If there is a second referendum ...

Enterprise_1701C

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

False.

The commission has proposed phasing out rebates, however this can only be done as part of the MFF budget setting process and every country has a veto on this process.



Highly Misleading.

QMV has for a long time been the norm in some areas of EU policy, and quite rightly as the UK was one of QMV's biggest advocates, but all the big areas (EU Army, Taxation, Budgets, Rebates, etc) still require unanimous agreement and therefore the veto remains.

The Commission proposes things all the time (they proposed tax changes this week, which Ireland promptly said they'll veto), but in each and every case where they try to change the rules on decision making from Unanimity to QMV they still require this to be Unanimously approved by the Council first. So the veto remains unless we choose to give it up.



1. We have a Veto that cannot be taken away unless we choose to give it away.

2. They cannot force us to become signatories to treaties that we are not part of. That's entirely our decision to make.

Well this chap seems to think we woukd lose our rebate

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-budget-rebate-gunther-oetinger-second-referendum-remain-a8580616.html

And they are not unknow for avoiding treaties to get their way, there is always a back door.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Well this chap seems to think we woukd lose our rebate

Politicians float ideas all the time. About 1% of those ideas end up happening.

EU budget decisions cannot be implemented without agreement from all the member states and the democratic and legal processes being followed.

In this case the process that would have to be followed would be for the democratically elected leaders of every member state in the EU (the Council of Ministers) to approve the revocation of rebates as part of the Multilateral Financial Framework for the next budget term.

Every member state holds a Veto to that process.

So rebates cannot be removed without the agreement of the member states.

they are not unknow for avoiding treaties to get their way, there is always a back door.

There is no back door for this or any of the numerous other policy areas where Unanimity is specified under Treaty law.

If you're going to hate the EU, at least try and find real things to hate them for, rather than just making stuff up.

Malthusian

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

1. We have a Veto that cannot be taken away unless we choose to give it away.

Which "we" would have if the vote had gone the other way in 2016.

Ever closer union. You can ignore it but you can't escape it.

kabayiri

Hamish seems to think we would have the same moral authority within the EU as before.

It's questionable to say the least. There would be opportunity aplenty in the future to marginalize an UK which will be seen as weak and subordinate.

Rinoa

Foreign and Commonwealth Office staff have been sent a memorandum by the Head of the Diplomatic Service Sir Simon McDonald. It reveals that staff will be moved from current roles to work on No Deal from the middle of February.

Stepping up our No Deal planning
Yesterday the FCC’s Executive Committee (ExCo) agreed to intensify our contingency planning to manage a No Deal scenario. This includes working with Directorates to release staff from the ‘20%’ Directorate Crisis Lists for a potential No Deal response from mid-February (the 18th is pencilled in), as well as identifying experienced individuals to be deployed to EU Exit impacted areas outside of the Crisis Centre and to new short-term roles in the Europe network. The latter could require up to 5% of staff.

This will have a significant impact on Directorates so we will need to be rigorous in our prioritisation of non-EU Exit work. Prioritisation guidance for Directors will follow shortly to help them make decisions about what non-EU Exit work to delay, drop or do differently. We will also need to adapt the way we work, including relying more on Posts, devolving decision-making to more junior levels and streamlining central processes.

As part of this work, colleagues in HR Directorate have been looking carefully at what changes they can make to HR policies and processes More detail on this will follow next week.

No deal still on the table. :beer:

Filo25

I'm amazed that anyone looks across the EU at the moment and thinks there is an overwhelming majority of countries pushing for dramatically closer integration.

Just off the top of my head the UK (we are after all still in, and would be in this hypothetical scenario where we are forced into ever closer integration), Italy, and a fair proportion of the Nordics and Eastern Europe wouldn't be too eager to go down that path.

I wouldn't forsee all EU members being pushed down into dramatically closer integration against that kind of opposition, as a long term solution core and periphery makes far more sense for the EU

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Malthusian wrote: »

Which "we" would have if the vote had gone the other way in 2016..

And we will still have if we win a People's Vote to remain.;)

Malthusian

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And we will still have if we win a People's Vote to remain.;)

Even Remainers know they won't. There is a reason they haven't called one already even though it's their decision and they have nothing to lose.

If one is called now it will only serve to put the rump of Remainers out of their misery.

adindas

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Well this chap seems to think we woukd lose our rebate

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-budget-rebate-gunther-oetinger-second-referendum-remain-a8580616.html

And they are not unknow for avoiding treaties to get their way, there is always a back door.

Given the way the UK is negotiating with EU it is only people without a common sense will ever believe UK will not lose its rebate when rejoining EU.

Negotiation is about power. UK have all of the recognise power money, military, political, intelligence and security to be put on the table. The one who preventing this to be used is the remoaners. The weak PM such as TM is also the main problem.

UK will win if it threatens to invade Ireland to be put on the table. This is the way forward if UK want to get concession on the EU negotiation.

How come Switzerland a much smaller country and less powerful could get a better deal than UK ?

Herzlos

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Remain is not a status quo. The eu are moving towards "ever closer union", the nature of the beast is that it is ever changing. They have already decided to do away with rebates (one of the things I suggested they would do and every remainer denied), vetos are going the way of dinosaurs and QM voting coming in, who is to say they will not decide that we have to have the euro and join Schengen?

The eu seem to have a habit of listening to what people want and then doing what they want.

As for disingenuous, do you remember Blair giving away part of our rebate? The eu were meant to have a meaningful review of farming subsidies, don't recall that ever happening.

Everything is constantly changing and ever closer union is the future. That doesn't prevent it from being the status quo. What isn't changing is our current status and the framework for any future changes, which are all completely defined (except for any ambiguity). We know with absolute certainty what our future looks like within the EU because it's all codified and the rules for interaction are all there. If we don't like something we've got options: the veto (which we'd never give up), just ignore it (like the french) or leave at that point (after forming a plan).

It's about as low risk as possible.