15/12/2017 Politics Europe

But first on BBC News,

Politics Europe.

Hello, welcome to Politics Europe,

your regular guide to the top

stories in Brussels and Strasbourg.

On today's program, EU leaders give

the green light to move on to phase

2 of the Brexit talks.

When will the EU and UK

start discussing trade

and transition period?

Former European Parliament

President, Martin Schultz,

says that the EU should become

a United State of Europe by 2025.

Is that realistic?

Could Brexit hasten the process?

And, was the doner almost a goner?

A vote in the European Parliament

almost skewered the humble frozen

vertical meat stick,

or kebab to you and me.

We'll chew over the details.

So, all that to to come and more

in the next half an hour

and joining me for all

of it is Ann McElvoy

from the Economist and the Daily

Mail's Andrew Pierce.

First though, here is our guide

to the latest from Europe

in just 60 seconds.

Theresa May began the week

with a Brexit spring in her step,

following that deal to move talks

onto the next stage.

But by midweek, was her first defeat

in the Commons when MPs voted

to give Parliament a legal guarantee

of a vote on the final deal

struck in Brussels.

The European Parliament passed

a motion of approving a move

to phase 2 but not all

MPs were supportive.

Theresa the Appeaser has given

in on virtually everything.

Elsewhere, the new Polish Prime

Minister has said his dream

is to rechristianise the EU,

corner for a return to proper values

in an interview with

the Catholic TV channel.

The European commission President,

John Claude Junke is facing

an investigation over a case

involving an alleged illegal wiretap

when he was Prime

Minister of Luxembourg.

And Emmanuel Macron hosted 50

countries and one kid at a climate

change summit in Brussels.

A notable absentee was the US

President, Donald Trump but don't

worry, Arnold Schwarzenegger

was there instead.

Now, one of the stories we saw

there was about the new Polish

minister who wants to

rechristianise the EU.

What do you think about that?

I think Poland is in the sort of no

mates category in Europe.

It has such a big economy.

It has turned inwards,

it has problems within its legal

system, its politics have become

rather hideous and its views

of minorities are not good.

I am just going to say

that it is funny that we are nervous

when we had this argument about this

when Germany opposed Turkish entry.

It is an "in fairness

to Poland" clause.

Angela Merkel had a strong sort

of Christian identity and you didn't

have to be Christian to go to church

but there was a Christian

underpinning to the idea of the EU

which historically was true.

That is one of the reasons why

she kept the Germans,

Austrians and others

kept the Turks out.

It is interesting that has come back

and it does not feel

like it is the right language to be

talking about the EU.

Do you agree?

As Ann said, it seems a far cry

from the days when we were talking

about accession for Turkey.

Obviously that became an issue

during the EU referendum and now

we have a new Prime Minister

in Poland saying that they want

the European Union to return

to its traditionalChristian routes.

As a good Roman Catholic boy I ought

to welcome this but I am alarmed

because the politics in Poland have

turned very far to the right

and I think it has got

an unhealthy undertone,

it sounds like it could be a racist

undertone so I would

be quite concerned.

Now in the last hour,

European Union leaders have allowed

Brexit talks to progress

to the next phase.

Talks have moved into the UK's

eventual relationship with the EU.

It is up for discussion,

including trade, transition,

security, justice

and the list goes on.

The BBC's Adam Fleming caught up

with negotiator Michel Garnier

after the news broke.

Are you happy?

It is a big achievement.

You going to get new guidelines?

Are looking forward to that?

When do you think we will have

the transition period

sorted and ready?

There will be a transition

beginning next year.

When will we know?

Will we know by March when it is?

And, joining me now to discuss

all of this is the MEP,

Seb Dance, the leader of Labour

in the European Parliament.

He is here in the studio

and the Conservative leader

in the European Parliament,

Ashley Fox MEP joins

me from Bristol.

Ashley Fox, first of all what do

you want to see in terms

of Britain's position

and status within the EU

during the implementation phase?

Well, we want a deep and special

partnership with the European Union.

During that transition period,

I think we want to maintain

equivalence with the customs union,

equivalence with the single market,

so that during that 2-year period,

firms do not need to adjust

their rules again.

Does that mean still taking rules

from the European Union Court

of Justice and freedom of movement?

I think that that is

something to be negotiated.

And what is your view?

It is something to be negotiated.

I would expect freedom of movement

to continue from the 2 years

after we leave to the end

of the transition period.

Seb says that needs to be

negotiated, but formalising

the transition period and the status

of Britain will be part of that.

It also requires the approval

of the European Parliament.

What is the mood in Brussels

and Strasbourg from European MPs?

I suppose the mood is one

of caution, a slight air of relief

that we have managed to get some

progress now obviously because...

Yes.

There was a stage towards the end

of last week where there

were really panic stations.

It looked bad.

So, there is a sense of progress

but ultimately the government has

caved in on so much that I think

the expectation is effectively

that the transition period will be

another example of that.

The only difference is that we would

be able to make any rules,

we will just be applying them.

What ways have the

government caved in?

Well, if you look at this

one deal, alignment,

is the post- transition stage.

That means that the customs union,

and the single market.

Forget regulatory alignment

in the areas covered

by the Good Friday agreement..

You must accept

of the customs union.

We will not have a say

in those rules.

Do you accept that?

That there is possibility that

Britain remains in the customs union

beyond transition for many years?

No, I think Seb Dance

is talking nonsense.

We will leave the customs union

and we will leave the single market

and we will have a separate

agreement between the United Kingdom

and the EU and it is interesting

that the Italian Prime Minister

Gentiloni has already said it

would need a tailor-made solution

for the united kingdom.

I have to say it must be really

difficult to be a Labour MEP

at the moment because you have to be

permanently miserable, top-down.

Not miserable.

Mrs May has done really well

and she is a formidable politician.

I would like to know what magical

way of squaring this circle you have

come up with because that

is what the text says.

Unless you can come up with a way

of achieving full alignment

through some other means

that the customs union

and the single market,

and incidentally of had 18 months

to come up with this magic

solution and nobody has...

I'm not remotely miserable.

I am fascinated at how this magic

trick is going to be performed.

What is your response?

Seb had not read read the agreement

because what it says is,

we will maintain alignment for those

areas where there is north

south cooperation.

Look at the 12 areas.

Some are fairly minor

like waterways and tourism,

the two big ones are

agriculture and energy.

There is already a single energy

market and this will not change

so that challenges

related to agriculture.

We absolutely will not be staying

in the customs union.

Isn't the truth that Labour wants

to remain in all but name

within the single market

and the customs union and actually

you welcome the debate around this

issue of full alignment

regarding the border between Ireland

and Northern Ireland?

This is Labour's gameplan.

Not to recognise the

referendum outcome.

Say that all you like but I want

to stay in the European Union.

I will not make any

bones about that.

If they decide that they get

at the end of this process

is and what they voted for in the 23

June, it is a reasonable case

to say, is this what you want to do?

It is not up to me, it is up

to me to make the case.

Is that not the strategy?

Labour's strategy is to minimise

the damage of what Brexit will do,

to take a completely different

approach to what the Tories

are doing which is pursue,

at all costs, against the principles

they set, a hard Brexit.

That is not in the

country's interest.

It is a difficulty.

In the transition period

you won't be able to strike any

free-trade agreements

with other countries,

non- EU countries,

that is correct, isn't it.

I anticipate we will be able to get

into trade negotiations

but you are correct.

Until the transition

period is concluded,

I would imagine it to be

the first quarter of 2021,

the new trade arrangements

cannot take effect.

Do you know what the government's

position will be, in terms

of the vision for that trade

relationship between Britain

and the EU?

David Davies described it

as Canada plus plus plus.

When you look at our free-trade

agreement you will see that 98%

of tariff lines are

abolished and set at 0.

We see no reason why it can't be 0

and then we want an ambitious

service chapter on top of that.

Isn't that the problem?

The deal over services,

when you think of what a major part

of the British economy

services actually make up,

the Canada, and I take your point

about plus plus plus plus plus

but the deal does not

include services.

We start with an easier position

because we are in regulatory

alignment with the EU.

Our financial services providers

have the equivalent regulation

to the EU.

That is the point.

We are coming from a totally

different starting point to Canada.

Therefore, this idea

that it is going to be impossible,

it might take 80 years

is wishful thinking.

-- eight years.

No.

That is exactly the point

but we have regulatory alignment

because of course we are in the EU.

Those regulations

are decided by the EU.

Do we really think that we will be

deciding with the European financial

services regulations will be once

we are outside of the institutions

that set those?

Of course we won't.

This is not about taking

back control at all.

Do you think that the arch

Brexiteers within the Conservative

party are going to accept this idea

to be part of the European Court

of Justice for quite a few years,

to come and we will take

is in that sense?

The Supreme Court has first podium

will decide whether to refer

to the European Court of Justice.

For most of them they are unhappy

about it but they have accepted it

John McDonald, said the other day,

he wants to be in it

different single market.

I think they want to keep us

in the single market.

In which case, there

is the point leaving the EU.

Some of us do.

You say there is no point.

What you think the phase one

agreement has done in terms

of the customs union?

Ashley Fox talks about north-south

alignment and the DUP enjoyed

that it was East-West.

It is a huge chunk of

what the Brexit people

so that we would be

doing trade deals on.

It is now possible and we will not

be deciding the rules.

How do you see full alignment,

influencing our future relationship?

In a nutshell, it will dictate how

closely aligned our rules

and regulations and standards

are to the winds of the EU.

I figure it depends.

It is a great phrase.

It reminds me of variable geometry.

It can be made into anything

that you want it to be.

The position that you are coming

from, you say that it

makes no difference.

If you have full alignment

you should not bother but of course

you think that because you would not

have bothered anyway.

Remain have been open

about that anyway.

With Ireland, given the difficulty

that Ireland presents

with the internal border,

you have a language which allows

people to make deals which is not,

at the same time, saying you might

as well just accept customs union

and the single market

because you don't have to be very

far on the Brexit curve to say

that these things

are not acceptable.

I think that you are right.

Your colleague on the other side

in Brussels has a point.

You have to come up with instruments

which are going to make this

at least as less likely to lead

to any future problems

even if you cannot use it to cut

every problem through right now.

Do you think the EU blinked

in the end, in order to get

to the end of phase one?

I don't think either side blinked.

It is a difficult negotiation.

Mrs May showed herself to be

a formidable negotiator

and we reached an

equitable compromise.

These are the most difficult

negotiations I think that have been

undertaken by the United Kingdom

since the end of the 2nd World War.

Mrs May is doing a good job.

You think David Davis

is a formidable negotiator?

Yes I do.

I think is doing a good job too.

It's a shame that we

have opposition and

politicians who pretend

to support the country.

That take delight in

every small difficulty.

Why vote for the motion

to approve progress?

It's whether we are opposing it.

Why did you MEPs not vote for it?

We voted in favour specifically

of the paragraph that

called the talks.

It was a whole load of nonsense

put in by a man trying

to impose his agenda

on face to the talks.

That is not the purpose

of the European Parliament.

Let's leave it there for the moment.

There have always been tensions

in the EU between Federalists

who want integration

in the block and

those who value member states

sovereignty above all else.

Britain traditionally

sat in the 2nd camp,

but now that we are

moving, could plans

for European federalism be

moving ahead at pace?

Today, at the European Council

summit, bidders are expected

to discuss ways to deepen

the Eurozone integration.

On the table is the possible

creation of a budget

for the Eurozone as well

as a Finance Minister

to represent the block.

Earlier this week,

the European Council adopted

the creation of a permanent defence

and security cooperation network

known as Pesco.

25 EU states have signed the defence

pact with only Malta,

Denmark and the United Kingdom

choosing not to take part.

It will integrate military

planning, weapons

development and operations that

will rely on a 5 billion

Euro defence fund.

Last week, the leader

of Germany's centre-left

social Democrats, or SBD, and former

European Parliament President called

for the creation of

a United States of Europe.

Shultz told SDP delegates

that he wanted EU member states

to sign off on a

constitutional treaty,

committing them to take steps

towards a federal Europe.

Do you think it will catch on, this

idea of a United States of Europe?

It has always been

there in the minds of

federalists.

It depends on what

you call federalists.

It has been there.

That is in division of Europe

stretching back over 20 years.

I spent time in Germany recently,

looking at Angela Merkel's

situation.

Martin Schultz, sitting

there on 20.5% of the vote,

don't forget, he has had

a very bad election,

he needs to have something that

from his perspective is very

pro-European.

Where he has come from,

into this part of German politics,

he wants to offer something

very bold and visionary

and I think his view is that

you go will tilt for it.

You stop saying that

you don't want it.

That helps you get

on with Mr Macron.

You can do something forward.

Do you think greater integration

is the way that it is heading?

I think in many areas, yes.

In many areas no.

We probably will see the emergence

of Europe going forward.

Do you support the idea?

I think inevitably people will go

further in some areas.

Not as far in others.

At the end of the day

the European Union it's a union

of states and it is the member

states themselves that decide how

far are comfortable

at any given point.

Frankly, there will always be

federalists and there will be those

that prize the sovereignty of member

states above all else and that

conflict will always

be there, but the buck

stops with the member states.

That conflict will always be there.

As a result of that

conflict then, he

actually see it happening in terms

of having a budget Minister,

if you like, and there

is already a sort of

Foreign Minister but also that sort

of close co-operation on defence.

In the end, national

values will trump,

won't they, for many

countries in the EU.

I would agree.

My concern over this

structured defence

cooperation is set up

as a rival to NATO.

If it results in the European

nationstates spending more

on defence, that is to be welcomed.

But what we don't want is several

more divisions of bureaucrats

who don't actually add

to defence capability.

Doesn't it make sense to have those

countries remaining within the EU,

coming closer together?

For the Eurozone,

you're probably right.

The Euro is set up very badly,

with economies that

weren't convergent and

too many States,

we see many problems.

There probably needs to be

a greater fiscal capacity

for the Eurozone.

I am delighted that the

United Kingdom is not part of that.

Would you like to be part of it?

If Britain were to stay in the EU,

would you have been a fan

of being part of that

closer integration?

In defence it makes sense given

the level of threat that we have,

but we've got to counter

this idea that there

is somehow undermining NATO.

Britain and France have done

operations under a joint EU

flag in fact.

We have, that have not

undermined our contribution

to NATO.

It has not undermined the security

of the North Atlantic

Treaty organisation

in any way shape or form.

You can have multiple

layers of defence without

undermining existing layers.

Would it be a good thing?

No.

If this had been around

before the referendum,

with Schultz and other people

talking about a United States,

the referendum would

have been even bigger.

People do not like the idea

of the United States and Brussels

taking even more power away

from sovereign parliaments.

If there a problem with

Germany, or it seems

like a dictat from Martin

Schulz in this position.

To control everything

within the EU.

Yes, there is a problem

with Germany.

They run the whole show.

What show?

That is what it is.

That is the fact for

Germany running the show.

Germany is obviously

the economic powerhouse.

The French end of the Franco German

relationship is not at its strongest

and now there is a challenge,

but this is not the position

of Angela Merkel

who is likely to see and had

the government as we go forward.

It is the position

of the underbidder.

You take offence at this idea that

Germany runs the show.

Absolutely.

Germany is the largest economy,

incidentally had we stayed

in the EU,

we were on course to be

the biggest economy in the EU.

And Britain could have run the show

but we'll never know.

The idea that the Germany

runs the show.

Look through German eyes.

Here we have the biggest military

power in the European Union

leaving.

At a time we have threats

from Russia, at a time when we have

less than concrete assurances from

a good allies in the United States

and President Trump.

There is a lot of

nervousness around.

We will continue to.

To have a European layer

of integration makes sense.

In the run-up to

the referendum, David

Cameron spent a lot of time trying

to get concessions from the EU

and spent most of his

time talking to Mrs

Merkel because that is where it is.

And with that we'll

have a goodbye to our guests.

Are doners almost goners?

A vote in the European

Parliament seeking to ban

phosphates from frozen

from the meat fell short.

There were 3 votes

and the British MEPs

did their bit to save the frozen

vertical meat spit, or kebabs

as they are known by us.

Instead of saying the EU is banning

kebabs, that is not right.

The media and companies should be

asking the commission why

the commission is making food less

healthy and worse because that is

ultimately what the

whole story is about.

The Greens and social democrats

are simply spreading panic.

The reason why that is not the case

is that phosphates are allowed

in many foods, but they are

naturally present in many foods.

If they were such a great risk

to human health we would all have

been ill long ago.

Ibrahim Dogus, the founder

of the British Kebab awards

is here to chew this all over.

Those puns.

Are you relieved?

We welcome the position taken

by the European Parliament to allow

kebabs to be made.

What are phosphates used

for in making Doner kebabs?

The phosphates are used in a very

small section of industry,

in the frozen doner kebab industry.

The majority of kebabs shops

are using home-made kebabs

and they don't use phosphates.

But still, it is to keep meat moist

and also give it a bit of flavour.

It is an additive.

There are many others

used in many other

industries.

If they are only be used

for a small number,

would have had that much

of an impact if it was banned?

It would not impact British

kebabs but in Germany,

frozen donor kebabs industries

are bigger than it is in Britain.

In Britain we have more

restaurants and more takeaway

stores making their own doner

kebabs, but a frozen doner kebab

is still part of the industry and it

would have been bad to ban the use

of phosphates in industry.

How unhealthy is it to have

phosphates as part of the process?

The European food standards agency

and safety authority made

an assessment in 2013,

confirming there is no

health risk for any product

using phosphates, it does not cause

any direct health risk

to consumers at all.

How are you celebrating?

With a plate of kebabs?

With a big kebab.

I'm glad to hear it.

It is unfortunate because

everybody is hungry.

What is your view on this

great doner kebabs

debate?

I'm not a great eater

of donor kebabs, I have

to say but if you're

happy, I'm happy.

Do you eat kebabs?

I have a feeling that I fund

a lot of kebab eating

from my teenage sons.

If they didn't like the ones

with as many additives I would be

happy to nudge it in that direction.

For British MEPs that actually

helped the industry here,

there are falling

a function in here.

2 more years to go and they can

carry on doing good work.

And then our parliament

can sort this out.

You can't underestimate

the work that they are

doing at the moment.

Do you do any lobbying?

We didn't do any direct lobbying.

We knew the MEPs

are sensible people.

What make you think that, exactly?

Most of our MEPs have been doing

great work for many years.

We would expect them.

Is Nigel Farage on your side?

That is it for now.

Thanks to all of my guests.

Obviously, to you too

for being our guests of the day.

From all of us here, goodbye.