- lawyers are lawyers the world over - their time and opinions are chargeable. I have yet to see an example of somebody making a clause do something it does not include in case it was left out by mistake - judges the world over reject such arguments. Otherwise you could argue that Article 50 does not say we cannot redefine the UK and so open that whole can of worms. It does not happen - the law deals with what the law says - not what it does not say. Exiting the economic and political ties are an enormous task - and may take years of not a dcade or more - Gibraltar is just one of many many complications
For obvious reasons there is a huge amount of interest here. Hollande is exploring all avenues as he is unlikely to get re-elected unless he can pull a rabbit out of the hat. The most popular politician, and leading contender to take over is busy trying to gather votes. He is concentrating on the Calais problem as there are plenty of votes to win in the north, and would help to spike the arguments of the FN. He wants to remove the border in France, whereas at present Hollande is sticking to the agreement. The political arguments are currently far more obvious than the economic ones. There has been some comment that the UK government would wish to delay starting negotiations until the new government is in place, also German elections next year, as it could bounce the new regimes into agreements they do not want.
Negotiations could start officially now - but it seems most EU politicians are refusing to start till Article 50 is triggered. ( I suspect unoffically they have already started). Triggering Article 50 is solely down to the UK - the EU has no power over it. Different Tory leadership candidates have given different opinions on when they would trigger it - and it may be they have to get Parliament's backing - that is an uncertain legal position. ONce Article 50 is tabled there is a deadline of 2 years to complete exit - unless all member states vote to extend it
The statements coming out of the EU politicians and the EU officials is quite different some of the time. No great rush from the politicians, get on with it and go from the officials. They have a different agenda to each other some of the time, and from what I read the officials are not happy to spend the next months and years talking about the UK. The politicians on the other hand have their own domestic problems and are quite happy to let the whole matter disappear into the background. As Hammond stated today, no plans were in place to leave, and they could wait for the new government. He did say however that he would be having dinner with some of his counterparts this Sunday for unofficial talks.
The thing is that EU politicians and officials have no say on when Article 50 is tabled at all. All that has happened so far is that the UK has had a legally non binding referendum. In theory they could never activate anything which means the EU carries on as if nothing has happened. I am not sure it was even legal to exclude Cameron from last Tuesday's meeting of the Council of Ministers as at present he has a right to attend. Unfortunately though the markets are responding so ultimately they could drive timing of action if uncertainty became overwhelming
I agree 100%. The markets are fragile and so far there is no effective response. Half of the property investment funds cannot pay out to investors who want their money, and this is likely to continue into next year. Forecasters are talking in terms of the pound/ US$ being around £1.15 with one even suggesting it could reach parity. If this continues for another two years it will take forever to get things back onto an even keel.
I just hope Leavers are proud of the damage they have done to our economy - for some uncertain "sovereignty" benefits, for a leap into the economic dark or more realistically for the majority I suspect to slow immigration
It is obviously far far too early to judge the outcome of Brexit, we had the vultures circling when we left the ERM, it lead to many years of sustained growth.
It is not too early to predict that the effect of leaving one of the best markets in the world will not be advantageous
We will all have to wait to find out. There will be winners and losers, I am confident the UK can rise to the challenge.
Messed up my plans to see my American friends next year this far. Had planned to meet in Vegas but the exchange rate is now totally pants.
Yes that echoes the Leave campaign - thinking it is a question of is anyone running the UK down by suggesting whether or not it can meet a challenge. Of course the UK will always try to meet a challenge. The real point is though that this is an unnecessary challenge. We have walked away from a market that gave us free access to 500 million people - was that not a challenge enough for "Leavers" - a challenge to sell more to them - to close the trade deficit we had with a continent that Brexiters ran down as the slowest growing area etc etc. Why for heaven's sake walk away from a great market place with trading on excellent terms - tariff free. To turn the argument back on them - did Brexiters not have the confidence that the UK could trade with that market at the same time as going out into theworld and trading with everybody else? Why did they think it was either or and not both. It beggars belief it really does.
The main reasons for leaving were sovereignty, control of borders and not liking the direction the EU was travelling in, towards a single state. We also disliked the undemocratic rotten heart of a failed organisation that has left many countries with over 40% young unemployed. We can still trade with Europe, tariffs or not. Companies regularly solve a bigger problem than tariffs are likely to produce, that is currency fluctuation. It will be easier for the UK to obtain trade deals with other non EU countries, at least we will not have to ask 27 countries for their views.
Leo, I think there are problems in dealing with this only from the economic angle. Although I very much wanted remain to win, and was disgusted with the non factual nature of most of the arguments put forward by the Brexiters there was one aspect which troubled me. England has the highest population density in Europe, and the population of the UK. is rising faster than in most other countries. The demographic prognosis is that if population growth remains as it is now then Britain will overtake France by 2030 and Germany by 2045. Can you imagine Britain with a population of 80-90 million ? What would happen to the still unspoilt areas of the British countryside, and will Britain have the public services to match this ? These are questions which need to be addressed. The economists tell us that such a growth is good for the economy - but lifestyle is about more than just economy. Germany only has a falling population because of its birthrate - probably because it is the most expensive country in which to have children. Britain either has to plan for this, in which case what we think of as British life may change forever, or has to think of ways to control population growth....but how ?
Back to the sovereignty argument now the financial argument is going down the pan. What is it? If I choose to open a bank account with my own money that is sovereign to me, then I will have to agree to the terms and conditions of that bank. If I say I want to have different conditions to everyone else that uses that bank, then I will be told to get lost. The head of Border control was on TV yesterday and stated that despite all the checks done in France many illegal immigrants still get through. Lose those checks in Calais and the Port of Dover would grind to a standstill. A French politician was on the same item, and said that because of the forth coming Presidential elections you could not assume that France will continue with the existing arrangement.
There was a picture I found that I tried to download, but the site wouldn't let me. It was a picture taken in London today of one of those advertising lorries you see about, and it had a message on it inviting start up companies to go where they would be assisted , welcome and have access to a huge market.. Was it from a town or region in England or Scotland. No, it was from Germany.
For many people sovereignty and border control have always been their main disagreement with the EU. The leave side rightly want their own parliament to have the last word not some obscure group in Brussels. Financial instability was always going to happen, it is the long term financial effect that is more important. You can wallow in negativity, hopefully you are in the minority.
Would you like to explain then how you would deal with border control , if you disagree with the man trying to deal with it every day?
Border control is not my field of expertise so I would leave up the UK government to employ the best staff and practices. I would understand your negativity if the UK had a feeble government and dreadful industrial relations as they do in France. Even if France has a change of government next year it will still fail to tough out the opposition to the urgent reforms required. France will continue to fall behind the financially dominant Germans. Your best chance might be Le Pen.
