Theresa May proposes two-year 'period of implementation' after UK leaves EU - as it happened

22 Sept 201713.11 EDT

Afternoon summary

Andrew Sparrow

• Theresa May has asked EU countries to agree to a two-year Brexit transition during which the UK would continue to enjoy unfettered access to the single market.

Here is Jon Henley’s assessment of the key points from the speech.

And here are verdicts on the speech from a Guardian panel: Gina Miller, Owen Jones,John Redwood, Anne Perkins, and Kate Maltby.

That’s all from me for today.

Here is Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, on the speech.

Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament’s lead Brexit spokesman, has posted his response to the speech on Facebook. He says the UK is becoming “more realistic”.

Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister, has described Theresa May’s speech as welcome but not a “game changer” and not enough to ensure that the Brexit talks move on to phase two, covering the future trade relationship, in October. According to the FT he said:

Rather than nitpicking or being unnecessarily critical I think it’s important to accept this as a genuine gesture, an attempt to break the deadlock.

I don’t think it’s a game changer but I do give it a guarded welcome and I think it is a step in the right direction and very welcome in that sense. But I don’t think it’s enough to say at this stage that it allows us to move on to the next phase of negotiations.

Here is Steve Crowther, the interim Ukip leader, on May’s speech.

It was hard to see what in Mrs May’s speech would conceivably move the EU’s position. Ernest entreaty and good faith is not a negotiating position, especially with the EU, when they are bent on an inflexible stance and a disadvantageous outcome to teach everyone a lesson.

Oddly, she spent time setting up the vital importance of the UK’s co-operation to EU security, then said that our participation was “unconditional”. The latter is laudable, but cancels out the former, which is potentially a basis for getting the “flexibility, ambition and creativity” she expects from the EU.

Overall, the whole speech could be paraphrased as “Oh come on, guys. Can’t we just do this nicely?” Time our side started negotiating properly. No further talks until Barnier and the EU start talking properly, drop the ransom demand and start talking about sensible trade relations.

Here is a verdict on the speech from James Blitz, who writes the Financial Times Brexit Briefing email. He says:

This was a determined effort to break the logjam in the talks. It is too soon to say whether Mrs May will have convinced the EU to move to phase two in a little over a month’s time.

But it is clear that the cabinet is yet to have the critical conversation on Britain’s long-term future after Brexit. Mrs May comes across as someone trying to break down the door to phase two of the negotiations, but is not sure what to say when she gets to the other side.

Here is the Guardian’s editorial about the speech.

And here is an extract.

The prime minister has belatedly come to understand that the hard Brexit path she signalled in her party conference speech last year cannot be achieved in the time allowed under article 50. Although she daren’t quite admit it, talk of walking away without any deal has been exposed as a reckless, empty threat. That bluff has been called. But the ultimate shape of Britain’s trading relations with the EU remains, in the prime minister’s exposition, vague and utopian – a retention of membership benefits without membership. In time, reality will bite into that proposition as deeply as it has bitten chunks out of the fantasy of an easy, clean break in March 2019. Mrs May took important steps towards a sober appraisal of Brexit’s difficulties today. She has further yet to travel.

22 Sept 201712.48 EDT

Lisa O'Carroll

Campaigners for EU citizens’ rights have said they are “upset” and “disappointed” with Theresa May’s speech.

They welcomed her promise to put the future agreement on their rights into the withdrawal agreement but said it was “too vague” to give them comfort.

“People want to be re-assured that everything they have now, they will continue to have. They won’t be any more re-assured after today,” said Nicolas Hatton, co-founder of the3million campaign group in the UK.

EU citizens have been asking the government to abandon their plan to put them in a new immigration category of “settled status” post Brexit because they fear this will mean a reduction in their current rights and give the Home Office, which they say they do not trust, a say in their future.

They instead want the government to match the EU offer to roll over all the employment and social rights they have now.

In Spain there was dismay over the prime minister’s remarks about the UK’s position in Europe. Sue Wilson, chair of Bremain in Spain, one of the grassroots organisations campaign for Britons in the country, said:

May said that the UK had never entirely felt at home in the EU. Many of us feel prouder of being European than British, thanks to Brexit.

If May’s intention was to facilitate progress in the negotiations, I fear she will be disappointed. As per usual, we have more soundbites than substance. Again, she appears intent on talking about future arrangements rather than concentrating on separation priorities. I can’t believe anything she said today would persuade the EU27 that sufficient progress has been made to move forward.

Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, has accused Theresa May of not knowing what type of Brexit she wants. In a statement he said:

Fifteen months after the EU referendum the government is still no clearer about what our long-term relationship with the EU will look like.

The only advance seems to be that the prime minister has listened to Labour and faced up to the reality that Britain needs a transition on the same basic terms to provide stability for businesses and workers.

That’s because Theresa May and her Conservative cabinet colleagues are spending more time negotiating with each other rather than with the EU.

The Tories have made clear they want to use Brexit to deregulate and cut taxes for the wealthy. Labour wants a jobs-first Brexit that uses powers returned from Brussels to invest and upgrade Britain’s economy.

22 Sept 201712.28 EDT

Rowena Mason

Reaction to Theresa May’s speech from senior Brexit campaign supporters was mixed, with some expressing reservations about May’s strategy for a transitional period that will maintain the status quo.

Owen Paterson, a Tory MP and former cabinet minister, told the Guardian:

The speech was very good really, generous in tone and content. It was good to repeat we’re going to leave on March 29, 2019, and generous comments on rights of EU citizens with right of abode here.

But my main quibble is the transition period as it puts off the time when we can really take advantage of having left. The whole establishment mantra is that business wants to ease in and put off the evil day and it’s all going to be very difficult. That is absolute tosh. The businesses I talk to want to leave and if the EU doesn’t show it’s serious about agreeing some sort of reciprocal free trade deal, that should be easy to achieve on the basis of conformity of standards, then we should say no deal is better than a bad deal, which the PM confirmed. There is no need for a transition period if you agree the destination and just get on with it.

However, John Redwood, a Tory former cabinet minister and leading Eurosceptic, told the guardian that the speech put the UK in a strong position in the talks. He said:

[May] went out of her way to love-bomb the EU, expressing her enthusiastic wish for a bold and wide-ranging future partnership between an independent UK and an EU which needs to get on with its own agenda of economic, monetary and political union, freed of the UK seeking to slow or restrain those moves.

Here is Hilary Benn, the Labour chairman of the Commons Brexit committee, on the speech.

It has taken the government a very long time to accept the reality that the UK will need transitional arrangements as we leave the EU. So, the prime minister’s announcement that the government wants to stay bound by EU rules for “around” two years after March 2019, that it will offer a financial settlement to honour our obligations, and that EU citizens will still be able to come to the UK although they will have to register, does represent a small step forward. However, it remains to be seen whether these proposals will be enough to unblock the talks, especially since it is no clearer how the government proposes to avoid the return of a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.

More worryingly, we still don’t know what will come after the transition. Mrs May ruled out both the Norwegian and Canadian options in favour of a “bespoke” deal. Yesterday, Mr Barnier made clear that no such option is on the table as far as the EU is concerned. How does the prime minister plan to achieve such a deal when her speech did not provide the detail or certainty that British business desperately needs so it can plan ahead?

22 Sept 201712.12 EDT

Lisa O'Carroll

The shipping industry has said a two-year transition phase is not long enough and it is not confident new customs arrangements can be implemented. Guy Platten, chief executive of the UK Chamber of Shipping, said:

Setting a two-year limit to this transition phase carries significant risk and I am doubtful it will be long enough.

There is no way of knowing how long a transition period should be without knowing the exact regime we will be transitioning towards.

The UK government’s desire to see a bilateral, bespoke customs arrangement, to ensure trade can flow with as little friction as possible, is a sensible one.

But before we can prepare for this new arrangement we need to know exactly what it is and then allow significant time to transition towards it.

Here is Mike Russell, the Scottish government’s Brexit minister, on Theresa May’s speech.

While the prime minister’s speech was short on detail, her acceptance of a transition period within the single market, with freedom of movement, shows that the UK government has changed its position.

That is due to the growing consensus of opinion – including leading business voices – that leaving the world’s biggest single market is potentially disastrous for jobs, investment and living standards.

But having moved this far, the prime minister should now go further and, as we have called for, commit to a long-term future in the single market and customs union, not just as a transition arrangement.

Here is more reaction to the speech from Nigel Farage, the former Ukip leader.

Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has given a highly qualified welcome to Theresa May’s speech. Mostly his response is non-committal and his full statement reads like a bit like a teacher’s report. Roughly he has graded the speech B-; “could do better”.

Barnier welcomes May’s “constructive” tone and says May indicated “a willingness to move forward”. But he does not describe any announcement as offering a clear breakthrough.

The current round of talks is focusing on three issues: the rights of EU nationals, Ireland and money. On Ireland, Barnier says May has not clarified how the UK’s plan to keep the border with the Republic open would work. He is a bit more positive about her language on the rights of EU nationals (“a step forward”), and he reserves judgment on the money issue.

The United Kingdom recognises that no member state will have to pay more or receive less because of Brexit. We stand ready to discuss the concrete implications of this pledge. We shall assess, on the basis of the commitments taken by the 28 member states, whether this assurance covers all commitments made by the United Kingdom as a member state of the European Union.

May’s speech was at its most specific on the subject of the transition. But Barnier effectively rebukes the UK for not raising this earlier. And all he will say is that the request “could be taken into account”.

View image in fullscreen