Search

This paper examines the state of the art of the Brexit negotiations in the area of financial services. It uses a two‐level game model to first explain the positions of UK and EU negotiators on the basis of the domestic constraints they face, and second, to consider the scope for final agreement based on the 'win‐set' of both sides. The paper analyses the preferences and power of three main groups of players within the UK and EU: the political authorities, financial regulators, and the financial industry. We argue that the scope for agreement on financial services has been severely hampered by political and regulatory constraints which forced UK and EU negotiators to adopt early hawkish negotiating positions, and by the absence of a unified position from the financial industry. After the 2017 general election, the position of the UK government and UK financial industry briefly converged, thereby narrowing the domestic win‐set, but also increasing the scope for agreement. However, the July 2018 'Chequers' deal represents a hardening of the UK government's position on financial services. We argue that this reflects the fact that the twin pressures facing UK negotiators—acute political constraints at home and bargaining weakness in Brussels—has become more, not less, acute over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper aims to provide a critique of Shared Parental Leave (SPL) in the UK from a gender equality perspective, namely to assess whether SPL is capable of enabling more men to take leave in order to act as the main carer for their child. Leave policies in Nordic countries, where the rate of take-up by fathers is high, are also examined. It argues that SPL is open to legal challenge by fathers who do not meet the eligibility criteria, as the SPL scheme as currently drafted breaches the terms of the EU Parental Leave Directive and is also discriminatory on grounds of sex. The paper concludes that SPL is flawed as a policy. Whilst the UK government argues for a more equal division of childcare between father and mother, it seems unwilling to challenge the expectation that mothers provide the primary care for young children. Thus SPL will only be successful if the policy is reformed to include a higher rate of pay and a period of leave reserved for fathers. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Recent research has indicated that English identity was a strong predictor for a Leave vote in the referendum on membership of the European Union, and that it is an identity that is increasingly playing a role in British politics. In this paper, we explore whether Englishness affects even left‐right positioning of parties. Focusing on Labour, we find that it does, even controlling for other attitudinal and demographic variables. Alongside age and perceptions of the party leader, perceptions of immigration change and perceived lack of political efficacy also play a significant role. Given the potential electoral significance of this, we reflect on and propose a range of policy options that Labour could utilise to address this gap between English‐identifiers and the party. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Should we agree with Tom Peck that David Cameron was the "Worst Prime Minister in a Hundred Years?" (2016). Joseph Butler once stated that "Every thing is what it is, and not another thing" and that "Things and actions are what they are, and the consequences of them will be what they will be: why, then, should we desire to be deceived?" (Butler, 1841: Preface; 76). The United Kingdom (UK) is now faced with the claim that "Brexit means Brexit" - a vacuous phrase which palpably begs the question at issue. For the issue is: what is Brexit? and what type of Brexit was voted for? To say that "Brexit means Brexit" is whistling in the dark as a means to ward off unwelcome spirits and to conjure up an appearance of resolve. This paper argues that the referendum on whether the UK should stay in the European Union was held by the then Prime Minister, David Cameron, to satisfy internal party critics and the campaign conducted in a manner inspired by his previous success in holding and winning referendums. Further, it argues that it has unleashed a new doctrine: that of the referendum result as an expression of the undiluted 'will of the people'. The holding of the referendum, its conduct and its result were direct results of complacency and hubris; what precisely a vote for Brexit means is unclear and ambiguous, and the populist belief that the result has to be upheld because it expresses the 'will of the people' is both cause and consequence of the referendum campaign and result. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most striking questions raised by Brexit is undoubtedly related to security and defence. What should we expect from the United Kingdom (UK) in the collective and multilateral efforts within the European Union (EU) and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) after Brexit? This article aims to contribute to an answer by arguing that, in the security and defence field, Brexit hardly represents a threat to NATO or the EU. Instead, it offers an opportunity to readjust priorities and investments towards an effective multilateralism, both European and transatlantic. The paper argues that, faced with an apparent overlap of the threats and challenges shaped by the strategic environment and the priority concerns of both organisations, it is expected that the UK will continue to be engaged in the EU common security and defence policy's (CSDP) civilian missions and military operations as a third country, as well as enhance NATO's commitments in the aftermath of the implementation of the 2016 Warsaw Declaration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The issue of the United Kingdom's exit from the European Union (the so-called Brexit) means a turning point both in the history of the European integration and also of the United Kingdom. The 51% of the British electorate voted in favour of leaving the EU, which raised up uncountable legal, political and economic questions to be answered. The legal questions raised by the Brexit could be categorized into some groups. According to Takis Tridimas, there are open procedural, institutional and administrative issues of the withdrawal, which organize the 'know how' of the process; but we could talk about the future relationship forms between the United Kingdom and European Union; and the future of the European integration paradigm; or about the development and changes of the European Union's and United Kingdom's legal system due to the Brexit. In this paper - after presenting the historical background of a member state's withdrawal-I focus on the summary of the main public law questions opened to be answered by the Brexit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]