SENIOR EU POLITICIANS HAVE SPOKEN OUT ON THE PROSPECT OF THE UK REFUSING TO PAY THE £39 BILLION DIVORCE BILL. Theresa May has agreed to pay £39 billion to leave the European Union when she signed the Withdrawal Agreement, however, the UK could end up leaving with no deal and refusing to pay the full £39 billion.
Jacob Rees-Mogg and Wetherspoons Boss, Tim Martin, have proposed to the Prime Minister that she should seriously consider walking away from the EU without spending a penny.
Mr Rees-Mogg referred back to a House of Lords report from March 2017 which states that we don’t ‘owe them any money, because that may make them more willing to talk’.
One European Commissioner was asked what would be the outcome if the UK was to leave without paying the £39 Billion bill, the EU indirectly warned and threatened the British government.
European Commissioner for Agriculture Phil Hogan said: “Well that’s actually part of the divorce settlement, and I haven’t seen any divorce settlement actually ratified by the courts without actually observing or implementing the commitments already made.
“This is already agreed by the government of the United Kingdom and the European Union and I don’t see any way in which the credibility of any third country would be enhanced by actually reneging on financial commitments of the divorce settlement in the Withdrawal Agreement.”
Renege: ‘go back on a promise, undertaking, or contract.’.
What the EU is effectively saying is that if the UK goes against paying the divorce bill, which currently stands at £39 billion and is agreed on then they would damage their status in the world and their credibility with future partnerships.
In other words, the EU is telling us that if we refuse to pay the divorce bill, you are going to hurt yourself in the process.
Hogan added: “We have taken into account the fact that €12 billion less is available for the overall EU budget arising from the UK leaving the European Union.
“We have factored in all of the necessary financial scenarios.”
May has been on record saying: “I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.
“The UK will honour commitments we have made during the period of our membership.”
HOME»CULTURE»TV AND RADIO»BBC BBC admits receiving millions in grants from EU and councils The BBC received millions of pounds from the European Union and local authorities over the past four years, The Daily Telegraph can disclose. Leaving the EU is the only way we can regain control of immigration BBC received nearly £3million in grant money from the European Union over the past four years Photo: Alamy
The news prompted MPs to raise questions about the BBC’s impartiality when its journalists report on events in the EU.
The BBC admitted in a letter to a Tory MP that it has received nearly £3million in grant money from the European Union over the past four years.
Other grants totalling £16million came from local authorities across the UK. The money was spent on "research and development projects".
The broadcaster also disclosed that its commercial arm BBC Worldwide borrowed over £141million from the European Investment Bank since 2003. Of that figure £30million is still due to be repaid by the end of May this year.
These figures are disclosed in the commercial arm’s annual report, while the BBC's annual report does not make clear where the grant money comes from.
Related Articles Tories would rip up BBC charter 19 Oct 2009 Mark Thompson's successor is tipped as Helen Boaden 24 Jan 2012 Wage cut for BBC Director General 23 Jan 2012 BBC viewers 'face new licence fee to watch huge TV archive' 13 Jan 2012 Conservative MP Karl McCartney, who obtained the information through a Parliamentary Question, said he was concerned that receiving the money could affect the way the BBC covers events in the European Union.
He said: “People will quite rightly continue to question what influence the EU exerts over the BBC, particularly in the light of EU loans and grants, and the BBC's often one-sided coverage of matters relating to Europe.
“This and other examples of BBC bias and left wing leaning politicised reporting worry and concern both me and my colleagues.”
Conservative MP Dominic Raab said that this “financial dependence of the BBC on the EU casts a shadow over its editorial independence”.
He added: “The BBC covers EU issues on a daily basis, so people will understandably - and legitimately - question whether there is a link between the money it receives and the reporting it broadcasts.
"Whether or not there is an actual conflict of interest, it risks undermining their perceived impartiality.”
Priti Patel, a Tory MP, said that the figures “explains much of their subjective, pro-European commentary and hostility to those who critic the EU”. She asked: “How can a public service broadcaster demonstrate genuine impartially on European issues if it in receipt of EU funds?”
The news comes after questions have been raised about the uncritical tone of the BBC’s coverage of the EU. In 2010, Jonathan Charles, the BBC’s former Brussels correspondent, admitted he and the BBC had got carried away by the launch of the Euro currency in 2002.
He said: ‘Even now, I can remember the great air of excitement. It did seem like the start of a new era... for a few brief days, I suppose I and everyone else suspended their scepticism and got caught up in that euphoria.”
An analysis by Eurosceptic thinktank Global Britain found that over the past six years, just 0.04 per cent of the coverage on Radio Four’s flagship Today programme was devoted to the potential benefits of withdrawing from the EU.
A BBC spokesman said: "Each year in our Annual Report we disclose the total income received from a variety of grants. Grants from the EU make up a relatively small proportion of the total figure. The vast majority of EU grants are used for research and development projects.
“BBC News does not receive any grant funding from the EU. Impartiality and balanced reporting is and always will be of paramount importance for the BBC.”
BBC Worldwide, which buys programmes from the BBC and markets them around the world, said there were "no editorial conditions of any sort" attached to the loans it had received from the European Investment Bank.
The BBC borrowed money from the EIB because it was able to lend at a cheaper rate than other commercial institutions.
A BBC Worldwide spokesman said: "It represents funding for BBC Worldwide, the commercial arm of the BBC, which is self-financing and has absolutely no access to licence fee funds.
"This loan was obtained on a fully commercial basis and has no editorial impact on the BBC’s output.”
UK signs Swiss trade deal as heat grows on Liam Fox
Previous deals have been signed with Chile (Stuttgart: 704599.SG - news) , Israel and the Faroe Islands, but critics have claimed that too little progress has been made in securing agreements with vital trading partners. Britain has long traded around the world under the terms of deals agreed by the European Union, a procedure that will come to an end after Brexit.
The EU has 40 agreements, covering trade with 71 different countries, that would need to be rolled over. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, these would need to be completed by 29 March, an ambition that many in British business now believe to be almost impossible
He has faced growing criticism for failing to sign more deals, and for appearing to criss-cross the globe to little effect. Last month, Dr Fox was accused of having "extremely low credibility" by the chief executive of Unipart, John Neill.
'Disorderly Brexit' likely to hit UK economy in short and long term
“A disorderly Brexit would be likely to lead to lower economic growth in the short and long run,” says major thinktank Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS). In its latest report, The outlook for the 2019 Spending Review, the IFS outlined why a no-deal Brexit, which is when the UK crashes out of the European Union without a deal in place, will hit the UK economy over a long period of time.
BREXIT SNUB: Barnier warns Stephen Barclay that Brussels WILL NOT renegotiate May's deal
BREXIT Secretary Stephen Barclay drew a blank from crunch talks with EU negotiator Michel Barnier who refused to reopen the withdrawal agreement in order to break the Westminster deadlock
After a two-hour dinner, Mr Barnier emerged from the British residence in Brussels having told his negotiating counterpart that the EU will continue to refuse alter the Irish backstop, the mechanism to avoid a hard border. Theresa May sent Mr Barclay and her European advisor Olly Robbins to hold official negotiations for the first time since the draft EU withdrawal agreement was signed off by European leaders in November last year. Tonight’s meeting was described as “constructive” by the UK Government, who have pledged to continue negotiations until they reach a compromise acceptable to MPs in Westminster.
Common sense tells us that it would have been sensible to have negotiated our divorce settlement prior to the referendum and the subsequent issue of article 50.
It did not happen that way.
However, maybe it's not too late.
We could rescind article 50; issue notice on the EU of our intention to withdraw at a date to be defined by us when terms have been agreed; and to insist that all countries within the EU (including us) are involved in negotiations to define the exact basis upon which each and every country would be allowed to leave the EU.
The negotiations might take some time but doing it this way would avoid the "us and them" scenario which we are involved with at the moment. All countries would have their own self interest at heart making negotiations easier.
During this period we could in tandem endeavour to conclude our potential post Brexit deals with countries outside the EU.
Is this tooooooo simple?
Better than falling off the edge of a cliff maybe?
Common sense tells us that it would have been sensible to have negotiated our divorce settlement prior to the referendum and the subsequent issue of article 50.
It did not happen that way.
However, maybe it's not too late.
We could rescind article 50; issue notice on the EU of our intention to withdraw at a date to be defined by us when terms have been agreed; and to insist that all countries within the EU (including us) are involved in negotiations to define the exact basis upon which each and every country would be allowed to leave the EU.
The negotiations might take some time but doing it this way would avoid the "us and them" scenario which we are involved with at the moment. All countries would have their own self interest at heart making negotiations easier.
During this period we could in tandem endeavour to conclude our potential post Brexit deals with countries outside the EU.
Is this tooooooo simple?
Better than falling off the edge of a cliff maybe?
We have the right to revoke Article 50. We could do this at any time before the end of March.
No need to ask the EU.
We would just continue as members.
We could invoke it again at some point in the future.
This would just start the 2 years notice all over again.
I think that the Withdrawal Agreement that has taken almost 2 years so far, should have taken no more than a week.
All we have been negotiating is citizens rights, how much we owe them, and the Irish border.
We could have immediately given EU citizens the same rights as they already have, as long as the EU reciprocated for the Brits living in the EU.
We know how much the bill is.
The solutions for the Irish border are the same now as they were 3 years ago. We just cant decide on one.
The original plan was to negotiate The Withdrawal Agreement, and the future trading arrangements within the 2 years.
May to ask MPs for further fortnight's grace in Brexit talks
PM will stress her continued focus on Irish backstop but EU indicates it will not give way
Theresa May hopes to convince the House of Commons on Tuesday to give her another fortnight’s grace to keep pushing for changes to the Irish backstop – despite the insistence of Michel Barnier that it is Britain that must compromise. With 45 days to go until Britain is due by law to leave the EU, with or without a deal, the prime minister will address MPs about progress in the Brexit talks, No 10 announced on Monday.
She is unlikely to signal any shift towards a closer future relationship with the EU, after writing to Jeremy Corbyn to underline her continued objections to a customs union, and instead she will focus on the backstop. “We are absolutely clear on this: we’re not considering Jeremy Corbyn’s customs proposals, we’re not considering any proposals to remain in the customs union. We must have our own, independent trade policy,” May’s spokesman said on Monday.
Barnier says Britain must give ground to break Brexit impasse
May will stress her continued focus on the backstop, but the EU’s chief negotiator insisted on Monday there was no question of Brussels giving in to Downing Street’s demands.
The Brexiteer story just falls apart, when it comes under scrutiny.
They shout from the rooftops that the best outcome is no deal, and just trade on WTO rules. Tim Martin loves to spout this story, Lord Snooty, and the ERG swear by it.
Liam Fox, himself a prominent Brexiteer, was more logical, when answering a WTO question at the end of last week.
As he is currently Secretary of State for International Trade and President of the Board of Trade, you would hope that he would know what he was talking about.
Well his reply to the question was simply "If the WTO is so good, why would anyone ever do a free trade deal?"
Very cagey on rolling over trade deals. The WTO bit starts at around 7 minutes in.
The Guardian reports that Theresa May hopes to convince the Commons to give her another fortnight's grace to keep pushing for changes to her Brexit withdrawal agreement - in spite of the EU's refusal to give in to her demands. The paper thinks she is unlikely to signal any shift towards a closer future relationship with the EU when she addresses MPs later. Describing her talks in Brussels last week, an unnamed ally of Mrs May tells the Financial Times: "We had a series of meetings where they effectively told us they were not prepared to give us the things that we need."
Huffpost UK claims a no-deal Brexit is now the prime minister's fallback plan to save her party and herself, if she can't rescue her withdrawal agreement. It says some of those who know her best say she is "thinking the unthinkable", after deciding in recent weeks that jumping off the cliff may somehow have a softer landing than expected. According to a report in the Sun, cabinet ministers believe Mrs May is preparing to resign as prime minister this summer - after delivering Brexit - so she can influence the choice of her successor. It says she's hinted as much to two senior figures, including International Trade Secretary Liam Fox. The Sun says the plan will be seen as an attempt to stop Boris Johnson becoming prime minister.
Research by the pollster, YouGov, for the Times, predicts that Mrs May would win a working majority if a general election were held today. The poll of 40,000 adults last week - combined with the demographics of individual constituencies - suggests Labour would lose 12 seats while the Tories would gain four. The Times says parliament would still be highly unstable and the prime minister would struggle to push through her policies, particularly on Brexit.
Hammond’s Brexit ‘dividend’ claim rejected as UK economy stalls
Chancellor’s claim undermined as rapid slowdown in GDP growth is revealed
Philip Hammond’s claim that Britain can reap an economic dividend from Theresa May’s Brexit deal has been flatly rejected by MPs, as official figures confirmed the UK has suffered its worst year for GDP growth since 2012. In a highly critical report, the Treasury select committee warned that the chancellor’s claims of a “deal dividend” if Britain avoided a no-deal exit lacked credibility.
For 2018 as a whole, GDP growth slipped to its lowest since 2012, at 1.4%, down from 1.8% in 2017. Nicky Morgan MP, the Conservative chair of the committee, said Hammond’s “dividend” claim, at the Conservative party conference last year, had already been undermined by the government’s independent forecaster, the Office for Budget Responsibility. The OBR had told the committee the dividend was not an economic boost so much as “avoiding something really very bad” in the form of a no-deal departure.
EU contribution pushes up government borrowing Britain’s budget deficit, the gap between spending and income from taxes, was higher than expected in December, as the government spent more than it received. Although the UK’s finances are steadily improving on an annual basis, the performance over the last month was worse than the City expected. Borrowing was about £3bn, versus an estimate of £1.9bn. The Office for National Statistics said the UK’s contribution to the EU budget was £1.5bn higher than in December 2017; transfers to Brussels can fluctuate at the end of each year.
Brexit stockpiling boosts business activity An increase in firms stockpiling before a potential no-deal Brexit helped UK factory output grow at the fastest pace in six months during December, amid growing fears of border delays. The latest snapshot from IHS Markit and the Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply suggests Brexit could perversely benefit the economy in the short-term by prompting firms to raise activity in preparation for no deal
The average wages of British workers rose at the fastest annual rate since the financial crisis in the three months to November as unemployment fell to the lowest rate since the mid-1970s. Average weekly earnings, excluding bonuses, increased by 3.3% in the biggest rise since 2008. Meanwhile, the number of people in work also rose after an increase of 141,000 people entering employment to a record high of 32.54 million in the three months to November. Despite the good news from the jobs market, some economists warned that employers may have turned to hiring contractors rather than full-time staff amid uncertainty over Brexit, with self-employment accounting for two-thirds of the rise in new jobs.
Comments
Theresa May has agreed to pay £39 billion to leave the European Union when she signed the Withdrawal Agreement, however, the UK could end up leaving with no deal and refusing to pay the full £39 billion.
Jacob Rees-Mogg and Wetherspoons Boss, Tim Martin, have proposed to the Prime Minister that she should seriously consider walking away from the EU without spending a penny.
Mr Rees-Mogg referred back to a House of Lords report from March 2017 which states that we don’t ‘owe them any money, because that may make them more willing to talk’.
One European Commissioner was asked what would be the outcome if the UK was to leave without paying the £39 Billion bill, the EU indirectly warned and threatened the British government.
European Commissioner for Agriculture Phil Hogan said: “Well that’s actually part of the divorce settlement, and I haven’t seen any divorce settlement actually ratified by the courts without actually observing or implementing the commitments already made.
Renege: ‘go back on a promise, undertaking, or contract.’.
What the EU is effectively saying is that if the UK goes against paying the divorce bill, which currently stands at £39 billion and is agreed on then they would damage their status in the world and their credibility with future partnerships.
In other words, the EU is telling us that if we refuse to pay the divorce bill, you are going to hurt yourself in the process.
“We have factored in all of the necessary financial scenarios.”
May has been on record saying: “I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.
“The UK will honour commitments we have made during the period of our membership.”
BBC admits receiving millions in grants from EU and councils
The BBC received millions of pounds from the European Union and local authorities over the past four years, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.
Leaving the EU is the only way we can regain control of immigration
BBC received nearly £3million in grant money from the European Union over the past four years Photo: Alamy
The news prompted MPs to raise questions about the BBC’s impartiality when its journalists report on events in the EU.
The BBC admitted in a letter to a Tory MP that it has received nearly £3million in grant money from the European Union over the past four years.
Other grants totalling £16million came from local authorities across the UK. The money was spent on "research and development projects".
The broadcaster also disclosed that its commercial arm BBC Worldwide borrowed over £141million from the European Investment Bank since 2003. Of that figure £30million is still due to be repaid by the end of May this year.
These figures are disclosed in the commercial arm’s annual report, while the BBC's annual report does not make clear where the grant money comes from.
Related Articles
Tories would rip up BBC charter 19 Oct 2009
Mark Thompson's successor is tipped as Helen Boaden 24 Jan 2012
Wage cut for BBC Director General 23 Jan 2012
BBC viewers 'face new licence fee to watch huge TV archive' 13 Jan 2012
Conservative MP Karl McCartney, who obtained the information through a Parliamentary Question, said he was concerned that receiving the money could affect the way the BBC covers events in the European Union.
He said: “People will quite rightly continue to question what influence the EU exerts over the BBC, particularly in the light of EU loans and grants, and the BBC's often one-sided coverage of matters relating to Europe.
“This and other examples of BBC bias and left wing leaning politicised reporting worry and concern both me and my colleagues.”
Conservative MP Dominic Raab said that this “financial dependence of the BBC on the EU casts a shadow over its editorial independence”.
He added: “The BBC covers EU issues on a daily basis, so people will understandably - and legitimately - question whether there is a link between the money it receives and the reporting it broadcasts.
"Whether or not there is an actual conflict of interest, it risks undermining their perceived impartiality.”
Priti Patel, a Tory MP, said that the figures “explains much of their subjective, pro-European commentary and hostility to those who critic the EU”. She asked: “How can a public service broadcaster demonstrate genuine impartially on European issues if it in receipt of EU funds?”
The news comes after questions have been raised about the uncritical tone of the BBC’s coverage of the EU. In 2010, Jonathan Charles, the BBC’s former Brussels correspondent, admitted he and the BBC had got carried away by the launch of the Euro currency in 2002.
He said: ‘Even now, I can remember the great air of excitement. It did seem like the start of a new era... for a few brief days, I suppose I and everyone else suspended their scepticism and got caught up in that euphoria.”
An analysis by Eurosceptic thinktank Global Britain found that over the past six years, just 0.04 per cent of the coverage on Radio Four’s flagship Today programme was devoted to the potential benefits of withdrawing from the EU.
A BBC spokesman said: "Each year in our Annual Report we disclose the total income received from a variety of grants. Grants from the EU make up a relatively small proportion of the total figure. The vast majority of EU grants are used for research and development projects.
“BBC News does not receive any grant funding from the EU. Impartiality and balanced reporting is and always will be of paramount importance for the BBC.”
BBC Worldwide, which buys programmes from the BBC and markets them around the world, said there were "no editorial conditions of any sort" attached to the loans it had received from the European Investment Bank.
The BBC borrowed money from the EIB because it was able to lend at a cheaper rate than other commercial institutions.
A BBC Worldwide spokesman said: "It represents funding for BBC Worldwide, the commercial arm of the BBC, which is self-financing and has absolutely no access to licence fee funds.
"This loan was obtained on a fully commercial basis and has no editorial impact on the BBC’s output.”
Previous deals have been signed with Chile (Stuttgart: 704599.SG - news) , Israel and the Faroe Islands, but critics have claimed that too little progress has been made in securing agreements with vital trading partners.
Britain has long traded around the world under the terms of deals agreed by the European Union, a procedure that will come to an end after Brexit.
The EU has 40 agreements, covering trade with 71 different countries, that would need to be rolled over. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, these would need to be completed by 29 March, an ambition that many in British business now believe to be almost impossible
He has faced growing criticism for failing to sign more deals, and for appearing to criss-cross the globe to little effect. Last month, Dr Fox was accused of having "extremely low credibility" by the chief executive of Unipart, John Neill.
https://uk.yahoo.com/finance/news/uk-signs-swiss-trade-deal-103700285.html
“A disorderly Brexit would be likely to lead to lower economic growth in the short and long run,” says major thinktank Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS).
In its latest report, The outlook for the 2019 Spending Review, the IFS outlined why a no-deal Brexit, which is when the UK crashes out of the European Union without a deal in place, will hit the UK economy over a long period of time.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/disorderly-brexit-likely-hit-uk-economy-short-long-term-065344339.html
BREXIT Secretary Stephen Barclay drew a blank from crunch talks with EU negotiator Michel Barnier who refused to reopen the withdrawal agreement in order to break the Westminster deadlock
After a two-hour dinner, Mr Barnier emerged from the British residence in Brussels having told his negotiating counterpart that the EU will continue to refuse alter the Irish backstop, the mechanism to avoid a hard border. Theresa May sent Mr Barclay and her European advisor Olly Robbins to hold official negotiations for the first time since the draft EU withdrawal agreement was signed off by European leaders in November last year. Tonight’s meeting was described as “constructive” by the UK Government, who have pledged to continue negotiations until they reach a compromise acceptable to MPs in Westminster.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1085803/Brexit-news-UK-EU-Michel-Barnier-Stephen-Barclay-Brussels-dinner-latest
It did not happen that way.
However, maybe it's not too late.
We could rescind article 50; issue notice on the EU of our intention to withdraw at a date to be defined by us when terms have been agreed; and to insist that all countries within the EU (including us) are involved in negotiations to define the exact basis upon which each and every country would be allowed to leave the EU.
The negotiations might take some time but doing it this way would avoid the "us and them" scenario which we are involved with at the moment. All countries would have their own self interest at heart making negotiations easier.
During this period we could in tandem endeavour to conclude our potential post Brexit deals with countries outside the EU.
Is this tooooooo simple?
Better than falling off the edge of a cliff maybe?
No need to ask the EU.
We would just continue as members.
We could invoke it again at some point in the future.
This would just start the 2 years notice all over again.
I think that the Withdrawal Agreement that has taken almost 2 years so far, should have taken no more than a week.
All we have been negotiating is citizens rights, how much we owe them, and the Irish border.
We could have immediately given EU citizens the same rights as they already have, as long as the EU reciprocated for the Brits living in the EU.
We know how much the bill is.
The solutions for the Irish border are the same now as they were 3 years ago. We just cant decide on one.
The original plan was to negotiate The Withdrawal Agreement, and the future trading arrangements within the 2 years.
This obviously didn't work.
PM will stress her continued focus on Irish backstop but EU indicates it will not give way
Theresa May hopes to convince the House of Commons on Tuesday to give her another fortnight’s grace to keep pushing for changes to the Irish backstop – despite the insistence of Michel Barnier that it is Britain that must compromise.
With 45 days to go until Britain is due by law to leave the EU, with or without a deal, the prime minister will address MPs about progress in the Brexit talks, No 10 announced on Monday.
She is unlikely to signal any shift towards a closer future relationship with the EU, after writing to Jeremy Corbyn to underline her continued objections to a customs union, and instead she will focus on the backstop.
“We are absolutely clear on this: we’re not considering Jeremy Corbyn’s customs proposals, we’re not considering any proposals to remain in the customs union. We must have our own, independent trade policy,” May’s spokesman said on Monday.
Barnier says Britain must give ground to break Brexit impasse
May will stress her continued focus on the backstop, but the EU’s chief negotiator insisted on Monday there was no question of Brussels giving in to Downing Street’s demands.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/11/may-to-ask-mps-for-further-fortnights-grace-in-brexit-talks
They shout from the rooftops that the best outcome is no deal, and just trade on WTO rules. Tim Martin loves to spout this story, Lord Snooty, and the ERG swear by it.
Liam Fox, himself a prominent Brexiteer, was more logical, when answering a WTO question at the end of last week.
As he is currently Secretary of State for International Trade and President of the Board of Trade, you would hope that he would know what he was talking about.
Well his reply to the question was simply "If the WTO is so good, why would anyone ever do a free trade deal?"
Very cagey on rolling over trade deals. The WTO bit starts at around 7 minutes in.
How do I send this to Wetherspoons?
The paper thinks she is unlikely to signal any shift towards a closer future relationship with the EU when she addresses MPs later.
Describing her talks in Brussels last week, an unnamed ally of Mrs May tells the Financial Times: "We had a series of meetings where they effectively told us they were not prepared to give us the things that we need."
Huffpost UK claims a no-deal Brexit is now the prime minister's fallback plan to save her party and herself, if she can't rescue her withdrawal agreement.
It says some of those who know her best say she is "thinking the unthinkable", after deciding in recent weeks that jumping off the cliff may somehow have a softer landing than expected.
According to a report in the Sun, cabinet ministers believe Mrs May is preparing to resign as prime minister this summer - after delivering Brexit - so she can influence the choice of her successor.
It says she's hinted as much to two senior figures, including International Trade Secretary Liam Fox. The Sun says the plan will be seen as an attempt to stop Boris Johnson becoming prime minister.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-47206306
The Times says parliament would still be highly unstable and the prime minister would struggle to push through her policies, particularly on Brexit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-47206306
Chancellor’s claim undermined as rapid slowdown in GDP growth is revealed
Philip Hammond’s claim that Britain can reap an economic dividend from Theresa May’s Brexit deal has been flatly rejected by MPs, as official figures confirmed the UK has suffered its worst year for GDP growth since 2012.
In a highly critical report, the Treasury select committee warned that the chancellor’s claims of a “deal dividend” if Britain avoided a no-deal exit lacked credibility.
For 2018 as a whole, GDP growth slipped to its lowest since 2012, at 1.4%, down from 1.8% in 2017.
Nicky Morgan MP, the Conservative chair of the committee, said Hammond’s “dividend” claim, at the Conservative party conference last year, had already been undermined by the government’s independent forecaster, the Office for Budget Responsibility. The OBR had told the committee the dividend was not an economic boost so much as “avoiding something really very bad” in the form of a no-deal departure.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/12/hammonds-brexit-dividend-claim-rejected-as-uk-economy-stalls
Britain’s budget deficit, the gap between spending and income from taxes, was higher than expected in December, as the government spent more than it received. Although the UK’s finances are steadily improving on an annual basis, the performance over the last month was worse than the City expected. Borrowing was about £3bn, versus an estimate of £1.9bn. The Office for National Statistics said the UK’s contribution to the EU budget was £1.5bn higher than in December 2017; transfers to Brussels can fluctuate at the end of each year.
An increase in firms stockpiling before a potential no-deal Brexit helped UK factory output grow at the fastest pace in six months during December, amid growing fears of border delays. The latest snapshot from IHS Markit and the Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply suggests Brexit could perversely benefit the economy in the short-term by prompting firms to raise activity in preparation for no deal
The average wages of British workers rose at the fastest annual rate since the financial crisis in the three months to November as unemployment fell to the lowest rate since the mid-1970s. Average weekly earnings, excluding bonuses, increased by 3.3% in the biggest rise since 2008. Meanwhile, the number of people in work also rose after an increase of 141,000 people entering employment to a record high of 32.54 million in the three months to November. Despite the good news from the jobs market, some economists warned that employers may have turned to hiring contractors rather than full-time staff amid uncertainty over Brexit, with self-employment accounting for two-thirds of the rise in new jobs.