For All Those Who Claim We are Leaving The EU, A Spanner In The Works

[Himaginn]

When I read the reports that people who voted in the EU ref didn't realise that leave meant actually leave the EU, I thought surely not. Today I met up with someone who I see in passing, an ex-copper who admitted he didn't realise his vote to leave meant just that. I think the UK should be ashamed over how stupid it's people are!

I think there are many who voted to leave, on the basis that they thought the EU was to blame for all their ills, whereas, in reality, it may have been the politics and policies, such as Austerity, of UK government that was causing their problems.

 

[blightymam]

But that makes sense Himmy, at least those would a genuine reason. He didn't have one when I asked him what he was thinking that the EU Ref was all about. He just mumbled something along the lines of he didn't know what it mean/was about and that it was like normal voting, people in Britain get fed up with each party every 10 years or so and vote to swap em over so he thought that's what he should do, not understanding that the EU wasn't a political party like Labour or the Cons.

 

[sooey]

Abraham Lincoln said you can't fool all of the people all of the time. But you don't need too, you just need to fool enough of the people some of the time.
That's what project fear was all about. They failed! Came unstuck! Dropped a b0llock! Whether that was through the intelligence or stupidity of the people doesn't really bother me.
Though I agree that a lot of people are so incredibly thick about these things.

 

[blightymam]

Whether that was through the intelligence or stupidity of the people doesn't really bother me.

It does me, doesn't seem like a fair fight somehow!!

The whole shebang from both sides was really badly done for such an important decision and I hope lessons are learned. American style politics, which this was, sucks!

 

[Gerrydelasel]

I think there are many who voted to leave, on the basis that they thought the EU was to blame for all their ills, whereas, in reality, it may have been the politics and policies, such as Austerity, of UK government that was causing their problems.

That is an interesting (and oblique) argument to leave: being in the EU blurs the lines of accountability. By leaving, there will no longer be any ambiguity: if you've got a beef with the law, it's the British establishment you need to talk to. No more flawed arguments on that score. A clean, comprehendible system.

 

[Himaginn]

I'm also aware that the founding members of the EU took it upon themselves to discuss their response to brexit, greatly ****ing off the other members in the process.
But you wish to imply that any country which had invoked article 50 would still be included in negotiations about the future of the EU after the exit of another country which had invoked it previously.
Riiiight.

I agree with your rather rambling interpretation, paragraph 4, of Article 50, IIRC.
When a nation state invokes Article 50, they may no longer be in a position to participate in discussion concerning the future of the EU, or more accurately, the EU Council, which is:

Members of the European Council
The members of the European Council are the heads of state or government of the 28 EU member states, the European Council President and the President of the European Commission.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/european-council/
Now that does not seem to include the EU Commission or the EU Parliament!
So, would those member nations that had invoked Article 50 be involved in exit negotiation of another state?
I don't think Article 50 is that precise, as yet.
In fact, the member of the withdrawing state must obviously be involved in negotiating the exit of that state. Therefore, by extrapolation, other withdrawing states would also be included in discussions.

However, a statement based on false premise is a false statement, as I explained:

UK does not negotiate with the individual countries in the EU. It matters little how many countries there are. The negotiations are with the EU. The statement was based on a false premise. Therefore, it was inherently false.

Moreover, there will be many more countries than 27, with whom negotiations will be necessary. Therefore, not only was his statement inherently false, it was nonsensical.

Can you limit yourself to the discussion without insults?

The fact remains that it was a false statement, based on a false premise, and therefore indefensible.
Now if you wish to place other interpretations on my comments, other than my explicit explanations, and resort to abusive comments, feel free. It demonstrates your lack of ability to discuss rationally, and perhaps, your guilty feeling about your position.

Just to clarify one point: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36743444 makes absolutely clear (about 30 seconds in) that UK's MEPs remain in place, with full voting rights for the two year Exit period. So does the UK Commissioner, although a new one will need to be appointed.

Thus, it is only the EU Council, which is the leader/PM's/Presidents of each member country who will no longer be able to participate in discussions concerning the future of the EU.