Brexit white paper

[Suff]

No chance, Meds! I want us to Remain, but fully remain, not some half-arsed part member version.

Before May triggered A50, possible. Since she did? I don't think so, too few want Schengen and the Euro.

If anyone thinks that the EU will let us back in again without Schengen and the Euro they can think again. The only thing which stopped Greece from defying the EU was the Euro and the ability to destroy the Greek economy. There is no way the EU will let the UK back without that control. That will be the price.

[cromwell]

I have been wondering why Theresa May would do all this shifty business, potentially putting the conservatives out of office at the next general election and enraging so many conservative party members.

Then the penny dropped. If it is true that Brexit is being directed by a cabal of civil servants working for No 10, that would certainly explain it. Their desire is for us not to leave the EU or if we have to, to leave us tied as closely as possible to it, damaging our chances of trading with other nations on good terms.

The fate of the Conservative party doesn't matter to the civil service. Conservative MP's may lose their jobs come the next general election, but no civil servant will lose their job, not one.

As long as we remain in the EU in all but name, it's job done for them.

[Workingman]

Aha Cromwell!

Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister were telling us that years ago but we proles thought they were fictional comedies. We can change governments but we cannot change the civil service, the true governors of the country. It matters not whether we are in or out of the EU.

[Workingman]

The latest is that May has given a stark warning that failure to back her Chequers plan would risk the UK not leaving the EU at all.

Well, the only way that can happen is if she revokes A50. Is that what she is hinting at to her Remainers and Brexiters, the SNP, Labour and all the other parties if they do not back her plan?

If it is it is a strange thing to do.

The overwhelming majority of MPs, regardless of the wishes of their constituents, still wish to remain in the EU, they might take her up on it. This could go horribly wrong for her or is it a cunning plan by May the Remainer for the UK to stay in?

[cromwell]

I'm getting really confused now.
100% remainer Peter Mandelson has described May's deal as "terrible" and as you say May is now threatening that it's her deal or no Brexit.
What a mess.

Eta - It is now obvious that May has been acting in very bad faith, setting up a "Brexit Department" but actually having her Cabinet Office conducting negotiations and making plans behind David Davis' back.
This is appalling behaviour but she's not getting called on it.

[Suff]

Well, the only way that can happen is if she revokes A50.

She can't. This is not a competence that she has.

The only way May could possibly do that is to go to junker and Tusk and ask the commission to accept a petition of withdrawal and then for the Council of Ministers to vote on it.

If you think May would last 24 hours without a vote of no confidence after doing that, think again.

When May says it is this way or the highway, she is talking to Labour Brexiteers.

[Workingman]

She can't. This is not a competence that she has.

I think you will find that there is a whole raft of lawyers, experts in interpreting international laws, treaties and conventions, including Lord Kerr who authored A50, who disagree with that view.

As it is the only way May can carry out her threat to stop Brexit she obviously thinks so as well.

It might be diplomatic to inform the 27 in order to give them time to respond, but a unilateral revocation is certainly not out of the question.

[victor]

In my opinion and to put it politely it's

ONE BIG MUCKING FUDDLE

[Workingman]

Have a look at your spell checker, Vic, it has gone as wonky as Brexit.

And turn caps-lock off.

[Suff]

She can't. This is not a competence that she has.

I think you will find that there is a whole raft of lawyers, experts in interpreting international laws, treaties and conventions, including Lord Kerr who authored A50, who disagree with that view.

As it is the only way May can carry out her threat to stop Brexit she obviously thinks so as well.

It might be diplomatic to inform the 27 in order to give them time to respond, but a unilateral revocation is certainly not out of the question.

Ah, the articles the articles, written in the press.

I started out looking for legal opinion articles. Then I found the horses mouth and decided that posting articles from the other end of the beast would be both counter productive and boring in the greatest sense.

Read the executive summary.

I can summarise the executive summary.

1. A50 is an EU competence which is both EU Political and Legal in nature
2. The EU Institutions would have to agree to any proposed withdrawal
3. Making as legal challenge after a unilateral declaration of withdrawal would have one of two consequences as the CJEU
a. Being thrown out as a political matter which does not fall within the jurisdiction of the CJEU
b. Being thrown out because the article already supplies a mechanism to allow the leaving party to re-join the EU.

In short, when we triggered A50 we left the EU. The fact that the terms of how we would remove the treaties and reallocate the terms of trade would take two years (or more if required and agreed), we are, to all intents and purposes, already OUT and if we want to re-join, we have to use the mechanism already accounted for in A50.

In short, if we are really serious about staying we're going to have to crawl and kiss serious EU booty. Oh and accept Every Single One of the restrictions they place on us.

Any other "opinion" opined, by UK legal minds is nothing more than the other end of the Bull. Note that every "opinion" I read ended by saying that

a. It would be a "political call"
b. The EU would have to "accept" the "request"

Nothing, not one thing, in the above, says that what I have said is wrong. However, virtually everything in that EU parliament position paper, says that the opinion that the UK can just unilaterally rescind is WRONG.