Why didn't Leavers and the EU tell us this?

[molly]

But isn't the whole point of the two years to exit so that we can discuss and sort things out. If they won't discuss trade for two years, why do we have the two years? We might as well b***** off now.

[Workingman]

The minimum two year period is for cool heads to work out the legal framework for how we extract ourselves from the various treaties and organisations within the EU and the order and timing of such things.

I honestly do not know what our standing would be on the international stage if we just upped sticks and did a Zimbabwe, though I cannot see it working out too well. I certainly would not want to risk us becoming a pariah state.

[Aggers]

EU; one lie after another! Leave: lie after lie after lie, and then some.

Stay: Even more lie after lies, and then more horror stories.

I consider that both the LEAVE and the STAY brigades were equally disgraceful
in their behaviour during the run-up to voting day.

[Suff]

A50 is very clear. the 2 years is to negotiate the new relationshiop betwen the EU and the UK. As the ONLY valid relationships will be borders, security and trade, she's lying. Or incompetent. Take your pick. Neither one changes a brexit decison in my eyes.

[Kaz]

It will take senior civil servants YEARS to unravel us from the EU, taking them away from the work that needs doing in other matters, all to get us (hopefully) only slightly worse off than we were a fortnight ago

[Workingman]

Let's put a few things to bed.

Leaving without Article 50, just walking away, simple eh?

Theoretically, there is nothing to stop a British Government unilaterally withdrawing from the EU by simply repealing the 1972 European Communities Act. Article 50 compels only the EU to seek a negotiation, not the withdrawing member state. However, while this may be the case in principle, such an approach would likely damage the UK’s chances of striking a preferential trade agreement with the EU after exit – since its first act as an ‘independent’ nation would have been to have reneged on its EU treaty commitments. It would also mean there is no transition period, so EU legislation along with the UK’s free trade agreements via the EU lapse immediately. Since some EU law applies in the UK directly, the UK would need to legislate to replace it.

So not quite as simple as some would like to think.

What about leaving via Article 50? It only has five clauses, all of them easy to understand.

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.

During the two-year negotiation period, EU laws would still apply to the UK. The UK would continue to participate in other EU business as normal, but it would not participate in internal EU discussions or decisions on its own withdrawal. On the EU side, the agreement would be negotiated by the European Commission following a mandate from EU ministers and concluded by EU governments “acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.” This means that the European Parliament would be an additional unpredictable factor in striking a deal.

The whole thing is about negotiating the UK's withdrawal from the EU, its treaties and its institutions and a formal framework for what comes after Brexit.

Still not sure? How about this from leading European Union law professor Michael Dougan.

The overwhelming consensus is that these things do not take two years to negotiate, the rough guide that we are all talking about in the field is around 10 years.

The treaty said that you have two years within which to make your divorce settlement. But the divorce settlement is completely separate from the framework agreement for your future relations with the EU.

Once Article 50 is activated the UK is cut out of EU decision-making at the highest level and there will be no way back unless by unanimous consent from all other member states.

So what we will have is a period of two years to actually reach our divorce, the actual severance of ties between the UK and the EU.

Most experts and academics are saying that the UK will have to wait until it has formally left the European Union before it can even begin to negotiate its own trade deals, including with the EU. I, for one, am not going to argue with them.

Kaz, very pertinent points. At the moment we do not have a fully functioning government and pretty soon that will break for summer recess, 21 July - 5 Sept.

[Kaz]

That last fact makes my blood run cold - surely at a time of national crisis, such as this surely is, they could postpone their jaunts to Tuscany, Cornwall or wherever and get on and sort out this mess???? One would hope

[medsec222]

Does anyone know what has happened to Nigel. Apart from his recent appearance in Brussels he seems to have been relatively quiet, for him.

[Workingman]

I think I saw him at that pathetic march by Remainers this afternoon.

He is hoping for a new referendum so that he has something to do again.

[Suff]

Ah, the overwhelimg concensus which does not factor into it the way the EU responds.

There is the documented theory and the actual fact.

Fact 1

Thatcher attempted to negoitate with Brussels for 6 months over the CAP. Answer, which part of NO don't you understand.
Thatcher blocked payment to the EU. Problem resolved in 2 weeks with the rebate we still have today.

Fact 2

Turrkey talks on EU accession for 20 years, no progress.
Turkey floods the EU with immigrants by the simple expedient of not blocking them at their borders
Result?
Turkish citizens will gain Schengen EU visa free accesss within 9 months.


Negotiating with the EU has always been like this. If you want something and they don't care, talks go nowhere. If they want something then talks can happen in weeks or months.

France and Germany are the two economic engines keeping the EU from recession. The vast majority of the 60bn annual trade imbalance betweeen the UK and the EU is with France and Germany.

Decade? It won't take the EU 6 months to ensure their economy is not in the crapper, let alone 2 years.

I've said this before but let me repeat it again just so we're clear on what I see. The EU does not like our goods or our trade. Which means the 30 billion we trade with them is in items and services they simply can't get either internally or via the open markets outsdie the EU without paying a penalty. On the other hand the vast majority of trade the EU does with us is via expediency because it's easier than going to the world market.

When we leave the EU, EU goods will no longer be "expedient". Which means we'll source those we want from the rest of the world who we willl be able to arrange trade deals far more rapidly with than the, apparently, intransigent, EU.. If we want German and French cars I'm sure the Australians would be quite happy to pick up the trade tarrif for Mercedes and BMW's put on a ship to Australia and landed in the UK. Of course, the much more likely scenario would be BMW setting up Factories in the UK to locally manufacture the cars for the Billions the UK pays them. After all, they already own and manufacture the Mini in the UK as well as the Rolls and Bentley brands.

Academics? Like the one who predicted that in 5,000 years time we'd grow longer thumbs because of texting. We won't be texting in 50 years, we'll be talking in 10 and thinking in 100.

All of these academics are the same. "All things being the same". Except in Brexit this is not a NEW trade deal for NEW trade. This is an existing trade Transision for existing trade. There is absolutely no comparison and it will hurt the EU far, far, more than the UK to be intransigent. If there is one thing the EU has taught me, it is that they are motivatedd most by pain.

So let's tell them how much pain they're going to feel instead of going on and on about how much pain we're going to feel when they kill their own trade.

It's not rocket science.