5 ms·

> Well, once that's done as far as I understand it there is no way back The UK has 2 year to retract as article 50 allows that. 2 years is a long period in UK

> Well, once that's done as far as I understand it there is no way back The UK has 2 year to retract as article 50 allows that. 2 years is a long period in UK politics during which a vote of no-confidence could happen, calling for new elections that could retract article 50. Even if the 2 years pass, the EU already said that they would fast track the UK back in if a future government wants to come back. This is not over.

jacquesm 10y ago
I don't think you are correct, or at least, the UK supreme court thinks that you are not correct: https://www.businessinsider.nl/uk-supreme-court-article-50-notice-cannot-be-withdrawn-2017-1/?international=true&r=UK https://www.businessinsider.nl/uk-supreme-court-article-50-n...
- blowski 10y ago
  It's possible they could extend negotiations. As long as the EU and UK parliaments both agree to do that, they can do whatever they like, as they can just change the law to support whatever they're trying to do. Whether there will be enough public support to do that is another matter entirely. Perhaps there will be another general election or referendum which will muddy the waters. If the last year has taught us anything, it's that the world is a very uncertain place right now, and all predictions are worthless.
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    Well, that may be how the UK sees it but I can pretty much guarantee that that is not how the rest of the EU will see things. The automatic end to the negotiations and finalization after two years is currently the law, it would probably be best to go on the assumption that that's exactly how it will play out. There is some sense on the UK side that the UK will come out of the negotiations in a better position than what they have right now in the EU, but the European side is adamant that no matter what the UK will not come out of this better than when they were a part of the EU, and this makes good sense (otherwise, why would any nation remain part of the bloc). Also, the UK has just handed the EU all their strong cards in the negotiations, and if the Scots exit the union that position will get weaker still. Keep in mind that the exceptional situation the UK has (had?) in the EU was always an annoyance to other member states but was tolerated in order to keep the UK in the EU. If the UK falls apart and Scotland re-joins (or even remains) then the UK negotiation position with respect to those exceptions has evaporated, something that would definitely be appreciated in other EU countries. Other general elections of referenda will not muddy the waters from an EU perspective, the deed is done, any regret will now take the form of a re-application, which will likely include the UK giving up their own currency, becoming a part of the Schengen area and getting rid of all the exceptions that were made for the UK. This was a dumb move if there ever was one, such major decisions should require a supermajority, not a simple majority and May did a huge dis-service to the UK just now. But by the time the chickens come home to roost she'll be enjoying her pension sitting under banner reading 'I gave the people of England what they asked for, not what they needed'.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > As long as the EU and UK parliaments both agree to do that Under Article 50(3), extensions can only be granted by unanimity in the Council. The EP and Council both need to agree to a final agreement, but the EP doesn't seem to be involved in extensions at all. http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on...
- pknight 10y ago
  You're misrepresenting the realities of A50 throughout this thread Jacques. The court case in question operated under the premise of the Government's position that A50 is irrevocable. Whether it is or not was not judged, it was just presumed to be irrevocable for the purpose of the case. That's a very important distinction. A50 is revocable unless a court says it is not and even if questioned, the courts would more than likely rule that it can be revoked. The official position of the European Parliament is that is revocable (1), subject to some conditions that are set out (the UK can't use it as a negotiating tool essentially) and this is also the position of many important EU officials. Piet Eeckhout (EU law professor) recently remarked that it would be unconstitutional to deny the UK a right to revoke A50 should it wish to exercise that option. It's also a mistake to judge A50 purely in legal terms, political reality is more important in this case. A point made abundantly clear by lawyers reporting on Brexit. If there's a will on both sides to abandon Brexit, it will be done. For that to happen the political landscape and mood will have to reshape itself. Such a thing is not impossible given that confidence in the economy is trending down and people are becoming more pessimistic (2) and because the many complications that lie ahead will be coming to the foreground. If the choice before Parliament is between a disorderly exit without a deal in 2019 with very clear negative repercussions, it would be unthinkable if they do not intervene. 1) https://www.scribd.com/document/343381933/Draft-Resolution https://www.scribd.com/document/343381933/Draft-Resolution 2) https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/c36c1ddf4ece4b8a858d741f1df5174d https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/c36c...
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    Time will tell. The situation in the UK has worsened rather than improved over the past 9 months, if you feel that the 'realities' of article 50 are that you can submit and withdraw it willy-nilly than that goes against what the rest of EU media and politicians are saying. There are some new developments but those are fairly tenuous at this stage, maybe they will solidify in a way that would give the UK an 'out' but for now it looks like the UK will in fact use such an out to bolster their currently non-existing negotiation position (and I don't blame them). The UK is a very divided place, as much as I don't like brexit (I think it is an exceptionally stupid move) I don't see the UK healing itself in time for this to be averted and the unanimous condition attached to any kind of revocation of Article 50 leaves very little room for hope. May is on the record as saying that if there is no 'good deal' then there will be 'no deal', which is absolutely terrible for the UK, it's a game of continental chicken which will have only losers. If the UK attempts to withdraw before negotations start then I give that some chance but if they first try to go through two years of negotiations and then attempt to withdraw as the deadline looms chances are very slim that they would be allowed to remain without serious concessions.
rmc 10y ago
It's unclear if A50 can actually be revoked. There is a court case (starting in Ireland, with the goal of getting to the CJEU in Luxembourg ASAP) which is trying to answer that question. If the CJEU says that A50 cannot be revoked, then the Houses of Parliament can do whatever they want, they're leaving. They would be free to rejoin. Euro, schengen, and metricification are mandatory now though.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > They would be free to rejoin. Euro, schengen, and metricification are mandatory now though. Well, in principle they could get unanimous consent on concessions again, they just don't come pre-baked.
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    There has been a lot of fuss about those concessions in the past, I really wonder to what extent the poorer EU countries that had no say in this when those concessions were given would be willing to give the UK something they themselves had to give up to join. That might not go over well and there are a lot of those countries now. That's a dangerous game of roulette.
    - rmc 10y ago
      It's not only a case of "we didn't get these deals". The UK got them, it wasn't good enough so they left. If they want to rejoin they are admitting they made a huge mistake and can they pretty please come back? Imagine you have a job, with a few perks other employees don't have, and you want more perks. And you don't get it, so you quit, complaining about how crap your employer is. A while later you ask for your old job back. What are the odds of you getting exactly the old perks back? ;)
- jamiethompson 10y ago
  It is unclear whether it can be revoked, yes. It is also unclear whether it cannot be revoked. It's simply unclear.
brango 10y ago
They'll only let us back in the club if they choose to from now on [1]. Basically, they've left the door open for us to vote in a pro-EU party in the next general election and abandon the whole thing. That's why they won't agree a trade deal in the next 2 years. They're hoping, like me, that things will get sufficiently bad in the next 2 years the public gives a mandate to a pro-EU party, and the whole sorry mess can be averted, and then we can try Johnson, Farage and the other scumbag liars for treason. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/29/first-eu-response-to-article-50-takes-tough-line-on-transitional-deal https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/29/first-eu-re...
- cabalamat 10y ago
  > They'll only let us back in the club if they choose to from now on I think this is basically correct. I also think that if, before the 2 years are up, the UK changes its mind about Brexit, the EU would be very likely to allow its membership to continue.
  - CaptainZapp 10y ago
    I very much hope this to be the case. I just don't see it happening in the current political climate in England. England probably would have to be prepared to lose a number of privileges should that happen. It would certainly be the best outcome of a very bad situation.
- fnord123 10y ago
  >and then we can try Johnson, Farage and the other scumbag liars for treason. And/or a serious rethink about the value of a free press that is allowed to act as News Corp. (The Sun, The Times) and Daily Mail and General Trust (Daily Mail, Metro, and previously the Evening Standard) have.
- patrickaljord 10y ago
  > and then we can try Johnson, Farage and the other scumbag liars for treason. I hope you're kidding here. Trying people who won the previous election for treason is the mark of the worst dictatorships. Please don't.

jacquesm 10y ago

I don't think you are correct, or at least, the UK supreme court thinks that you are not correct: https://www.businessinsider.nl/uk-supreme-court-article-50-notice-cannot-be-withdrawn-2017-1/?international=true&r=UK https://www.businessinsider.nl/uk-supreme-court-article-50-n...

blowski 10y ago
It's possible they could extend negotiations. As long as the EU and UK parliaments both agree to do that, they can do whatever they like, as they can just change the law to support whatever they're trying to do. Whether there will be enough public support to do that is another matter entirely. Perhaps there will be another general election or referendum which will muddy the waters. If the last year has taught us anything, it's that the world is a very uncertain place right now, and all predictions are worthless.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  Well, that may be how the UK sees it but I can pretty much guarantee that that is not how the rest of the EU will see things. The automatic end to the negotiations and finalization after two years is currently the law, it would probably be best to go on the assumption that that's exactly how it will play out. There is some sense on the UK side that the UK will come out of the negotiations in a better position than what they have right now in the EU, but the European side is adamant that no matter what the UK will not come out of this better than when they were a part of the EU, and this makes good sense (otherwise, why would any nation remain part of the bloc). Also, the UK has just handed the EU all their strong cards in the negotiations, and if the Scots exit the union that position will get weaker still. Keep in mind that the exceptional situation the UK has (had?) in the EU was always an annoyance to other member states but was tolerated in order to keep the UK in the EU. If the UK falls apart and Scotland re-joins (or even remains) then the UK negotiation position with respect to those exceptions has evaporated, something that would definitely be appreciated in other EU countries. Other general elections of referenda will not muddy the waters from an EU perspective, the deed is done, any regret will now take the form of a re-application, which will likely include the UK giving up their own currency, becoming a part of the Schengen area and getting rid of all the exceptions that were made for the UK. This was a dumb move if there ever was one, such major decisions should require a supermajority, not a simple majority and May did a huge dis-service to the UK just now. But by the time the chickens come home to roost she'll be enjoying her pension sitting under banner reading 'I gave the people of England what they asked for, not what they needed'.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > As long as the EU and UK parliaments both agree to do that Under Article 50(3), extensions can only be granted by unanimity in the Council. The EP and Council both need to agree to a final agreement, but the EP doesn't seem to be involved in extensions at all. http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on...
pknight 10y ago
You're misrepresenting the realities of A50 throughout this thread Jacques. The court case in question operated under the premise of the Government's position that A50 is irrevocable. Whether it is or not was not judged, it was just presumed to be irrevocable for the purpose of the case. That's a very important distinction. A50 is revocable unless a court says it is not and even if questioned, the courts would more than likely rule that it can be revoked. The official position of the European Parliament is that is revocable (1), subject to some conditions that are set out (the UK can't use it as a negotiating tool essentially) and this is also the position of many important EU officials. Piet Eeckhout (EU law professor) recently remarked that it would be unconstitutional to deny the UK a right to revoke A50 should it wish to exercise that option. It's also a mistake to judge A50 purely in legal terms, political reality is more important in this case. A point made abundantly clear by lawyers reporting on Brexit. If there's a will on both sides to abandon Brexit, it will be done. For that to happen the political landscape and mood will have to reshape itself. Such a thing is not impossible given that confidence in the economy is trending down and people are becoming more pessimistic (2) and because the many complications that lie ahead will be coming to the foreground. If the choice before Parliament is between a disorderly exit without a deal in 2019 with very clear negative repercussions, it would be unthinkable if they do not intervene. 1) https://www.scribd.com/document/343381933/Draft-Resolution https://www.scribd.com/document/343381933/Draft-Resolution 2) https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/c36c1ddf4ece4b8a858d741f1df5174d https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/c36c...
- jacquesm 10y ago
  Time will tell. The situation in the UK has worsened rather than improved over the past 9 months, if you feel that the 'realities' of article 50 are that you can submit and withdraw it willy-nilly than that goes against what the rest of EU media and politicians are saying. There are some new developments but those are fairly tenuous at this stage, maybe they will solidify in a way that would give the UK an 'out' but for now it looks like the UK will in fact use such an out to bolster their currently non-existing negotiation position (and I don't blame them). The UK is a very divided place, as much as I don't like brexit (I think it is an exceptionally stupid move) I don't see the UK healing itself in time for this to be averted and the unanimous condition attached to any kind of revocation of Article 50 leaves very little room for hope. May is on the record as saying that if there is no 'good deal' then there will be 'no deal', which is absolutely terrible for the UK, it's a game of continental chicken which will have only losers. If the UK attempts to withdraw before negotations start then I give that some chance but if they first try to go through two years of negotiations and then attempt to withdraw as the deadline looms chances are very slim that they would be allowed to remain without serious concessions.

rmc 10y ago

It's unclear if A50 can actually be revoked. There is a court case (starting in Ireland, with the goal of getting to the CJEU in Luxembourg ASAP) which is trying to answer that question. If the CJEU says that A50 cannot be revoked, then the Houses of Parliament can do whatever they want, they're leaving. They would be free to rejoin. Euro, schengen, and metricification are mandatory now though.

dragonwriter 10y ago
> They would be free to rejoin. Euro, schengen, and metricification are mandatory now though. Well, in principle they could get unanimous consent on concessions again, they just don't come pre-baked.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  There has been a lot of fuss about those concessions in the past, I really wonder to what extent the poorer EU countries that had no say in this when those concessions were given would be willing to give the UK something they themselves had to give up to join. That might not go over well and there are a lot of those countries now. That's a dangerous game of roulette.
  - rmc 10y ago
    It's not only a case of "we didn't get these deals". The UK got them, it wasn't good enough so they left. If they want to rejoin they are admitting they made a huge mistake and can they pretty please come back? Imagine you have a job, with a few perks other employees don't have, and you want more perks. And you don't get it, so you quit, complaining about how crap your employer is. A while later you ask for your old job back. What are the odds of you getting exactly the old perks back? ;)
jamiethompson 10y ago
It is unclear whether it can be revoked, yes. It is also unclear whether it cannot be revoked. It's simply unclear.

brango 10y ago

They'll only let us back in the club if they choose to from now on [1]. Basically, they've left the door open for us to vote in a pro-EU party in the next general election and abandon the whole thing. That's why they won't agree a trade deal in the next 2 years. They're hoping, like me, that things will get sufficiently bad in the next 2 years the public gives a mandate to a pro-EU party, and the whole sorry mess can be averted, and then we can try Johnson, Farage and the other scumbag liars for treason. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/29/first-eu-response-to-article-50-takes-tough-line-on-transitional-deal https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/29/first-eu-re...

cabalamat 10y ago
> They'll only let us back in the club if they choose to from now on I think this is basically correct. I also think that if, before the 2 years are up, the UK changes its mind about Brexit, the EU would be very likely to allow its membership to continue.
- CaptainZapp 10y ago
  I very much hope this to be the case. I just don't see it happening in the current political climate in England. England probably would have to be prepared to lose a number of privileges should that happen. It would certainly be the best outcome of a very bad situation.
fnord123 10y ago
>and then we can try Johnson, Farage and the other scumbag liars for treason. And/or a serious rethink about the value of a free press that is allowed to act as News Corp. (The Sun, The Times) and Daily Mail and General Trust (Daily Mail, Metro, and previously the Evening Standard) have.
patrickaljord 10y ago
> and then we can try Johnson, Farage and the other scumbag liars for treason. I hope you're kidding here. Trying people who won the previous election for treason is the mark of the worst dictatorships. Please don't.