Welcome to the Guardian’s weekly Brexit briefing. If you would like to receive it as a weekly email, please sign up here. You can also catch up with our Brexit Means … podcast right here.



Also, producing the Guardian’s independent, in-depth journalism takes time and money. We do it because we believe our perspective matters, and it may be your perspective, too. If you value our Brexit coverage, please become a Guardian Supporter. Thank you.

The big stories

The UK, as we have seen, does Brexit by speeches. The EU tends to prefer documents. Last week saw the release of its guidelines on Britain’s post-Brexit relationship with the bloc – a limited deal that rejects what the European council president, Donald Tusk, called Theresa May’s “pick and mix” approach.

The bloc envisages a deal based on zero tariffs on goods in return for existing EU access to British waters, a customs arrangement that will minimise barriers to trade but entail “rules of origin” checks and other border controls, and a limited deal on non-financial services modelled on the EU-Canada FTA.



It also offers participation in EU research, education and culture programmes in return for payments into the EU budget, and calls for an aviation accord “to ensure connectivity” (but with fewer rights for UK airlines in EU markets) and continued cooperation on defence, security and foreign policy.

The EU does, however, expect a UK commitment not to become a low-tax, low-regulation state undercutting the EU model, and has warned it will not push on with trade talks until Britain has signed a text translating its first-phase commitments – including on the Irish border – into law.

The chancellor, Philip Hammond, responded instantly (and inevitably) with a speech, warning that the government could reject any Brexit deal that did not include financial services as “not fair and balanced”.

Parliament’s Brexit select committee finally released the long-delayed Brexit economic impact assessments, confirming that government analysts believe that over 15 years, the economy would grow by between 1.6% and 7.7% less than otherwise under any of the existing models for a future UK-EU relationship.

And the foreign affairs committee said the UK’s post-Brexit Global Britain strategy was essentially a meaningless slogan with no political or economic underpinning, amounting to “a superficial rebranding exercise” that risked “damaging the UK’s reputation overseas”. So that’s all good.

Best of the rest

Top comment

In the Guardian, Jonathan Lis, deputy director of the thinktank British Influence, says the Brexit that the government is heading for will block ports and cripple business, and it is time for it to get its fingers out of its ears:

Calais’s boss is entirely correct that compulsory tariff checks (as a result of leaving the customs union) and phytosanitary checks (as a result of leaving the single market) will be unavoidable legal realities if the government insists on putting us outside key economic instruments. But the prime minister has settled in her bunker, refuses to heed warnings, and continues to offer solutions she knows the EU cannot accept ... Brussels insists that a seamless border requires both a customs union and a single market. No other kind of frictionless border exists anywhere on Earth. The entire UK must stay in both. Last week at Mansion House May promised five tests for Brexit. One was to protect jobs and security; another was to keep Britain outward-looking. A broken border and rotting food at Calais do not qualify. Nor do they remotely meet any democratic mandate. If this is the best the government can think of, it must think again. So, ultimately, might we.

On a similar theme, Nina Schick in the New Statesman says the hard Brexiters claiming the EU will offer the UK a “bespoke” deal are deluded – if the government wants to leave the single market, customs union and ECJ, only one option remains:

The FTA will be bespoke to the degree that no two FTAs the EU has agreed with a third-country are identical, but this will not be anywhere close to the level of access the UK would like. In her speech, May argued that the UK could remain closely aligned to the EU in areas that are expedient to the UK, whilst diverging in others. European Council President Donald Tusk quickly shot this suggestion down. Clearly, it’s not in the EU’s long-term strategic or economic interests to offer the UK a better deal outside than the (bespoke) deal that it enjoyed when it was a member. The sooner we grasp this, the better. If good politics is about managing expectations, then British politicians should level will the public, and admit that we are still many, many years away from taking back control.

Top tweet

The president of the European council spells it out: