Since it's a thing once again, let's talk Art.50 extension:
1/
So this is one of a group of means of lengthening the Brexit (in the largest sense) process
2/
However, it's very particular, because it involves lengthening the period that the UK is a member of the EU
3/
You'll recall the 2 year period that we've got. That comes from Art.50 itself, which says 2 years after notifying the EU it wants to leave, a state will leave (unless otherwise agree)
That's designed to protect the sovereign right of the state
4/
The 2 years bit is to allow time to deal with all the detail of unpicking relations.
And because no-one knew whether that might be the right amount of time, there's a mechanism to allow for more time
5/
That mechanism is simply the unanimous agt of the departing state and the remaining EU members.
Procedurally, it's a doddle: a statement from the European Council, signing by all involved
6/
That extension can be of any length, so it's super-flexible
great stuff.
7/
But problems abound
The biggest is that one of the few points of agt w/in UK gvt right now is that membership ends 29 March 2019 (ie 2 years after notification)
8/
There would have to be exceptionally good reasons to justify UK support for an extension, probably grounded in need for a v.short period (weeks) to allow for ratification
9/
That suggests, politically, it would have to be HMG that requests Art.50 extension, rather than anyone on EU side. And right now that's not on the cards
10/
Second big issue is that any extension of more than a couple of months runs into the sticky problem of the European elections #EP19
11/
If the UK is a member then, then it should have elected MEPs to take those roles.
But if they're not going to sit for more than a few weeks, why bother?
12/
Moreover, the seats for the UK have been partly reallocated to other members, so there's a space issue too
13/
This might all be manageable by having nominated (not elected) MEPs for the period, and suspending the reallocation until it ends, but that's all rather messy and legally fraught
14/
Finally, getting unanimity from EU members might not be such 'a doddle'
15/
While no one particularly wants another crisis on their doorstep, caused by a no-deal exit, there are member states that might feel either they can get something out of their consent, or who have had enough of it all
16/
We'll not run through all the possible vetoes here, but worth keeping in mind both domestic politics and inter-state politics dimensions
17/
Politicians always have to keep domestic audiences onside
and
not a whole lot of love between EU members right now, eg on migration, Russia, Trump, etc
18/
To pull this together:
Art.50 extension isn't complex to do, in practical terms.
But it is, in political ones.
/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Possibly more for me than for you, let's try to pull this week together a bit:
1/
Let's start with the EU side
Having largely kept heads down during conference season, yesterday's Tusk/Varadkar presser demonstrated that EU is keeping the pressure on
2/
The tension seems to be between COM/EUCO and IE, as @pmdfoster explained well yesterday: IE making conciliatory noises, central EU bodies pushing EU integrity line
Back in Sept, there was much talk about this being a crunch point in the UK debate, as May would come under fire for Chequers and there would be scope for changes/realignments/whatever
2/
Certainly that first bit has happened, with numerous op-eds over the weekend and assorted fringe events (inc. yesterday's Johnson speech)
3/