Predictions for how long before we rejoin the EU?

[SoloD]

I reckon between 10-15 years, if I narrow that down I reckon 2033

5 years for the full economic impact to be felt, 5 years to get a rejoin majority government, year to do an referendum, 2 years to negotiate to join.

As no country in the EU has any form of combat conscription, its not likely an EU army will have conscription.

European nations already co-op on defence a great deal.

However, the very thing that little englanders fear - a european army, can now happen, with zero input on its formation from the UK... own goal!

The Euro is the world's 2nd most traded currency, it survived the biggest financial crash since the 1920s in 2008.

I think the EU will now advance without the UK slowing it down, its new zero carbon aims and Green initiatives are very ambitious.

The UK will never rejoin, we will soldier on stoically, believing we are the best & on the cusp of winning the football W/C once again.

I think the EU will now advance without the UK slowing it down

If UK was a hindrance to the EU why did EU try to prevent UK from leaving?

My tip is Italy will be next member to leave. Then the domino effect will follow.

We won't rejoin. Doesn't matter whether the country would be better off or not as politics doesn't work like that. Any politician with a sniff of power won't touch a toxic subject like the EU as it could interfere with them being in power

Will be interesting to see what happens at the next general election. Are Labour and LibDems going to promote UK rejoining the EU?

If UK was a hindrance to the EU why did EU try to prevent UK from leaving?
How did they try to prevent them from leaving?

The EU did nothing to stop us leaving. What an odd idea.

The EU was replaced by the CCEI (countries of common economic interest) in 2032, which has a wider scope and includes some non-European members. We rejoined as part of the new entity in 2033.

My tip is Italy will be next member to leave.
Why? My experience is that even Italians who despise the EU don't want to leave as they know it won't be good. Don't forget that thousands of Italians rely on easily being able to cross borders for work and school. Italy isn't an island which makes a difference.

How did they try to prevent them from leaving?

The initial divorce bill the EU wanted was £100 Billion.

They did not follow Article 50 correctly

Pretended that GFA and Ireland were reasons to cancel Brexit and hoped the border issue would stall Brexit forever. Remember the legal advice on the backstop that Theresa May tried to stop MOs from seeing. The backstop wording could have resulted in the UK being locked into the EU forever.

Suggested Scotland would be accepted as a member without hesitation in the hope that it would divide the UK and increase the chances of Brexit being cancelled or voted down in a general election.

The third largest donor to the EU is leaving and that bothers the EU. Had a taker member left there would have been no obstacles.

Mystery
The £92bn divorce bill originally estimated by the EU was based on calculations that, unsurprisingly, differed from the UKs. When two people get divorced, the fact that they disagree on financial arrangements doesn't mean one is trying to hold on to the other.

I'm not going to go down the road of whatever it is you're trying to say about Art 50. TM invoked it, not the EU.

How did they "pretend the GFA and Ireland were reasons to cancel Brexit"? When did they "pretend" this?

The legal advice on the backstop was produced by the Attorney General and TM tried to withhold it. In what way does this show the EU did not want the UK to try and leave?

Who has said Scotland would be accepted without hesitation as a new EU member if it became independent?

MTA

Much of what you are quoting as fact was hearsay and posturing... by both sides.
SM integrity had to be satisfactory to the EU, May had no plan for the NI border, the EU came up with one, the UK agreed on this, it was not foisted on the UK, we signed the original WA.

Our 8 to 12billion contribution is around 5 to 8% of the total EU budget (160 billion in 2017) it is not a game changer for europe but the UK is part of the continent of Europe and we should be at its heart, that is why the EU was against Brexit and why many in the UK would have wanted to stay, despite the EU's many faults.

8 years is my optimistic prediction.
The 5 years of economic impact being the same 5 years to get a rejoin majority government. But that relies on the economic impact being bad enough for the Government / Daily Mail to become incapable of blaming it on something else.

It’s inevitable that the UK will at some point regain something closely resembling EU membership.

Why?

Because in the 21st century there will be three economic superpowers : the US, China & the EU. It will be massively in the economic interests of the UK & EU to be on the same team.

20 years. It'll be my toddler's generation that takes us back in. Her older brother will just have to accept he'll grow up with fewer prospects because of the voting records of his grandparents.

When two people get divorced, the fact that they disagree on financial arrangements doesn't mean one is trying to hold on to the other

Many a divorced person would disagree with that logic. Usually the one that stands to be worse off is the one that drags it out.

I'm not going to go down the road of whatever it is you're trying to say about Art 50. TM invoked it, not the EU

But EU has to comply with Article 50 when a member invokes Article 50.

The legal advice on the backstop was produced by the Attorney General and TM tried to withhold it. In what way does this show the EU did not want the UK to try and leave?

TM was and still is a remainer. Hence she was happy to bend to EU wishes.

How did they "pretend the GFA and Ireland were reasons to cancel Brexit"? When did they "pretend" this?

When Article 50 was drafted and accepted by every EU member (Ireland included) there was no reference to GFA or that GFA prevented either UK or Ireland leaving the EU.

After the referendum GFA appeared.

Who has said Scotland would be accepted without hesitation as a new EU member if it became independent?

Directly and officially nobody, but lots of indirect assurances given that SNP MPs were quick to quote on question time.

UK agreed on this, it was not foisted on the UK, we signed the original WA

Incorrect statement. TM signed WA without approval from MPs which goes against the law that was passed after Gina Miller case.

Fantastic answers to my questions, thanks.

How did they "pretend the GFA and Ireland were reasons to cancel Brexit"? When did they "pretend" this?
When Article 50 was drafted and accepted by every EU member (Ireland included) there was no reference to GFA or that GFA prevented either UK or Ireland leaving the EU. After the referendum GFA appeared

Since it was signed, The Belfast Agreement (a.k.a. The Good Friday Agreement) has ALWAYS been there. It wasn't hiding or lurking. It was there. No one paid the slighted bit of interest in it in the run up to the referendum, except perhaps the citizens of Northern Ireland (who in my opinion are being screwed over by the rest of the UK but that's a whole other story).
The Republic of Ireland will remain in the EU and are very happy to do that. Northern Ireland citizens actually voted to stay in the EU during the referendum (that again in my opinion Cameron has a lot to answer for) but they are being dragged out of the EU by the rest of the UK.
For one of the key voting points "take control of our borders", there is an awful lot of ignorance surrounding Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland in the UK.

For one of the key voting points "take control of our borders", there is an awful lot of ignorance surrounding Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland in the UK

The take control of borders promoted by Leave was immigration related as opposed to trade.

Remain campaign promoted that immigration was good for the UK and concentrated on trade with the EU. Neither NI nor the GFA was referenced in the booklet that was sent to every household in the UK at cost of 9 million by remain campaign. Trade across the Irish border is about 1% of UK's total trade. Maybe that's why remain campaign did not bother to mention NI or GFA in their booklet?

@MysteryTripAgain: The take control of borders promoted by Leave was immigration related as opposed to trade.
A border is a border whether it's for trade or immigration. Is there a second 'border' on the island of Ireland that we're not aware of that deals with immigration? Or is the second secret border the one that deals with trade on the island of Ireland?

It didn't need to be mentioned in Northern Ireland though. In a booklet or pamphlet. They knew.
Maybe "Remain" thought that the rest of the UK was aware and didn't need to spell it out. Or perhaps the rest of the UK doesn't really care about Northern Ireland or else they would have taken the time to check the facts out independently from the Leave/Remain sides.

A border is a border whether it's for trade or immigration

But that is not how it was sold. Border control related to immigration in the eyes of voters.

Maybe "Remain" thought that the rest of the UK was aware and didn't need to spell it out

Cameron was convinced that the vote would be to remain as the pheasants are obliged to agree with the Eton elite.

Or perhaps the rest of the UK doesn't really care about Northern Ireland or else they would have taken the time to check the facts out independently from the Leave/Remain sides

Very possible. NI is about 2% of UK population and not attached to the mainland. Also trade across the Irish border is less than 1% of UK trade.

the pheasants are obliged to agree with the Eton elite.
And then the ungrateful buggers shoot them.

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

I think we'll ask to rejoin within 10 years ... but it takes two to tango ...

If there is a Referendum to rejoin in the future, wouldn't our rejoining be conditional on taking the Euro, and joining Schengen etc.
I can't see too many people being enthusiastic about that tbh.

Article 49 allows UK to apply to rejoin, but no obligation on the other members to agree.

Can't see it happening. Mistigiri post based on wishful thinking.