EU Referendum - How will you vote?

[unbeliever]

How long did it take the EU and Canada to negotiate that?

 

No idea. But then the Eu was under no legal obligation to make a free trade agreement with Canada.

 

Changed tack a little there haven't you.

[truman]

No idea. But then the Eu was under no legal obligation to make a free trade agreement with Canada.

 

Changed tack a little there haven't you.

 

So what happens in the 5 or 10 years they take to make the agreement?

[L00b]

No idea.

7 to 8 years.

But then the Eu was under no legal obligation to make a free trade agreement with Canada.

And there's no legal obligation in Article 50 TFEU for the EU to make a free trade agreement with the UK. At all. Nor that the agreement must be finalised within the 2 year period of Article 50 TFEU (at the expiry of which the UK is automatically out of the EU, overnight, agreement in place or not), only that the agreement must be finalised (sub: 'sometime').

 

Here is Article 50 TFEU again, for reference:

Article 50

 

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

 

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

 

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

 

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

 

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

 

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

The article does not qualify the agreement as a 'free trade agreement', by any stretches of meaning. It's just a 'withdrawal agreement'.

 

Sub-paragraph 2 is that under which the agreement must be negotiated and concluded, makes no reference to any specific time period, and is not cross-referenced to sub-paragraph 3 (which specifies the 2 year period).

 

Sub-paragraph 3 is that under which the EU Treaties cease to apply to the UK either from the date of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that [de minimis interpretation: if there is no withdrawal agreement by then], two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2 [the date at which the UK formally notifies the European Council of its intention to leave: no doubt no.10 will kick that particular can into the long grass as far and as often as it can, to try and buy itself some negotiating time - that would come with an adverse economical cost].

 

Sub-paragraph 3 is accordingly that under which the UK could well find itself outside the EU after 2 years [if there is no withdrawal agreement agreed by then], still without a finalised agreement, and therefore in a much worse negotiating position overnight [because the European Council is not obliged to extend the 2 year period and could ask for an extra pound of flesh to do so, repeatedly for however long the negotiations go on] and also trading-wise [because automatically transferred to WTO rules].

Changed tack a little there haven't you.

Not really, have I?

A fall in the value of the pound would do nothing for bond investors other than decrease the real value of any bonds they hold.

You missed the forest for the tree, I'm afraid.

 

Read it again please, and see what the market pricing of a guilt turns on: BoE interest rate and UK inflation. Not the value of the pound.

 

Guess what tool the BoE uses to shore up the value of the pound and manage the inflation rate? Yup, the base interest rate.

 

Gilts are performing strongly because investors are getting ever more scared of a Brexit and its consequences. See here.

So what happens in the 5 or 10 years they take to make the agreement?

WTO rules. Including the tariffs on goods and non-tariff barriers on services. That's the legal default.

 

I posted and linked a recent interview by the WTO boss in the FT about this not long ago, which was pretty objective/non-partisan (IMHO) and well supported. But as usual Brexiters in here just wavy-handed it away as "scaremongering".

 

Funny how, whenever it's bad news or a contrarian view, it's always "scaremongering", no matter how factual and clearly explained with supporting evidence. I'm pretty sure a shrink would diagnose it as denial, but what do I know

Edited June 3, 2016 by L00b

[truman]

At the start of all this I really was undecided but after seeing all the airy fairy stuff coming from the Brexiteers (not specifically on here) I'm very much minded to vote Remain..

[Tomjames]

At the start of all this I really was undecided but after seeing all the airy fairy stuff coming from the Brexiteers (not specifically on here) I'm very much minded to vote Remain..

 

I was remain, then staunch brexit, now I'm wavering but think I will vote leave....the debates have been interesting.

[panzer1]

Merkel finally nailed it for me yesterday, do not like being threatened even if it was a veiled threat.

I still think the eu will come back with a better offer although everybody says they will not but that is common sense, You do not offer a crap deal and say if you do not take it we will give you a better deal.

If not then we leave and see how we go.

The plus side is if we go I think the rot will set in and others will follow, probably Italy they pay more in than us but get more out so net are the next country below us in the table.

The pressures of the euro, immigration when Erdogan opens the med up following Germany upsetting him, unemployment will herald the fall of the eu.

[Tomjames]

Merkel finally nailed it for me yesterday, do not like being threatened even if it was a veiled threat.

I still think the eu will come back with a better offer although everybody says they will not but that is common sense, You do not offer a crap deal and say if you do not take it we will give you a better deal.

If not then we leave and see how we go.

The plus side is if we go I think the rot will set in and others will follow, probably Italy they pay more in than us but get more out so net are the next country below us in the table.

The pressures of the euro, immigration when Erdogan opens the med up following Germany upsetting him, unemployment will herald the fall of the eu.

 

Merkel is a bully. She just makes me want to do everything in my power to bring down the eu!

[Glennis]

I was remain, then staunch brexit, now I'm wavering but think I will vote leave....the debates have been interesting.

 

I was in the remain camp but think I will be voting Brexit now.

Edited June 3, 2016 by Glennis

[tinfoilhat]

Merkel is a bully. She just makes me want to do everything in my power to bring down the eu!

 

But she'll be out of a job by the end of next year.

[MobileB]

Merkel is a bully. She just makes me want to do everything in my power to bring down the eu!

 

I know she is right bully. I felt so threatened that I curled up and cried for half the evening when she said "‘You will never get a really good result in negotiations, particularly on very important issues, when you’re not in the room and giving input.’