This is a subscriber-only article
Much was made of Borris Johnson’s trite phrase in the UK referendum campaign that the UK could effectively have its cake and eat it by leaving the EU.
As negotiations proceed slowly, the EU has hit back with its own catchphrase about the clock ticking towards an exit without much of a picture so far of what a future EU – UK relationship might look like.
Transition
It looks like there is some serious thinking taking place in the corridors of Westminster in what is traditionally the close season in politics.
Chancellor of the Exchequer (Finance Minister) Philip Hammond, a pro-EU voice in a cabinet dominated by leading leave campaigners pre election, has been reinvigorated since the Conservatives disastrous election campaign, even though the pro Brexit Michael Gove has made it back to the Cabinet table.
He has been advocating with some success that the UK should seek a transition arrangement with the EU for a period of years after March 2019 when the UK formally leaves the EU under the terms of Article 50.
This will need the individual agreement of the remaining EU 27 which will be another debate and will involve personal issues such as Greece looking for the return of historic treasures from the UK whose ownership has been disputed.
Assuming these are overcome, both the EU and UK will be in new territory and this is where Wolfgang Munchau in the Financial Times presents an interesting scenario.
Re-joining
This is essentially a model whereby the UK exits the EU under Article 50 as it is currently in the process of doing but re-joins under the much less quoted Article 49 of the Lisbon Treaty.
This is where the transition window where the UK would technically be outside the EU after March 2019 but nothing would change if it was voluntarily continuing as before with the endorsement of the EU 27.
The FT piece suggests that this effectively means that the UK has fulfilled the wishes of voters in the referendum by leaving the EU.
Change of heart
Then the twist. Just as it is an accepted fact that a parliament in the UK cannot bind its successors, it follows that a referendum cannot do likewise.
If there is a two or three year “transition period” then there will be a clearer picture of what life outside the EU will look like.
It would not be unreasonable to suggest that the UK, five or six years after the previous referendum, might again be asked to vote on a choice of by then remaining outside the EU, against a clear picture of what that would mean beyond the clichés of the previous referendum, or re joining the EU.
By that stage a proper and informed debate will have taken place over several years unlike the previous referendum which was decided very much on emotion and little meaningful and real debate.
Of course the UK could decide to remain on the path of being outside and if it does, that will be the issue settled for at least a further half century.
However, it could also be that after a prolonged and informed debate the UK as a whole might decide as the Scots did in their referendum, that it is better together.
SHARING OPTIONS: