Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

[Crazedwraith]

Well it's been done. BBC Live Feed

[Gandalf]

So now I guess the clock is ticking for all of the sticky issues, like Brits living in Spain?

[The Romulan Republic]

Its kind of impressive, the amount of damage that Britain's government is wilfully inflicting on itself. This is little more than an attempt at national suicide.

[Tribble]

May invoked Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, but apparently she did not invoke Article 127 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area. Well, at least for the moment. Given that the UK is a separate signatory to the EEA agreement Article 127 will probably have to be invoked at some point if May wants the UK to leave the EEA.

[Crazedwraith]

May invoked Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, but apparently she did not invoke Article 127 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area. Well, at least for the moment. Given that the UK is a separate signatory to the EEA agreement Article 127 will probably have to be invoked at some point if May wants the UK to leave the EEA.

Did they get a ruling on whether invoking article 50 also invoked 127 automatically? All the rhetoric has been all out all the way but it'd be interesting if we actually stopped short of it.

[Thanas]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/vi ... highlights


Really like the moment when May says the world needs the values of Europe and then the opposition erupts in laughter.

[LaCroix]

May invoked Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, but apparently she did not invoke Article 127 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area. Well, at least for the moment. Given that the UK is a separate signatory to the EEA agreement Article 127 will probably have to be invoked at some point if May wants the UK to leave the EEA.

Did they get a ruling on whether invoking article 50 also invoked 127 automatically? All the rhetoric has been all out all the way but it'd be interesting if we actually stopped short of it.

Well, staying in thr EEA means the UK has to follow pretty much the same rules as now, but has no say in them. That'd be a stupid move.

[Vendetta]

Has there been anything about the entire Brexit process, especially anything emanating from the British government, that wasn't a stupid move?

It would be a stupid move in a stupid game played by arch dimwits. The only reason it wouldn't happen is if they found anything even stupider to do instead.

[Tribble]

Did they get a ruling on whether invoking article 50 also invoked 127 automatically? All the rhetoric has been all out all the way but it'd be interesting if we actually stopped short of it.

IIRC UK courts dismissed the case for the moment claiming it was too premature to look into.Of course, another option would be to invoke parliamentary sovereignty and just flat out withdraw all the legislation without negotiations... May will likely go that route.

As it stands right now though, technically speaking I would argue that the UK has not started the process of leaving the EEA. The fact that the both the EU and the UK (along with other countries) signed the EEA agreement separately implies that they would remain EEA members unless they invoked Article 127.

Well, staying in the EEA means the UK has to follow pretty much the same rules as now, but has no say in them. That'd be a stupid move.

Leaving the EU while remaining in the EEA would still transfer significant amounts of sovereignty back to the UK. The UK would no longer be a part of the ECJ and the common agricultural and fisheries policy. It would be able to negotiate treaties with other countries outside of the EU. And there are provisions for some control (albeit limited) over immigration. Only ~28% of EU legislation is applicable to EEA members. And although EEA members do not have a formal vote they are required to be consulted when legislation is proposed that may effect them, and there are some mechanisms to challenge the legislation when its put into force.

The EEA would check off all the requirements on May's list of things she wants, and at the very least moving to the EEA first would give them time to rebuild agreements with another nations before withdrawing entirely. Naturally May is against the notion since "ZOMG immigrants!" trumps everything else.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Has there been anything about the entire Brexit process, especially anything emanating from the British government, that wasn't a stupid move?

It would be a stupid move in a stupid game played by arch dimwits. The only reason it wouldn't happen is if they found anything even stupider to do instead.

It's like they actually want to wind the economic clock back to 1945. If I wasn't stuck on the ship I'd actually laugh as it gets steered onto the rocks.

[Thanas]

Did they get a ruling on whether invoking article 50 also invoked 127 automatically? All the rhetoric has been all out all the way but it'd be interesting if we actually stopped short of it.

IIRC UK courts dismissed the case for the moment claiming it was too premature to look into.Of course, another option would be to invoke parliamentary sovereignty and just flat out withdraw all the legislation without negotiations... May will likely go that route.

As it stands right now though, technically speaking I would argue that the UK has not started the process of leaving the EEA. The fact that the both the EU and the UK (along with other countries) signed the EEA agreement separately implies that they would remain EEA members unless they invoked Article 127.

Well, staying in the EEA means the UK has to follow pretty much the same rules as now, but has no say in them. That'd be a stupid move.

Leaving the EU while remaining in the EEA would still transfer significant amounts of sovereignty back to the UK. The UK would no longer be a part of the ECJ and the common agricultural and fisheries policy. It would be able to negotiate treaties with other countries outside of the EU. And there are provisions for some control (albeit limited) over immigration. Only ~28% of EU legislation is applicable to EEA members. And although EEA members do not have a formal vote they are required to be consulted when legislation is proposed that may effect them, and there are some mechanisms to challenge the legislation when its put into force.

The EEA would check off all the requirements on May's list of things she wants, and at the very least moving to the EEA first would give them time to rebuild agreements with another nations before withdrawing entirely. Naturally May is against the notion since "ZOMG immigrants!" trumps everything else.

However they would still have to allow freedom of movement and the other core freedoms which apparently is a rubicon for them.

[Tribble]

Did they get a ruling on whether invoking article 50 also invoked 127 automatically? All the rhetoric has been all out all the way but it'd be interesting if we actually stopped short of it.

IIRC UK courts dismissed the case for the moment claiming it was too premature to look into.Of course, another option would be to invoke parliamentary sovereignty and just flat out withdraw all the legislation without negotiations... May will likely go that route.

As it stands right now though, technically speaking I would argue that the UK has not started the process of leaving the EEA. The fact that the both the EU and the UK (along with other countries) signed the EEA agreement separately implies that they would remain EEA members unless they invoked Article 127.

Well, staying in the EEA means the UK has to follow pretty much the same rules as now, but has no say in them. That'd be a stupid move.

Leaving the EU while remaining in the EEA would still transfer significant amounts of sovereignty back to the UK. The UK would no longer be a part of the ECJ and the common agricultural and fisheries policy. It would be able to negotiate treaties with other countries outside of the EU. And there are provisions for some control (albeit limited) over immigration. Only ~28% of EU legislation is applicable to EEA members. And although EEA members do not have a formal vote they are required to be consulted when legislation is proposed that may effect them, and there are some mechanisms to challenge the legislation when its put into force.

The EEA would check off all the requirements on May's list of things she wants, and at the very least moving to the EEA first would give them time to rebuild agreements with another nations before withdrawing entirely. Naturally May is against the notion since "ZOMG immigrants!" trumps everything else.

However they would still have to allow freedom of movement and the other core freedoms which apparently is a rubicon for them.

I know, I agree that position really stupid. It's "100% European immigrant ban or bust" apparently. I'm just pointing out that moving into the EEA is not a terrible decision on its own, especially when compared to what they are trying to pull off.

[Thanas]

Gibraltar might have to be handed back to the Spanish or become a poor third-world country according to the EU if a deal is to succeed.
Spanish diplomats have succeeded with inserting language to that effect into the negotiation guidelines.

Gee, maybe May should not have threatened the EU. "Give us free trade or we will not honour the defence treaties we have with you" is not going to work out.

[Tribble]

Gibraltar might have to be handed back to the Spanish or become a poor third-world country according to the EU if a deal is to succeed.
Spanish diplomats have succeeded with inserting language to that effect into the negotiation guidelines.

Gee, maybe May should not have threatened the EU. "Give us free trade or we will not honour the defence treaties we have with you" is not going to work out.

Well then I guess the UK won't be forming any trade deals with the EU. And if it comes down to it I'm pretty confident that the UK will start shooting if Spain tried to take it via force.

Edit: and it's not really a defensive agreement - Britain outright captured Gibraltar in 1704 and it was ceded to Britain in the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. Spanish desires for repossession aren't exactly a new idea here.

Not to mention that Gibraltar overwhelmingly opposed the idea of giving Spain back some control in every referendum held on the subject (though this could potentially change as Brexit goes on).

[Thanas]

Edit: and it's not really a defensive agreement - Britain outright captured Gibraltar in 1704 and it was ceded to Britain in the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. Spanish desires for repossession aren't exactly a new idea here.

I was referring to May's blackmail attempt in the Brexit letter.

[The Romulan Republic]

Gibraltar might have to be handed back to the Spanish or become a poor third-world country according to the EU if a deal is to succeed.
Spanish diplomats have succeeded with inserting language to that effect into the negotiation guidelines.

Gee, maybe May should not have threatened the EU. "Give us free trade or we will not honour the defence treaties we have with you" is not going to work out.

Well then I guess the UK won't be forming any trade deals with the EU. And if it comes down to it I'm pretty confident that the UK will start shooting if Spain tried to take it via force.

So this cluster fuck could potentially end in a war between Britain and the EU?

Or is Spain attempting to take it by force basically something that would never realistically happen?

Edit: and it's not really a defensive agreement - Britain outright captured Gibraltar in 1704 and it was ceded to Britain in the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. Spanish desires for repossession aren't exactly a new idea here.

Not to mention that Gibraltar overwhelmingly opposed the idea of giving Spain back some control in every referendum held on the subject (though this could potentially change as Brexit goes on).

I hate to say it, because the British government are a bunch of Nazi-lite morons tearing their own country apart, but its hard not to side with Britain in that case.

[SolarpunkFan]

Has there been anything about the entire Brexit process, especially anything emanating from the British government, that wasn't a stupid move?

It would be a stupid move in a stupid game played by arch dimwits. The only reason it wouldn't happen is if they found anything even stupider to do instead.

Is anyone surprised at this?

I mean, the Tories have a tight grip on the U.K. You know, these guys?

[K. A. Pital]

In other news, Spain will no longer veto Scotland potentially joining the EU as a member state.

As I've thought before, Sturgeon would have likely checked her cards before going on with the second referendum tactic, and likely heard some noises from the EU which were reassuring. Now comes the confirmation - the EU, as a whole, can make some of its members accept unwelcome results, if it furthers the interests of the whole bloc.

Very interesting times, very interesting. Will Mel Gibson ride again on his horse or not?

[Zaune]

At this point, I think Scottish independence is damn near inevitable. The only question is whether it can be achieved without bloodshed.

[Hillary]

At this point, I think Scottish independence is damn near inevitable. The only question is whether it can be achieved without bloodshed.

FFS, don't be a drama queen. The Scots will get another referendum - the only question is when it will be. If they then vote for independence (which probably isn't the most likely result as things stand), they will get it. There will be no need for Mel Gibson to be wheeled out.

[Hillary]

Gibraltar might have to be handed back to the Spanish or become a poor third-world country according to the EU if a deal is to succeed.
Spanish diplomats have succeeded with inserting language to that effect into the negotiation guidelines.

Gee, maybe May should not have threatened the EU. "Give us free trade or we will not honour the defence treaties we have with you" is not going to work out.

Just because May is behaving like a knob, there's no need for the EU to follow suit. This is a dickish move by them that only impacts the people of Gibraltar. Spain has no defensible claim on the Rock but is doing some sabre rattling for internal purposes, as it does periodically. Are the EU seriously prepared to try and force the UK to give Gibraltar back to Spain in defiance of almost its entire population.

You should note that Gibraltar voted 96% to Remain, so the EU has fucked off a load of its allies. Stupid.

Well then I guess the UK won't be forming any trade deals with the EU. And if it comes down to it I'm pretty confident that the UK will start shooting if Spain tried to take it via force.

So this cluster fuck could potentially end in a war between Britain and the EU?

Or is Spain attempting to take it by force basically something that would never realistically happen?

No, this is not going to happen. Neither the UK or the EU wants a war over Gibraltar - it's absurd to think it.

[Crazedwraith]

Generally I'm assuming every is going to sound like a knob and grab as many bargaining chips as they can at the moment. The EU might so much want to get Gibralter for Spain as to make May concede on other issues to keep it.

[mr friendly guy]

My prediction. Right wing fiction will now have the EU invade Gibraltar and the brave Brexit supporters have to save it.

[Zaune]

FFS, don't be a drama queen. The Scots will get another referendum - the only question is when it will be. If they then vote for independence (which probably isn't the most likely result as things stand), they will get it. There will be no need for Mel Gibson to be wheeled out.

Given this administration's track record for doing the most damn silly thing possible in the most damn silly way possible, I'll believe Scotland are getting a referendum when there's official confirmation of the date, and that Whitehall will respect the result of it when the necessary Act of Parliament gets Royal Assent. Until then I'm not ruling out anything. I don't think the nightmare scenario of straight-up civil war is likely, but the chain of incredibly stupid decisions necessary to change that is worryingly short.

No, this is not going to happen. Neither the UK or the EU wants a war over Gibraltar - it's absurd to think it.

It was absurd to think we'd be having this conversation in the first place not so long ago, but here we are.

EDIT: "Well that escalated quickly... Lord Howard tells Sophy [Ridge from Sky News]: PM would show "same resolve" re Gibraltar as Mrs T in Falklands"

[Thanas]

Gibraltar might have to be handed back to the Spanish or become a poor third-world country according to the EU if a deal is to succeed.
Spanish diplomats have succeeded with inserting language to that effect into the negotiation guidelines.

Gee, maybe May should not have threatened the EU. "Give us free trade or we will not honour the defence treaties we have with you" is not going to work out.

Just because May is behaving like a knob, there's no need for the EU to follow suit. This is a dickish move by them that only impacts the people of Gibraltar. Spain has no defensible claim on the Rock but is doing some sabre rattling for internal purposes, as it does periodically. Are the EU seriously prepared to try and force the UK to give Gibraltar back to Spain in defiance of almost its entire population.

No, I think this is the EU gently reminding Britain that they have the better bargaining position.


EDIT: To elaborate, in the letter May pretty much tried to blackmail the EU with security issues. This is the EU simply saying that this is not something May wants to escalate because there are a host of issues the EU could raise in return.