May-Merkel agreement on Brexit

From Missy on a possible May-Merkel deal on Brexit – if soi thnis could be a breakthrough for Theresa May:

This is a blog post from the Bruges Group, a eurosceptic think tank that was set up by Conservative MPs / Members in 1989, but now has cross party support. In saying that they generally have a good reputation for well researched articles, and some of the information in this blog post does tally loosely with many rumours circulating at the time of the Chequers deal.

“There is no doubt about the veracity of this account since documents have been seen.

On Monday July 9th 2018, several leading French, German and Dutch senior managers were called by EU officials to an urgent meeting.

The meeting was said to be private and those present were informed that Prime Minister May and Chancellor Merkel had reached an Agreement over Brexit. Knowledge of this was attained from the actual transcript of the meeting between May and Merkel.

1) The Agreement was couched in a way to ‘appease’ the Brexit voters.

2) The Agreement would enable May to get rid of those people in her party who were against progress and unity in the EU.

3) Both Merkel and May agreed that the likely course of events would be that UK would re-join the EU in full at some time after the next general election.

4) May agreed to keep as many EU laws and institutions as she could despite the current groundswell of ‘anti-EU hysteria’ in Britain (May’s own words, apparently.)

5) Merkel and May agreed that the only realistic future for the UK was within the EU.

The original Agreement draft was completed in May 2018 in Berlin and then sent to the UK Government Cabinet Office marked ‘Secret’.

NB This Agreement draft was authored in the German Chancellor’s private office.

The Cabinet returned the Agreement draft with suggestions, and there was some to-ing and fro-ing during June 5th 2018.

Private calls between the Prime Minister and Chancellor were made.

The Agreement’s final draft came out late in June 2018. The German Chancellor told Prime Minister May that this was a deal she would support, though there would need to be some more small concessions by the UK to keep the EU happy.

The Chancellor and Prime Minister met in Germany. Merkel had this meeting recorded as a ‘private meeting’ though the Prime Minister was probably unaware of that.

The Chancellor had the transcript of that meeting circulated secretly to EU and key German embassies.


Documents make it quite clear that Prime Minister May was negotiating with Germany, not the EU.

The transcript also makes it clear that the Prime Minister intended to keep all this secret from minsters, especially the Brexit group.

She wants to keep as many EU institutions in UK as intact as possible in order to facilitate an easy return to the EU after 2020.

Chancellor Merkel briefed May on tactics to force Cabinet approval.

The Prime Minister and senior civil servants were working with Germany to stop Brexit or water it down to prevent free trade and the ending of freedom of movement, but to keep cash flowing to the EU.

David Davis was kept in the dark while key EU premiers in France, Holland and Ireland were briefed in full.

Key EU heads were actually briefed in full the day before the Cabinet meeting at Chequers.”

At the time of the Chequers agreement release one journalist said a source let slip that May had said that Angela had seen and approved the deal, this was later denied by no. 10, it was also rumoured that the majority of the negotiation by May was being done with Merkel, and generally believed that if Merkel agreed the deal then it would be agreed to by the EU.

Tomorrow is PMQs, we just have to hope a Brexit supporting MP will bring this up. It will be interesting to see what her response is.

Leave a comment


  1. Missy

     /  6th March 2019

    Pete, this won’t be a breakthrough for May, this agreement that is discussed in this article is the Chequers deal that has been rejected.

    If this is true this is the end of May, it shows her appeasing the EU, and that she lied to the British public in order to try and avoid a true Brexit.

    People are angry about this and are demanding answers. Hopefully it will hit MSM, and will be brought up in PMQs.

    • The Consultant

       /  6th March 2019

      On the one hand it’s a bombshell.
      On the other hand it does not surprise me at all, given May’s history of appeasing / agreeing with bureaucrats. I thought some of the stuff she did as Home Secretary, particularly on matters of surveillance of British people, were terrible breaches of individual human rights. She’s more a bureaucratic functionary out of 1984 than a democrat.

      It’s time this was done and over with. Break from the EU, with no deal, and let the chips fall where they will. The screaming from the Remain crowd has been endless and like all hysteria, has moved from one object to the next as their worst predictions melted away for each thing. Now we’re at the Irish border, and I don’t believe the worst-case predictions on that any more than the other Chicken Little crap of the last two years.

      • Missy

         /  6th March 2019

        Agree completely, except regarding the Irish border.

        From a trade perspective it will be nowhere near as bad as they are painting it, but it is possible that a no deal Brexit (or Brexit in general) could be used by Irish dissidents to restart the troubles.

        Over the last couple of years there have been some isolated incidents, and today three IEDs were sent to three major transport locations in London (Heathrow, Waterloo, and City Airport), they had Irish stamps on the packages, and it is believed that Irish dissidents could be behind the plot.

        Whether it is a hoax, or a genuine attempt at causing some damage, or just someone using Brexit to create trouble it is hard to know. What I do know is that they didn’t seem to want to hurt or kill anyone, the explosives were small and the one (at Heathrow) that did go off just started a small fire which was quickly dealt with. It feels more like a warning as opposed to an actual attempt to hurt anyone.

        • JeevesPonzi

           /  6th March 2019

          By ‘Irish Dissidents’, I hope all reading this understand that the probability is quite high that these ‘Irish Dissidents’ could easily be British Unionists, a few of whom are currently beside themselves with excitement at the idea of a nice big concrete wall manned by nice big shiny soldiers….

          • Missy

             /  6th March 2019

            Two points.

            1. Unlikely to be unionists as the packages originated in the Republic.

            2. There won’t be a wall in Ireland unless the EU build it, and it certainly won’t be manned by soldiers unless the EU get their army and put soldiers on it.

            • Blazer

               /  6th March 2019

              point 1…you can’t be serious!
              point the hell can you be sure!

            • JeevesPonzi

               /  6th March 2019

              Two points:

              point 1- You really can’t be F**king serious.

              point 2 – If Brexiteers want to ‘take back control of (their) borders, and if the UK is trading on WTO grounds, then goods and people will need to be checked, by both sides. Unless you want all those cheeky dark skinned immergrants just walking into N.I. with their smuggled goods.
              And that means customs officers, and customs officers will lead to unrest, which leads to policemen, and then to bullets, and then soldiers , and then bombs.

              And a bonus point- for someone with your background it a real shame you deliberately play down the heartfelt and very real fears of both communities on both sides of the six county line.

              The Troubles were very very real and they haven’t gone away, you know.

            • Missy

               /  6th March 2019

              “Two points:”

              You made three. Learn to count.

              “point 1- You really can’t be F**king serious.”

              Sorry, do you have information that the packages did not come from the Republic of Ireland? You should let the Met Police and Gardai in Dublin know, they are working under the impression (based on the evidence they have) that the packages were sent from Dublin. If you have evidence they don’t it isn’t a good idea to retain it.

              “point 2 – If Brexiteers want to ‘take back control of (their) borders, and if the UK is trading on WTO grounds, then goods and people will need to be checked, by both sides. Unless you want all those cheeky dark skinned immergrants just walking into N.I. with their smuggled goods.
              And that means customs officers, and customs officers will lead to unrest, which leads to policemen, and then to bullets, and then soldiers , and then bombs.”

              Where did I say things wouldn’t be checked? I said that if there is a wall manned by soldiers it would be put there by the EU. You are sounding like a hysterical Remainer, the British have said there will be no wall, no hard border, and no soldiers, but you (again) seem to know better since you seem to think there will be “a nice big concrete wall manned by nice big shiny soldiers….’

              “And a bonus point- for someone with your background it a real shame you deliberately play down the heartfelt and very real fears of both communities on both sides of the six county line.”

              Two things on this:
              1. You don’t know anything about my background, do not even assume that you do.
              2. I never deliberately played down the fears of both communities, many of those communities are doing that themselves. However, I do not believe that it will return to the same levels as during the worst of the troubles, I do believe that Remainers will stoke the fear that it will, and that some dissidents (from either side) will take advantage of those fears being stoked, and Brexit, to cause trouble.

              “The Troubles were very very real and they haven’t gone away, you know.”

              I am aware the troubles were very real, however, when I was in Belfast recently, venturing into both Catholic and Protestant areas, there was nowhere near the same tensions that were present when I was there 20 years ago. Many in Northern Ireland have moved on and do not want a return to the Troubles.

            • Missy

               /  6th March 2019

              “point 1…you can’t be serious!”

              Yes, unless you know more than the Met Police and Gardai, in which case I suggest you pass it on.

              “point the hell can you be sure!”

              Because the UK Government, Northern Irish Politicians, and Republic of Ireland Government have all stated, there will be no “nice big concrete wall manned by nice big shiny soldiers….” The only way there will be one is if the EU directs it from Brussels.

            • Blazer

               /  7th March 2019

              ‘that the packages were sent from Dublin. ‘…so fucking what…proves?

  2. Duker

     /  6th March 2019

    Always knew it would a political agreement in the end , between leaders. Negotiating with the EU bureaucracy was in itself absurd- we could imgaine it here to be like applying to the council for some massive consent,always more information required, always invented reasons why you couldnt do it your way…and so on.
    It would be those Countries worst affected who would push for compromise- Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, France ( especially agriculture in northern France) and Ireland.
    And with Britains democracy acting like it should , with no clear majority for any solution or going back into the EU, May has been in an impossible situation.

  3. Missy

     /  6th March 2019

    The author of the article has responded to criticisms of not providing links to the information, here is his response to that:

    “John Petley on Tuesday, 05 March 2019 13:58
    Without links, etc, I can appreciate your caution. However, giving away too much detail could put people at risk. The person who has seen it is a Brexit supporter in a foreign country whose reliability I trust. He has a contact who has provided him access to these transcripts but who would face very serious disciplinary issues if any attempt was made to provide unauthorised copies of them. Subsequent to receving these details, my contact has passed on to me other pieces of information from the same source which have then been reported in the UK press a day or two later, so I am confident of the reliability of what has been posted here. I would love to have been sent actual copies of the transcripts, but if I had been, the national media would have been very interested and we would probably have a new PM by now. I appreciate that my answer isn’t fully satisfactory but what is posted here does to me seem completely consistent with the PM’s behaviour since Chequers, although I believe she has underestimated the strength of feeling against the EU in her own party – both MPs and grassroots activists.”

    And here is another response to criticism:

    “John Petley on Tuesday, 05 March 2019 17:26
    MY source is dependent on a contact of his who, in even allowing him to see the transcription, was taking a great risk. To have provided a copy of it would have been one step too far – just too dangerous. Please see my reply to “Moraymint” below. I would love to be able to unearth a copy of the transcription. Perhaps an investigative journalist might succeed where us ordinary folk end up hitting the buffer stops.”

    These answers make me believe that the information passed on was very sensitive, and perhaps even classified (albeit at a low level classification), either that or it is of such that it could easily be traced who would have passed on the information whether electronically or in hard copy.

  4. Alan Wilkinson

     /  6th March 2019

    Strange that this is not yet in the UK media?

    • Missy

       /  6th March 2019

      One or two things that correlate with what is reported in this was reported last summer, but since then nothing.

      The media today have two main stories, Macron’s comments and the IEDs. I only saw this story this evening, so I don’t think it broke until this afternoon, it will be interesting if any of the media pick it up or not. Legally they may not be able to print it without verification, but I am not 100% sure on what their laws are like, they could of course report on the blog post, but my bet is they won’t. Only one or two outlets are pro Brexit, so the Remain supporting media won’t want to print it, and it is hard to know if the Leave supporting media will or not. Of course if it is raised in PMQs tomorrow it may get some coverage.

      It has been picked up by one or two small fringe news websites and blogs, but nothing major.

  5. Missy

     /  6th March 2019

    Interestingly the article has been removed from their website, no explanation as yet that I have seen.

    This could mean:

    1. There has been a request from either the UK or Germany or the EU itself for it to be removed, something which can happen under EU law. I also believe that the EU have brought in tighter controls (or they could be about to) around what the EU considers fake news, and they have (or will have) the ability to remove anything that they consider fake news.


    2. Some questions came up around the veracity of the information contained. This would be interesting if so, especially as some of what is in this article was reported at the time of Chequers, and a lot of it correlates with some rumours, and comments, from media and Government sources, but nothing reported.

    • Gezza

       /  6th March 2019

      We’ll have to wait & see if Trump tweets anything about it.

    • Duker

       /  6th March 2019

      I think you have been scammed Missy….there’s a dozen reason why fake news is generated on the EU Brexit negotistions….British press is full of rubbish every day, planes won’t fly, 25 km truck queues and so on…
      Do NZ customs check every fucking container….no they don’t, nor would they in UK after Brexit on UKs borders.
      Wiser people have been through many ‘sky is falling’ scams over the last 75 years.. last one was the Y2K bug…..say no more.
      Well at least you tried to be open minded about it all

      • Missy

         /  7th March 2019

        Not sure if it is a scam Duker.

        1. The Bruges group – whilst Eurosceptic – is usually pretty reliable
        2. Some of what was in the article correlates with reporting at the time of the Chequers deal, including secret meetings between Merkel and May, reports that Merkel had seen and rubber stamped the deal, and that it was kept from Cabinet deliberately. The rest definitely plays into the fears some have that May will either work to keep the UK in the EU or is looking at BRINO with a view to remaining

        Earlier the Bruges Group tweeted that the article was uploaded in Draft form and has been removed to be reworked and updated. It will be interesting to see what the changes in the article are. It could be substantial, or could be clearer about the source of the information.

  6. The Consultant

     /  6th March 2019

    Too good not to watch….

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  6th March 2019

      At last a video worth watching and you don’t have to waste much time waiting for.the money shot.

    • Gezza

       /  6th March 2019

      Started off too slow & morbid, but it soon picked up very nicely.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: