Cont: Brexit: Now What? Part 6. Pick up sticks...

Status
Not open for further replies.
That is one thing that Tusk has said was OK, IIRC.

Face it, although the UK would be far worse off with a no-deal Brexit, it would also harm other EU countries.

Sure, but such a request for an extension has to be matched with the possibility of reaching agreement on the deal and in a timely fashion. The EU has already ruled out any further negotiations... to me it's seems that you are just delaying the inevitable... an exit without a deal.
 
That is one thing that Tusk has said was OK, IIRC.

Face it, although the UK would be far worse off with a no-deal Brexit, it would also harm other EU countries.

All 27 countries would need to agree, and Donald Tusk doesn't speak for 27 governments.
 
Sure, but such a request for an extension has to be matched with the possibility of reaching agreement on the deal and in a timely fashion. The EU has already ruled out any further negotiations... to me it's seems that you are just delaying the inevitable... an exit without a deal.

Ok then, ABORT!
 
Ok then, ABORT!

Revoke article 50? That will be fun!

I can honestly only see that happening as a result of another referendum... or perhaps another election where one of the parties runs revoking article 50 as their main policy objective.

The current UK government doesn't seem that interested in either solution though.
 
Revoke article 50? That will be fun!

I can honestly only see that happening as a result of another referendum... or perhaps another election where one of the parties runs revoking article 50 as their main policy objective.

The current UK government doesn't seem that interested in either solution though.

Regardless, it seems like the lesser evil right now, unless the UK just wants to weather the storm for the next generation and avoid the presumed EU collapse/whatever.
 
Revoke article 50? That will be fun!

I can honestly only see that happening as a result of another referendum... or perhaps another election where one of the parties runs revoking article 50 as their main policy objective.

The current UK government doesn't seem that interested in either solution though.

Regardless, it seems like the lesser evil right now, unless the UK just wants to weather the storm for the next generation and avoid the presumed EU collapse/whatever.

The longer the delay, and the more people see what the consequences of no deal, the more a second referendum will be seen as the only way out of the deadlock.

Even now, 3% of the people entitled to vote in my constituency were under 18 at the time of referendum. Demographics is making Brexit less popular, regardless of the fiasco of Grayling and May.
 
Regardless, it seems like the lesser evil right now, unless the UK just wants to weather the storm for the next generation and avoid the presumed EU collapse/whatever.

And as it happens revoking Article 50 is something that the UK can do unilaterally according to the European Court of Justice.

The longer the delay, and the more people see what the consequences of no deal, the more a second referendum will be seen as the only way out of the deadlock.

Even now, 3% of the people entitled to vote in my constituency were under 18 at the time of referendum. Demographics is making Brexit less popular, regardless of the fiasco of Grayling and May.

And how many of those voted Leave did so with the assurance that the EU would have to give us a favourable deal? What is on offer in no way resembles what was promised time to call a halt to the sorry mess.
 
Last edited:
And as it happens revoking Article 50 is something that the UK can do unilaterally according to the European Court of Justice.



And how many of those voted Leave did so with the assurance that the EU would have to give us a favourable deal? What is on offer in no way resembles what was promised time to call a halt to the sorry mess.


How many voted leave to give £350M / week to the NHS?
 
How many voted leave to give £350M / week to the NHS?

Exactly, the majority of Leave voters did so on the assurance of economic and social benefits to the UK that it is now painfully obvious were wishful thinking at best and outright lies at worst. This 'Brexit means Brexit' BS is leading to nonsense like a ferry company with no ferries.
 
How likely is it that all 27 EU-members will agree to a delay?

They'd probably be happy so long as it ends before May 23. I don't think the EU would want to go through the effort of having to run a parliamentary election for a country that's leaving not too long afterwards.
 
They had that Sked on TV yesterday saying that he is looking forward to a hard Brexit and the UK then can easily trade with the EU on WTO rules. I don't think that's academically satisfactory, or will work in practice. Has he ever tried negotiating with the EU about the matter? There is a bit about the matter at this website:

http://leavehq.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=128

The WTO Option is an approach to Brexit much favoured by some groupings. It is an approach where the UK leaves the EU without having negotiated any trade agreements with the EU, either within the framework of Article 50 negotiations, or on the margins. Instead, it relies entirely on multilateral WTO agreements covering trade-related matters.

The general thrust of the WTO Option argument is that: "Were the UK to leave the EU, it would continue to have access to the EU's markets, as World Trade Organisation rules prevent the EU from imposing unfair, punitive tariffs on UK exports". In reality, the WTO rules only afford very limited protection against discrimination, and then only in respect of tariffs - which are no longer central to trade matters.

As the WTO site itself says, "by their very nature RTAs (Regional Trade Agreements — as is the EU) are discriminatory", and, under WTO rules, an amount of discrimination against third countries (and that would include the UK) is permitted.
 
Last edited:
It seems more and more commentators are now coming out with the 'Article 50 will need to be extended line' and they all seem to say it as if its just something TM can do at her behest. It isn't. And they either know that or are incompetent.

I'm not sure what the deadline is for making that decision because there will be a time lag between asking for it and 27 EU countries approving it. There is also the risk one or more say No at the first time of asking so it would really need to be done helluva soon to allow Plan C to enacted.

I would think there is also an element of a game of chicken since if she asks for an extension she is showing her hand that she needs more time and countries will see that if she doesn't get it she wouldn't have much choice but to revoke A50 at least for the time being.
 
They'd probably be happy so long as it ends before May 23. I don't think the EU would want to go through the effort of having to run a parliamentary election for a country that's leaving not too long afterwards.

I can see them agree to that.... I just don't expect another 2 months will make any difference to the internal politics of the UK.
 
It is.... but revoking article 50 isn't quite the same as delaying article 50.

Okay, how about this?

UK Gov: Can we delay Article 50?
EU27: No
UK Gov: Okay, we will revoke it
EU27: Um...okay
UK Gov: Now, we will start it up again.

It amounts to the same thing.
 
They had that Sked on TV yesterday saying that he is looking forward to a hard Brexit and the UK then can easily trade with the EU on WTO rules. I don't think that's academically satisfactory, or will work in practice. Has he ever tried negotiating with the EU about the matter? There is a bit about the matter at this website:

http://leavehq.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=128

I saw Dr Sked at a conference some years ago. He is actually quite learned and some kind of economist.

Unfortunately, his UKIP supporters in the audience were a bunch of bovver-booted, braces and mutton chop sideboard skinhead morons.

I stood up to ask him a challenging question. Afterwards outside, the guy I was with said, right run!

This was after we were approached by one of these intimidating characters who wanted to give me a lecture on British patriotism.
 
Okay, how about this?

UK Gov: Can we delay Article 50?
EU27: No
UK Gov: Okay, we will revoke it
EU27: Um...okay
UK Gov: Now, we will start it up again.

It amounts to the same thing.

I would hope that the UK government wouldn't stoop to such an infantile approach... which most likely means that they totally would :(
 
Okay, how about this?

UK Gov: Can we delay Article 50?
EU27: No
UK Gov: Okay, we will revoke it
EU27: Um...okay
UK Gov: Now, we will start it up again.

It amounts to the same thing.
Except it will tie the UK to the EU for another 2 years. A new funding cycle will start in 2020. That could cost the Uk a lot more as they will be signatories to a 5 year funding cycle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom