Novocastrian

Read the EU position paper. It's clear the they see UK resident EU27 citizens as maintaining existing rights after Brexit. Rights granted by the EU constitution and subject to oversight by the ECJ.

You said earlier that the negotiations will be a marathon but I think it's more like a 3000m steeplechase with 35 barriers including 7 water jumps to surmount.

Davis, May and the rest of the Tory troglodytes are falling flat on their face at the first hurdle.

Water jumps remind me of cliffs.

Novocastrian

No. Only to EU27 citizens resident in the UK on or before a cutoff date (to be determined). And to UK citizens resident in the EU27 on that date.

There isn't (yet) a position that the ECJ will be the arbiter in other matters, but just wait until they get around to trade (if they ever do).

BritInParis

The EU doesn't have a constitution but on the broader point the EU doesn't seem to have grasped that it will no longer have any legal jurisdiction over the UK once we leave.

BritInParis

Err, that's what I said. And no, the ECJ won't have a say once the UK leaves as it will no longer be under its jurisdiction.

As I said, if they're considering that as a real option, which flies in the face of every international norm, then the UK can just walk away as it's obvious they don't actually want a deal.

Novocastrian

Says who?

Do you think we should just call off the negotiation? I prefer the obvious alternative which is to just call off Brexit.

BritInParis

That would the 'no deal is better than a bad deal' scenario. In reality the EU did try that as a sort of wrecking amendment then the individual member states, particularly Mrs Merkel in Germany, wouldn't let it stand. The UK may be struggling in comparison at the moment but as time goes on it will be more and more apparent that what is good for the EU as an institution doesn't necessarily tally with what is good for the EU as individual member states, hence all the talk about being so united, a 'price to be paid' for leaving and not having such a good deal on the outside as we did on the inside. The reality is that a CETA-type deal would be best for everyone but the EU itself.

BritInParis

It's simply the legal consequence of leaving the EU. Its jurisdiction only extends to EU member states and the UK would no longer be an EU member state.

Novocastrian

EU laws and regulations also apply to third countries trading into the EU. And, they contend, to citizens of the EU who entered the UK (and vice versa) while the UK was a member (which it still is).

Novocastrian

My alternative is quite different. It's that the deal we had is better than any other we could possibly get now. Damage limitation should be the strategy but we can already kiss goodbye to the UK rebate.

BritInParis

If you want to sell a product in the EU then it has to meet EU wide regulations for aspects such as safety, that's true, but that applies to the manufacturer or distributor, not the country of origin. Just because Apple manufactures iPhones in Taiwan and then sells them in the EU doesn't mean that the US or the Republic of China are subject to the ECJ. And EU laws and regulations only apply to the UK whilst we're a member of the EU. When the UK leaves, that ceases to be true, hence the negotiations on what comes next.

There won't be a rebate because there won't be any more budget contributions to have a rebate for.

Novocastrian

Want to bet? But read the thread from the top before deciding how much.

Editha

Err.... Yes we do. We don't have a written codified constitution, but we do have a constitution; either that or the exam syllabus I studied for my constitutional law exam was a work of fiction.

BritInParis

No EU membership, no EU budget contributions, no rebate.

Who is the 'we' you refer to?

Editha

Ah sorry, I thought you said British. But the EU similarly does not have a codified constitution, but does have a network of treaties, body of law etc. which together amount to a constitution.

Editha

Norway makes budget contributions. So does Switzerland.