The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

[Carlos R]

	Quote:	Medea Fleecestealer
	Yeah, but we can get started on the negotiations. The UK can't sign anything until it's no longer part of the EU anyway. So say 2-4 years to leave and in the meantime negotiate with other countries and there should be very little gap.

You've got that the wrong way round. We can't start negotiations with the EU until we triggert Article 50 (that's the EU's position). This then means the start of negotiations with a max timeline if 2 years. If agreements can be reached before the deadline then these can be signed.

[marton]

	Quote:	Jim2007
	That entirely depends on what the deal is. Almost all third country deals require Parliament approval and if it requires an kind of change to the treaties (free movement for example), then it needs approval beyond the Council and will involve referenda (France, Denmark & Ireland). If it only involves EEA or WTO, there would be nothing to approve, the UK would need to join EFTA and commit to the EEA agreement and so on.

"commit to the EEA agreement" so free movement and Schengen &&&&

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:	Jim2007
	No, the UK joined the European Economic Community not a free trade movement, that was something the UK failed to understand from day one, it would appear.

The UK joined the 'Common Market' as it was known in English at the time in 1973.

[Kosti]

	Quote:	Jim2007
	That entirely depends on what the deal is. Almost all third country deals require Parliament approval and if it requires an kind of change to the treaties (free movement for example), then it needs approval beyond the Council and will involve referenda (France, Denmark & Ireland). If it only involves EEA or WTO, there would be nothing to approve, the UK would need to join EFTA and commit to the EEA agreement and so on.

Any deal that requires a treaty change and therefore a eferendum in a country won't even be considered by the EC.

No one wants to go through what Cameron just did.

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	The UK joined the 'Common Market' as it was known in English at the time in 1973.

No.

Maybe commonly known as that but the official title was then the EEC.

[Urs Max]

	Quote:
	The British civil service has no trade negotiators, the former head of the government’s EU unit has confirmed. Oliver Letwin says all British negotiators are currently employed by the EU.

Seems like a non-issue, no? Kind of a distinction without a difference, upon Brexit they switch back to UK as employer and that's that. The problem lies in the (lack of) knowledge and negotiating capacity available, and the potential unsuitable priorities of foreign help.

	Quote:	Phos
	I think any new deal outside of the existing models will be based on rational pragmatism rather than EU idealism.

That's what the UK wants, but the EU has made it very clear that this won't happen. EU actually has little choice if they want to avoid all other 27 from doing the same as the UK.

[Medea Fleecestealer]

	Quote:
	No. Maybe commonly known as that but the official title was then the EEC.

It was still aimed at a single common market and not intergration into a European wide governmental system.

"The Community's initial aim was to bring about economic integration, including a common market and customs union ..."

That is what the UK signed up to with their referendum of 1975.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ferendum,_1975

The British public were not given the opportunity to vote on Maastricht.

"In accordance with British constitutional convention, specifically that of parliamentary sovereignty, ratification in the UK was not subject to approval by referendum."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastr...y#Ratification

Now, finally, we have been given the chance and clearly stated we don't want it.

	Quote:	Urs Max
	Seems like a non-issue, no? Kind of a distinction without a difference, upon Brexit they switch back to UK as employer and that's that. The problem lies in the (lack of) knowledge and negotiating capacity available, and the potential unsuitable priorities of foreign help. That's what the UK wants, but the EU has made it very clear that this won't happen. EU actually has little choice if they want to avoid all other 27 from doing the same as the UK.

Are they bothered by the idea of the interests of all 27 countries and its 500 million people taking precedence over EU interests?

The EU issues lots of statements, but most are merely words. The 27 countries are not united nor loyal to the EU. They each have circumstantial interests that change over time. EU statements only have a veneer of solidarity.

If the UK approaches this from the perspective of each country's self interest, instead of merely the UK's self-interests. I think it would resonate with the member states and it could easily dissolve that veneer of EU solidarity. I don't think the member states are as blindly loyal to the EU as the EU would like to portray. Perhaps entrenched government officials are. But when it start to connect with the population of those countries, it will be harder for their governments to maintain the same EU party line.

This does not have to mean a dissolution of the EU. Brexit could be the actual reform the EU needs to stay relevant for the future.

[marton]

	Quote:	Urs Max
	Seems like a non-issue, no? Kind of a distinction without a difference, upon Brexit they switch back to UK as employer and that's that. The problem lies in the (lack of) knowledge and negotiating capacity available, and the potential unsuitable priorities of foreign help. That's what the UK wants, but the EU has made it very clear that this won't happen. EU actually has little choice if they want to avoid all other 27 from doing the same as the UK.

"upon Brexit they switch back to UK as employer" No, EU is their employer. The EU has already announced their jobs are safe.

Trade negotiators are not slaves; they will only only switch back to UK voluntarily if they have a good job offer.

[marton]

	Quote:	Medea Fleecestealer
	It was still aimed at a single common market and not intergration into a European wide governmental system. "The Community's initial aim was to bring about economic integration, including a common market and customs union ..." That is what the UK signed up to with their referendum of 1975. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ferendum,_1975 The British public were not given the opportunity to vote on Maastricht. "In accordance with British constitutional convention, specifically that of parliamentary sovereignty, ratification in the UK was not subject to approval by referendum." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastr...y#Ratification Now, finally, we have been given the chance and clearly stated we don't want it.

From your first link; "IF WE SAY 'NO'

We would have to try to negotiate some special free trade arrangement, a new Treaty. We would be bound by that Treaty. Its conditions might be harsh. But unless and until it was in force, Britain's exports to the Common Market would be seriously handicapped.

We would no longer be inside the Common Market tariff wall - but outside.

For a time at least, there would be a risk of making unemployment and inflation worse.

Other countries have made these special arrangements with the Community. They might find Community decisions irksome, even an interference with their affairs.

But they have no part in making those decisions."

[marton]

Karma!

"Boris Johnson attends his first EU foreign ministers’ meeting today"

Source (might be behind a pay wall)

Non-paywall Source

David Davis is the man. When asked about breaching EU law by conducting trade talks during Art 50 process, his reply?

"What are they going to do?"

[marton]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	David Davis is the man. When asked about breaching EU law by conducting trade talks during Art 50 process, his reply? "What are they going to do?"

So he has chosen the confrontational route

"What are they going to do?"

I suppose they could seek to impose fines "Fines levied through an Article 260 TFEU3 action might be collected by putting in escrow some portion of the Member States’ EU funding streams until the Member State complies." or take some other selective action?

[amogles]

	Quote:	marton
	So he has chosen the confrontational route "What are they going to do?" I suppose they could seek to impose fines "Fines levied through an Article 260 TFEU3 action might be collected by putting in escrow some portion of the Member States’ EU funding streams until the Member State complies." or take some other selective action?

Right now I wouldn't assume that just yet.

He's just rattling his sabre to please the crowds.

It's an age old tradition of the UK dealing with the EU that politicians say one thing when in Brussels and another when back at home.

[JagWaugh]

Just a side observation here. Kerry seems much more intelligent when he limits himself to short soundbites.

He is positively babbling at a press conference in Belgium right now.

	Quote:	marton
	So he has chosen the confrontational route "What are they going to do?" I suppose they could seek to impose fines "Fines levied through an Article 260 TFEU3 action might be collected by putting in escrow some portion of the Member States’ EU funding streams until the Member State complies." or take some other selective action?

What are they, prison wardens? Having balls is not confrontational.

They would have to impose on the UK and the country they are in dialog with. Great way to splinter the EU further.

It would have been more fun if Theresa May assigned Farage to deal with the EU.

[amogles]

	Quote:	Phos
	What are they, prison wardens? Having balls is not confrontational. They would have to impose on the UK and the country they are in dialog with. Great way to splinter the EU further.

Judging by their actions so far, I don't think that preventing splintering is part of their agenda.

When Germans are convinced they are right and all that ...

[amogles]

So much for businesses pulling out of the UK post Brexit

Spanish train maker, CAF, announces it wants to open a plant in the UK

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/b...bly-plant.html

And SoftBank just went shopping, buying ARM for £24bn.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ar...KCN0ZY03B?il=0

Don't they listen to the "experts"?

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:	marton
	Trade negotiators are not slaves; they will only only switch back to UK voluntarily if they have a good job offer.

Trade negotiators are negotiators, they will work for who pays them the biggest sum