Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

If May had waited a few months, so Article 50 date + 2 years was past the elections, what would have happened?

bobmalooka

Hurrache wrote: »

March 29th is the legal date to leave, nothing arbitrary about it.

I’m not contesting that it’s the legal (and indeed default) date for leaving.

Just noting that the date was based on an arbitrary time scale imposed by A50 - a minor adjustment to it could be facilitated depending on the impact - my view is the real impact point is EP election time.

On that basis I think there’s benefit in allowing a short extension rather than refusing (and allowing UK to push the narrative that they’ve been dumped out when they needed a short extension)
Allowing the extension pushes the responsibility back where it belongs.

Seth Brundle

Deleted User wrote: »

If May had waited a few months, so Article 50 date + 2 years was past the elections, what would have happened?

Sam thing as March 29th - their MEPs (and commissioners) cease to have a valid security pass to get into the building!

Hurrache

The ever changing tide
https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1108317673128189952

Hurrache wrote: »

There was a slight bit of optimism this morning with rumours that a SO24 may go ahead which is a standing order for emergency debates. Some remain parliamentarians were going to try get the extension changed to a longer period as it's likely May is only going to request a short one.

Then Corbyn and Labour comes along and says Labour won't support it.

https://twitter.com/jrmaidment/status/1108312457456558080

Seth Brundle

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Sam thing as March 29th - their MEPs (and commissioners) cease to have a valid security pass to get into the building!

But the UK would have had to hold elections for MEPs?

hill16bhoy

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I think no-deal is likely at this stage. The UK will waste the last few days bickering about what kind of extension to ask for and for what purpose, and when they do eventually ask for an extension it seems almost inevitable that it will have to be rejected by the EU because the purpose is to allow more time for the UK to seek further concessions from the EU, or to better prepare for no-deal, or to give May more time to get the deal through parliament without any clear plan of how to do that. The UK has not gotten its act together in the last two years, I can't see it happening now in the next week.

That leaves the UK with a choice of revoke A50 or go ahead with no-deal. Given the choice, I am not confident that enough MP's will have the sense to revoke A50.

I'm beginning to get the distinct feeling that there will be feature length documentaries made and books and long journalistic pieces written about the malign, underhand, behind the scenes goings on over the next ten days.

Hurrache

hill16bhoy wrote: »

I'm beginning to get the distinct feeling that there will be feature length documentaries made and books and long journalistic pieces written about the malign, underhand, behind the scenes goings on over the next ten days.

I'm looking forward to the behind the scenes books on this, but going back to the beginning of the sorry farce.

May is due to arrive at PMs questions within a half hour so still no news on the letter. What's the playing at, waiting to see if the SO24 goes ahead, or briefing parliament about the letter before she sends it. Who knows.

seamus

Deleted User wrote: »

But the UK would have had to hold elections for MEPs?

Yes.

While a country is in the EU, it is not legally possible for it to negotiate with the EU about an exit agreement.

Notification under article 50 is what makes it a possibility - this allows the country to remain in the EU, and negotiate the exit strategy at the same time.

While a country is in this position, it remains a full EU member with all the rights and obligations of same.

An extension under article 50 continues the arrangement. As a result if an EU election of any kind is held while a country is in the notification period, it retains its full voting rights and MEP seat allocation until the end of the notification period. The EU and UK can't legally agree to just "ignore" the elections and not include the UK in them.

This is why any extension beyond 22nd May is so troublesome. Even if they were to extend to 30th May, legally the EU would be required to include the UK in the MEP elections, appoint UK MEPs and then withdraw their seats again 3 days later, and redistribute them, possibly requiring supplementary elections.

So it's not going to happen. Any extension will either end before 22nd May, or go way beyond it - like two years beyond it.

rob316

Its headed for a crash out I just see no other way right now. The indecisiveness and delusion is ridiculous.

Joe_ Public

Jo Coburns utter bewilderment with the conservative politician on bbc right now is just indicative of the utter surreal farce we’re in. Stella Creasy losing her head completely.

Imreoir2

Deleted User wrote: »

If May had waited a few months, so Article 50 date + 2 years was past the elections, what would have happened?

The UK would have had to participate in the European Elections, A50 was triggered when it was specifically to avoide this.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

Deleted User wrote: »

But the UK would have had to hold elections for MEPs?

Unlikely. As is probably going to be the case if an extension is granted, UK will not hold MEP elections and will nominate other officials to take the seats.

BonnieSituation

Here we go...
Request made it seems

Seems it has not and I misread. Carry on.

EDIT: Poor Stella Creasy. And yet she's in Labour being led by Corbyn?

Seth Brundle

Head banging stuff...

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1108336605901709313

Joe_ Public

It looks like Keir Starmer has made the labour leadership see sense over the emergency debates. Need to see Starmer asserting himself more on his party’s hierarchy i think, do like the cut of his jib on most things.

Infini

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Jo Coburns utter bewilderment with the conservative politician on bbc right now is just indicative of the utter surreal farce we’re in. Stella Creasy losing her head completely.

In fairness though anyone who's been monitoring this thread for sometime will be easily aware of the extent of the ignorance, arrogance and incompetence of these fools and their deluded fantasies.

At this stage I dont think there will be an extention they'll either crash out next week or they'll table an emergency A50 withdrawal in the face of economic calamity. It's the binary choice that should have been presented to them weeks ago but either incompetence or blind arrogant pride that has May refusing to do so.

There's a big March for remain on the 26th. Could see an A50 cancellation shortly after that because if there's no sign of an extention it's likely well see the real effects of a crashout Brexit beginning to manifest as the deadline approaches.

Seth Brundle

More Tory nonsense on the BBC, this time from David (everyone else is at fault but me) Davis...

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1108328584559525889

road_high

30th June extension she’s saying in Parliament...

Hurrache

30th of June on the condition of a 3rd MV. I'm sure the EU are like WTF.

ancapailldorcha

road_high wrote: »

30th June extension she’s saying in Parliament...

Has she said anything about what she's had to use to justify the extension to the Europeans?

Hurrache

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Has she said anything about what she's had to use to justify the extension to the Europeans?

Another meaningful vote, that's it.

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1108339511963066369

road_high

Hurrache wrote: »

30th of June on the condition of a 3rd MV. I'm sure the EU are like WTF.

No! The EUs opinion doesnt seem to matter

ancapailldorcha

They have to reject that though. They can't even get it past Bercow, never mind 27 European Parliaments.

Hurrache

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They have to reject that though.

Madness altogether, she says she's sure she can find a way to get a 3rd MV in the house. That's her master plan.

Infini

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Head banging stuff...

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1108336605901709313

I honestly feel sorry for the Labour MP here, its people like her who should be in charge not not people like that Headbanger of a conservative living in a deluded fantasy. If only the brits would vote enmass to dump the conservatives and their cancerous stupidity.....

Hurrache wrote: »

Another meaningful vote, that's it.

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1108339511963066369

Honestly they could grant an extension but honestly they should just turn around and say that unless it involves a General Election or 2nd Referendum then there's no granting of said extension to be forthcoming.

Peregrinus

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Unlikely. As is probably going to be the case if an extension is granted, UK will not hold MEP elections and will nominate other officials to take the seats.

Holding elections isn't something member states do because they think it's a good idea. It's a legal requirement of EU membership, and not one easily modified.

If the UK had waited another year, say, before serving A50 notice it would have been known all along that the UK would still be a member at election time, and into the session of the new Parliament. The UK would have held elections in the usual way at the usual time, and the Withdrawal Agreement would have dealt with the withdrawal of the UK MEPs on Brexit Day and the reallocation of the UK seats and interim arrangements for filling those seats until the next regular election. The WA could not have provided for the UK not to hold elections but simply nominate temporary MEPs for the simple reason that, on election day, the UK would still be a member and the WA would not yet be in force and so could not alter the rights and obligations associated with membership.

In the present situation, if the UK gets a long enough extension it will have to hold elections. There is neither the appetite nor, I suspect, at this stage the time to start modifying EU law to accommodate the British in not holding elections. Again, it's not something the WA could address for the same reason as before; the WA won't enter into force in time.

So, yeah, this is a real issue in considering the extension. The wilingness and ability of the UK to conduct elections, and the attitude of the EU to the possibility of the kind of MEPs who might get elected in the present situation taking seats in the Parliament, is a big factor in deciding whether to grant an extension and, if so, of what length.

Joe_ Public

Personally I think the may deal passing with a people’s vote amendment passed after it is the best way, so maybe the eu could work with that? That said, her performance in the commons right now is pathetic.

jaykay74

Hurrache wrote: »

Madness altogether, she says she's sure she can find a way to get a 3rd MV in the house. That's her master plan.

Based on nothing changing in it! And no indication that substantial numbers have changed position. And basically inviting the ERG/DUP et al to tell her to go back to Brussels and get a better deal... again.

Thanks, but no thanks unless plenty strings are attached.

Donald Trump

seamus wrote: »

Yes.

While a country is in the EU, it is not legally possible for it to negotiate with the EU about an exit agreement.

Notification under article 50 is what makes it a possibility - this allows the country to remain in the EU, and negotiate the exit strategy at the same time.

While a country is in this position, it remains a full EU member with all the rights and obligations of same.

An extension under article 50 continues the arrangement. As a result if an EU election of any kind is held while a country is in the notification period, it retains its full voting rights and MEP seat allocation until the end of the notification period. The EU and UK can't legally agree to just "ignore" the elections and not include the UK in them.

This is why any extension beyond 22nd May is so troublesome. Even if they were to extend to 30th May, legally the EU would be required to include the UK in the MEP elections, appoint UK MEPs and then withdraw their seats again 3 days later, and redistribute them, possibly requiring supplementary elections.

So it's not going to happen. Any extension will either end before 22nd May, or go way beyond it - like two years beyond it.

I don't think it is even that simple. I would think that for any extension, the EU would need to insist on plans being made for UK to elect MEPs.


They could extend until 22nd May and the UK revoke unilaterally on 21st May and then you have a full EU member with no representation in the European Parliament


Unless an extension would be before the deadline for initiating or electing their MEPs, it would have to insist on it.

robinph

Hurrache wrote: »

Madness altogether, she says she's sure she can find a way to get a 3rd MV in the house. That's her master plan.

I think her master plan is to crash out and run away screaming that it was all the EU's fault as they never did what she didn't actually ever ask for.