clown you are Gerald. Interesting to note I’d never heard of him before not surprising really,
After seeing the accompanying image with the article I’m thinking that all those two clowns need are bowler hats and they could head to a fancy dress party as Laurel & Hardy
Bullyingdon club ha more like there in the bilderburg group,it’s worth looking up this illegal secret group
Its not an illegal group…
I’ve always found it pathetic that in the US you cannot criticise anything the US Military does without being rounded on as ‘unpatriotic’ or ‘un-American’
It seems that we have the exact same thing going on here. You cannot criticise the CPA without being accused of attacking “teachers, nurses and Gardai” – they just roll off the tongue of Rabbit and his cabal.
Pathetic…..
Excellent point. Even those here in favour of CP keep rolling out the same trintiy. Its because they are trying to obscure the real issue. Nobody wants to get rid of guards Nurses of teachers. Its about the high earners not labels. If you are a high earner over 80k ( I think everyone will agree ) then regardless of whether you are a Guard a Teacher or a Nurse then your pay and increments have to be looked at.
Let’s sticks to our guns… These guys are the best we have, let’s not turn against them when the times are gettin tough.. Who else is there to do a better job in all reality?
Stephen Donnelly?. A qualified economist . Actually able for the job.
A monkey could do a better job.
have your say