Once Article 50 is triggered we are leaving the EU. No ifs, not buts, we are leaving, deal agreed or not, after two years. End of chat on that one so I'm unsure as to what an MP can vote on except maybe whether or not to accept the deal that may be on the table with the EU for our post Brexit future.
I agree. But at the same time, while for the most part Theresa May is impressing me, we can't possibly trust her alone to lead us into a new era. She is accountable and must be held accountable. That said, I do hope that the spineless cry babies don't get in the way too much. May impressed me today when she effectively told the smug weasels in Brussels where they can stick their union, thus totally calling their bluff. This is a massive game of chess or poker now, in that it's about tactics and bluff as much as it is about cold logic. So far she is doing really well. While she should be held to account, I really hope corbyn or Sturgeon aren't standing behind her, whispering what cards she's holding.
That's the last thing you can accuse an MP of, pete!! No, my point was that MP's will be in a fix because they're the one's that have agreed to trigger Article 50 after the Prime Minister proposed it to them. Therefore, at the end of the negotiations, on agreeing with the EU, about the terms of leaving the EU, the MP's who don't support the terms of the agreement are going to be [a] in the minority have the ire of the Media and British Public focused on them, as they were informed that should the EU want to give us a bad deal, then there would be no deal and we would go into the Open Market and do better.
Agreed!! But, it does seem that some MP's don't either realise that or even want to. They are in the minority but from the acts of treachery, double dealing, back tracking, that some MP's of all Parties have enacted over the last 12 months, there will be some stupid enough to try to be Machiavellian and try to make the road harder.
Like an experienced Gun Fighter she probably wouldn't have anyone she didn't trust standing behind her.
The vote is about on what terms we are leaving. As I said, some would have us "leave" but still be bound by their rules and regs.
Agreed, which is why May has told the country that the UK will leave the EU and have no connections a either a part member, associated member, will also disconnect completely from the EU Courts of Justice, and not be subject to the EU powers whatsoever.
And you believe that,.....do you? I hope she is right, but I still think the MPs vote is the last word. What happens if they vote against the fact that we have no deal with the EU?????
I disagree, pete, it's the Country that has the last say. As longk pointed out, once Article 50 is triggered we are going out of the EU, no if's, no buts. Any MP can vote against the terms of the deal but it's extremely doubtful that they would be more than a minority. Think about this, say we get to the end of the negotiations and have provisionally agreed terms on leaving the EU. The terms are then rejected by the majority MP's, what's left? Do you think the EU would say "Okay, we'll give you a better deal"...........I don't think so and I'm sure that even the rogue MP's realise that. To me a hard Brexit would be one where we left having tax duties and barriers placed on us, that is highly unlikely as that would be reciprocated and cause chaos in the EU. So, yes, we are leaving the Single Market as we have no alternative, but we can possibly stay in the Custom Union or come to an alternative agreement with the EU. As I said, two years is a long time!!
It would make no difference, we would still have no deal and be leaving. May has to talk tough. She realises that the most important thing is that we leave with some kind of financial services passport and that his main aim. Whether we like it or not the financial services sector is the largest single contributor to the UK governments tax revenue paying something like 10 to 12% of the total tax take.
She has already hinted to the EU that if the EU try to impose tariffs/sanctions on the financial system here then she would reduce the restrictions and taxes on the financial institutions that would then make this country an irresistible attraction for their banks. It's the start of the hard bargaining. If the EU refuse to negotiate (as Junker had stated at one time) then they would be in contravention of the Lisbon Treaty as Article 8 is fairly clear. "1. The Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation. 2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Union may conclude specific agreements with the countries concerned. These agreements may contain reciprocal rights and obligations as well as the possibility of undertaking activities jointly. Their implementation shall be the subject of periodic consultation."
That is just bluff and bluster for the sake of PR. We can offer all the tax breaks and regulatory perks we want but if the host country is not a part of the EU/EEA then these financial institutions will still need to establish a base within that zone (and consequently pay their taxes there). Lloyds of London will be starting the move to an EU country this year with the setting up of a subsidiary operation. But the get out clause for the EU is in the very first paragraph.................... "1. The Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation." So they negotiate, we refuse to accept free movement of people and that game is played out.
Yes, but some of the special relationships have been different from what they are proposing we should have.
I'm not totally sure as to what you're referring to. I assume that you mean the three members who are a part of the EEA and the one member who is a part of the EFTA (?) but not members of the EU? If so then just because they do have those agreements in place we cannot assume that we will get such an agreement. Indeed, we were told before the referendum that such an agreement was highly unlikely if we opted to leave.
