The consequence thread (Brexit)

[foxy lady]

Tim, unless I've misread (anticipated apologies if so), with respect, I don't believe the above is true until the Article 50 2 year period is up and unless the period is not extended.

 

During those 2 years, the rights guaranteed by the EU treaties of all Brits living in the EU and all EU-citizens in the UK still apply, because (by the logic of your explanation: 'propose a treaty to replace the existing treaties that it will be nullifying unilaterally') the EU treaties are not nullified until and unless the replacing treaty is signed by both sides, or the 2 year period is up without extension, whichever happens first.

 

This is why both (i) the timing of the Article 50 letter and (ii) completing the negotiations within 2 years from same, are crucial: the nullifying of EU treaties and the WTO rules kick in automatically when the 2 years are up, if the negotiations are still ongoing by then and the negotiating period is not extended.

 

That is pretty much the case. If the leaders of EU countries has any sense they will quietly dispose of Junker before the negociators get to work. That way there might be a sensible outcome to discussions. They are too used to dealing with Greece and are slowly coming to grips with the fact that trying to harm the UK has the potential to harm them more.

 

---------- Post added 29-06-2016 at 16:04 ----------

 

It was expected and predicted that the markets would fall as would the currency.

 

However we don't know of the long term repercussions of Brexit- no doubt these will come and things may not then just be a short term blip.

 

Of course it may not be a short term blip. It may be long term sustained growth as UK industry takes up the slack left when EU goods aren't flooding the market.

 

We can of course help that process now that it isn't disloyal to urge people to buy British. My next car will certainly be coming from Castle Bromwich.

[Obelix]

Tim, unless I've misread (anticipated apologies if so), with respect, I don't believe the above is true until the Article 50 2 year period is up and unless the period is not extended.

 

During those 2 years, the rights guaranteed by the EU treaties of all Brits living in the EU and all EU-citizens in the UK still apply, because (by the logic of your explanation: 'propose a treaty to replace the existing treaties that it will be nullifying unilaterally') the EU treaties are not nullified until and unless the replacing treaty is signed by both sides, or the 2 year period is up without extension, whichever happens first.

 

This is why both (i) the timing of the Article 50 letter and (ii) completing the negotiations within 2 years from same, are crucial: the nullifying of EU treaties and the WTO rules kick in automatically when the 2 years are up, if the negotiations are still ongoing by then and the negotiating period is not extended.

 

My understanding is that even if the treaties are nullified etc those who have already excercised their right to reside here still have it. It would require additional legislation to revoke that.

 

I know of one family who are friends of mine. She is French, he is Belgian. They married in Scotland. Their adopted child from his first marriage is English. They have a son born in Belgian, and another born in England.

 

So if you boot them out hows that going to work? Are we going to require our citizens - who have no other nationality to leave if their parents are ejected? The whole thing is so messy that the status quo for the residents already here must be allowed to continue. If we do boot them out are we prepared for all the pensioners that Spain will eject in a heartbeat?

[tzijlstra]

As some have mentioned Juncker on this thread I thought this interesting as it happened while he was in charge.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36662636

 

EDIT - not sure what the consequence of this would be in the context of the EU. This was a Luxemburg Court-case, I would even speculate it is only being reported on now because all of a sudden the BBC and other British media outlets are aware that the EU exists.

 

Tim, unless I've misread (anticipated apologies if so), with respect, I don't believe the above is true until the Article 50 2 year period is up and unless the period is not extended.

 

That is correct, I should have included that, I assumed it as a given.

 

During those 2 years, the rights guaranteed by the EU treaties of all Brits living in the EU and all EU-citizens in the UK still apply, because (by the logic of your explanation: 'propose a treaty to replace the existing treaties that it will be nullifying unilaterally') the EU treaties are not nullified until and unless the replacing treaty is signed by both sides, or the 2 year period is up without extension, whichever happens first.

 

That too is correct.

 

This is why both (i) the timing of the Article 50 letter and (ii) completing the negotiations within 2 years from same, are crucial: the nullifying of EU treaties and the WTO rules kick in automatically when the 2 years are up, if the negotiations are still ongoing by then and the negotiating period is not extended.

 

And that too is correct

 

The point I made was that once those 2 years are up, it is over, unless an extension is agreed. But, as far as I am concerned, 2 years should be enoug time to come to a conclusion.

 

My understanding is that even if the treaties are nullified etc those who have already excercised their right to reside here still have it. It would require additional legislation to revoke that.

 

I know of one family who are friends of mine. She is French, he is Belgian. They married in Scotland. Their adopted child from his first marriage is English. They have a son born in Belgian, and another born in England.

 

So if you boot them out hows that going to work? Are we going to require our citizens - who have no other nationality to leave if their parents are ejected? The whole thing is so messy that the status quo for the residents already here must be allowed to continue. If we do boot them out are we prepared for all the pensioners that Spain will eject in a heartbeat?

 

That understanding is partially true and partially false. At the moment UK citizens are members of the European Union (check your passport). That status is going to change unless agreement on the matter is achieved. This whole referendum goes down to the core of citizenship - is a UK citizen also a European Union citizen? Well it is, until the treaties invoking that right are redrawn. If the treaties are unilaterally withdrawn by the UK (in case of rejection by the EU) than that status diminishes.

 

I used citizenship as one example. There are literally thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of joint legislation, now most of that is not actually underpinned by the treaties, so nothing will change there, but the core issues as agreed in the treaties will.

 

I haven't had time to read the Parliament UK Library material on the subject yet, but there is a lot to get through there...

Edited June 29, 2016 by tzijlstra

[geared]

FTSE 100 has shot right up and closed higher than it was last week.

Hopefully the pound follows suit.

[I1L2T3]

Juncker was anti British and his family had a very dubious war record. Without Juncker in charge the negociations might have gone a lot better and with a favourable deal we might have voted remain.

 

I would agree with this. Junker is probably a greater threat to the EU than a Brexit.

[tzijlstra]

FTSE 100 has shot right up and closed higher than it was last week.

Hopefully the pound follows suit.

 

The Pound is slowly clambering up. I am 99% sure this is based on the understanding that the UK will not leave the single market, which is absolutely wonderful news. Now let's hope that the new PM doesn't screw up and it should be a good outcome for all involved.

 

What I don't really have an explanation for is why the other European key-indexes, DAX and CAC in particular, didn't follow suit. Yet more homework...

 

---------- Post added 29-06-2016 at 18:47 ----------

 

I would agree with this. Junker is probably a greater threat to the EU than a Brexit.

 

Except that Juncker doesn't actually run any negotiations, certainly not between the UK and the Council, so it is an odd thing to agree with. (Although I can understand why, as the British media have apparently decided Juncker speaks for the whole EU).

 

Having said that, Juncker needs to learn to shut up and speak on behalf of the EU when in fact it is Tusk's role, it is clear that there is a lack of control on his function as things stand and reform on that front is needed in the EU.

[glennpickard]

Juncker is one of the "Ever closer political integration" types and supports much more sovereignty to be transferred to Brussels away from the EU countries. All of it if he had his way. All UK laws would eventually come from Brussels. And unlike laws passed by Westminster, there apparently is no recourse once Brussels has spoken

 

I think even the French are beginning to be concerned about people like him and his positions

He is also a huge proponent of the right of free movement of labour forces within the EU, which is a principal UK concern

 

NAFTA does not have this provision and it appears to be much more workable and acceptable to its participants. The EU needs to get back to being a trading block and forget the forced political integration

[tzijlstra]

Juncker is one of the "Ever closer political integration" types and supports much more sovereignty to be transferred to Brussels away from the EU countries. All of it if he had his way. All UK laws would eventually come from Brussels. And unlike laws passed by Westminster, there apparently is no recourse once Brussels has spoken

 

I think even the French are beginning to be concerned about people like him and his positions

He is also a huge proponent of the right of free movement of labour forces within the EU, which is a principal UK concern

 

NAFTA does not have this provision and it appears to be much more workable and acceptable to its participants. The EU needs to get back to being a trading block and forget the forced political integration

NAFTA is under huge pressure from the Americans. Average Joe hates it because they blame it for American Jobs going to Mexico. A bit like the opposite of the UK in the EU, where UK jobs go to EU citizens.

[taxman]

Everyone's had a big laugh at Cornwall who voted for Leave before pathetically pleading for the new Tory Brexit government to match the EU contributions.

 

Same has happened in Sheffield.

[woahthere]

Sheffield was due 180mil from the EU up to 2020. Now that's not guaranteed (obviously). I'm sure the 51% will dig deep to make this shortfall up.

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/david-cameron-no-guarantee-sheffield-will-still-get-180m-of-european-funding-after-brexit-1-7988110

 

Also...

 

The leave campaign have changed their website which has gotten rid of their pledges. I know you'll say that they aren't a political party, but you'd think they'd leave them up to remind those in charge of brexiting us. Then the people can hold them to account if they don't follow them. That is unless they were a series of hollow promises that aren't achievable.

 

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/27/why-has-vote-leave-just-deleted-its-website-and-all-its-election-promises-5969341/