If we vote for Brexit what happens

kabayiri

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Tell us what the EU itself will look like in 2022. Idle speculation is pointless. You can only worry about tomorrow and deal with the future when the time arrives.
...

Who honestly here could foresee the events which have happened since 2012? Brexit; Trump; Syrian refugee crisis; terrorism.

Blimey. On that basis I would just make rough guesses.

Thrugelmir

kabayiri wrote: »

When the history books record this Brexit event, I wonder how they will describe the to-ing and fro-ing early in the negotiations.

May highlight the real divisions of opinion that lie beneath the surface.

CKhalvashi

Tromking wrote: »

There will be another general election where everything will be up for grabs. You know that all is not lost for Remain voters like yourself CK?
You are lucky enough to live in one of the worlds great democracies.

So, you want a revote until you get the answer you want?

I've called for some form of vote (not necessarily a referendum) on which type of deal we go for, but I've never called for a second rerun of the actual event.

I've never hidden that the vote on what type of deal we go for will most likely yield the answer that I (and some Leavers) would prefer, though, as for me personally customs union access isn't so important, where single market access is.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Tell us what the EU itself will look like in 2022. Idle speculation is pointless. You can only worry about tomorrow and deal with the future when the time arrives.

Thought you were leaving the country though?

For the first part, I'd say it's looking increasingly like a 2 speed Europe, which would keep (to an extent) leavers and remainers happy, at least to the 60-70% mark if done right.

On the second part, I've stated that I'm not willing to discuss the matter in any further detail than I have already as a result of the amount of digging that some (admittedly not yourself) have done, and personal info that's been posted.

Nothing personal, and as you're aware from other parts of the site, even though I don't agree with most of you here, I do respect your point of view, and often agree with you elsewhere on this site.

The_Last_Username

There will be no "Brexit Armageddon" for the London financial district.

Mark Boleat, head of policy at the City of London, the local government that administers Europe's biggest financial centre, said talk of a massive exodus has been mistaken.
"If it was going to be Armageddon, we would have noticed it by now," Boleat told Reuters in an interview in a room off the local government's seat of power in the medieval Guildhall.
"They are never all going to up sticks and leave ... We expect the steady flow of new business coming in."

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-city-idUKKBN17227O?il=0

A_Medium_Size_Jock

David Davis - we will be able to deport criminals:

Britain has begun to take back control from Brussels as David Davis announced that the first EU law to be scrapped after Brexit will be a charter that helps criminals avoid deportation.

Revealing details of the forthcoming Great Repeal Bill, Mr Davis told MPs that the controversial EU Charter of Fundamental Rights will be dropped on the day Britain leaves Europe.

MPs cheered in the House of Commons as the Brexit Secretary told them Britain would be regaining the sovereignty it last enjoyed in 1972.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/30/uk-takes-back-right-deport-britain-repeals-powers-eu/

A_Medium_Size_Jock

The harsh realities of Michel Barnier's task ahead:

For a chief negotiator, Michel Barnier has little room to maneuver.

Barnier, the dapper Frenchman tasked with brokering the U.K.’s departure from the EU, has at least 30 masters — the 27 EU leaders and the three European institutions — unlike his British counterpart, David Davis, who answers to just one.

http://www.politico.eu/article/michael-barnier-europe-brexit-not-so-supremo-uk-negotiation-deal/

Fella

An amusing but not often mentioned aspect of the Referendum is the real reason it was allowed to happen in the first place. People say (correctly) that Cameron was scared of the UKIP threat eating into the Tory vote & didn't think he had much choice but to offer a referendum as part of the Tory manifesto. That was the Stick. The Carrot, which gets mentioned far less often, is that the Remain side (which very firmly included Cameron of course) fully intended to make this the only chance we ever got to quit the EU. I believe the reason so many Remainers still voted Tory even with a referendum pledge on the manifesto is that although they didn't like the very outside chance we'd vote Leave, they were pretty certain that we'd vote Remain and that would be the membership question answered once more & forever. That is emphatically what Cameron & pretty much all of the Establishment intended & explains the increasingly desperate way they threw everything they could into scaring people to vote Remain.

A great irony of British politics IMO, that the most democratic/patriotic thing Cameron ever did was also his greatest misjudgement & the reason he lost his job.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

I just saw this from yesterday; I can't see this going down well in Ireland:

Ireland must loosen its strict abortion laws and replace them with a regime more respectful to women's rights, the Council of Europe's human rights commissioner has said.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ireland-abortion-laws-council-europe-orders-to-loosen-a7658976.html

Thrugelmir

CKhalvashi wrote: »

For the first part, I'd say it's looking increasingly like a 2 speed Europe, which would keep (to an extent) leavers and remainers happy, at least to the 60-70% mark if done right.

On the second part, I've stated that I'm not willing to discuss the matter in any further detail than I have already as a result of the amount of digging that some (admittedly not yourself) have done, and personal info that's been posted.

A two speed Europe is actually going to result in far more integration for the inner core. The UK has consistently held this in check over the years. Which in all likelihood will mean rejoining is far less likely in the short term. As the gulf in views will widen.

I wasn't digging at you personally. More at a business level. As have no interest in who you are. Like many a business you need to make decisions on what's best for the operation. Seen enough of similar decision making over the years to be open minded. Brexit just happens to be the trigger currently. Another day it will be the result of something else.

gfplux

vivatifosi wrote: »

Q&A:
BBC: you say no separate negotiations between separate states and the UK.
Tusk: I want to be very cautious and precise. I have no doubt after the Summit of Rome that all 27 want and will be rerepsented in the negotiations. If they want to achieve constructive negotiations then they MUST negotiate only with the 27 as a unity.
MUSCAT: we are in regular contact with the UK. We will continue to engage, but and this is the clear demarcation line, when it comes to Brexit and future relationships, there is a clear commitment to have just one point of contact: Barnier.

You won't move onto a second phase until "sufficient progress" made, what does this mean.
Sufficient progress... EU27 will probably decide in the Autumn and then move on.

Reuters: a transition period is anticipated in the guidelines, why have you included ECJ and .... in them?
Tusk: there is no such thing as a brexit bill or penalty for leaving, it is just about fairness and commitments. For both sides it is important that we want to be fair to each other.
Muscat: there is no Brexit bill. The letter from May recognises that the UK has commitments. Those commitments must be respected and we need to come up with a methodology that shows this, as well as what the UK should take from EU assets as a balance sheet.
In terms of the ECJ and transition periods... you are still a member and still have access to a membership situation. While you are in transition, these organisations such as the ECJ will still stand as you are still a member and have access to a membership situation. We will not intrude on what happens afterwards within the UK. When it comes to a free trade agreement, we will decide what types of operations will govern.

TV Malta: asked about May's letter and the wording re security cooperation
Tusk: after terror attack in London we know that this is a common problem. I know Theresa May well enough and know her views. This is a misinterpretation, security is not being used as a bargaining chip, our partners are wise and decent partners. This is why I am absolutely sure that nobody is interested in using this as a bargaining chip.
Muscat: we have had reassurances from the British government that this is a misinterpretation and they are decent partners, not bargaining on the security of our citizens.

Thank you for all of that. Real time quotes are worth so much more than spin we may see from the media.