If we vote for Brexit what happens

setmefree2

Turkey's government is the latest to line up to sign a free trade agreement with the UK once Brexit takes place, with its economy minister promising a “wide ranging” deal with Britain. At the same time Britain's Chancellor Philip Hammond met Chinese officials to agree new deals to increase investment between the UK and China.

Turkey is in a customs union with the EU which means many of the country’s goods can circulate freely around the trading bloc.
It does not, however, bind Turkey’s hands externally - Ankara can still sign its own free trade deals with other countries.
Turkey currently has deals with countries including close Mediterranean neighbours such as Egypt as well as more far-flung economies including South Korea.

Its latest talks with China include an agreement to start work on the London-Shanghai Stock Connect, a system which should make it easier for British and Chinese investors to put money into each stock market.
A planned process of sharing information on financial technology, known as the FinTech Bridge, is also in the works.
“It will bring mutual benefits. For the UK, the initiative will help to cement London’s position as the leading financial centre and open up new sources of investment," said Mr Hammond.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/11/11/turkey-pushes-for-free-trade-deal-with-post-brexit-britain/

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

The negotiating position has been undermined by the government looking like a bunch of chumps for not considering the legalities of the A50 process properly.

in what way does the legal situation make any difference to the post article 50, negotiating position?
is it because the government may have to declare some of its negotiating points in parliament ?

setmefree2

Brexit could be reversed, government lawyers may argue

Legal team looking at possibility of arguing in supreme court appeal that MPs’ vote not needed as article 50 can be revoked

Dr Eirik Bjorge, a senior law lecturer at Bristol University and an expert in EU law, said: “If the government decides to – and is allowed to – argue that the article 50 notice can be revoked, then it is all but sure to win in the supreme court. In those circumstances it cannot be said that, once the trigger has been pulled, the bullet will inexorably hit the target and expunge our rights under the European Communities Act 1972.”
Tridimas is one of those who believes article 50 could be reversed before the UK’s exit from the EU had been completed. “My view is that it is reversible,” he said. “There’s nothing in the wording of article 50 which says that it cannot be withdrawn. The Vienna convention on the law of treaties says that they can be reversed unless they state otherwise. The point of no return is two years after notification has been given [to the EU].”

Prof Paul Craig, an Oxford University expert on both EU and constitutional law, said the triggering of article 50 should be revocable by parliament. “It is a cardinal legal principle that a party is not bound by a contract or treaty until agreement has been reached,” he has argued in a blog. “The consequences of not being able to revoke would be particularly severe: withdrawal would have to proceed even if invocation of article 50 triggered an economic meltdown in the country.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/11/brexit-could-be-reversed-government-lawyers-may-argue

wotsthat

CLAPTON wrote: »

in what way does the legal situation make any difference to the post article 50, negotiating position?
is it because the government may have to declare some of its negotiating points in parliament ?

It's because the government are making themselves look like Brexit is in control of them rather than the other way round.

Maybe they're just pretending to be inept to draw the EU negotiators into a false sense of security.

wotsthat

setmefree2 wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/11/brexit-could-be-reversed-government-lawyers-may-argue

..and as they didn't argue this in the first hearing it'll cost them some political capital.

Can't wait to hear the argue Brexit doesn't have to mean Brexit after all.

spadoosh

setmefree2 wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/11/brexit-could-be-reversed-government-lawyers-may-argue

Ive said this all along and im not that bright.

Leaving the EU is reversible. The EU have to let us in if we match the Copenhagen criteria (their rules say they have to). The slight difference is we would have to jump in balls deep instead of having our toe in the water. I would say if brexit when completely wrong we wouldnt be able to meet the criteria but we dont currently either.

This is why i dont understand the high court ruling. The british electorate who parliament represent have decided to leave the EU. They have given power to the government to invoke article 50. Any trade deals, FOM is down to the government and not parliament. Ive got it in my head that if the british people wanted a referendum and the government didnt it was parliaments job to seek out a referendum. If anything parliament shouldve sought agreement prior to the referendum. They didnt. Probably because they where delusional enough to think we would remain.

It sets a precedent of needing parliament approval for any trade deal which is a bit silly.

spadoosh

wotsthat wrote: »

..and as they didn't argue this in the first hearing it'll cost them some political capital.

Can't wait to hear the argue Brexit doesn't have to mean Brexit after all.

As a brexit voter it really doesnt. No Government can set something in place that a later parliament cant repeal. EU rules allow for any country to join the EU so long as they meet the Copenhagen criteria.

If a political party wants to be in the EU they should make it part of their manifesto and get voted in to government. I couldnt wait to see that. The EUIP party lead by gideon. Sounds like and makes you want to throw up.

setmefree2

The End Of Elites? How Technology Is Killing The Man

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/quentin-bargate/the-end-of-elites-how-tec_b_12893994.html

Conrad

setmefree2 wrote: »

Its latest talks with China include an agreement to start work on the London-Shanghai Stock Connect, a system which should make it easier for British and Chinese investors to put money into each stock market.
A planned process of sharing information on financial technology, known as the FinTech Bridge, is also in the works.
“It will bring mutual benefits. For the UK, the initiative will help to cement London’s position as the leading financial centre and open up new sources of investment," said Mr Hammond.


/

But, but, but how can this be, we were told we couldn't manage to find our way in the world, that we would be a small island with the drawbridge pulled-up, 'ISOLATED', and of course a laughing stock lol!!

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

It's because the government are making themselves look like Brexit is in control of them rather than the other way round.

Maybe they're just pretending to be inept to draw the EU negotiators into a false sense of security.

even if true, how does that effect our negotiating position?