Off the wire
Lula da Silva accepts to be presidential candidate despite prison sentence  • Researchers find efficient way to filter salt, metal ions from water  • UN chief briefly meets with DPRK leader at Olympics  • Schools closed, flights canceled as winter storm hits Chicago, Detroit  • Kenya's first Olympic alpine skier becomes UNEP Mountain Hero  • One shot dead at nursing home in U.S. state Georgia  • Colombian gov't, rebels to seek new ceasefire accord  • Roundup: Small consumers hit harder as electricity cost rises in Kenya  • Official: Angola's long-awaited natural gas legislation in final stages  • South Sudan peace talks continue on pre-transitional period, other issues  
You are here:  

Britain sees "fundamental contradiction" in EU position over Brexit transition period

Xinhua,February 10, 2018 Adjust font size:

LONDON, Feb. 9 (Xinhua) -- British Brexit Secretary David Davis said Friday there was a "fundamental contradiction" in the approach the European Commission was taking on the transition period.

Davis said it was surprising to hear EU chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier was unclear on the UK's position on the transition period after Britain leaves the EU.

Davis made the remarks a day after he slammed an EU statement for being "discourteous", when Barnier suggested the bloc could end a transition period if there were disagreements between the UK and EU.

The EU's chief negotiator said a transition period was "not a given" and that Brussels was having problems "understanding the position" of the UK.

"Given the intense work that has taken place this week, it is surprising to hear that Michel Barnier is unclear on the UK's position in relation to the implementation period," Davis said.

"But there is a fundamental contradiction in the approach the commission is taking," he said. "Today they acknowledged that a way to resolve disputes and infringements is needed."

"It is not possible to have it both ways," he said.

The exchange marks the first signs of major fallout over the next stage of negotiations.

"I do not think it was in good faith to publish a document with frankly discourteous language and actually implying that they could arbitrarily terminate in effect the implementation period," he said.

"That's not what the aim of this exercise is, it's not in good faith, and we think it was unwise to publish that," he added. Enditem