Welcome to the Guardian’s weekly Brexit briefing, a summary of developments as the UK heads towards the EU door marked “exit”. If you’d like to receive it as a weekly early morning email, please sign up here.

You can listen to our latest Brexit Means podcast, updated every Wednesday, here. And with the general election under way in the UK, you can also sign up to the Snap, our daily email election briefing, here.



Also: producing the Guardian’s independent, in-depth journalism takes a lot of time and money. We do it because we believe our perspective matters – and it may well be your perspective too.

If you value our Brexit coverage, become a Guardian Supporter and help make our future more secure. Thank you.

The big picture

As Theresa May tried to dig her way out of the “dementia tax” debacle (see below), the EU27 unanimously signed off on their negotiating positions for Brexit talks, which will begin on 19 June.

Presenting the key directives in an 18-page document intended to cover the first phase of the negotiations, Michel Barnier, the European commission’s chief negotiator, said the bloc would insist the divorce deal was agreed before talks on the future relationship:

It is the UK which is leaving the EU and not vice-versa. We have clearly, the 27, confirmed that position that we must defend … From the day the UK decided to leave, the EU has gone through an intense preparatory process. We are ready and well-prepared.

The Guardian last week revealed the long-awaited talks will begin 10 days after Britain’s general election – a week later than expected because of a row over the UK’s blocking of a mid-term review of the union’s budget.

Barnier also told the European parliament last week that he was not seeking “no deal or a bad deal”, and wanted to “conclude a deal with the UK, not against it”. It was time to drop the aggressive rhetoric and “create the foundations for ongoing trust that we need to build a future relationship”, he said.

Separately, however, he warned the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, that the refusal of member states to soften their demands over the size of Britain’s “divorce bill” could lead to the talks collapsing and the UK crashing out.

The question of the UK’s divorce payment – which could hit €100bn (£86bn) – could prove the dealbreaker because France and Germany have refused to pay more into the EU budget to cover the hole left by the UK’s departure, while countries that receive the most from EU funds are opposed to any cuts in spending.

The UK’s Brexit secretary, David Davis, reinforced the impression that the bill could prove a major obstacle to an agreement, telling the Sunday Times that Britain would walk out of the talks unless the EU reduced its demands:



We don’t need to just look like we can walk away, we need to be able to walk away. Under the circumstances, if that was necessary, we would be in a position to do it.

The view from Europe

Countries seeking a trade deal with the EU will have to meet its standards on labour law and fair competition, the EU’s competition commissioner said in remarks that could have a bearing on any future UK deal.

While a UK deal would necessarily be different because of the existing relationship between the two parties, Margrethe Vestager made clear the bloc would not entertain a “race to the bottom” on social and environmental standards or tax competition.

German business, meanwhile, again warned Britain to think again if it believes pressure from German exporters, such as carmakers, would persuade EU negotiators to maintain free trade access after the UK leaves.

Steffen Kampeter, chief executive of the German employers’ federation, indicated that for the EU27, politics would outweigh economics:

The top priority of European business is the integrity of the single market; the second priority is making good business with the UK. We will see if there is a conflict, but the message is: do not harm the single market by cherrypicking deals.

Good news, though, came from the European court of justice, which in an unexpected ruling made it harder for national parliaments to block key components of any post-Brexit trade deal.

In a long-awaited test case, the court ruled that while member state ratification is required in specific areas, such as inward investment and dispute resolution, EU officials had otherwise broad powers to negotiate international trade deals.

Meanwhile, back in Westminster

With Westminster still deserted bar the occasional journalist and the 24-hour patrols who make sure parliament somehow doesn’t set itself on fire, the political trail has spread far and wide, with less than three weeks to go till the election.

The Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems launched their manifestos. There is little mention about the effects of Brexit – except from the Lib Dems, who are basing much of their election strategy around the subject.

For all Theresa May’s talk of “strong and stable leadership”, it was her party which had the wobbliest week, making a U-turn on plans to finance social care only four days after unveiling them as a key element of the manifesto.

Announcing the change in Wrexham, an irate May dismissed the idea this was a U-turn, insisting “nothing has changed” on the core principle of how older people would contribute to their care costs.

On Brexit-related matters, the Greens made the subject a key part of their appeal to younger voters, arguing they had been “betrayed” by May’s choice to go for a harder variant of departure from the EU.

There was also the first TV debate of the campaign, though it featured neither May nor Corbyn. The former had announced she was boycotting the format, prompting the Labour leader to follow suit.

The exchanges were long and sometimes fierce, even if the main takeaway from the night was that Paul Nuttall, the Ukip leader, seems to call women “Natalie” when he is not sure of their real name.

Either that, or he thinks the star of Splendor in the Grass leads Plaid Cymru.

You should also know

Read these

In the Guardian, Anne Perkins argues that by “lashing themselves to the mast” of a second referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal when the remain vote appears to be fading, the Lib Dems are not doing themselves any favours:

The EU has been at the core of the party’s being since it took shape in the wake of the first euro vote; anything else must have risked appearing a betrayal of fundamental principle. It seemed, too, to point to a way out of the 2015 catastrophe ... The trouble is that the remain vote has turned out to be much flakier than it felt last June. Polling now suggests as many as half of those who wanted to stay in the EU are ready to get on with leaving ... Unsurprisingly, this is not turning out well for the party. The Lib Dem manifesto is a defence of the essence of liberal Britain: open, tolerant and outward-looking. Fabulous, but not necessarily in a good way.

On a similar theme, John Denham in the New Statesman argues that the Brexit referendum gave people the agreeable feeling that their vote actually mattered and had changed something – which is not good news for the Labour party:

Labour policies are popular. On many doorsteps it is Labour that is dealing with the issues that matter most to voters. But they are all on that long list of promises that many voters assume will never be delivered whoever gets in. Brexit, on the other hand, is a decision that we the people, the people of this country and this place have taken, and we took it together. To go back on last year’s vote would be to surrender the power ‘we’ took for ourselves. The one thing we can make sure on its that our decision is followed through. To that end, voters will choose the leader and party most likely to keep faith with their decision.

Tweet of the week

Deputy director of British Influence Jonathan Lis (among many others) suspects May’s social care U-turn does not augur well for Brexit negotiations: