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

	Quote:	marton
	From tragedy to farce Source

Actually I would describe it as finally seeing sense. As I tried to explain in this thread before (and was attacked by the Brexit corner for), the UK can't even start a negotiation until their own position is clear. Only when the UK states what it wants can the EU even begin to respond with a proposal on what they can accept and at what cost.

The UK is exiting so it is completely up to the UK to state its opening position on what it wants after exit. From the EU end the triggering of Art 50 says more-or-less "goodbye and see you in the WTO" unless the UK asks for something more.

[Pachyderm]

	Quote:
	Actually I would describe it as finally seeing sense. As I tried to explain in this thread before (and was attacked by the Brexit corner for), the UK can't even start a negotiation until their own position is clear. Only when the UK states what it wants can the EU even begin to respond with a proposal on what they can accept and at what cost. The UK is exiting so it is completely up to the UK to state its opening position on what it wants after exit. From the EU end the triggering of Art 50 says more-or-less "goodbye and see you in the WTO" unless the UK asks for something more.

No, the negotiations can't start until A50 is invoked. The EU have been very clear that they won't talk until this happens, despite repeated requests.

I don't know what you mean by a "clear position". This is a negotiation. You start with objectives, but the mechanics of the deal is hammered out (if possible) during the negotiations.

It would have been better for all concerned if the EU had agreed to preliminary talks, as this would have provided precisely the information that you seek. Instead, we have to rely on electioneering, chest-thumping statements from a variety of EU politicians.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	Pachyderm
	It would have been better for all concerned if the EU had agreed to preliminary talks, as this would have provided precisely the information that you seek. Instead, we have to rely on electioneering, chest-thumping statements from a variety of EU politicians.

I'm glad you were never negotiating anything my behalf with that attitude towards the process.

This is the time in the process where the Empress should be identifying common ground with all of Parliament and with her EU counterparts, and listing the possible bones of contention and further requirements. There are huge areas of common ground which will be mutually beneficial to all concerned (information sharing with Europol being a major one), many issues that only require minor tweaking to become common ground, and then the rest where the negotiations should be concentrated.

After listening (twice) to Lord Pannick's 7 points address to the Supreme Court yesterday, it feels like the constitutional aspects of this could be more time consuming than any negotiations with the EU. That should run parallel to the process rather than delay it, but it could run well into the 2020s.

	Quote:	Blueangel
	I'm glad you were never negotiating anything my behalf with that attitude towards the process. This is the time in the process where the Empress should be identifying common ground with all of Parliament and with her EU counterparts, and listing the possible bones of contention and further requirements. There are huge areas of common ground which will be mutually beneficial to all concerned (information sharing with Europol being a major one), many issues that only require minor tweaking to become common ground, and then the rest where the negotiations should be concentrated.

Blueangel guide to negotiation - lay all your cards out on the table and rely on the kindness of the other party to grant what you wish.

	Quote:	Blueangel
	Europe or the EU? You have children and you would wish that on them??? I don't get your logic and believe you're just trolling. Be careful what you wish for Loz.

Did I say Europe? I actually meant the world.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Blueangel guide to negotiation - lay all your cards out on the table and rely on the kindness of the other party to grant what you wish.

It's one step further in the plan than May and her tribe have got.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Blueangel guide to negotiation - lay all your cards out on the table and rely on the kindness of the other party to grant what you wish.

After being part of a national wage negotiation committee and being trained in negotion skills by the (then) DTI's advisor to No.10, I think I probably know more about successful negotiation than you. Negotiation fails when it becomes adversarial. You should always go into proceedings with a clear set of objectives and expectations accumulated after consultation with the people concerned, complete and tidy away all the common ground parts of a deal, then work on the bones of contention in order to bring them into the realms of common ground. That's the objective. What you don't reveal is your 'wiggle room' in the negotiation. You never make your level and range of compromise clear at the outset.

It's really bugging me that people keep using poker as an example of how these proceedings should pan out. Just look at the current Supreme Court hearings... The game of poker is between the government's team and Gina Miller's team. The negotiation is between each team and the Surpeme Court judges who have to convince the judges that their proposals share common ground with current constitutional law and UK common law.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Did I say Europe? I actually meant the world.

Troll.

[Urs Max]

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	The graph you showed was a 5 year graph, where you made the claim I responded to.

I was quoting your two years claim. And I clarified. Twice.

Anyway I'm done with that, I made my point.

[Urs Max]

	Quote:	Blueangel
	After listening (twice) to Lord Pannick's 7 points address to the Supreme Court yesterday, it feels like the constitutional aspects of this could be more time consuming than any negotiations with the EU. That should run parallel to the process rather than delay it, but it could run well into the 2020s.

What if May invoked art.50 in March but it was later found that it required an individual law, invalidating the first invokement(is that a word?)? Unthinkable!

This can't run in parallel. If it takes years to clarify that's just how long it will take.

[Aeneas]

	Quote:	Urs Max
	What if May invoked art.50 in March but it was later found that it required an individual law, invalidating the first invokement(is that a word?)?

I believe the technical term would be 'tough crap'. The invocation of article 50 would have reached the EU via official diplomatic means. If someone screwed up along the way, it would be an internal British issue and would not be their problem.

	Quote:	Blueangel
	After being part of a national wage negotiation committee and being trained in negotion skills by the (then) DTI's advisor to No.10, I think I probably know more about successful negotiation than you. Negotiation fails when it becomes adversarial. You should always go into proceedings with a clear set of objectives and expectations accumulated after consultation with the people concerned, complete and tidy away all the common ground parts of a deal, then work on the bones of contention in order to bring them into the realms of common ground. That's the objective. What you don't reveal is your 'wiggle room' in the negotiation. You never make your level and range of compromise clear at the outset. It's really bugging me that people keep using poker as an example of how these proceedings should pan out. Just look at the current Supreme Court hearings... The game of poker is between the government's team and Gina Miller's team. The negotiation is between each team and the Surpeme Court judges who have to convince the judges that their proposals share common ground with current constitutional law and UK common law.

Comparing national wage negotiation with Brexit. Wow. What were your bargaining chips? That another million feckless would be forced to spend their time glued to their sofas?

[kriss kross]

Nigel Farage on the shortlist for Time magazine's person of the year for his role in Brexit!

[Mikers]

	Quote:	kriss kross
	Nigel Farage on the shortlist for Time magazine's person of the year for his role in Brexit!

Nigel Farage stands for what he believes in. Its fair game to say he may have completely the wrong beliefs but his commitment to his cause can't really be questioned so if the Person Of The Year is someone who has had an impact then he isnt a bad choice. If the person of the year is someone who has done lovely things for society then perhaps not.

That said, if its just about making an impact, then perhaps Bashir Al Assad should be up for it.

Reminds me a bit of Bob Crow. you hated him, as you queued for the bus because they were All Out again over some tiny administrative point, but tube drivers earned 50k for a 33 hour working week (or something like that its around there) and he got them there. In a way, you had to admire the man.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Comparing national wage negotiation with Brexit. Wow. What were your bargaining chips? That another million feckless would be forced to spend their time glued to their sofas?

Not a fan of experts, Loz?

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:	Sbrinz
	Can we recapitulate a bit? Britain wants to leave the EU - correct? Britain wants to incorporate all EU law into UK law - correct? Britain expects 2 years to negotiate after Article 50 - correct? Chief EU negotiator wants 18 months negotiations - correct? Britain now has a record number of foreigners living in UK - correct? Britain presently has a low unemployment rate - correct? In this situation, what are the advantages in leaving the EU? .

Not sure they do want all the EU laws, why would they?

Britain & Germany pay for everyone else, Britain wants to leave, simples.

[marton]

	Quote:	Aeneas
	I believe the technical term would be 'tough crap'. The invocation of article 50 would have reached the EU via official diplomatic means. If someone screwed up along the way, it would be an internal British issue and would not be their problem.

Article 50 says

	Quote:
	Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

Now if some lawyer were to argue that UK's own constitutional requirements were not met?

	Quote:
	Not a fan of experts, Loz?

Blueangel isn't an expert.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Comparing national wage negotiation with Brexit. Wow. What were your bargaining chips?

It's the same skill set whether you represent 14k people or 62million. There's a place for clarity and a place for keeping your own counsel, but the aim is always to get most of the objectives into common ground which is acceptable to both parties. But when you emerge from that darkened room, you have to 'sell the deal' to the people you represent.

Just as an exercise for yourself, what would you identify as the areas of common ground and the bones of contention?

[marton]

	Quote:
	Actually I would describe it as finally seeing sense. As I tried to explain in this thread before (and was attacked by the Brexit corner for), the UK can't even start a negotiation until their own position is clear. Only when the UK states what it wants can the EU even begin to respond with a proposal on what they can accept and at what cost. The UK is exiting so it is completely up to the UK to state its opening position on what it wants after exit. From the EU end the triggering of Art 50 says more-or-less "goodbye and see you in the WTO" unless the UK asks for something more.

"I would describe it as finally seeing sense." I agree with the sentiment but the situation is that May and her Brexit ministers seem unable to make a public statement about Brexit without it being later withdrawn by one of the team.
I would describe it as another defeat for May?

Having said that I have sympathy for May I do not see how she can win when the people who voted for Brexit had so many different expectations.

The EU people must be laughing their socks off. 27 Countries, the Commission, the Parliament all involved and yet they manage to make public statements without contradicting themselves.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Blueangel isn't an expert.

I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I am experienced in negotiation. Being shrewd and being adversarial are totally different things and achieve radically different results.

[Cata1yst]

	Quote:	marton
	The EU people must be laughing their socks off. 27 Countries, the Commission, the Parliament all involved and yet they manage to make public statements without contradicting themselves.

I doubt it.. I reckon a few are having real squeaky bum moments.

There will be a lot of new German cars stacking up in Oostend waiting patiently to arrive in the UK mit neue steuer if this is not sorted.