voted they wanted us to take control of our laws. when we are no longer a member of the european union, no one here will be subject. just last i've to get clarity that the part of article 50 that

applies for the scope of flexibility on the operative it will not be exercised. it will not be the intention to make use of that flexibility? p.m. may: what article 50 allows for is that is there is an agreement, that the negotiation period, the withdraw and relationship with the european union is extended, agreed with the member state concerned, ie the u.k., that allows for that to be extended. we're not setting out to extend that period. we are setting out to negotiate in the two-year timeframe. >> good afternoon, prime minister. this marks six months since the referendum.

three months ago to trigger article 50. can you tell us when the government's plan will be published. when will we see the publication of the plan? p.m. may: i will make a speech that will set out more of our approach. before we trigger article 50, we will be setting out more details of our approach. i have not set a date for the plan to be published. you will hear more what i speak in the new year. >> can you give assurance that when the plan appears it will be efore article 50 is triggered and there will be sufficient time for us to do our job looking at it. p.m. may: as i have said, parliament need not have any concerned about its ability to have opportunity to comment on the matters. i expect parliament will have

proper opportunity to look at the matters before triggering article 50. a what would be your view of reasonable time before the triggering of article 50? p.m. may: that is another way of asking when i will publish a plan. i do not have a date. i will not set out a time. we will ensure that parliament has an opportunity to look at these issues. will factor into the timetable the question of the supreme court judgment. if they find in favor of the government that leaves one course of action, against the government, there will be a need to respond to the supreme court judgment. >> is it your intention that parliament will have a final vote? will haveparliament every opportunity to vote through the great repeal

ill on the negotiations with the european union. >> the question is, is it your intention to ensure that our limit has a chance to vote on the deal? yes or no? my. may: it is intention to ensure that parliament will be able to discuss. it is not clear, i indicated my expectations for the timetable. it is not clear if it will take two parties to go through that process of negotiations. ensuring as we go through, as i said. when we are able to give clarity, i will do so. >> i'm not sure why it is so difficult to answer the question. we know european parliament will

be able to vote, why can you not say that british parliament will also have a vote? p.m. may: when more details become available of how this will operate, there is a question about the timetable in relation to the agreement and the necessity of how the timetable will operate with the european parliament. what i am ensuring is that when ofcome to the point delivering the vote to the british people that we will be leaving the european union. about the timetable, negotiations are expected to be completed by october 2018 to provide scrutiny. in the complex negotiations of the divorce arrangement and the new agreement about market access and trade, do you expect those

to be ton sequentially or in parallel? p.m. may: i am working on the bases that we will negotiate in parallel. that is what makes sense. 50 in the in article treaty itself, making clear you have to know what the framework of the future relationship is before finalizing withdraw. at the point that we exit, we will need to know what the new relationship with the european union is. to take it you are confident it will be possible to negotiate both parts in as little as 18 months? be 18 months. you refer to it as being in relation to the needs of the european parliament to have ratification here there is concern european leaders have in relation to the parliamentary

elections in 2019. it concerns their point of view to make sure the arrangements provisionsefore taken in the u.k. parliamentary elections. >> are you confident the 27 can negotiate in 18 months given that rogers has reported to advise ministers come with a view he has picked up with the 27, that it could take up to 10 years to agree on a new trade deal? p.m. may: i noted when talking to individual leaders the willingness to ensure that we can undertake this as smoothly and in orderly of a fashion as possible. there is a recommendation that we want to get this arrangement in place so that people can move on to the new relationship they will have with the united kingdom. i think there is a willingness to undertake that on this basis.

>> can you confirm it is the government's intention to seek transitional arrangement to cover the period from the negotiation of the deal to the full implementation to give certainty to business and avoid the cliff edge? when peoplethink talk about transition, different people mean different things. some will talk about transition as a deliberate way of leaving the european union. for others, transition is tatian you cannot get the deal in two years and you need a further period. when you think about the process we will go through when we have gotten in the arrangements, they will be a necessity for adjustments to the arrangements for implementation of practical changes that may need to take place in relation. that is what business has been arguing for.

they used the phrase about not edge. a cliff they do not want to wake up one morning after having a deal the night before, and discovered they have to do everything in a different way. making sure people can adjust to a new relationship, not delaying the point at which we leave, not trying to extend negotiations. >> can you confirm the decision has not yet been taken by the government about when we will remain or leave the union, and if that is the case, don't we half to stay in the customs union to honor commitments given about seeking a situation in which they can trade without tariffs and bureaucratic impediments? p.m. may: in the customs union, this is not a binary decision.

of differentumber relationships that exist in relation to the customs union. this is more complex than simply out of theyou in or customs union. the way i approach and government is approaching this and other issues is to say the outcome you wish to achieve and how do you reach those outcomes? regards the further investment assumptions made by nissan, and we want to make sure we have the best possible deal within the single european market. that is what i have been saying public way and to companies. and that we want to ensure the competitiveness of the british economy. bringing newn's models to sunderland is a huge

vote of confidence. it is the most productive car plant in europe. >> can i take you back to one answer that sounded favorable to the proposals being brought by business, in particular the financial community, for c win i

r it

issues fall under article 50? >> when you say which issues will fall under article 50? >> it's possible that our partners could find themselves in the same trap the government has found itself in with action being taken, the ability to conclude majority, there's actually an agreement that would be so extensive that it will be out of the scope of article 50 and we could find our seven with

ourselves with a 27 on the the council and in the same position that way now. >> if i understand the question correctly you are saying that there may be, at the end of this process, some matters that are ratified by individual as well is by the parliament. that is something we are aware of and something we will be negotiating. >> you say you're confident you know what the issues are. >> i think work is still going in great detail on this, but i think one of the questions is a matter of legal discussion and

that is the question of any trade arrangement with the european union and the extent. >> would that be published as part of the formal negotiation to the european council as to what might be seen. >> i don't think that's appropriate for the triggering of article 50. this matter, i hesitate to say this, but there will be legal discussions, this will be a matter on which the lawyers will be discussing. i think it will be for us to assert. >> the lawyers have had a disagreement of setting a timetable of your own government and the move to the supreme court.

what judgments we be making about achieving under the article 50 negotiation and will you be reviewing those in the process. >> first well, i would point out that we hope to have articles 50 by the end of march next year end had to come forward with the judgment. i expect to be able to trigger this of march of next year. we haven't blown the timetable off course. >> it is your intention to cover as many aspects of our future relationship of the european union as possible within the article 50 negotiation. >> within the negotiation we will be having with the european union, it would be my intention to cover not just the process but also the future relationships. >> ok. what would be the major consequences of failing to agree, in your view?

>> you mean failure to agree in the european union -- >> if we find it them vetoing any deal. >> i imagine the process then will have whether or not they wish to continue negotiation. imagine that would be the next step they will take. >> my committee is looking at the government issues. they say the government is working well and you have your own specialists advising you personally and you also set up dat and each have their

-- set up separate departments. each have their own concerns and priorities. how will the government synthesize these different approaches in a single uk negotiating policy. >> i have also set up cabinet subcommittee which is responsible for looking at the brexit on trade. there are number of cabinet subcommittee to address that approach to government and debates taking place regularly within the committee on issues we are thinking about the future trade relationships and aspects of the legal processes in article 50 and so forth. >> what kind of capacity does the relevant subcommittee have to synthesize different approaches coming up from other departments?

>> the papers are submitted to the committee by the state. the majority of papers will come from the state court brexit of the european union. they were put forth the papers to do so. >> inevitably because brexit is a separate department, it will be seen as something is arrival to other departments and who is holding the weight between these two departments and what capacity do you or the cabinets office have in order to make sure these different approaches are drawn into one approach? >> i'm afraid i would challenge the concept. i think it is the focus of the

work that's being done, but it does call on the expertise of other departments. what were very clear about, we don't get that rival or duplication between the departments. >> the cabinet office department that is correlating the other departments on your behalf, is that correct. >> it's the government department that is responsible for working with the other government departments. >> so who will actually negotiate the agreement. >> the negotiation will be conducted at a number of levels. obviously i will have a role to play regarding the european leaders and the state within the european union will have a key role to play and there will be technical negotiations and discussions that will take place. >> who will actually negotiate the uk new trade relationship with the eu? >> that will be part of the negotiation.

those who are negotiating will be part of that. >> will the trade minister have a special role in that? >> as we unfolds, obviously we will bring in expertise and ministers as appropriate from the department of international trade. >> many governments have a single trade negotiator, the u.s. government, for example, has a single trade individual. do believe we should have someone playing such a role. or should we have? >> we are currently building up

the specific trade negotiation expertise within the department of international trade and in due course we will be setting out more clearly. >> do you think that should be applied. >> where it is appropriate. >> they are looking department by department. the institute of government has produced a paper suggests they are having to choose and the brexit priorities. how confident are you that these departments can handle the priorities. [inaudible] should not certain we

employ more civil servants. >> right. ok. the chancellor suggested that the foreign office taking over the aspects of foreign affairs that are currently hampered by the eu, that would need to change the layout. how will they reinforce their diplomatic network. >> let us see what the nature of the relationship that we have with the european union is. we will look to see a number of areas where the european union has been negotiating and undertaking activity, notably in trade, we know we need to build off our trade expertise and we need to do this for appeared of time because it's being done under the european union.

we been contributing to that debate within the european union, but as we look to the role outside of the eu, it's it's not just about what we do in relationship to the eu, but it's how we build the our presence globally. we have to start looking at europe and the rest of the world. >> thank you very much. >> can i just come back to one of these points that we touched on earlier. they made a firm commitment on a number of occasions that parliament will be informed as well as diplomatic committees. in the course of those negotiations, are you committed to that as your brexit minister. >> we are committed to ensuring that parliament does have an

opportunity to look at these issues and discuss these issues. to be discussing these issues and putting these issues forward. we have been very clear, we're not going to give a running commentary on every aspect of negotiation, but we will make sure that parliament has the opportunity to be informed. as we make information available we will. >> so you are supporting that objective. >> we are very clear that we want parliament to be able to have the opportunity to debate and discuss these issues. the european parliament has a specific role within the negotiation which is different from the role the uk are hearing about. >> there seems to be this idea that somehow were not letting parliament do anything. we have made statements to parliament, we debate in parliament, we had the great

debate deal and we will make sure that parliament has the opportunity to discuss these matters as we go through the negotiation. what we will not be doing is setting out, as i said in detail on an hour by hour basis of running commentary what aspects of negotiation we are discussing or what the particular discussions are that are taking place. we need to have that flexibility in the government to be able to enter negotiations on that basis. >> people can draw their own conclusions from the response, but i have to say for my part, i didn't hear a yes to the question. i have a couple other points, is it your intention parliament should vote on a final deal once it has been negotiated? >> it was a question put to me earlier and it's my intention that parliament should have

every opportunity to consider these matters but what i'm also clear about is to ensure we actually deliver on the vote of the british people which was a vote to leave the european union . ok. was that a yes or a no? >> i gave the answer i gave, chairman. >> in the exchanges at the beginning, you did give a very clear answer to one question that it ruled out seeking an extension of the negotiation time period. >> as we go into negotiations, it is not our intention to extend that time period of negotiation. >> but you didn't completely rule out completing the negotiations within the negotiation. but, applying an implementation date at some point after 2019. >> what i said -- >> that was specifically

provided in article three amounts what i'm seeking clarity of. >> article 50, sub clause three is not about an implementation phase, it's about the extension of the time. of negotiation. >> well, i think that's a matter of interpretation. let's just read it out. the treaty shall seek to apply to the state in question from the date of entry the withdrawal agreement. so, that date of entry and withdraw agreement can be after 2019 and indeed it is generally understood by most people have looked at it. that's why been asking this question. i just want clarity about that question. >> i have misunderstood the question that you are asking me earlier because i thought you were asking me if the period

will be extended. >> the negotiating period . you did give a clear answer to that. expect -- to be able to know sh negotiate the deal within the two-year time. that is set out. >> we all agree on that. >> it may be the case that there are practical aspects which require a time period of implementation thereafter. that is what we will need, not just for us but for businesses and that has to be part of the negotiation. >> thank you, i quite understand , and that is what you said. clarify, you therefore may seek to use the discretion provided by article 50, subclause three, to negotiate an implementation date after the

end of the completion of the negotiation, even if if the negotiation time. is within the two-year frame. >> we will discuss whether we needed implementation phase, whether it is a issue of an implementation phase. >> the reason i keep raising this question is because what i get privately from major institutions and businesses is that we are at risk of walking straight toward the cliff of what they want is some kind of assurance or they will take measures now. if i can just read you what one large financial institution has given me. they do not want to be named. they gave me permission to read it out. i have read this to the chancellor as well on the basis that he reply. he said two years is unlikely to

be sufficient to complete the changes that are needed. the same document says severe disruption to client services may occur causing financial instability and significant costs and the firms may need to activate contingency plans at this point rather than waiting until the terms of the agreement are known leading to the instability discussed earlier in this document. that is what is being put to me and to the treasury committee and i think to a wide number and it is that that is leading us today in various ways to press too for a commitment to you for an early negotiation of some kind of transitional arrangement and clarity that there will be one to prevent.

>> that's what i hope to get clarity on. -- a commitment on. >> it's precisely because we understand that businesses, financial services and other businesses may need an implementation phase that we are talking about that. it may be that government actually needs a period of time to ensure that its systems are adjusted for arrangements. the difficulty here, and the uncertainty here is that the extent to which that is required actually depends on the nature of the deal, and the extent of change that is required by that deal. >> thank you very much prime minister. we have had just over an hour on brexit. i'm sure we will be coming back to it are many more occasions. we are just going to move on to health and healthcare.

>> coming up on today's washington journal, talking about president elect trump plaza selection for education secretary. then the book "white rage: the unspoken truth about the racial ivide." what the author calls "white rage." that is coming up on washington journal at some :00 a.m. eastern on c-span. on sees00 a.m. eastern man. ♪ announcer: the presidential and not is friday, january 20.

a bo kellye and more. this week in prime time on c-span. morning'sup on this washington journal, we take your calls on the 2016 election results. later this hour, we talked to chavousambers -- kevin about the choice for education secretary. then carol anderson about her

book "white rage: she argues that throughout history black progress has met with what she calls "white rage." you could join the conversation on facebook and twitter. ♪ host: good morning on this wednesday, december 20 100 a move by president obama to firm up his environmental legacy. -- wednesday, december 21. it will be up to the incoming president to determine what comes next. call this number if you are a republican. .02-748-8001 if you're a