Post-Brexit Thread

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by ianch99

What no apology for being accused of pulling "ficticious figures pulled out of the air"?

Disappointed but not surprised

I suppose stupid is a s stupid does.

It is ficticious in that it implies 63% did not wish to leave.

The same fiction that 79% didn't want to remain.

---------- Post added at 18:22 ---------- Previous post was at 18:10 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

Others may not ,and if you already knew that why pose the question ?

---------- Post added at 17:18 ---------- Previous post was at 16:57 ----------



There may not be and that may stand but according to A50 we have to notify the EU of our intention to leave ,in law the word intention cannot be interpreted as final or irreversible.The very wording of Article 50 makes provision for the process to be reversed This is worth a read



The argument that it has already been invoked is in my mind a bit spurious .Some legal minds are saying that because the UK has made it perfectly clear to the world in general that we intend to leave the EU then formal notification in writing or whatever the process is unnecessary and we are already in the process of leaving

The wording of A50 does not make provision for the process to be reversed, I don't need to try and find a way around paywalled links to know this as I have actually read article 50.

What it does provide is the option fror a state to re-apply subject to Article 49.

Article50(5)

If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

Article 49

Any European State which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union. The European Parliament and national Parliaments shall be notified of this application. The applicant State shall address its application to the Council, which shall act unanimously after consulting the Commission and after receiving the assent of the European Parliament, which shall act by an absolute majority of its component members. The conditions of admission and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the Union is founded, which such admission entails, shall be the subject of an agreement between the Member States and the applicant State. This agreement shall be submitted for ratification by all the contracting States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. The conditions of eligibility agreed upon by the European Council shall be taken into account.

Article 2 (1)

When the Treaties confer on the Union exclusive competence in a specific area, only the Union may legislate and adopt legally binding acts, the Member States being able to do so themselves only if so empowered by the Union or for the implementation of acts of the Union.

Be careful what you wish for.

I suppose I'd better post a non paywalled fully google searchable link for those who may doubt my quotes from the Lisbon Treaty.

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the...article-2.html

You can find all the other Articles from that starting point, they even provide forward and back buttons so you can go through all the articles.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

12,949,258 didn't vote either way - i blame Pokemon go .

so a rough calculation add 2 subtract bull x tin foil hat = 12,949,258 fictitious votes

Hmm, we're not taking these percentages seriously enough. I wonder what percentage of the electorate of 46,501,241 like marmite and what percentage don't? We need facts. Also, how many unborn babies would vote remain if we string out our extraction for long enough? And another thing, who is that masked man with Tonto?

I'm wavering now I realise I voted leave without knowing anything .

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Hmm, we're not taking these percentages seriously enough. I wonder what percentage of the electorate of 46,501,241 like marmite and what percentage don't? We need facts. Also, how many unborn babies would vote remain if we string out our extraction for long enough? And another thing, who is that masked man with Tonto?

I'm wavering now I realise I voted leave without knowing anything .

don't look at me i'm " giving brexit a bad name"

Originally Posted by pip08456

I suppose stupid is a s stupid does.

It is ficticious in that it implies 63% did not wish to leave.

The same fiction that 79% didn't want to remain.

---------- Post added at 18:22 ---------- Previous post was at 18:10 ----------



The wording of A50 does not make provision for the process to be reversed, I don't need to try and find a way around paywalled links to know this as I have actually read article 50.

What it does provide is the option fror a state to re-apply subject to Article 49.

Article50(5)



Article 49


Article 2 (1)



Be careful what you wish for.

I suppose I'd better post a non paywalled fully google searchable link for those who may doubt my quotes from the Lisbon Treaty.

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the...article-2.html

You can find all the other Articles from that starting point, they even provide forward and back buttons so you can go through all the articles.

From the FT article i linked to ,fully searchable and non paywalled

First, as everyone agrees, the decision to invoke Article 50 is a unilateral act that does not depend on what other member states think or do. The sole condition is that the interested state must act “in accordance with its own constitutional requirements”.

Second, the Article 50 procedure provides for notification by the interested state only of its “intention” to leave. Formal notification of that intention would be made to the European Council, comprising the heads of government of the other 27 member states. In law, the word “intention” cannot be interpreted as a final and irreversible decision. Legally, you may withdraw an intention, or change it, or transform it into a decision.

Let us assume Mrs May invokes Article 50 on January 1 2017. Imagine that, one year later, the UK changes its mind, for whatever reason. This could be after a big political event such as the election of a new government, a new referendum or second thoughts about the decision to leave.Nothing in Article 50 would then prevent the UK from deciding, in conformity with its constitutional requirements, to withdraw its unilateral “intention”. In legal terms, this would stop the two-year clock, removing the possibility that Brexit would occur automatically after these two years. Paragraph 5 of Article 50 confirms this interpretation: an ex EU member state can be a candidate to rejoin but only after having withdrawn. If the intention to leave was withdrawn, the process would be interrupted and the status quo ante would prevail. The UK would still be in the club.

Even after triggering Article 50 and notifying the EU of its intention to leave, there is no legal obstacle to the UK changing its mind, in accordance with its constitutional requirements.

The writer, a former director-general of the Council of the European Union’s Legal Service, is author of ‘If the UK Votes to Leave’


Google "can uk change its mind on Article 50"

[pip08456]

Article 50 is quite specific.

A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

[Osem]

That's bloody unions for you!

Originally Posted by pip08456

Article 50 is quite specific.

yes it is....sort of anyway

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements

and as such according to our own laws it must be reversible ,this is not simply my opinion ,this is the opinion of may legal experts both from our own judiciary and that of the EU courts and will very shortly be tested in court .The government need to be clear on the law and the options open to them because they are acting for the whole of the country ,In 1 or 2yrs time circumstances may mean the best decision is to reverse the process for the betterment of the country ,no one knows and that is why the government should have all the facts at hand

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

That's because there actually are dark plots and dastardly conspiracies in every doorway

I trust you're joking.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by martyh

yes it is....sort of anyway

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements

and as such according to our own laws it must be reversible ,this is not simply my opinion ,this is the opinion of may legal experts both from our own judiciary and that of the EU courts and will very shortly be tested in court .The government need to be clear on the law and the options open to them because they are acting for the whole of the country ,In 1 or 2yrs time circumstances may mean the best decision is to reverse the process for the betterment of the country ,no one knows and that is why the government should have all the facts at hand

The key words are "may decide". Once it has then EU law take over. Once a member state has invoked A50 having decided to do so "in accordance with its own constitutional requirements" then A50(2) comes into effect and must be concluded.

No grey areas, not doubt. If it contravened UK law why is it being taken to Ireland?

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

don't look at me i'm " giving brexit a bad name"

Shot through the heart
And you're to blame
Darlin'
You give brexit a bad name

Think I'll be calling you Papa Bon Jovi from now on .

Originally Posted by pip08456

The key words are "may decide". Once it has then EU law take over. Once a member state has invoked A50 having decided to do so "in accordance with its own constitutional requirements" then A50(2) comes into effect and must be concluded.

No grey areas, not doubt. If it contravened UK law why is it being taken to Ireland?

There is plenty of doubt and masses of grey areas that's why people are seeking clarification through the courts .They are using Irish courts because UK courts are doing their best to keep any cases away from the European courts ,that was explained fully in the link you provided days ago and i repeatedly supplied yesterday ,maybe actually reading them is the way to go

[TheDaddy]

Mrs May snubbed

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/744...ean-Union-snub

No need for them to be rude imo

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Mrs May snubbed

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/744...ean-Union-snub

No need for them to be rude imo

the express your "giving brexit a bad name"

Well we're not in the club anymore as far as they are concerned so why bother with us till it suits them. Pretty pathetic from a group of politicians it's not as though May created this mess she's just having to deal with as the real cowardly culprit did a runner.

[1andrew1]

Business leaders want a Brexit plan
"Almost six months have passed since Britain made its momentous decision to leave the EU. And as politicians and the public survey what progress the UK has made in preparations for its departure, one conclusion is impossible to avoid: Theresa May’s government still hasn’t got a plan.
In his appearance before MPs this week, David Davis, Brexit secretary, said a plan would be produced before the UK triggers Article 50 in the spring — but he added that it wouldn’t be published before February and he would not say how detailed the document would be....
What should alarm Mrs May and her ministers at the end of this week is the way in which UK-based companies, uncertain about the future, are taking firm decisions about relocating operations overseas."

The many unanswered questions include:
* Will the UK leave the customs union? (Mr Davis said there are still four options.)
* What kind of immigration controls would Britain impose on EU nationals? (Mr Davis refused to reveal details.)
* Will the UK pay for access to the single market after leaving the EU?

Google the headline for the full article or subscribers can read https://www.ft.com/content/8fcefce8-...2-f57d90f6741a