Berlin urges London not to postpone Brexit after delay reports

[webfact]

Berlin urges London not to postpone Brexit after delay reports

 

 

BERLIN: -- Germany has urged London not to delay Brexit, following a flurry of British media reports which suggested Prime Minister Theresa May might postpone the formal procedure to leave the EU.

 

The start of January is widely touted as the most likely date to trigger Article 50, which officially begins Brexit.

 

So far Downing Street has only said it will not be invoked this year.

 

That has raised concerns the UK’s departure from the European Union could drag on until at least 2019, possibly longer.

 

Germany’s European Affairs Minister Michael Roth said: “The end of the year should really be sufficient time to get organised and adjust to the new situation. It does not need any additional political pressure, I am convinced that the economic pressure from Great Britain itself is strong enough, because it is in the interest of Britons and especially the British economy to provide more clarity on how Great Britain will continue outside the European Union.”

 

Under the Lisbon Treaty Article 50 must be enacted before the formal two year negotiations on Britain’s departure from the EU can begin.

 

Despite mounting political pressure on Theresa May from Berlin and other European capitals to stick to a quick timetable, there are growing concerns she may be forced to delay because Britain’s new Brexit and International Trade departments will not be ready.

 

 

-- © Copyright Euronews 2016-08-17

 

 

[happy Joe]

Yes, the delay is especially bad for the British economy where all investors are waiting.

 

But I am convinced that the only reason is the reluctance May government driving the country on the hazardous path chosen by the majority.

[tomwct]

I don't agree! Britain needs to exit sooner than later. There will be more exits over the next several years because the EU Bureaucracy

is failing Big Time. EU is just another large government agency which is useless and thrives on members Taxes. Britain will come

out stronger and better after the exit!

[bkkcanuck8]

13 minutes ago, tomwct said:

I don't agree! Britain needs to exit sooner than later. There will be more exits over the next several years because the EU Bureaucracy

is failing Big Time. EU is just another large government agency which is useless and thrives on members Taxes. Britain will come

out stronger and better after the exit!

 

Until businesses know what type of trading arrangement there will be with Europe -- they will not be able to make forward looking plans and will default to a status-quo approach until they know how things will change.  Projects and investments will continue status-quo and will eventually complete, new projects will be put on hold until things become clear... which will only create more recessionary headwinds until that happens.  The longer there is uncertainty, the more economic damage will be done.  It has been pretty clear that there was a vote for brexit, but there were no plans by anyone and probably no agreement at what brexit actually means.  

 

BTW, the first two sentences seem to conflict with each other.  You don't agree (with the article that states that Brexit should be triggered sooner rather than later) but then you say Britain needs to exit sooner than later.... which is it?

Edited August 16, 2016 by bkkcanuck8

[tomwct]

Exit sooner the better! Bite the bullet as they say!

[Kasset Tak]

If England want to drag on Brexit then the rest of EU should just kick them out, block the tunnel and impose huge import tariffs (2-300% like import to Thailand) on anything from England. Whiskey and other products from Scotland shouldn't have any imports tariffs as Scotland has some independence and still wants to be a part of EU. 

[Caps]

Yes,   It needs doing one way or another.  Dragging feet is not doing anyone any good

[Srikcir]

I'd think that for UK-based businesses that have substantial EU business and are on a calendar year for tax filings, waiting beyond December 2016 for Brexit from the EU may be too late. The best assurance for business stability may be for them to leave the UK before year-end.

[HooHaa]

It's quite amusing, Europe isn't going to let this go. 

 

One yer bike, be off with ya.

[tomwct]

Time to go! No more excuses! The voters have voted! Let the Scots vote for independence! Who cares?

[swanny321]

1 hour ago, HooHaa said:

It's quite amusing, Europe isn't going to let this go. 

 

One yer bike, be off with ya.

 

  'Dai priape''  We have the advantage as Brexiting could initiate a domino effect!

[Rykbanlor]

5 hours ago, bkkcanuck8 said:

 

Until businesses know what type of trading arrangement there will be with Europe -- they will not be able to make forward looking plans and will default to a status-quo approach until they know how things will change.  Projects and investments will continue status-quo and will eventually complete, new projects will be put on hold until things become clear... which will only create more recessionary headwinds until that happens.  The longer there is uncertainty, the more economic damage will be done.  It has been pretty clear that there was a vote for brexit, but there were no plans by anyone and probably no agreement at what brexit actually means.  

 

BTW, the first two sentences seem to conflict with each other.  You don't agree (with the article that states that Brexit should be triggered sooner rather than later) but then you say Britain needs to exit sooner than later.... which is it?

 

 

What a surprise, a Brexit supporter who can barely express a coherent opinion.

 

(aimed at the poster mentioned at the bottom of the quote, not bkkcanuck8)

 

 

Edited August 17, 2016 by Rykbanlor
adding clarity

[klauskunkel]

6 hours ago, webfact said:

So far Downing Street has only said it will not be invoked this year.

I understand. An invocation takes time: the planets need to be aligned, incense need to be bought, and virgins need to be found...

[Grouse]

6 hours ago, happy Joe said:

Yes, the delay is especially bad for the British economy where all investors are waiting.

 

But I am convinced that the only reason is the reluctance May government driving the country on the hazardous path chosen by the majority.

 

Yes, this is the truth

 

May had no choice but say Brexit means Brexit. However, she knows this is bonkers.

 

Invidious situation indeed

Edited August 17, 2016 by Grouse
Typo

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, Kasset Tak said:

If England want to drag on Brexit then the rest of EU should just kick them out, block the tunnel and impose huge import tariffs (2-300% like import to Thailand) on anything from England. Whiskey and other products from Scotland shouldn't have any imports tariffs as Scotland has some independence and still wants to be a part of EU. 

 

Yeah right-oh. There is no legislation to do that in the EU. France would certainly not want to block the tunnel and nor would Germany. The latter wants to protect it's substantial UK market place. The US would not tolerate a trade war like that and China, India and Australia are already on the starting blocks to fill any gaps. 

England and Scotland are not independent countries and neither are members of the EU. The country is called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and this country is still a full member and significant net contributor to the EU budget until it leaves.

 

German politicians can huff and puff all they want. But things cannot proceed until legal challenges have been dealt with and an agreement as to how constitutional law is applied agreed. From what I've read about 70% of experts say a parliamentary debate, vote and Act of Parliament is required, whilst 30% say the PM can use the Royal Prerogative for the government i.e. the cabinet to make the decision alone. Nothing can move forward until this is all resolved.

 

Your understanding of the political economic social and legal context of this could almost fill a postage stamp. Mind you don't sit on your spiked helmet now.

Edited August 17, 2016 by Baerboxer

[Usernames]

Whatever the Germans want, do the opposite.

[Baerboxer]

8 hours ago, bkkcanuck8 said:

 

Until businesses know what type of trading arrangement there will be with Europe -- they will not be able to make forward looking plans and will default to a status-quo approach until they know how things will change.  Projects and investments will continue status-quo and will eventually complete, new projects will be put on hold until things become clear... which will only create more recessionary headwinds until that happens.  The longer there is uncertainty, the more economic damage will be done.  It has been pretty clear that there was a vote for brexit, but there were no plans by anyone and probably no agreement at what brexit actually means.  

 

BTW, the first two sentences seem to conflict with each other.  You don't agree (with the article that states that Brexit should be triggered sooner rather than later) but then you say Britain needs to exit sooner than later.... which is it?

 

Everything is politically motivated now of course. The Federalists, led by many German politicians want Britain out quickly and preferably on not too favorable terms. They want to stem any more countries from holding referendums and potentially leaving by showing they deal quickly and ruthlessly with any who don't follow their path. See how the 6 founding members held their little get together and didn't worry about the other members or their views. They want to use this to whip the others into line and increase the march pace towards "ever closer union".  Not interested in testing what the wishes of the people of Europe are - Germany, or certainly this German government will tell them.

Britain was a strong opponent of federalism and as such seen as an obstacle to their vision, so another reason to get them out quickly.

Britain should have stayed in the EU and fought for less centralism and bureaucracy, supported by a number of other countries who see what's happening. But that was never explained to the British electorate.

 

The Cameron government, the Brexit campaigners and supporters never expected a leave vote. That's why they're all so clueless about what to do next. The whole thing was pretty slip shod in it's organization and lacked prior checking of legal consequences and results criteria. All because Cameron expected to win a remain vote and none of that detail would have mattered. Well now that detail does matter and is conspicuous by its absence. And no huffing and puffing from anyone is going to make it suddenly appear.

 

If the courts decide there must be a parliamentary debate, then vote, May will be in a terrible position whatever happens and will be forced to call a general election. A party could contest that election on a "remain" platform and might well be elected. Her only hope is the legal eagles say the Royal Prerogative is o k and then she and her cabinet can make the decision when to invoke article 50; which probably goes against her best judgement and for which she will be held accountable. See why Cameron buggered off and Johnson tried to bottle it. 

[Enoon]

Britain "might" postpone departure?

 

Edited August 17, 2016 by Enoon

[ilostmypassword]

Ordinarily, the lack of data and reasoning in your posts would lead me to be doubtful.  But given all those exclamation points, I must concur!!!!!

 

9 hours ago, tomwct said:

I don't agree! Britain needs to exit sooner than later. There will be more exits over the next several years because the EU Bureaucracy

is failing Big Time. EU is just another large government agency which is useless and thrives on members Taxes. Britain will come

out stronger and better after the exit!

 

9 hours ago, tomwct said:

Exit sooner the better! Bite the bullet as they say!

 

5 hours ago, tomwct said:

Time to go! No more excuses! The voters have voted! Let the Scots vote for independence! Who cares?

 

1 hour ago, GuestHouse said:

 

 

 

 

[Scott]

A post violating Fair Use Policy has been removed, along with replies.   You can only quote the first 3 lines and a link to the remainder of the article.  

[dunroaming]

Phillip Hammond said last week that the British government has guaranteed financial support that would be stopped when we leave the EU. He has guaranteed that for four years. What does that mean?  The article will not be activated this year and when it is it will take a minimum of two years to complete, some economists predict it will take quite a bit longer.  So until then we still receive the handouts from the EU, In other words we are covered anyway.

 

Merkel is fairly sympathetic to the UK over brexit but most of the others are not.  Merkel is under pressure and may not be elected next time and that would make our negotiations much harder to get any trade deals.  At the moment the message from Junker and the boys is no deals without free movement of people.  That would be fine by me but not the majority of the brexit supporters.

[bkkcanuck8]

2 hours ago, dunroaming said:

Phillip Hammond said last week that the British government has guaranteed financial support that would be stopped when we leave the EU. He has guaranteed that for four years. What does that mean?  The article will not be activated this year and when it is it will take a minimum of two years to complete, some economists predict it will take quite a bit longer.  So until then we still receive the handouts from the EU, In other words we are covered anyway.

 

Merkel is fairly sympathetic to the UK over brexit but most of the others are not.  Merkel is under pressure and may not be elected next time and that would make our negotiations much harder to get any trade deals.  At the moment the message from Junker and the boys is no deals without free movement of people.  That would be fine by me but not the majority of the brexit supporters.

It would be funny if brexit actually meant having the same thing but without a voice (i.e. the Norway option - EFTA) -- and maybe a little more difficult than first thought.... Norway has indicated it "may" veto Britain joining EFTA (club of four nations) because it was of disproportionately large compared to the other members and thus not the best fit.

[SheungWan]

7 hours ago, Usernames said:

Whatever the Germans want, do the opposite.

 

Yes, go Greek. Smart move.

[Skywalker69]

12 hours ago, swanny321 said:

 

  'Dai priape''  We have the advantage as Brexiting could initiate a domino effect!

EU will make an example of Britain, to scare other EU members not to leave.

[bkkcanuck8]

52 minutes ago, Skywalker69 said:

EU will make an example of Britain, to scare other EU members not to leave.

 

Britain is owed nothing, and thus they will be treated like any other country negotiating an agreement.  The EU will negotiate from a position of strength being a larger market -- and will negotiate an agreement that is in their interest.... nothing more, and probably nothing less.  That is after all what brexit was all about... being independent was it not?

[Skywalker69]

4 hours ago, bkkcanuck8 said:

 

Britain is owed nothing, and thus they will be treated like any other country negotiating an agreement.  The EU will negotiate from a position of strength being a larger market -- and will negotiate an agreement that is in their interest.... nothing more, and probably nothing less.  That is after all what brexit was all about... being independent was it not?

Yes, do off you go.

[swanny321]

5 hours ago, Skywalker69 said:

EU will make an example of Britain, to scare other EU members not to leave.

 

    Oh I believe with a view of the broader canvass the EU-ites will play nicely.After all when the

'Zombie Apocalypse' starts; if it hasn't already, there's only one place and currency that's going

to be a safe-haven and it ain't Switzerland!