I have some questions, please help?

[dragonsarebest]

As I understand it, all that has happened so far is that an advisory poll has returned a "leave" verdict. Article 50 hasn't been triggered and so - to all intents and purposes - nothing has actually changed yet.

So, until that time, does the UK still attend summits, have a say in decisions made, etc? I wasn't sure after Cameron's attendance at the summit immediately following the Ref whether it was his" last EU summit or our^ last EU summit. Are we still active in the EU Council, for example?

The next question that I have is, what would happen if we decided to stay before Article 50 was triggered? I realise this is theoretical but just interested to know - would we just carry on as if nothing had happened?

Finally, if the UK triggers Article 50 and then during the negotiations it becomes apparent that it would be totally against the country's interest to leave, could we then stay? Or would we be required to continue with the leave process to conclusion, and then reapply to join afterwards?

I'm just curious how this process actually works and haven't been able to find any layman-friendly answers. I understand that Article 50 hasn't been used before, at all, so in some ways we are all on a voyage of discovery...

Thank you in advance.

[dragonsarebest]

Urgh, italics fail... his last EU summit or our last EU summit...

[willconcern]

I'd like to know the answers to these questions too.

[dragonsarebest]

Hmm interesting. Thank you. What a mess though.

[LurkingHusband]

What a mess though.

Almost like it hadn't been thought through !

[GreenMouse]

I found this really informative and interesting OP, if scary:
www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/07/14/everything-you-need-to-know-about-theresa-may-s-brexit

[concertplayer]

Imagine it the other way round: Australia tells the UK after years of
friendship they do not want to have such a close relationship. We would be a bit miffed.
The UK put the cart before the horse and basically said "Eu Sod Off"
In diplomacy terms this is not really what to do as it creates deep wounds which never really heal .You see lots of other Eu countries have similar problems and the institution does need reform.
It is a very risky strategy to assume the UK is so wonderful they will give it what it wants especially as there are other countries waiting to join and to whom the Eu can export.
Also and this is crucial: neither side pointed out during the campaign - I
blame Remain for this- that we had quite a good deal eg we were allowed
out of Schengen and to keep Sterling. They also failed to consider the
Scottish situation particularly as Scotland had recently had its own UK
referendum and clearly had itchy feet in some areas.
Leave failed to make it clear that before you can have £x billion to spend
on the NHS you have to earn that money. Businesses make money and Government spends it. Before businesses invest they look for stability.
You do not simply vote Leave and suddenly you have this £350 b. It is the other way round: businesses act quickly Government acts slowly.

[dragonsarebest]

Interesting article GreenMouse - thanks.