May: UK to seek further Brexit delay, try to break logjam

LONDON — With Britain racing toward a chaotic exit from the European Union within days, Prime Minister Theresa May veered away from the cliff-edge Tuesday, saying Britain would seek a further delay to Brexit as its politicians sought a compromise solution to the crisis.

May made the announcement after the EU’s chief negotiator warned that a disruptive and costly Brexit was likely unless Britain broke the impasse that has paralyzed the government and Parliament.

After almost three years of refusal to bend in her insistence that Britain embrace her vision of Brexit, May said the country needed “national unity to deliver the national interest.”

Following the defeat of the government’s plan and a range of lawmaker-written alternatives, May said Britain would need a further delay to its EU departure, currently scheduled for April 12. And she offered to hold talks with opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn in an attempt to find a compromise solution.

“This debate, this division, cannot drag on much longer,” May said in a televised statement from 10 Downing St. that acknowledged her attempts to win backing for the government’s version of Brexit had failed.

European Council President Donald Tusk gave a cautious welcome to May’s change of course.

“Even if, after today, we don’t know what the end result will be, let us be patient,” he tweeted — a suggestion the EU would wait for Britain to present a clear plan.

Earlier, EU negotiator Michel Barnier offered a downbeat assessment of the situation.

“As things stand now, the no-deal option looks likely. I have to tell you the truth,” Barnier said in Brussels.

Barnier said “we can still hope to avoid it” if the intensive work in London produces a breakthrough before an April 10 EU summit.

The leaders of the EU’s 27 remaining countries have given the U.K. until April 12 to leave the bloc or to come up with a new plan, after lawmakers thrice rejected an agreement struck between the bloc and May late last year.

The House of Commons has also failed to find a majority for any alternative plan in two days of voting on multiple options.

May’s statement came after a seven-hour meeting of her Cabinet, which is split between supporters of a “soft Brexit” that keeps close economic ties with the EU, and Brexiteers who believe a no-deal exit is better than compromising.

Her words seemed to indicate that she was veering away from the possibility of a no-deal Brexit — but also that she has not given up on her own withdrawal agreement, which has been rejected by Parliament three times.

Her plan is to seek approval for the legally binding agreement — which sets out the terms of Britain’s departure and triggers a long transition period for the two sides to work out future relations — after securing cross-party political support for a vision of those future ties between the U.K. and the EU.

If she and Corbyn fail to reach agreement, May said Parliament would get to vote on a range of options — and the government would be bound by the result. It is the first time she has committed to following the instruction of lawmakers.

May said she hoped Britain could pass the agreement by May 22, in time to avoid participating in elections for the European Parliament.

A no-deal Brexit would jeopardize trade and travel, with new checks on borders and new regulations on dealings between the EU and Britain.

Barnier said the EU was prepared, but “being prepared for no deal does not mean that there will be no disruption.”

Businesses have warned that the economic impact in Britain could be devastating.

Ford of Europe Chairman Steven Armstrong said “a no-deal Brexit would be a disaster for the automotive industry in the U.K.”

Armstrong that if the U.K. can’t work out a deal on leaving the EU that guarantees “frictionless trade,” the vehicle maker “will have to consider seriously the long-term future of our investments in the country.”

Edwin Morgan, interim director general of business group the Institute of Directors, said May’s statement was “a welcome step towards compromise,” though their remained obstacles ahead.

“We urge the leader of the opposition to work with the prime minister to find a solution,” he said. “Both sides must play ball.”

Britain’s political paralysis — and May’s failure to get Parliament’s approval for the withdrawal agreement she negotiated — have exasperated EU leaders.

French President Emmanuel Macron said that if Britain’s politicians could not agree on a way forward, “they will de facto have chosen for themselves to leave without a deal.”

“We cannot avoid failure for them,” Macron said before a meeting in Paris with Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar.

But Varadkar stressed “there’s still time” for May to come to the April 10 summit with “credible” proposals.

British lawmakers intent on avoiding a no-deal Brexit have drawn up plans to prevent Britain crashing out of the bloc, by accident or design.

“We are now in a really dangerous situation with a serious and growing risk of no deal,” Labour Party legislator Yvette Cooper said.

Cooper introduced legislation, which Parliament is set to consider, this week, that would compel May to seek to extend the Brexit process beyond April 12 in order to prevent a no-deal departure.

___

Casert reported from Brussels. Mike Corder in Halfweg, Netherlands, contributed to this story.

___

Follow AP’s full coverage of Brexit at: https://www.apnews.com/Brexit

Jill Lawless, Raf Casert And Danica Kirka, The Associated Press

The Canadian Press

syndication.thecanadianpress.com/rss/69467d8c-ad4b-48a4-895e-9e19d79c6c8e

Storytelling is in our DNA. We provide credible, compelling multimedia storytelling and services in English and French to help captivate your digital, broadcast and print audiences. As Canada’s national news agency for 100 years, we give Canadians an unbiased news source, driven by truth, accuracy and timeliness.

Follow Author

Peckford: Hallelujah! Supreme Court of Canada to hear Newfoundland and Labrador charter case

COVID-19 / 10 months ago

Supreme Court will not hear case about government’s violation of rights and freedoms

Alberta / 11 months ago

Alberta looking to ban electronic vote tabulators ahead of next provincial election

Uncategorized

Taxpayers Federation calling on BC Government to scrap failed Carbon Tax

Published on January 16, 2025

Todayville

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Carson Binda

BC Government promised carbon tax would reduce CO2 by 33%. It has done nothing.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on the British Columbia government to scrap the carbon tax as new data shows the province’s carbon emissions have continued to rise, despite the oldest carbon tax in the country.

“The carbon tax isn’t reducing carbon emissions like the politicians promised,” said Carson Binda, B.C. Director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. “Premier David Eby needs to axe the tax now to save British Columbians money.”

Emissions data from the provincial government shows that British Columbia’s emissions have risen since the introduction of a carbon tax.

Total emissions in 2007, the last year without a provincial carbon tax, stood at 65.5 MtCO2e, while 2022 emissions data shows an increase to 65.6 MtCO2e.

When the carbon tax was introduced, the B.C. government pledged that it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 33 per cent.

The Eby government plans to increase the B.C. carbon tax again on April 1, 2025. After that increase, the carbon tax will add 21 cents to the cost of a litre of natural gas, 25 cents per litre of diesel and 18 cents per cubic meter of natural gas.

“The carbon tax has cost British Columbians a lot of money, but it hasn’t helped the environment as promised,” Binda said. “Eby has a simple choice: scrap the carbon tax before April 1, or force British Columbians to pay even more to heat our homes and drive to work.”

If a family fills up the minivan once per week for a year, the carbon tax will cost them $728. The carbon tax on natural gas will add $435 to the average family’s home heating bills in the 12 months after the April 1 carbon tax hike.

Other provinces, like Saskatchewan, have unilaterally stopped collecting the carbon tax on essentials like home heating and have not faced consequences from Ottawa.

“British Columbians need real relief from the costs of the provincial carbon tax,” Binda said. “Eby needs to stop waiting for permission from the leaderless federal government and scrap the tax on British Columbians.”

Uncategorized

The problem with deficits and debt

Published on January 13, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Jake Fuss

This fiscal year (2024/25), the federal government and eight out of 10 provinces project a budget deficit, meaning they’re spending more than collecting in revenues. Unfortunately, this trend isn’t new. Many Canadian governments—including the federal government—have routinely ran deficits over the last decade.

But why should Canadians care? If you listen to some politicians (and even some economists), they say deficits—and the debt they produce—are no big deal. But in reality, the consequences of government debt are real and land squarely on everyday Canadians.

Budget deficits, which occur when the government spends more than it collects in revenue over the fiscal year, fuel debt accumulation. For example, since 2015, the federal government’s large and persistent deficits have more than doubled total federal debt, which will reach a projected $2.2 trillion this fiscal year. That has real world consequences. Here are a few of them:

Diverted Program Spending: Just as Canadians must pay interest on their own mortgages or car loans, taxpayers must pay interest on government debt. Each dollar spent paying interest is a dollar diverted from public programs such as health care and education, or potential tax relief. This fiscal year, federal debt interest costs will reach $53.7 billion or $1,301 per Canadian. And that number doesn’t include provincial government debt interest, which varies by province. In Ontario, for example, debt interest costs are projected to be $12.7 billion or $789 per Ontarian.

Higher Taxes in the Future: When governments run deficits, they’re borrowing to pay for today’s spending. But eventually someone (i.e. future generations of Canadians) must pay for this borrowing in the form of higher taxes. For example, if you’re a 16-year-old Canadian in 2025, you’ll pay an estimated $29,663 over your lifetime in additional personal income taxes (that you would otherwise not pay) due to Canada’s ballooning federal debt. By comparison, a 65-year-old will pay an estimated $2,433. Younger Canadians clearly bear a disproportionately large share of the government debt being accumulated currently.

Risks of rising interest rates: When governments run deficits, they increase demand for borrowing. In other words, governments compete with individuals, families and businesses for the savings available for borrowing. In response, interest rates rise, and subsequently, so does the cost of servicing government debt. Of course, the private sector also must pay these higher interest rates, which can reduce the level of private investment in the economy. In other words, private investment that would have occurred no longer does because of higher interest rates, which reduces overall economic growth—the foundation for job-creation and prosperity. Not surprisingly, as government debt has increased, business investment has declined—specifically, business investment per worker fell from $18,363 in 2014 to $14,687 in 2021 (inflation-adjusted).

Risk of Inflation: When governments increase spending, particularly with borrowed money, they add more money to the economy, which can fuel inflation. According to a 2023 report from Scotiabank, government spending contributed significantly to higher interest rates in Canada, accounting for an estimated 42 per cent of the increase in the Bank of Canada’s rate since the first quarter of 2022. As a result, many Canadians have seen the costs of their borrowing—mortgages, car loans, lines of credit—soar in recent years.

Recession Risks: The accumulation of deficits and debt, which do not enhance productivity in the economy, weaken the government’s ability to deal with future challenges including economic downturns because the government has less fiscal capacity available to take on more debt. That’s because during a recession, government spending automatically increases and government revenues decrease, even before policymakers react with any specific measures. For example, as unemployment rises, employment insurance (EI) payments automatically increase, while revenues for EI decrease. Therefore, when a downturn or recession hits, and the government wants to spend even more money beyond these automatic programs, it must go further into debt.

Government debt comes with major consequences for Canadians. To alleviate the pain of government debt on Canadians, our policymakers should work to balance their budgets in 2025.