"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

quote
Article 50 provides that the EU will negotiate a new agreement with
the withdrawing country over two years. That can be extended, but
only by unanimous agreement.The article also specifies that, when
agreeing a new deal, the EU acts without the involvement of the
country that is leaving.
/quote

So that basically rather than going in there and negotiating the
best deal for the UK - a scenario accepted by many commentators - the
UK will have to stand in the corridor outside the headmasters office
and then be called in, once the likes of Rumania and Poland have
finally decided what her fate should be.

I don't think it's saying the EU excluding the leaving country *decides* what happens
to the leaving country, rather that the EU excluding the leaving country *negotiates*
with the leaving country.


I think this point has already been made in another post

The agreement and negotiations take place among the remaining members
as to what deal they're going to offer the UK. Then the UK is allowed back into
the room and given the choice of accepting or rejecting the new deal .*

If this goes on for longer than two years, then the existing deal remains in place
including the £350 million per week or whatever it is ,which the UK contributes
to the EU.

Basically the UK is losing £350 a week until it agrees to whatever Poland,
Rumania etc decides to give it.

As others have said there's nothing to stop the UK breaking whatever treaties it
likes; just so long as nobody minds the pound sterling losing its status as
a reserve currency, dropping like a stone and ranking alongside the
Zimbabwean Dollar or the Argentinian Peso at the bottom of the bucket

* Possibly it could have been better expressed -

The article also specifies that, when agreeing a new deal [among themselves],
the EU acts without the involvement of the country that is leaving.


michael adams

....