Evening Standard comment: Theresa May’s EU divorce letter: let’s be friends

The Prime Minister’s letter, triggering Article 50, took effect only when Britain’s EU ambassador handed it over today to European Council president Donald Tusk. But its intended readership is wider: we the public, the EU leaders with whom a deal must be struck, and Mrs May’s Cabinet colleagues, who will be seeking signals that their particular priorities have been addressed.

The tone is obviously important. Britain has left the EU; it has not left Europe, nor could we. Further, we wish the EU well. As the PM says to MPs, “I want us to be a truly Global Britain — the best friend and neighbour to our European partners, but a country that reaches beyond the borders of Europe too. A country that goes out into the world to build relationships with old friends and new allies alike.” So, best friend status, with scope to go further — a friends with benefits relationship.

Whatever can be done by way of co-operation that does not entail compromise on the fundamentals of Brexit — control over immigration but also an end to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice — will be done. The most obvious point of agreement is security: London, like Berlin, Brussels and Paris, is vulnerable to Islamist terrorism, as last week’s attack in Westminster reminded us. One interesting focus of the Article 50 letter is that the PM explicitly links security and economic co-operation. “In security terms,” she writes, “a failure to reach agreement would mean our co-operation in the fight against crime and terrorism would be weakened... we must work hard to avoid that outcome.” This apparent linkage points to a harder Brexit stance than expected.

Beyond security, the priority for any negotiation must be, as the letter says, to establish the secure status of EU nationals living and working here, and that of British nationals living in the EU. Helpfully, Michel Barnier, the chief Brexit negotiator for the EU, has said he is “ready to discuss this issue from day one”.

Global talent

Of course, negotiations mean compromise. It may well be that Britain, given its new freedoms to control immigration, will give priority to EU nationals over those of most other nations. The PM’s letter talks of Britain as “a magnet for international talent and a home to the pioneers and innovators who will shape the world ahead”. Attracting global talent is a priority, but it does not preclude continuing to allow EU nationals to enjoy privileged access to the British jobs market, and quite possibly, to the benefits system too. The point about Brexit is that Britain will have freedom to make its own arrangements: as Brexit Secretary David Davis observes, this may entail increases as well as decreases in immigration, depending on the needs of the economy.

We should be realistic about one thing: the timetable for negotiations is, in theory, two years. In practice, it will take longer to thrash out a sensible Brexit — former World Trade Organisation director Pascal Lamy puts it at three to five years. A two-year timetable usefully concentrates minds, but it should not impede a workable deal.

This is the beginning of the end of the phoney war; the beginning of serious talks which we must hope are based on mutual goodwill and a perception that a deal that hurts one party hurts the other. There will be brickbats for the UK today from other EU states, but usefully negotiators from the EU, including M Barnier, have made clear that the intention is not to punish Britain for Brexit.

This is a momentous day for Britain and for London. The capital is uniquely outward-looking in its world view, hospitable to talent from across the globe. Most of us are sorry to leave the EU, but we shall expand our horizons, not contract them. Triggering Article 50 is not an occasion to become inward-looking but to seek new friends and allies, and retain our friendship with Europe.