Brexit deal: what has been agreed, and what happens next?

James Crisp
The deal finally seems imminent - GETTY IMAGES
The deal finally seems imminent - GETTY IMAGES

The Brexit trade deal was more than 95 per cent done for weeks before reports of “white smoke” from the negotiators in Brussels on Wednesday night.

Disagreements over the three major sticking points of fishing rights, level playing field guarantees and the deal’s enforcement proved far more difficult for the two sides to agree.

And with “nothing agreed until everything is agreed”, that meant the agreement wasn’t done at all.

The issues were vital for both sides. The EU wanted guarantees that UK companies would not undercut its standards in what it said would be unfair competition with its businesses.

Britain could not sign up to any deal that tied any future government’s ability to split from EU rules.

Governance, the deal’s enforcement, was tricky. The EU insisted on robust enforcement after being infuriated by the UK putting forward clauses that broke the Withdrawal Agreement in the Internal Market Bill.

Boris Johnson has been in regular contact with Ursula von der Leyen in a bid to get the deal over the line - PIPPA FOWLES
Boris Johnson has been in regular contact with Ursula von der Leyen in a bid to get the deal over the line - PIPPA FOWLES

In the end, fishing – which was long predicted by many in Brussels to be the easiest to solve – was the last of the familiar three obstacles to remain in the way of a deal.

The sides were divided over how long a transition period should last before annual negotiations over fishing opportunities, and how much of the value of fish caught in UK waters should be repatriated to British fishermen.

So, if a deal is announced, what would be in it?

Trade

Britain wants to be able to continue trading with the EU free from tariffs or quotas in a deal that would be more generous than any offered by Brussels to another country.

If Boris Johnson manages such a deal, it would mean neither side would impose tariffs on goods being traded, and a zero quota agreement would mean no limit on the quantity of any type of goods that could be traded.

It would be similar to the “Canada plus plus” deal Brexiteers had wanted all along, as it would have the benefits of the deal the EU struck with Canada but without any of the quotas or tariffs imposed on some Canadian goods.

The goal would be for Britain not only to be able to trade freely with the EU but also to be free to strike free trade deals with other countries, meaning consumers would, over time, see prices of some goods coming down.

The fact the UK will have left the customs union from Jan 1 means there will be more friction for businesses, which will face more paperwork when exporting goods, and customs checks.

The deal is also expected to cover financial services – 80 per cent of British exports – by recognising professional qualifications, though the City of London’s access to the EU market will be judged on the basis of “equivalence” – a kind of regulatory authorisation that can be withdrawn unilaterally at as little as 30 days’ notice in some cases.

Read more: A deal seems imminent – but will Johnson be able to sell it to Conservatives?

Fishing

Britain offered the EU a three-year transition period but demanded it return 80 per cent of its quotas for catching fish in UK waters. The EU countered by demanding unfettered access to UK waters for 14 years in return for giving back just 15 per cent of its quotas.

During months of talks, Brussels came down to 10 years, then eight, leaving the sides haggling over the five-year gap between them, as well as the division of the catch between Britain and the EU in the years before the UK takes back full control of its waters.

Mr Johnson agreed that the EU would only repatriate 25 per cent of the value of fish caught in its waters during a five and a half year transition period, sources in Brussels said. The UK had originally demanded a three-year period with 80 per cent of the value, while the EU wanted a ten-year period with just 15-18 per cent. However, the EU stuck firm at 25 per cent, when the UK asked for 35 per cent. 

Mr Johnson was forced to drop his demands in exchange for a six-month cut in the transition period from the six years the EU was offering to five and a half years.

After the fishing transition period, the UK will conduct annual negotiations on fishing opportunities with the EU, which was a key British ask. 

The EU dropped its demand for a link between the fisheries agreement and the trade deal. London feared Brussels would retaliate by freezing UK companies out of the Single Market in retaliation for disputes over fish. 

If a deal is agreed, Britain will start to carve up access to its waters on an annual basis after the transition period.

UK negotiators recognise that British fishermen need time to increase the size of their fleet, as Britain could not currently catch all the fish in its waters even if it wanted to, while also giving the EU time to adjust.

The EU is also acutely aware that if it does not agree a trade deal, Britain will be entitled to 100 per cent of the fish in its waters, and, as one Tory MP memorably put it, if EU nations try to fish in our waters after Dec 31 “all they will get is a visit from the Royal Navy”.

Level playing field

Britain has already agreed to accept the principle of a “rebalancing mechanism” in a concession that helped unlock negotiations after months of stalemate.

The UK agreed to the idea that the EU could retaliate with tariffs if Britain strayed too far from EU subsidy law.

In return, Brussels dropped its demand that such remedial action be unilateral and accepted the need for arbitration via an independent panel.

Another major issue to be resolved is the EU’s last-minute demand that funding from Brussels, including a €750 billion coronavirus stimulus package, be exempted from the subsidy rules.

It would enable EU countries to be given as much state aid as they wanted, as long as the money was channelled through Brussels, a situation unacceptable to the UK. A deal will only be struck if the EU removes this demand.

Governance

A new dispute resolution body, similar to those in use in trade deals around the world, will settle future disputes on whether either side has broken the terms of the deal. The body will consist of equal representation, with an independent arbitrator holding the balance of power so it stays politically neutral.

A demand by the EU that it should be able to impose lightning tariffs on the UK without arbitration was dropped at the last minute, meaning tariffs can only be imposed by the arbitrator.

Britain agreed the trade and security deal, as well as the fishing agreement, be part of one overarching treaty.

London was anxious at the risk of cross-sector retaliation and that, for example, parts of the trade deal could be frozen in response to a dispute over fish.

European Court of Justice

Britain has insisted that the European Court of Justice has no future role in British affairs. Boris Johnson – and Theresa May before him – promised that Britain would take back control of its money, borders and laws, meaning that ending the ECJ’s jurisdiction was an absolute red line.

The EU had wanted the ECJ to have a role in interpreting EU laws that were transposed into British law when Britain left the EU, but any deal struck would require that role to be down to an independent arbitration body, which would have no ECJ representation.

Borders and security

Britain wants to retain access to Europol and other European security databases in return for allowing the EU access to the UK’s world-class criminal intelligence.

Britain also expects to have full control of its borders, having ended free movement and with no new concessions over migration.

What happens next?

Now MPs must vote on the deal. Boris Johnson is prepared to push back the parliamentary recess to Christmas Eve should a deal be agreed and MPs have been primed to be recalled.

Parliament could sit on December 30 to vote on it, with Labour already signalling its support. 

Ministers have drawn up plans for the Bill to pass through the Commons and the Lords and achieve Royal Assent in a single day. 

However, senior Tory Brexiteers warned that they expected sufficient time to go through the deal's wording, which was expected to run to 2,000 pages, and seek legal opinion.

In addition, the UK's apparent concessions over fishing has rung alarm bells for Leaver Tories who do not want a deal that compromises over British sovereignty,

Read more: Camilla Tominey: Will this deal be good enough for Eurosceptic Tories?

What's the deadline?

The Brexit transition period ends on December 31.

The Government has repeatedly ruled out prolonging it further and legislated for a commitment not to agree to any extension.

However, it doesn’t necessarily mean that trade talks will come to a halt.

Negotiators are said to be exploring the idea of review clauses to break the deadlock in EU-UK trade talks, with the possibility that parts of the deal could be revisited several years after they take effect.

Could we still end up with no deal?

If an agreement cannot be reached and signed off by the parliaments of Europe and the UK, Britain will leave the European Union without a deal on December 31.

Michel Barnier has warned of a disruptive no-deal period, during which the EU and UK would trade on World Trade Organisation terms before resuming negotiations.

The Government has prepared the country for a no-deal Brexit and proposed the Royal Navy patrol Britain's fishing waters in the event of a no-deal, after Mr Johnson’s attempts to negotiate directly with Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron were rebuffed three times in a week.

Cabinet ministers are drawing up a multibillion-pound bail-out package to bolster industries hardest hit by a no-deal Brexit.

Read more: What no-deal Brexit means, and how it might affect daily life in the UK

What's happening with the Withdrawal Agreement?

After months of heated negotiations and an enormous amount of Parliamentary wrangling, the Withdrawal Agreement was signed in January.

The agreement set out a myriad of conditions of the UK extricating itself from the EU, laying the groundwork for a trade deal with the bloc.

Included in the legislation – ratified in both Brussels and London – is the framework for how the UK will make “divorce bill” payments for years to come.

It sets out areas in which the European Court of Justice still plays a role in the UK and includes an arbitration procedure for disputes about the Withdrawal Agreement.

Perhaps most importantly, the agreement includes protocol for the border on the island of Ireland.

The aim of the protocol was to avoid the return of a "hard" land border between Northern Ireland, in the UK, and the Republic of Ireland, in the EU, due to fears that infrastructure such as cameras or border posts could become a target and lead to political instability.

The Government contravened the agreement in September by tabling the Internal Market Bill, which gives the Government powers to override sections of the protocol, breaking international law in a “limited and specific” way according to ministers.

While it passed the Commons, it facing strong opposition in the House of Lords, where Peers voted to remove the section of the bill that would allow ministers to break international law by 433 votes to 165.

After a meeting between Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove and his EU counterpart Maros Sefcovic, ministers agreed they were prepared to remove these clauses in the Bill as  it moves through the Commons for a second time.

Mr Gove and Mr Sefcovic agreed that 90 per cent of goods crossing the Irish Sea will not be subject to any EU tariffs in the event of a no deal Brexit. Some animal and meat products will be subject to tariffs if they are deemed to be “at risk” of being sold in Ireland, which is part of the EU.

The EU will also have officials stationed in Northern Ireland from January 1, which the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) said was “unnecessary” and “concerning”, while senior Brexiteers warned the Prime Minister they would be “watching” to make sure he does not give too much away when he meets the European Commission President. 

On December 13, the Democratic Unionist peer Lord Nigel Dodds revealed his hopes that the extension of talks may lead to a tariff and quota-free trade deal between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. 

Mr Dodds shared his concerns regarding a no-deal Brexit, suggesting it would be hard for trade between Northern Ireland and the EU to continue. He shared: "We must ensure that Great Britain to Northern Ireland trade is tariff-free and with the minimum checks."

Latest Stories

  • The disappointing downfall of Dr. Deborah Birx

    Along with Dr. Anthony Fauci, Birx was seen as a potential counter to Trump and those who abetted his worst impulses.

  • South Dakota’s controversial governor wields flamethrower in Instagram post

    'Is it too late to add something to my Christmas list,’ she wrote.

  • Russia’s New Territory

    In November, Russia gained a slice of somebody else’s country. It did this not through unidentified troops moving across a border, nor through hybrid warfare. Instead, it negotiated its capture in full view of, and without a single question asked by, the United States or the rest of the world.Fighting between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh preceded the annexation. The mountainous region is internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan but since a 1994 ceasefire between the two nations has been controlled by ethnic Armenians. The conflict flared up again in September. Two months later came a peace deal, with Russia the winner: It mediated a ceasefire that placed the Kremlin’s ostensibly peacekeeping boots on the ground. America watched idly as this happened.As Armenia’s traditional protector, Russia held the only leverage to convince Armenia to sign this ceasefire. By signing, Yerevan gave up claims to the territories it had occupied within Azerbaijan since 1994 and gained nothing — bar a ceasefire rather than a forced surrender. In return for securing for its ally a marginally smaller humiliation, Moscow gained a present and a presence.In reality — unless America is prepared to engage fully in the peace process — Nagorno-Karabakh is now Russia’s indefinitely. The Kremlin ostensibly controls the territory for five years, with an automatic rollover for an additional five should none of the three parties to the ceasefire object six months before the end of the mandate.Russia certainly won’t. It is now gatekeeper to a region central to Europe’s energy diversification (reducing the role of Russian imports). If the region is strategically important to NATO, that makes it strategically important to the Kremlin.Armenia, for mistrust of Azerbaijan, will want the peacekeepers to stay. The short but brutal conflict has proven conclusively that Armenia cannot win militarily, and that therefore ethnic Armenians must accept either governance by Azerbaijan or the protectorate of Russia. Weak and broken, Yerevan finds it less of a humiliation to accept Russian tutelage in Nagorno-Karabakh, if only to deny an archenemy a complete victory. But this is a longer-term disaster for the Armenians. It means they are effectively trapped in a Russian embrace. They cannot turn west and cannot turn east — either diplomatically or for investment — because the Russians are now in charge.Though traditionally thought of by Moscow as “on the other side,” Azerbaijan — owing to lukewarm support from the United States and EU in recent years — has been steadily deepening diplomatic and economic relations with Russia, in part from necessity and a lack of serious alternatives. Yet now, with Russian military boots on Azerbaijani territory for the first time since the fall of the Soviet Union, Moscow’s leverage has also become economic leverage: By militarily guaranteeing a transport corridor across Armenia — closed before the ceasefire — to Azerbaijan’s exclave of Nakhichevan, Russia now controls Azerbaijan’s long-sought-after, direct land route from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean and Europe.The West certainly could have seen this coming. This is how it always begins: A toehold soon morphs into a footprint. Crimea, Eastern Ukraine, South Ossetia, Abkhazia — the list of examples goes on. Russian presence becomes Russian control: the only logic of Putin’s neo-czarist ambitions.Indeed, now, only a matter of weeks after troop deployment, the Kremlin is maneuvering: Lines on maps have started to bend and flex. On the Russian Ministry of Defense website, a page shows a map outlining the area where Russian peacekeepers, by the terms of the agreement, are to be stationed and will have jurisdiction within which to operate. On December 13, miraculously, the land they control had expanded. This was changed back to the original on the next day, after Azerbaijani diplomatic pressure. But this activity demonstrates that Kremlin cartographers are getting creative — and very early in this intervention.Rumors now swell of Russian “passportization” in Nagorno-Karabakh. Manufacturing new demographic realities on the ground by granting citizenship has been used to maintain influence in the internal affairs in other post-Soviet nations. Once Russians occupy the area, the Russian state is obliged to step in.It is a classic of the Kremlin repertoire. It preceded the invasion of Crimea. It happened in two regions in Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, again before wars broke out, with Russia coming out as the chief beneficiary. Most recently, passportization has been aggressively deployed in eastern Ukraine, through a helpfully streamlined process. The Kremlin forecasts that there will be over one million Russian citizens bearing newly minted documents by the end of the year. In all of these situations, Russia’s grip is secure.Passportization would mean that a negotiated settlement on the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh — what was supposed to be some form of autonomy within Azerbaijan, as in Soviet days — will never materialize. It will instead turn into a Russian-passport protectorate, giving Russia the pretext — or in Moscow’s lexicon, the legal right — to jump into the region were any imagined threat to its “citizens” to emerge.Considering the U.S.-led assistance now poured into Ukraine in the wake of Russian destabilization, it is surprising that more precautionary measures are not being taken in the South Caucasus.Yet time remains for America to step in: The ceasefire shall give way to negotiations for a final peace deal, with much left to decide. The U.S. must fully and comprehensively oppose passportization. American companies should invest in infrastructure and energy projects in the region so as to limit Russia’s room for maneuver. And U.S.-led joint investment initiatives between Armenia and Azerbaijan would help to cut the dependence of both on Russia.It’s time for America to step up diplomatic and economic efforts and reinsert itself in this process. Otherwise, Russia’s empire will continue to expand unchecked.

  • The Blackwater guards Trump pardoned were jailed for a massacre of civilians, including 2 kids

    The 15 people President Trump pardoned Tuesday evening include the first two congressmen who endorsed him for president — former Reps. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.) and Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), both convicted of financial crimes — two people jailed in Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, and four private guards working for Blackwater who were serving long sentences for an unprovoked and unnecessary 2007 massacre of civilians in Baghdad's Nisour Square that left 17 Iraqis dead, including two boys, ages 8 and 11.Blackwater, since sold and renamed Academi, is a private military contractor outfit headed at the time by Erik Prince, brother to Trump's education secretary, Betsy DeVos. The Nisour Square massacre marked a low point in U.S.-Iraqi relations after the 2003 U.S. invasion, and federal prosecutors spent years bringing the four Blackwater guards — Nicholas Slatten, Paul Slough, Evan Liberty, and Dustin Heard — to justice.After a federal judge in 2009 dismissed the first murder and manslaughter convictions of the Blackwater contractors, ruling the evidence was tainted, then-Vice President Joe Biden said at a press conference in Baghdad that the men had not been acquitted and the U.S. would appeal the decision. "In subsequent years, as the case continued, the contractors became known in conservative media as the 'Biden Four,'" The Washington Post reports. Slatten was eventually sentenced to life in prison for first-degree murder, while the other three were convicted of manslaughter and given sentences of 12 to 15 years."Campaigns urging that the four receive presidential pardons began in earnest last year, most arguing that the men were veterans still in engaged in quasi military duties," the Post reports, noting that Trump has already pardoned two Army officers convicted or awaiting trial on murder charges for shooting Afghan civilians. In a 2009 column at Fox News, Duncan Hunter — still in Congress — called "the Biden Four" brave "political pawns" who were "sent to prison for doing their jobs."More stories from theweek.com What would actually happen if Trump tried the 'martial law' idea? House GOP leader McCarthy reportedly nixes Pelosi’s attempt to pass $2,000 payments by unanimous consent Trump shows up too late to his presidency

  • Japanese supreme court grants retrial to 84-year-old known as world's longest death-row inmate

    Japan's highest court has upheld a ruling granting a retrial to a man described as the world's longest-serving death row inmate, a lawyer for the 84-year-old said on Wednesday. Iwao Hakamada has lived under a death sentence for more than half a century, after being convicted of robbing and murdering his boss, the man's wife, and their two teenaged children. Mr Hakamada had confessed to the crime but later recanted in court citing his allegedly brutal police interrogation and planted evidence. In a rare about-face for Japan's rigid justice system, a district court in the central city of Shizuoka in 2014 granted his request for a retrial. The court said investigators could have planted evidence and ordered the former boxer freed. Prosecutors appealed the ruling and won at the Tokyo High Court, prompting Mr Hakamada to move the case to the Supreme Court, which on Wednesday ruled in his favour, backing the retrial.

  • Woman sues after Chicago police drag her from car by hair

    A woman who says she was yanked by her hair from a car by Chicago police during a shopping mall encounter has filed a federal lawsuit against the city. Mia Wright, 25, and four family members claim their civil rights were violated and asserts the May confrontation left her blind in one eye from flying glass caused by police breaking the windows of the car to get to its passengers. “During this attack, Mia Wright could not breathe and was in paralyzing fear as her face and neck were smashed against the concrete ground,” says the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Chicago.

  • US companies no longer have to pay sick leave to people with Covid after Mitch McConnell reportedly blocks extension

    ‘This crisis has made it clearer than ever why paid leave for every worker is so important to families,’ says senator Patty Murray

  • A US Naval Armada and 2,500 Marines Are Off Somalia to Cover Troop Withdrawal

    The carrier Nimitz and its strike group, as well as the Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group, are standing by.

  • Biden suggests GOP senators speaking out against alleged Russian hack is a sign of bipartisan future

    President-elect Joe Biden on Tuesday had some harsh words for President Trump's response to the alleged Russian cyberattack on U.S. federal agencies and companies. He accused the Trump administration of failing to prioritize cybersecurity and letting their guard down in the first place, but also expressed frustration with Trump for downplaying the seriousness of the hack and failing to officially identify a perpetrator, whom the intelligence community widely suspects is the Kremlin. Biden's ire toward the White House did not extend to the Capitol, however.Biden said he was pleased to see lawmakers from both parties speak out "loudly and clearly" against the security breach. "I want to thank prominent Republicans in the Senate particularly for speaking out," he said. "It's a sign. A sign that with a new administration we can confront these threats on a bipartisan basis with a united front here at home. That should be encouraging to the American people and a warning to our adversaries."> Biden on massive hack of US government computer systems: "The truth is this: The Trump administration failed to prioritize cybersecurity ... This assault happened on Donald Trump's watch, when he wasn't watching." pic.twitter.com/lSD6XgpWfR> > — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 22, 2020As Biden showed throughout his presidential campaign, his desire to reach across the aisle and work with Republicans on key issues is a priority, so it's no surprise to hear him single out GOP senators in this instance.More stories from theweek.com What would actually happen if Trump tried the 'martial law' idea? House GOP leader McCarthy reportedly nixes Pelosi’s attempt to pass $2,000 payments by unanimous consent Trump shows up too late to his presidency

  • Aides fear what Trump will do next as his behavior proves to be erratic after the election

    With four weeks left in President Trump’s term, he is at perhaps his most unleashed — and, as events of the past few days have demonstrated, at the most unpredictable point in his presidency.

  • Surgeon avoids being struck off after branding livers of two patients

    A surgeon who branded his initials onto the livers of two patients has avoided being struck off despite pleading guilty to assault. Consultant Simon Bramhall used an argon beam machine to mark the organs during transplant operations. His initials were discovered on one of the patients' livers by chance after the donor organ Bramall had transplanted failed about a week after he had carried out the life-saving operation. The 55-year-old resigned from his job at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham and was later convicted of assault. However, despite the General Medical Council advocating that he be struck off, a tribunal decided to suspend him after hearing he had been under pressure at the time of the incidents. The Medical Practitioners Tribunal, chaired by Christina Moller, considered that "his actions were seen by colleagues as out of character at a time of work-related stress". "Mr Bramhall has taken responsibility for his actions, pleaded guilty to common assault at the earliest opportunity, demonstrated genuine remorse and sought to apologise," the tribunal said. Mr Bramhall was suspended from the register for five months, but avoided being struck off because it was not "appropriate". The tribunal report said: "Mr Bramhall's assault convictions are not fundamentally incompatible with continued registration, taking account of all the circumstances, guidance and relevant principles. It thus did not consider erasure to be an appropriate or proportionate response."

  • Police kept Black man naked in yard while looking for teens

    A 71-year-old Black man in South Carolina was embarrassed and feared for his life when a police officer looking for teens who might have been breaking into cars held him outside naked and at gunpoint after he peeked out his door to check on the disturbance, the man said in a lawsuit. Body camera video of the June 2019 encounter in Rock Hill shows Officer Vincent Mentesana cursing at Jethro DeVane and telling him not to close the door. Mentesana orders DeVane to stand outside his home naked at 4 a.m., facing the wall, according to the video, which DeVane and his lawyer obtained through a public records request and released Tuesday.

  • California Covid patient beats roommate to death with oxygen tank

    Authorities have not yet determined motive for attack

  • Why Six Senate Republicans Voted against the COVID Relief Bill

    Congress on Monday night passed a $900 billion coronavirus relief package after months of political gridlock, with the Senate nearly unanimously voting in favor of the measure, save for six Republican senators.The 5,593-page bill handily passed in the House 359-53 before being approved by the Senate 92-6. The six votes against the measure came from Republican Senators Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.), Rand Paul (Ky.) Rick Scott (Fla.), Ron Johnson (Wisc.), Mike Lee (Utah) and Ted Cruz (Texas).The six senators were mostly critical of the financial and physical scale of the bill.Paul called the bill a “spending monstrosity” saying “so-called conservatives” who vote for the measure would be no better than socialist Democrats."When you vote to pass out free money, you lose your soul and you abandon forever any semblance of moral or fiscal integrity," he said.He instead supported opening the economy and trimming wasteful spending in the budget in order to stop creating additional debt for future generations.Johnson similarly said in a statement that the government does “not have an unlimited checking account.”"We must spend federal dollars — money we are borrowing from future generations — more carefully and place limits on how much we are mortgaging our children’s future."He clarified that while he supported the sweeping CARES Act in the spring as swift, massive action was needed then to “prevent an economic meltdown,” that this time around he wanted to take a more targeted approach; In September he proposed a smaller $600 billion relief bill.Scott also pushed against the “massive omnibus spending bill that mortgages our kids & grandkid’s futures.”> We must help Americans & small businesses in need but we can’t keep operating this way. > > Once again, in classic Washington style, vital programs are attached to a massive omnibus spending bill that mortgages our kids & grandkid’s futures. Therefore, I can’t support this bill. pic.twitter.com/poShVDXzHb> > -- Rick Scott (@SenRickScott) December 21, 2020He said in a tweet he would not support the bill, adding in a statement that "Washington doesn’t seem to understand that new spending today will be paid for by increased federal debt and result in a tax increase on families down the road." "The easy route is simply to go along as Congress continues to do harm to future generations of Americans, but I will not be a part of it," he said.However, Johnson said that while he was "glad a government shutdown was avoided and that financial relief will finally reach many who truly need it," he was critical of the “dysfunction” of the process."The dysfunction of Washington, D.C. was on full display as Congress combined covid relief with a massive omnibus spending bill three months past the deadline and into the current fiscal year," Johnson said. "This monstrosity was 5,593 pages long, and passed only nine hours after the Senate first saw it.""I simply could not support this dysfunction, so I voted no," he said.Cruz and Lee also pushed back against lawmakers being given just hours to read several thousand pages of legislation.In response to a tweet by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.), in which the progressive lawmaker lamented having to vote on the bill without receiving adequate time to review it, Cruz agreed that the process is “absurd.”"It’s ABSURD to have a $2.5 trillion spending bill negotiated in secret and then—hours later—demand an up-or-down vote on a bill nobody has had time to read," Cruz tweeted.> .@AOC is right.> > It’s ABSURD to have a $2.5 trillion spending bill negotiated in secret and then—hours later—demand an up-or-down vote on a bill nobody has had time to read. CongressIsBroken https://t.co/EQp8BfRBHj> > -- Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) December 21, 2020Lee echoed these criticisms, posting a video to Twitter in which he showed how long it took just to print the bill: three minutes for just the first 100 pages of the massive bill."Because of the length it is impossible that anyone will have the opportunity to read it between now and the time that we will vote," Lee said in the video. "And I am absolutely certain that this has been cobbled together by a very small handful of members of Congress and their staffs and to the exclusion of 98% of members of Congress of both political parties in both houses.""This process, by which members of Congress are asked to defer blindly to legislation negotiated entirely in secret by four of their colleagues, must come to an end," he said.> 1/4 This is the spending bill under consideration in Congress today. I received it just moments ago, and will likely be asked to vote on it late tonight. It’s 5,593 pages long. I know there are some good things in it. I’m equally confident that there are bad things in it. pic.twitter.com/SoWXnEWYfV> > -- Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee) December 21, 2020Cruz and Blackburn also criticized some of the funding areas that had made their way into the $1.4 trillion spending bill with which the COVID relief legislation was bundled. Cruz said the bill "advances the interests of the radical Left, special interests, and swamp lobbyists, with funding going towards expanding authority for more H-2B visas for foreign workers while a near record number of Americans remain unemployed[.]" It also sets the stage "for Democrats to implement the ‘Green New Deal' by claiming a ‘need' to meet the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, or zero-emission energy sources,” he said.While Blackburn acknowledged that the legislation had a number of positives, including the development and distribution of vaccines, assistance to schools and help for small businesses, she said it came at too high a cost and included a number of measures she could not support."I cannot support nearly $2.4 trillion in spending that will make recovery even harder," she said in a statement. "I have serious concerns with provisions buried in the 5,593 page bill, such as expanded visas, Pell grants for prisoners, and households with illegal aliens receiving economic impact payments. For these reasons, I voted no on passage of this legislation."

  • Should You Be Living in a Hotel?

    7 extended-stay accommodations that transform work-from-home into work-from-anywhereOriginally Appeared on Architectural Digest

  • Trump's longtime Deutsche Bank private banker and her close colleague abruptly resign

    Rosemary Vrablic, a managing director and senior banker in Deutsche Bank's wealth management division, has resigned, effective Dec. 31, Vrablic and Deutsche Bank said Tuesday. Vrablic became President Trump's private banker at the German lender in 2011, at a time when Trump was having difficulties borrowing money due to his history of defaulting on loans. Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, already a client of Vrablic's, introduced her to Trump."The reasons for Ms. Vrablic's abrupt resignation were not clear," The New York Times reports. But Deutsche Bank in August opened an internal investigation into a real estate deal in which Vrablic and a longtime colleague at the bank, Dominic Scalzi, invested in an apartment building partly owned by Kushner. Scalzi is also resigning at the end of the year.The status of the internal review is unclear, the Times reports. But the relationship between Trump and Deutsche Bank is the subject of congressional, civil, and criminal investigations, including a criminal inquiry by the Manhattan district attorney. Vrablic is not among the handful of Deutsche Bank employees questioned by New York investigators yet, but her lawyer told CNN that "Ms. Vrablic is committed to cooperating with the authorities if asked."Deutsche Bank has been exploring how it can end its heavily scrutinized relationship with Trump, Reuters reports. But for Trump, his "key contacts at his biggest financial backer are leaving at a perilous time for the departing president," the Times reports. "He owes Deutsche Bank about $330 million, and the loans come due in 2023 and 2024. Mr. Trump provided a personal guarantee to get the loans, meaning that if he fails to pay them back, the bank can pursue his personal assets."More stories from theweek.com What would actually happen if Trump tried the 'martial law' idea? House GOP leader McCarthy reportedly nixes Pelosi’s attempt to pass $2,000 payments by unanimous consent Trump shows up too late to his presidency

  • No, China Did Not 'Expel' a US Warship from its Territory, Navy Says

    China called the McCain's movements "a serious violation" of its sovereignty and security.

  • UPS driver dies after assault; co-worker taken into custody

    A UPS employee sought in a deadly assault on a co-worker was taken into custody Wednesday, Connecticut state police said. The suspect, Elijah David Bertrand, 19, had been the target of search since Tuesday night when a fellow UPS worker, Nathan Burk, was found suffering from injuries. The two men apparently were riding in the same vehicle before the assault, Connecticut State Police Trooper Joseu Dorelus said at a news conference.

  • Missouri couple charged with murder of 4-year-old girl they claimed was possessed by a ‘demon’

    The girl’s father said he knew the couple had been beating her for weeks

  • World's oldest captive giant panda dies

    She leaves behind at least 150 descendants around the world - plus legions of fans, and one doting zookeeper. Xin Xing - the world's oldest giant panda and a matriarch extraordinaire - has died at the grand age of 38. The Chinese-born bear was one of the most famous of her species after giving birth to at least ten cubs during her lifetime. It made her the chief ambassador of China's so-called "panda diplomacy", with her cubs and their offspring sent to grateful zoos around the world. She is thought to have had 153 descendants in all, including grandchildren and great-grandchildren, living variously in the USA, Canada and Taiwan. As well as being a record-breaking mother - most pandas struggle to conceive in captivity – Xin Xing was among only a handful of pandas in zoos to have lived beyond the age of 30. Being aged 38 made her the equivalent of at least 110 in human years. Xin Xing - whose name in Mandarin translates as "New Star" - was born in a panda sanctuary in China's Sichuan Province, and transferred to a zoo in the south-western city of Chongqing at the age of one. She was among some 600 giant pandas in captivity, roughly a quarter of the total population. Zookeepers remember her for a prodigious appetite - she could eat 70lbs of bamboo shoots and fruit per day - and occasional fiery temper. However, according to Zhang Naicheng, her keeper for the last 28 years of her life, she grew more placid in her dotage. In an interview to mark her birthday last August - when she celebrated with a slap-up meal of watermelon, bamboo shoots and apple wedges - he said: “She is like a family member to me.”