What would a British exit from the EU, or 'Brexit' look like?

[webfact]

What would a British exit from the EU, or 'Brexit' look like?
By Catherine Hardy



Euronews takes you through the options for Britain’s potential divorce with Brussels.

What happens if the UK votes to leave the EU?

Article 50 of the 2009 Lisbon Treaty outlines the process of withdrawal. It has not yet been used as no state has ever left the EU.

But what about Greenland?

Greenland left the bloc’s predecessor, the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1985. As part of Danish territory, it was also not an EU member state in its own right.

How would withdrawal work, in practice?

• If the UK votes to leave the EU, Prime Minister David Cameron would immediately notify the European Council (EC) of its plans to withdraw.

• Negotiations would then begin on arrangements for the UK to leave and on its future dealings with the remaining 27 members.

• The remaining EU leaders and the European Parliament must agree on a settlement deal. This may also require ratification by national parliaments.

• The UK will not be involved in the EU side of the talks and will have no say on the final terms offered.
• EU treaties will have to be amended to allow for the UK’s new status. The UK may have to prepare fresh national legislation.

There is a lot of talk about other non-EU states like Switzerland, Norway. How might that work for the UK?

There are some examples of countries that work with the EU without being members of the bloc. Each arrangement is unique and comes with its own advantages and
disadvantages.

Switzerland



• Member of European Free Trade Association (EFTA)
• Swiss exporters have tariff-free access to EU markets
• Switzerland is free to negotiate trade deals with non-EU countries (China, for example)
• Limited access to EU services market
• Almost no access to EU financial services market
• Freedom over social and employment policies
• But does contribute to EU budget
• Accepts free movement of people

This looks good. Could it work for the UK?

Yes and no.

The financial services market is a significant contributor to the UK economy. Experts say restrictions on access to the EU sector would pose problems for the UK.UK “Out” campaigners also want to end budget contributions and free movement of people.

These issues remain for Switzerland, particularly free movement.

Per head of the population, Switzerland has a high immigrant population. Swiss citizens voted in a 2014 referendum to introduce quotas on EU migrants from 2017, thereby violating the bilateral agreement on free movement.

The EU has refused to permit this. Brussels says it will suspend all other EU-Swiss agreements and market access if quotas are brought in unilaterally.

Norway



• Member of EFTA
• Member of European Economic Area (EEA)
• Free to negotiate trade deals with non-EU countries
• Not subject to European Court of Justice
• Accepts free movement of EU citizens
• Contributes to EU budget, paying twice as much per head than the UK •Applies single market rules and regulations
• Has no vote on themNorway has twice rejected EU membership in referenda.

Is Norway a good example for the UK to follow, then?

David Cameron says not.

Norway pays twice as much per head to the EU as Britain, he says, and applies the single market rules but has no “seat at the table” as it has no vote.

Greenland



• Left the EEC in 1985, three years after its own referendum
• EU funding continued
• Tariff-free access to the fisheries products market continued
• Gave the EU fishing rights over its waters in return
• Free movement rights for EU migrants retained for transitional period

So if Greenland has left the EU already, then surely this means it can be done?

It is not that simple.

Greenland left the EEC, not the EU, and commentators say this is a different matter.Experts say comparisons between Greenland and the UK are difficult to make. Greenland was not a member state in its own right – it had joined the EEC as part of Denmark.

At approximately 57,000, its population is also very small. Some think the transitional arrangements for EU migrants could work for the UK, which has two million citizens living in the EU and 2.5 million EU citizens on its own territory.

What arrangement does Turkey have with the EU?

Turkey has a customs union arrangement with Brussels. This means it does not pay tariffs to export most goods to the EU. However, it has to accept EU external tariffs when trading with non-EU countries.

As it is still only an EU candidate country, Turkey does not yet have a say in setting these tariffs. The agreement does not cover the services market. A lot of this seems to be about trade.

Why can’t a non-EU UK simply negotiate its own trade deals with Brussels?

In theory, it can.

“Out” campaigners say this would allow the UK to trade with the EU as before, but will also leave it free to agree deals with other countries like the US (its biggest individual export partner).

The EU has just agreed a deal like this with Canada. It removed 99 percent of customs duties.

Additionally, the “out” camp says the UK is too valuable a market for the EU to simply shut off. It has a trade goods deficit of 7.6 billion UK pounds and it is predicted there would be uproar if barriers were put in place restricting access for EU businesses.

The UK would not have to accept free movement under a free trade agreement.

Sounds good. Why can’t the UK just do this?

Again, it is not that simple.

“In” campaigners say these deals take a long time to agree. The Canadian agreement has taken seven years so far. Talks on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and US began in 2013 and are ongoing.

It has also been argued that the UK would not have the same “clout” when negotiating trade deals on its own that it has as a member of the EU and may find the process much more difficult.

Some predict that Brussels could choose to make Brexit as painful as possible for Britain. This would be to discourage others from following the UK example and breaking up the EU – the so-called “contagion” that many refer to.

What about the World Trade Organisation, then?



Some are calling this the “Brexit safety net”. If the UK fails to agree a free trade deal with the EU, it could fall back on WTO rules.

• Low or zero tariffs on many exports
• Tariffs in key sectors like cars, chemicals and food would remain relatively high
• Barriers would remain on some services, especially highly-regulated markets like finance
• UK would not have to accept free movement Find out more

VOTE LEAVE: http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org
STRONGER IN: http://www.strongerin.co.uk/#Pz4C540rM4fIXsS5.97

SOURCES: Compiled with the help of Reuters : http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-brexit-factbox-idUKKCN0VQ0KB?mod=related&channelName=topNews&utm_source=twitter


-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-03-04

[ukrules]

If they leave it could take 10 years or more just to finalise all the necessary arrangements.

It takes a long time to join the EU so I would think it's going to take at last as long, if not longer to leave.

[Somtamnication]

The future will be so bright, you gotta wear shades.

[soalbundy]

This insular mentality ' our islands way of life' could break the UK's neck. The only thing the UK does well is to pee over its working population.

[wombat]

This Brexit 'Crusade' can be reduced to very simple dynamics.

Open Borders or security?
Womens rights or sharia law?
Security or Muslim refugees?
Full social security rights or reduced?
EU laws and restrictions or plain old commonsense?
Strained social services or broken social services?

[car720]

It is all theoretical really as the main island is sinking into the ocean at a rate of 1" per year.

Time to leave the sinking ship as they say.

[onni4me]

The UK will not be involved in the EU side of the talks and will have no say on the final terms offered.

Interesting to say the least...who has given this kind of power to Brussels and other EU members to walk over the rights of a nation?

[wabothai]

The future will be so bright, you gotta wear shades.

40 bht Somt.

[technologybytes]

This Brexit 'Crusade' can be reduced to very simple dynamics.

Open Borders or security?

Womens rights or sharia law?

Security or Muslim refugees?

Full social security rights or reduced?

EU laws and restrictions or plain old commonsense?

Strained social services or broken social services?

This is so wrong... in my opinion total BS

[HauptmannUK]

 

The UK will not be involved in the EU side of the talks and will have no say on the final terms offered.

Interesting to say the least...who has given this kind of power to Brussels and other EU members to walk over the rights of a nation?

 

Not 'interesting' at all, its downright obvious. The EU is a trading block， the UK would have chosen to leave it. It would then be entirely up to the remaining members how they wish to interact with the UK. No need for our wishes to be considered at all.

[jope]

The UK will not be involved in the EU side of the talks and will have no say on the final terms offered.

Interesting to say the least...who has given this kind of power to Brussels and other EU members to walk over the rights of a nation?

Are you saying that if Britain leaves the EU, Britain should nevertheless have rights within the union it just left?

But to answer your question: Britain did, by signing the respective EU treaties.

[Thongkorn]

Britain or England would go from strength to strength. We would not be bogged down with useless red tape from the EU. We would become inventive again . We could do what we always use to do when standing alone use our brains without restraint from Europe.

Edited March 4, 2016 by Thongkorn

[ozyjon]

more on the subject

http://theportugalnews.com/news/british-expats-should-register-as-soon-as-possible-for-eu-referendum/37549

[GAZZPA]

This insular mentality ' our islands way of life' could break the UK's neck. The only thing the UK does well is to pee over its working population.

There is no insular mentality, you have no idea what you are talking about. The UK is one of the most cosmopolitan and open countries on earth with citizens living there peacefully from hundreds of different countries. indeed many different cultures have even effected a change in British culture itself.

The reason why the UK are considering leaving is because they are sick of the mess that is the EU, tired of not being able to control it's boarders, tired of stupid EU legislation like the shape of bananas, tired of ploughing money into the EU for what is generally a crap return. The trading with the EU would not be lost forever, in fact it could open it's door wider to other international markets by striking trade deals with China and the US.

I for one am sick of the EU but have to confess being nervous about leaving it. I need to read and understand more but it is quite a complex issue and people disagree on so much. But whatever the UK do it is not motivated by an insular mentality.

You are clueless, have you even been there?

[GAZZPA]

The future will be so bright, you gotta wear shades.

I hope you're right fella, I really do.

I am sick of the EU BS. Tired of brussels, tired of the restrictions, tired of not managing our own country as we see fit. I guess I am not alone which is why there is a referendum.

[Baerboxer]

This insular mentality ' our islands way of life' could break the UK's neck. The only thing the UK does well is to pee over its working population.

Do you seriously think any EU country does any different to the UK at the moment?

The UK and Germany lead the EU whilst wannabee past glories self important arrogant France tries to be a leader but isn't really taken seriously.

Hollande "threatening Britain is a joke". He must be more stupid than apparent if he thinks Britain will lie down for France and put up with their dictatorial nonsense.

He should worry more about the imploding French economy, increasing industrial actions, and growth in home grown Muslim radical terrorists. Trying to off load the refugee problem France allowed to fester onto Britain, whether they are in or out of the EU won't work.

[Baerboxer]

The UK will not be involved in the EU side of the talks and will have no say on the final terms offered.

Interesting to say the least...who has given this kind of power to Brussels and other EU members to walk over the rights of a nation?

Are you saying that if Britain leaves the EU, Britain should nevertheless have rights within the union it just left?

But to answer your question: Britain did, by signing the respective EU treaties.

Are you saying that the EU will dictate any terms if any nation chooses to leave?

They would also be denying the right of participation to a country that was still a member state.

Brussels has become a joke - a bureaucratic nightmare that makes PC decisions based on ideology rather than what the people they represent want.

Britain should not leave but work with other forward looking members like Denmark, Finland, the Baltic States, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary etc to drive through changes. Rather than simply give in to the Federal Centralist control freakes like Merkel, Juncke and their poodle Hollande who all want to impose a central planned and controlled EU - economic, political and cultural. Wonder where Comrade Merkel got that idea from?

[Ulic]

 

The UK will not be involved in the EU side of the talks and will have no say on the final terms offered.

Interesting to say the least...who has given this kind of power to Brussels and other EU members to walk over the rights of a nation?

 

Not 'interesting' at all, its downright obvious. The EU is a trading block， the UK would have chosen to leave it. It would then be entirely up to the remaining members how they wish to interact with the UK. No need for our wishes to be considered at all.

I am left shaking my head. Trade and tariffs are a two way street. The UK is a market the EU

wants to access and the UK is a market the EU wants to access. Current trade agreements

are templates. Just subtract free movement and payments to the EU Parliament. "Taxation

without representation is tyranny." Threats by the French government saying there will be

"consequences" if you leave this marriage is a head scratcher. Of course there will be

consequences. Just because the French say the Calais camp will move to the UK is

ridiculous. Illegal migrants will simple be stopped at the boarder and returned to France.

Instead of giving France 10's of millions to help with migrant control in Calais the money will be spent

beefing up security at UK boarders and sending back migrants. The UK and French/EU

governments can act like adults in a civilized divorce or crazy lunatic divorcees who want

everything from the other party when there are clearly irreconcilable differences. Europe/France

saying you must stay married to me or I will make you pay, and the UK saying sorry

this relationship has run its course. The UK went to marriage counselling and got nothing

in trying to make the marriage work. The UK should leave while they still can. Brussels

and the European Government are out of control with no democratic process and are unaccountable.

It sounded like a good idea with good intentions, but expanded fro 9 to 28 far to quickly with

few controls. Germany is the Captain at the helm and the current migrant is fully of Merkel's

doing. The Greek problem will be back in 2-3 years. Get out now and steer the bus. One

more thing Europe is terrified because Switzerland and Norway will want the same deal as

the UK if common sense prevails in the divorce. Free trade, no money transfers, migration control.

[MJP]

I'll take Neil Woodford's advice on this thanks . . .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35647771

and Ruth Lea's . . .

http://www.cityam.com/234438/ignore-eu-scaremongers-why-britain-would-thrive-post-brexit

[jope]

The UK will not be involved in the EU side of the talks and will have no say on the final terms offered.

Interesting to say the least...who has given this kind of power to Brussels and other EU members to walk over the rights of a nation?

Are you saying that if Britain leaves the EU, Britain should nevertheless have rights within the union it just left?

But to answer your question: Britain did, by signing the respective EU treaties.

Are you saying that the EU will dictate any terms if any nation chooses to leave?

They would also be denying the right of participation to a country that was still a member state.

Brussels has become a joke - a bureaucratic nightmare that makes PC decisions based on ideology rather than what the people they represent want.

Britain should not leave but work with other forward looking members like Denmark, Finland, the Baltic States, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary etc to drive through changes. Rather than simply give in to the Federal Centralist control freakes like Merkel, Juncke and their poodle Hollande who all want to impose a central planned and controlled EU - economic, political and cultural. Wonder where Comrade Merkel got that idea from?

I am saying: if you are out, you are out. And the EU is not obliged to fulfill any wishes the UK might have (and vice versa).

Edited March 4, 2016 by jope

[jesimps]

Being in the EU is like living permanently under a Labour govt, only you can't vote them out. It'll cost me echange rate wise for a while but it'll be worth it to be free of their meddling and pull up that drawbridge.

[beano2274]

no more Freedom of Movement for those of us who take our Thai wifes to Europe first then use the Suringda Singh route to the UK. No more free Visas for those people from the UK wishing to take their thai wives to Europe for a holiday.

[onni4me]

The UK will not be involved in the EU side of the talks and will have no say on the final terms offered.

I am saying: if you are out, you are out. And the EU is not obliged to fulfill any wishes the UK might have (and vice versa).

They can always say NO! to terms offered. Or what you think? Classical ultimatum leading to trade war or worse.

Or are you in favor or mafia type offers that can't be refused? EU is acting like a thug and not like a democratic union of nations as it was sold to us. Me myself want out and want EU reduced as a free trade zone. Nothing less, nothing more.

Edited March 4, 2016 by onni4me

[jope]

The UK will not be involved in the EU side of the talks and will have no say on the final terms offered.

I am saying: if you are out, you are out. And the EU is not obliged to fulfill any wishes the UK might have (and vice versa).

They can always say NO! to terms offered. Or what you think? Classical ultimatum leading to trade war or worse.

Or are you in favor or mafia type offers that can't be refused? EU is acting like a thug and not like a democratic union of nations as it was sold to us. Me myself want out and want EU reduced as a free trade zone. Nothing less, nothing more.

In reality, the EU and the UK would come to the conclusion that it is best for both sides, to grant mutual access to their markets.

But the idea that a country that is leaving the EU could dictate the final terms for their leaving is ridiculous.

[RickBradford]

But the idea that a country that is leaving the EU could dictate the final terms for their leaving is ridiculous.

I think it's even worse than that.

A spurned and embittered EU is going to try to screw the UK into the ground on every negotiating point. Hell hath no fury like an EU scorned. They will try to make life as difficult and unpleasant for a UK which disrupts their lovely project, even if it disadvantages them to some extent in the short term.

They don't much like the way the UK behaves inside the EU; that is nothing as to how bitter they're going to get if it leaves.

That's not to say the UK shouldn't leave; it's just that it should prepare itself for a vicious backlash from the Eurocrats.

[jope]

But the idea that a country that is leaving the EU could dictate the final terms for their leaving is ridiculous.

I think it's even worse than that.

A spurned and embittered EU is going to try to screw the UK into the ground on every negotiating point. Hell hath no fury like an EU scorned. They will try to make life as difficult and unpleasant for a UK which disrupts their lovely project, even if it disadvantages them to some extent in the short term.

They don't much like the way the UK behaves inside the EU; that is nothing as to how bitter they're going to get if it leaves.

That's not to say the UK shouldn't leave; it's just that it should prepare itself for a vicious backlash from the Eurocrats.

Nah, can't really see it.

If (!) the Uk leaves, most member states want to continue having mutual friendly relations. In the end, we are all on the same side (democracy an' all). And it makes sense for all sides to continue trading. I doubt that the EU would create real obstacles that would hinder free exchange of goods (except in the service sector).

The real problem for the UK would be their absence in the decision making process of the EU. The UK would have to follow EU regulations but could not influence them in advance.

[allanos]

I think it is debateable as to how much "influence" Britain actually has in the EU. Despite being a strong economy,

it is only 1 of 28 voices. David Cameron and his clique are fond of saying that Britain will influence European

events from within the EU, and will not be able to once it is on the outside.

However, I think it is telling that, after his discussions with EU ministers and European leaders recently, he has

not come back to the electorate with very much at all. So much for influencing the EU from the inside!

The big issue is the erosion of sovereignty and judicial process, which have become more and more subservient

to the Brussels mandarins. David Cameron is strangely silent on this issue, all the while trying to convince the

British people that they are better in the Union that facing the future uncertainty outside it. At its heart, it is

fear-mongering, and it is the strongest tactic which the "ins" can put forward in the debate.

[jope]

I think it is debateable as to how much "influence" Britain actually has in the EU. Despite being a strong economy,

it is only 1 of 28 voices. David Cameron and his clique are fond of saying that Britain will influence European

events from within the EU, and will not be able to once it is on the outside.

However, I think it is telling that, after his discussions with EU ministers and European leaders recently, he has

not come back to the electorate with very much at all. So much for influencing the EU from the inside!

The big issue is the erosion of sovereignty and judicial process, which have become more and more subservient

to the Brussels mandarins. David Cameron is strangely silent on this issue, all the while trying to convince the

British people that they are better in the Union that facing the future uncertainty outside it. At its heart, it is

fear-mongering, and it is the strongest tactic which the "ins" can put forward in the debate.

Let's debate it, then:

The UK represents roughly 12,7 % of the EU population in the Council of the Ministers. The UK sends 74 MEPS to Brussels and Strasbourg (roughly 10 % of the parliament).

For a decision in the Council a majority of at least 16 member states representing at least 64 % of the EU population is needed.

To block a decision a minimum of just 4 member states representing at least 35 % of the EU population is needed.

At certain issues (e.g. foreign policy) each member state can veto a decision.

Adding the previous and recent opt-outs, privileges and bonuses to these figures, I think calling the UK just "1 of 28 voices" is quite a mellow way of describing the British influence within the EU.

Anyway, in the end it might just be an emotional thing. Do the British people "feel" European and do they feel that they belong to this club or do they not. I sincerely hope that they decide to stay. But whatever the outcome will be, at least it is clear afterwards.

[SheungWan]

This insular mentality ' our islands way of life' could break the UK's neck. The only thing the UK does well is to pee over its working population.

There is no insular mentality, you have no idea what you are talking about. The UK is one of the most cosmopolitan and open countries on earth with citizens living there peacefully from hundreds of different countries. indeed many different cultures have even effected a change in British culture itself.

The reason why the UK are considering leaving is because they are sick of the mess that is the EU, tired of not being able to control it's boarders, tired of stupid EU legislation like the shape of bananas, tired of ploughing money into the EU for what is generally a crap return. The trading with the EU would not be lost forever, in fact it could open it's door wider to other international markets by striking trade deals with China and the US.

I for one am sick of the EU but have to confess being nervous about leaving it. I need to read and understand more but it is quite a complex issue and people disagree on so much. But whatever the UK do it is not motivated by an insular mentality.

You are clueless, have you even been there?

Fighting on the beaches in defence of curved bananas. Way to go.

[allanos]

I think it is debateable as to how much "influence" Britain actually has in the EU. Despite being a strong economy,

it is only 1 of 28 voices. David Cameron and his clique are fond of saying that Britain will influence European

events from within the EU, and will not be able to once it is on the outside.

However, I think it is telling that, after his discussions with EU ministers and European leaders recently, he has

not come back to the electorate with very much at all. So much for influencing the EU from the inside!

The big issue is the erosion of sovereignty and judicial process, which have become more and more subservient

to the Brussels mandarins. David Cameron is strangely silent on this issue, all the while trying to convince the

British people that they are better in the Union that facing the future uncertainty outside it. At its heart, it is

fear-mongering, and it is the strongest tactic which the "ins" can put forward in the debate.

Let's debate it, then:

The UK represents roughly 12,7 % of the EU population in the Council of the Ministers. The UK sends 74 MEPS to Brussels and Strasbourg (roughly 10 % of the parliament).

For a decision in the Council a majority of at least 16 member states representing at least 64 % of the EU population is needed.

To block a decision a minimum of just 4 member states representing at least 35 % of the EU population is needed.

At certain issues (e.g. foreign policy) each member state can veto a decision.

Adding the previous and recent opt-outs, privileges and bonuses to these figures, I think calling the UK just "1 of 28 voices" is quite a mellow way of describing the British influence within the EU.

Anyway, in the end it might just be an emotional thing. Do the British people "feel" European and do they feel that they belong to this club or do they not. I sincerely hope that they decide to stay. But whatever the outcome will be, at least it is clear afterwards.

The numbers you have researched make interesting reading, but, alas, I cannot see that the United Kingdom's position of influencing its future within the EU is greatly bolstered by them. Unfortunately, the die has long been cast, which is why David Cameron could only bring back not much of substance, and certainly far removed from his earlier stated aims.

Your comment about how "European" the Brits feel, is well made. However, I feel that the population has long been irked, irritated and annoyed by many of the decisions handed down from Brussels, and probably don't feel very "European" at all. History and geographical position would also serve to underpin the position that the British are, first and foremost, just that; and not European.