Brexit haunts May as she seeks China trade post-EU

Hounded by Brexit rows at home, Prime Minister Theresa May met Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday to seek deeper trade ties after Britain leaves the European Union.

But criticism in London over her domestic agenda and her handling of Britain's contentious divorce with the European Union loomed large, prompting her to declare she was "not a quitter" before her arrival.

May held talks with Xi at the Diaoyutai State Guest House on Thursday after visiting an agricultural sciences academy, but there were no immediate readouts of their meeting.

The BBC reported that May, who was expected to raise environmental concerns, would present Xi with a box set of the network's Blue Planet II series, with a personal message from presenter David Attenborough.

Brexit crept into her talks with Premier Li Keqiang on Wednesday, though her Chinese counterpart reassured her that their "golden era" of relations would not be affected by London's EU departure.

"As a trade and strategic partner of both Britain and the EU, China certainly hopes that the result (of Brexit) will be good for both sides," said Cui Hongjian, director of the European studies department at the China Institute of International Studies.

"If it comes to a double-lose result, that will be also unfavourable to China," Cui told AFP.

China worries that Britain's EU exit will remove a pro-free trade force from the bloc and give rise to protectionism, he said"

Wooing China is part of London's broader strategy to seek deeper trade ties with countries beyond Europe's borders after Britain leaves the EU next year.</s>A minister who questioned whether Brexit should be halted after a secret Government analysis exposed the predicted economic damage has been silenced by Theresa May.

Phillip Lee was told to “air his views in private” after a meeting with the Conservative chief whip, but has escaped the sack, No 10 said.

The disciplinary action raised fresh questions about Brexit minister Steve Baker, who has not been censored despite suggesting civil servants had drawn up the analysis behind the backs of ministers.

We’ll tell you what’s true. You can form your own view. From 15p €0.18 $0.18 USD 0.27 a day, more exclusives, analysis and extras.

The Prime Minister’s spokesman was forced to deny that pro-EU civil servants were “working rogue” – insisting it was “entirely correct” for such studies to be prepared.

However, the spokesman said Mr Lee, a justice minister, should “recognise that the analysis was initial and not worth commenting on”.

“He has been spoken to by the chief whip and been reminded that it is best to air views in private,” he added.

In tweets last night, Dr Lee said he doubted whether Mrs May could “legitimately lead a country along a path that the evidence and rational consideration indicate would be damaging”.

The extraordinary intervention was an apparent response to Mr Baker’s statement to MPs that the analysis was worthless because forecasts drawn up by civil servants are “always wrong”.

Dr Lee posted: “The next phase of Brexit has to be all about the evidence. We can’t just dismiss this and move on. If there is evidence to the contrary, we need to see and consider that too.

“It’s time for evidence, not dogma, to show the way. We must act for our country’s best interests, not ideology & populism, or history will judge us harshly. Our country deserves no less.”

Inside Politics newsletter The latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox Inside Politics newsletter The latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox Enter your email address Continue Continue Please enter an email address Email address is invalid Fill out this field Email address is invalid Email already exists. Log in to update your newsletter preferences Register with your social account or click here to log in I would like to receive updates on politics every morning by email Update newsletter preferences

A leak of the analysis – which will now be published, after a Government cave-in – suggested a no-deal Brexit, leaving Britain trading with Europe on World Trade Organisation terms, would reduce growth by 8 per cent over 15 years.

Shape Created with Sketch. Brexit: the deciders Show all 8 left Created with Sketch. right Created with Sketch. Shape Created with Sketch. Brexit: the deciders 1/8 European Union's chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier Getty 2/8 French President Emmanuel Macron Getty 3/8 German Chancellor Angela Merkel Reuters 4/8 Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker EPA 5/8 The European Parliament's chief Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt Getty 6/8 Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May Getty Images 7/8 Britain's Chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond PA 8/8 After the first and second appointed Brexit secretaries resigned (David Davis and Dominic Raab respectively), Stephen Barclay is currently heading up the position PA 1/8 European Union's chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier Getty 2/8 French President Emmanuel Macron Getty 3/8 German Chancellor Angela Merkel Reuters 4/8 Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker EPA 5/8 The European Parliament's chief Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt Getty 6/8 Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May Getty Images 7/8 Britain's Chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond PA 8/8 After the first and second appointed Brexit secretaries resigned (David Davis and Dominic Raab respectively), Stephen Barclay is currently heading up the position PA

Leaving with a Canada-style free trade agreement would see growth cut by 5 per cent, while staying inside the single market would reduce growth by 2 per cent.

The document also warned that the gains from free trade deals with other big countries would fail to make up for the losses – a boost of just 0.2 per cent over 15 years from a deal with the US, for example.

Its leak has enraged Brexiteers, who accused the head of the civil service of conspiring with the Treasury to produce the devastating research without the knowledge of ministers in the Department for Exiting the European Union.

On Tuesday, Mr Baker told the Commons: “Even the ministerial team in my department has only just been consulted on this paper in recent days and we've made it clear it requires significant further work.

“It is a selective interpretation of a preliminary analysis. It is an attempt to undermine our exit from the European Union.”

The attack triggered a protest from the Whitehall trade union, which said it was an “insult” to dedicated professionals and suggested he should be sacked.

Asked why Mr Lee had been disciplined over his remarks but not the Brexit Minister, a spokesman said Mr Baker's comments were made in a statement to the Commons, while Mr Lee had been “speculating” on leaked documents.</s>The Prime Minister will have found the acrobatic performance of Chinese opera in the city of Wuhan a welcome respite from the soap opera at home.

On every leg of her trip, mid-air, Number 10 must have wondered what news would emerge on their secure mobile phones as Theresa May's RAF Voyager touched down into cellular connection range.

The leak of a Brexit impact assessment during her flight to China required her to play down its significance as "very preliminary" and not signed off by ministers.

Then, when she arrived in Wuhan, it appeared her own minister Steve Baker had criticised "always wrong" forecasts from civil servants.

By the time she reached Beijing, another minister - Philip Lee - called for the forecasts to be published as part of an "evidence-based" approach to Brexit and for Government strategy to prevent the negative outcomes predicted.

Mr Lee was then reprimanded by the Chief Whip, as the Opposition secured a release of the documents through a humble address, Tory MPs obliged to abstain not to vote against, even though the Government argued the data could undermine negotiations.

All that against the backdrop of domestic woes for a Prime Minister who had been hoping that her China tour would show she was leading "for the long term" and "for the sake of the country".

She told Sky News that Britain "did not vote for nothing to change when we come out of the EU".

Her efforts seem to focus on winning back the Brexit-backing MPs who have supported her premiership since the election disappointment: playing down the Brexit assessment, disciplining Philip Lee, saying things would change, absolutely denying reports that she was negotiating a three year transition period, and taking on Michel Barnier's account of how that phase will function.

But China is also a crucible of what her Brexiteer MPs see as the opportunities that come with an EU exit.

As the world's second biggest economy, it is precisely the sort of place where a more nimble UK could develop post-Brexit trade that is more free.

So far, however, those ambitions seem limited.

In discussions with Premier Li Keqiang, there was some opening up of Chinese agricultural products though a lifting of a BSE ban on beef.

But the discussion on steel capacity was a reminder of the limits of free trade with the industrialising giant of the east.

Try explaining free trade on Chinese steel in Port Talbot.

It is difficult to see much planned in the UK-China trade relationship that would be limited by the issue that so sparked the rebellion of her Brexiteer MPs - reforming a customs union with the EU after Brexit.

Instead, the bulk of the effort here is on existing impediments to trade.

These include educational exchange (though the PM again refused to countenance removing the 150,000 Chinese students in the UK from her net migration target), pharmaceutical investment in British drugs used to treat a type of cancer predominantly found in China, and a firm signing a contract to design an entirely new city.

The first challenge for this trade mission is focusing on is the woeful comparative export performance of the UK in China under existing EU structures. Germany manages nearly five times as many exports here under exactly the same rules.

Chinese officials joke that not much has changed in the 225 years since Emperor Qianlong wrote to King George III telling him: "I have no use for your country's manufactures".

Instead the Prime Minister got the chance to talk about shared problems, such as plastics polluting the oceans at the River Yangtze. North Korea also remains a problem where Downing Street needs China to remain engaged.

Mrs May has been notably less enthusiastic about China's $900bn global infrastructure successor to the Marshall Plan, called the Belt and Road Initiative. No memorandum was signed with Premier Li. This reflects some fears over standards and the strategic implications of China's push east.

Premier Li did sound a supportive note about the ongoing bilateral relationship post-Brexit.

But more than anywhere, strength and stability are admired qualities in this nation.

Real negotiations with China will have to wait, however, until after a successful outcome with EU, and that requires a more immediate negotiation for this British leader, with some of her own ministers, 5000 miles away.</s>A former Brexit minister has challenged Theresa May to make it clear what sort of relationship she wants with the European Union after Britain leaves the bloc.

Lord Bridges of Headley said ministers had provided “no clear answers” on the UK’s future relationship, offering only “conflicting, confusing voices”.

He told peers he feared the Government would come up with “meaningless waffle” for its future relationship with Brussels, and that the implementation period would be “a gangplank into thin air”.

His comments came on the first of a two-day debate in the Lords on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill.

Lords Leader Baroness Evans of Bowes Park said she did not share concerns that peers will ignore the referendum or use the Bill to frustrate the Brexit process.

Labour former transport secretary Lord Adonis, meanwhile, proposed a rare motion of regret that the Bill, which aims to transfer European law into UK law, did not provide for a second referendum on the terms of the final Brexit deal.

Almost 190 peers are listed to speak over the two days of second reading, where the principle of the Bill will be considered.

Conservative peer Lord Bridges, who left the Government in July, said: “What is the country we wish to build once we have left the European Union?

“Only once we have answered this question can we properly and fully answer the second question – what agreement do we want to strike with the European Union? What do we value more, parliamentary sovereignty and control, or market access and trade?

“Four months on, and there are still no clear answers to these basic, critical questions. All we hear, day after day, are conflicting, confusing voices.

“If this continues, and ministers cannot agree among themselves on the future relationship the Government wants, how can this Prime Minister possibly negotiate a clear, precise heads of terms for the future relationship with the EU?”

He went on: “My fear is that we will get meaningless waffle in a political declaration in October.

“The implementation period will not be a bridge to a clear destination. It will be a gangplank into thin air.”

Lord Bridges told peers that the Government cannot and must not “indulge in that very British habit of just muddling through”.

He added: “The Government must be honest with themselves and the public about the choices we face.

“And then the Prime Minister and her Cabinet must make those choices.

“As has been said, to govern is to choose, and as we face the biggest challenge this country has faced since the Second World War, keeping every option open is no longer an option.”

Opening the debate, Lady Evans said the Government was making “good progress” with the Scottish and Welsh administrations on how devolved powers were treated in the Bill.

Ministers have previously committed to bringing forward amendments on this issue in the Lords.

She went on: “Some suggest that this House will ignore the referendum or attempt to use the Bill to frustrate the Brexit process.

“I don’t share those concerns. I am keenly aware of the collective sense of responsibility felt across this House to our important constitutional role and I am confident noble Lords will take a constructive approach to our deliberations.”

Labour’s Lady Smith said all peers want to avoid this becoming a “fiendishly complex” process that weakens both parliamentary sovereignty and legal protections.

She added: “The time for slick soundbites to pacify extremists has long since gone.

“Instead of vague superficial statements of a ‘Global Britain’, ‘Brexit means Brexit’ and now the appalling ‘Buccaneering Brexit’, we have to deal with the reality and the nitty-gritty of the detail. That is the test for this Bill and the Government.”</s>A Tory minister was given a dressing down today, after breaking ranks to suggest Brexit should be stopped if evidence showed it would be “damaging.”

Justice Minister Philip Lee spoke out late last night, after a leaked Whitehall assessment showed every modelled outcome of Brexit would leave Britain worse off.

In a burst of Tweets, he warned "we can't just dismiss this and move on."

A senior Number 10 source said: "He has been spoken to by the chief whip and been reminded that it is best to air views in private."

But they said no further action will be taken and Dr Lee will not be sacked.

It came as the Tories were on the verge of backing down on their refusal to release the Whitehall Brexit assessment, which was leaked to the media on Monday night.

The document suggested economic growth would be reduced by at least 2% compared to current forecasts even if the UK maintained access to the single market.

If we crash out without a deal, the document suggested the reduction would be as much as 8%.

Writing on Twitter last night, Dr Lee warned: "The next phase of Brexit has to be all about the evidence. We can’t just dismiss this and move on. If there is evidence to the contrary, we need to see and consider that too.

"But if these figures turn out to be anywhere near right, there would be a serious question over whether a government could legitimately lead a country along a path that the evidence and rational consideration indicate would be damaging. This shows the PM's challenge."

He added: "The PM has been dealt some tough card s and I support her mission to make the best of them. It’s time for evidence, not dogma, to show the way.

"We must act for our country’s best interests, not ideology & populism, or history will judge us harshly. Our country deserves no less."</s>A minister has been slapped down after saying "evidence, not dogma" should dictate the Government's approach to Brexit.

Downing Street said Phillip Lee had been spoken to by chief whip Julian Smith and "reminded it is better to express such views in private in future".

It came after the justice minister commented on a leaked Brexit analysis in a series of messages on Twitter.

Downing Street said Dr Lee was "speculating about provisional leaked documents and he was asked to keep that speculation private".

The disclosure of the document, obtained by BuzzFeed News, has dominated the political agenda in recent days and sparked calls for the full paper to be released.

Downing Street said on Wednesday it would not contest a vote forced by Labour to get the analysis published.

According to the leaked draft, Britain would be worse off under every Brexit scenario modelled, with the much-vaunted benefits of new trade deals predicted to add just 0.3% to GDP in the long term.

Speaking in the Commons on Tuesday, Brexit minister Steve Baker described the document as a "preliminary analysis" and said the reporting of it was a "selective interpretation".

He also cast doubt on the accuracy of economic forecasts generally, telling the Commons there is "huge uncertainty" around such work and "these analyses have proven to be wrong in the wake of the referendum".

Mr Baker made reference to his comments on Twitter on Wednesday, writing:</s>The head of the CBI business organisation has piled pressure on the Government to publish its assessments of the impact of Brexit on the economy.

Carolyn Fairbairn said it was “very important” that people have access to the full facts about EU withdrawal, so that decisions on the UK’s future relationship with Europe are made “on basis of evidence and not ideology”.

Ms Fairbairn, who is travelling with Prime Minister Theresa May in China, said that the signing of deals worth £9 billion during the three-day trip showed Britain was able to expand its trade with the far eastern giant while within the EU’s customs union.

“The debate has been framed as a false choice – either being close to Europe or global Britain,” the CBI director-general told Sky News in Beijing. “In fact being close to Europe helps global Britain.

“These opportunities don’t require an FTA (free trade agreement). We can do them now. Meanwhile we can get our Brexit deal right.

“What this trip is proving is we can and should do both.”

The Government has agreed to release to MPs documents drawn up by the Department for Exiting the EU into the potential impact on the economy of various possible outcomes of Brexit.

The analysis, obtained by website Buzzfeed, suggested that, even with a comprehensive EU trade deal, UK growth would be down by 5% over the next 15 years, rising to 8% if Britain left without a deal.

Ministers were forced into agreeing to release the document after coming under parliamentary pressure from Labour and critics on the Tory benches.

But the analysis will only be made available to MPs and will not be published more widely.

Ms Fairbairn said the evidence should be made accessible so people could make up their minds on the kind of Brexit they want.

“It’s very important we have the facts on the table,” she said.

“Ideology can’t be what governs these decisions, we need the facts, the evidence – determinants of jobs in the future – to be what determines these decisions.

“What our businesses have been telling us is how valuable frictionless trade within the EU is. The fact we are now getting evidence on the table that shows that is very welcome.

“Such an important hard choice, has to be made on basis of evidence and not ideology.”</s>Theresa May has hit back at claims that she is heading for a "Brexit in name only", declaring she recognises that voters wanted to see change in the UK's relations with Europe when they backed Leave in the 2016 referendum.

The Prime Minister repeated her promise to deliver on Brexit, pointedly noting that the 17.4 million Britons who handed victory to Leave "did not vote for nothing to change when we come out of the EU".

The comments come as the Prime Minister made clear she will fight the proposal on citizens' rights which emerged in negotiating guidelines agreed by the EU27 earlier this week.

Asked whether she believes in Brexit "hand on heart", Mrs May replied: "Yes."

READ MORE: Brexit minister fuels conspiracy about 'rogue' civil servants

Speaking to reporters during a trip to China, Mrs May firmly rejected speculation that she might seek to extend the expected two-year transition period after the official date of Brexit on March 29 2019 to three or more years.

"People are saying 'Oh we're secretly negotiating for three years'. No. We're not," she said.

And she promised to fight Brussels proposals which would give EU nationals full citizens' rights if they come to the UK as late as the end of 2020.

There is growing disquiet among pro-Brexit Conservatives that the Prime Minister is softening her stance on the terms of the UK’s EU exit, leading to growing speculation about a challenge to her leadership.

"What we're doing now is doing the job that the British people asked the Government to do, which is to deliver on Brexit," Mrs May said.

"They want us to do that. But in doing that, they did not they did not vote for nothing to change when we come out of the EU."

She added: "When we agreed the citizens' rights deal in December, we did so on the basis that people who had come to the UK when we were a member of the EU had ... made a life choice and set up certain expectations and it was right that we have made an agreement that ensured they could continue their life in the way they had wanted to," said the PM.

"Now, for those who come after March 2019, that will be different because they will be coming to a UK that they know will be outside the EU.

"This is a matter for negotiation for the immediate period but I'm clear there's a difference between those people who came prior to us leaving and those who will come when they know the UK is no longer a member of the EU."

New leaked government analysis has revealed that a post-Brexit trade deal with the United States will not make up for economic growth lost by curbing immigration from the EU.

Border checks and the loss of market access in certain sectors on top of the impact of immigration reforms will cause the main damage to the economy, Brexit analysis prepared for the Department for Exiting the EU found.

Several immigration policies were analysed in the papers leaked to the BuzzFeed news website, assessing their impact they are likely to have on UK finances.

The research found replacing free movement with a system similar to that in place for non-EU citizens would have a bigger negative effect than the 0.2% boost to GDP growth that a US trade deal would provide.

SNP Europe spokesman Stephen Gethins said the analysis showed there would be “huge economic harm” from leaving the single market and ending free movement.

“EU nationals contribute enormously to our society, our economy and our workplaces,” Mr Gethins said.

“It is vital that the Prime Minister listens to small and large businesses who employ thousands of EU nationals – including many who work tirelessly in our frontline services, including the NHS.

“It’s now clear that this UK government is being driven by ideology, rather than protecting the UK’s economic and social interests.”

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Vince Cable said: "The view that restricting immigration is a positive thing, something this Conservative government have only encouraged, has been starkly contradicted by their own analysis.

"This analysis shows a fall in EU migration is far from cost free.

Mrs May also told journalists in China that she will discuss Britain's security relations with the remaining EU in a speech to the Munich Security Conference in Germany next month.

But she declined to say whether she would use the address as an opportunity to spell out her vision for the "end-state" she wants for Britain after Brexit.

"As and when we have more to say and to clarify, then I will do so, as I have," she told reporters.

READ MORE: Ruth Davidson: ‘there is life after Brexit’</s>
• Theresa May will not publish the leaked Brexit impact report.
• The report will not be released in its current form because it was an "incomplete draft document," a spokesperson for the prime minister said on Tuesday.
• The report, produced by the Treasury for the Brexit department, suggests Britain will be worse off outside the EU no matter what scenario.
• The PM's spokesperson did not rule out publishing the analysis once it is complete.

LONDON — Prime Minister Theresa May is refusing to release a secret cabinet document detailing the damage Brexit will do to the economy.

The document, which was produced by the Treasury and then leaked to Buzzfeed News, shows that Britain would see lower economic growth under every likely Brexit scenario modelled.

A spokesperson for the prime minister today told Business Insider that the report will not be made public because it is "an incomplete draft document" that "had not been signed off" by ministers.

Speaking in the House of Commons, Brexit minister Steve Baker said the government would not release the analysis, because economic forecasts were "always wrong."

May told her Cabinet on Tuesday that the report was "initial work not approved by ministers" which only considered "off the shelf options" for Britain's departure from the European Union, and not the "deep and special partnership" the government seeks to negotiate with the EU, Mays spokesperson said.

"This was a draft document that had not been signed off."

However, they did not rule out the impact analysis being made public once it is completed.

Brexit minister Steve Baker later confirmed that the government would publish the completed form prior to MPs and Lords voting on the final withdrawal deal.

The government will release "appropriate analysis the government has done so the house can make an informed decision," Baker said.

He added that the government cannot be expected to publish the analysis while negotiations with the EU are ongoing because it would risk "harming our negotiation position" and "the national interest."

Baker described the leaked version of the report as "an attempt to undermine our exit from the European Union."

The analysis, commissioned by the Department for Exiting the European Union, looked at the impact of Britain leaving with either a free trade agreement, a Norway-style single market deal, or a no-deal scenario.

Under all three scenarios, Britain would be worse off than if the country decided to remain in the European Union, according to the analysis, which was intended to be presented to May's Cabinet in private over the coming days.

It found that with no deal, UK economic growth would be 8% lower than remaining in the EU and with a free trade agreement it would be 5% lower.

Even under the 'softest' option of remaining inside the European Economic Area but leaving the EU, growth would be 2% lower than staying in.

May under pressure to publish the report

Labour this morning called on the government to publish the findings of the report in full.

Matthew Pennycook, shadow Brexit minister, said: "Labour has made clear since the referendum that Tory Ministers cannot withhold vital information from Parliament and the public about the impact of different Brexit scenarios on jobs and the economy.

"Ministers should publish this information immediately and allow for a full debate in Parliament about its implications."

Conservative MPs Nicky Morgan and Anna Soubry have also joined calls for the report to be released.

Morgan, Treasury select committee chair, said: "I think it should be published."

Soubry, who has long been a thorn in the government's side on Brexit from the Conservative backbenches, said: "The people must indeed take back control - at the moment we’re in danger of our future being determined by a small elite of hard Brexit MPs."

Brexiteer and Former Conservative party leader, Iain Duncan Smith, described the leak as "highly suspicious" and said "almost every single forecast coming from government, and most of the international organisations, has been completely wrong."

Smith was echoed by his colleague Jacob Rees-Mogg, who said the report was based on "opinion" rather than "facts."

The parliamentary Brexit committee, led by Labour's Hilary Benn, is likely to discuss the leaked report when it meets on Wednesday, a source close to the committee has told Business Insider.</s>Until recently, Brexit-supporting Conservatives had been reasonably disciplined, content that Mrs. May’s negotiating compromises — including agreeing to a divorce payment to the European Union of up to 39 billion pounds — were worth making to secure Brexit, which is due to take place formally next March.

But critics on the right are becoming more vocal in articulating fears that Mrs. May will agree not to the clean break with the bloc that they crave, but “Brino” — an acronym for Brexit in Name Only.

Businesses are desperate for a transition agreement to avoid an economically ruinous departure next March. But the price of such a deal is to remain subject to European Union laws without a vote on them, paying into the budget and accepting free movement of workers. That has been likened by one prominent hard-line Brexiteer, Jacob Rees-Mogg, to being a “vassal state.”

And a suggestion by the chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond, that the outcome of Brexit might be to move the British and European economies only “very modestly, apart” provoked calls from Brexit supporters for him to be fired.

Not that the pro-Europeans are content with Mrs. May either.

Debate starts Tuesday in the House of Lords, the unelected second chamber of Parliament, on her Brexit legislation. Her critics hope to pass as many as 10 amendments, including one that would scrap plans to enshrine next March’s withdrawal date in law, making it easier to postpone Brexit if negotiations break down.

Mrs. May’s recent reshuffle of her cabinet has inadvertently sharpened debate among pro-Brexit right-wingers by promoting some right-wingers into the government, and freeing up the leadership of the European Research Group, a collection of pro-Brexit Conservative lawmakers.

That allowed Mr. Rees-Mogg to become its new leader, giving an influential platform to the quirky, cartoonish, right-winger who has emerged as a surprise potential candidate to take over from Mrs. May.

Perhaps in response to that competition, the leading Brexit right-winger in the cabinet, Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, has raised his profile, straying well beyond his brief to suggest more funding for the health service, then making headlines by calling for the construction of a bridge across the English Channel.

While would-be successors to Mrs. May, like Mr. Johnson, are limbering up, it is not clear that a contest is imminent. There is no agreed candidate to take over from Mrs. May and both pro- and anti-Europeans worry they might get someone worse.

Any challenge to her would be likely to lead to a bitter fight and expose Conservative Party divisions over Brexit.

Then there is the new distraction of Mr. Williamson, the defense secretary.

Last week, he told The Daily Mail that, in 2004, when he worked for a manufacturer of fireplaces, he had a relationship with a female colleague that “became flirtatious and a couple of times we shared a kiss.” The Guardian reported that the statement had been made after Mr. Williamson’s lawyers had refused to answer questions it had posed, including whether “the woman reported Williamson’s behavior to her line manager and an internal process followed.”

Mrs. May also faces a series of political and policy challenges, several of which could bring her down. It requires 48 Conservative lawmakers to request a contest, and British media reports suggest that around 40 such requests have already been lodged, though that cannot be confirmed.

Strains in the health service and education, and the government’s failure to tackle problems such as housing, illustrate the extent to which Brexit preoccupies the government. In May the Conservatives face local elections, and a poor set of results could put the prime minister under more pressure to quit.

But it all comes back to Brexit. So far, Mrs. May has survived largely because she has been seen as the compromise figure in a cabinet split between those who want a clean break with the European Union and those who want Britain to remain closely aligned with the bloc economically, even after Brexit.

As negotiations proceed it may become harder to sit on the fence. Mrs. May has been reluctant to outline her plans for Britain’s “end state” after Brexit, other than to say that she wants something between a Norwegian-style soft Brexit, with very close links to the bloc, and a harder Brexit that would arise from a free trade deal of the type negotiated by Canada.

While business leaders grow increasingly anxious, awkward discussions in the British cabinet are being postponed, for fear of provoking renewed civil war.

By contrast, the 27 remaining European Union nations have, so far, defied their reputation for division by presenting a surprisingly united front. On Monday Sabine Weyand, the bloc’s deputy chief negotiator, said European ministers had adopted their guidelines for how a Brexit transition period should look after two minutes of discussion.
Prime Minister Theresa May orders Phillip Lee, a Justice minister, to "air his views in private" after he suggested that Brexit planning should be based on evidence rather than dogma.