If we vote for Brexit what happens

Thrugelmir

Rinoa wrote: »

Juncker in surprise climb down. Definite change of tune today.

The EU is most likely concerned that the Swiss will form an alliance with the UK.

mrginge

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The EU is most likely concerned that the Swiss will form an alliance with the UK.

Now that would be an interesting development

buglawton

Conrad wrote: »

If you haven't watched yesterdays Lib Dem conference on the Brexit debate (morning session), it's a right wheeze.

Most of them want a referendum on the terms. Can you imagine it, the terms would involve things such as migration, trade, rules, environment etc, thus there are so many reasons for people not be happy with the package and vote it down.

And then what, we go back for more debate, more negotiation with the EU and then back for another referendum?

This shows the profound naivety of Lib Dem types, thinking the world of business and EU Politics can just sit around whilst these sandal wearers leisurely debate the terms over and again.

No reason why it shouldn't be turned into a 'Terms Talent Contest' on primetime TV with push-button voting! Might as well do it properly.

BobQ

The original reason for retiring the Royal Yacht was the sheer expense of operating it and "pretending" that it had a role as a hospital ship. If the public who were suffering post war austerity had known how much expense was involved in creating the Yacht they would have been appalled.

A replica that looked the part but was constructed of modern materials, civilian crew and had no military function is a better idea but it is a very expensive way of flying the flag. If this is what British Industry wants maybe they should chip in to fund the project? I suspect few would see it as a commercially viable operation.

Money_saving_maniac

I think the issue is Conrad a lot of people confused 'access to the single market' with 'being in the single market' so think 'not being in the single market' means we will be unable to sell stuff to Europe.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

In interesting "piece" in the Telegraph (20th Sept) of "5 reasons" - giving for & against an EU "hardball" stance.
Interestingly although it seems reasonably balanced, NO thought is given to possible changes in EU attitudes due to forthcoming elections etc.
Much can change in two years - who would have imagined the current scenario back in 2014 for example?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/20/five-reasons-why-europe-will-make-life-impossible-for-theresa-ma/

And in other news, Morgan Stanley are saying that Germany will no longer drive growth in the EU;

Morgan Stanley's chief European economist, Elga Bartsch, suggests the German engine may be spluttering.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/20/germany-wont-drive-growth-in-europe-next-year-says-morgan-stanley.html

Whilst here "at home" in the UK, Markit's September HFI remains largely positive, saying: "Households' financial expectations remain stable amid rising workplace activity and low inflation".
https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/82841bb8a8584725b962241c6185197a?s=1

wotsthat

CLAPTON wrote: »

So you would envisage us negotiating a detailed position with the EU, the EU ratifying the deal with all 27 countries whilst they were fully aware that the UK parliament / new referendum might reject the deal.
It would seem to put our negotiating team in an extremely weak position.
Would you see both parliament voting and then a referendum?
If they disagreed who would have precedence.

Don't need a referendum but, given we had one to decide this issue, it's not to much to ask that any deal is acceptable to the sovereign parliament. The EU sovereigns will get to ratify the deal - why not the UK's?

Conrad

Just to say, as I said just after the referendum, I would be happy with a cap on EU migration, something like 10,000 pa (I suspect it will be more).


I am expecting that if this forms part of the deal, the Bremoaners will claim Brexiteers will reject this, but I think Mrs May will feel this is a compromise she can get away with, that most people will accept.

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

Don't need a referendum but, given we had one to decide this issue, it's not to much to ask that any deal is acceptable to the sovereign parliament. The EU sovereigns will get to ratify the deal - why not the UK's?

I was trying to raise the issue of would and when such a parliamentary vote or second referendum would be held and indeed what would the question be.
If parliament rejected the deal what then would be the consequences?

vivatifosi

As you know Conrad I voted to remain, but I agree that there will be a deal done. Pragmatically, whatever anyone else says, we are a pretty big country in EU terms. Only Germany is bigger in population terms and we have over many years jostled with France over who has the largest GDP. If it were Sweden leaving, with its prosperity but smaller population, or Poland, with its relatively large population but reduced prosperity, it may be different.

We will leave a UK sized hole. While both the extremists within the Brexit movement and within the EU may want to sever ties completely, or teach Britain a lesson, this is not what will happen. It will suit the EU to have some of our money as a net contributor. In short, they need it.

Furthermore, they can say all they like about stealing our financial service and they may achieve that - over time. But realistically they just don't have the space or skilled workforce to do it in the short term, plus of course Frankfurt and Paris will not agree over where the "city" should go.

Cool heads and common sense will win through in the end. Juncker may not like this, but the heads of the other countries will see sense.