[Politics] Brexit

[lawros left foot]

I am not sure thats fair, many EU ministers had indicated that Turkey should be considered for membership and negotiations were ongoing since 2005, so it was on the table.

It could be argued that the Leave campaign who were probably smeared as racist insisting this was a bad move by the EU having foreseen likely incompatible geographic, political and cultural differences showed greater awareness of the situation.

My mistake, I could have sworn that's what was said during the referendum campaign, my memory is getting terrible.

 

[BigGully]

So by your logic you are assuming the taxes will be paid by the exporters into our exchequer with no change to those export prices? It's not going to hurt our economy at all, just a net benefit to the treasury? I find this train of thought staggering. You're just guessing though, which you are entitled to do, but it is a guess that even 'leave' economists don't appear to be forecasting.

No, I said that we have a trade deficit with the EU, it seems far more unlikely that a punitive, tariff driven deal should be agreed to a point where it might start to offset our £13 billion contribution savings starting point.

The staggering mentality isnt driven by the UK or Brexiteers insistence of trying to broker a fair reciprocal trade deal in favour of both the EU and the UK, it is the Remainers total acceptance that there is bound to be a punitive deal that might harm both the EU and the UK and then deem this as wholly reasonable.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Just watching Sky News now, whilst enjoying a Cheese & Pickle Sandwich and listening to dulcet tones of John Redwood MP. There seemed to be some conjuncture between him and his fellow guest Chris Leslie MP over the Great Repeal Bill and The EEA Act and whether parliament would have to vote to remove that act to enable British law not to recognise single market membership. Apparently when pushed in parliament about it, David Davis was somewhat vague in his response too.

I'm sure it'll all probably be okay though.

 

[Bold Seagull]

No, I said that we have a trade deficit with the EU, it seems far more unlikely that a punitive, tariff driven deal should be agreed to a point where it might start to offset our £13 billion contribution savings starting point.

The staggering mentality isnt driven by the UK or Brexiteers insistence of trying to broker a fair reciprocal trade deal in favour of both the EU and the UK, it is the Remainers total acceptance that there is bound to be a punitive deal that might harm both the EU and the UK and then deem this as acceptable and reasonable.

No one has said it is punitive. We have a membership we pay for that entitles us to trade under certain rules. You can't expect to come out of that agreement, retain similar access to trade without paying a similar contribution. Nonsensical to think that will be the case.

 

[ManOfSussex]

I expect this will be revived if Turkey have any money.
View attachment 83349

No need. We're selling them £100m worth of fighter jets and, Inshallah, once we're free of the evil, repressive tyranny aka The EU, our agricultural sector can be saved and our crops harvested by nice Turkish men like Erdogan, as part of one of these comprehensive, free trade agreements with our new best friends in The Bosphorus. It's quite horrendous the visa and work restrictions imposed by those evil people in Brussels.

 

[Pavilionaire]

The EU Draft response published yesterday seems fairly clear that there is no room for special deals or unique treatment for specific sectors such as finance. Yet still Theresa May and her crew talk about a special free trade deal as though there's a chance it might be on the cards.

Not only have the EU appeared to rule it out, but they also have to consider the terms they've agreed with other international trade partners who will be up in arms if the UK gets special treatment, not to mention members of the 27 who would otherwise have gained had the UK been forced to adopt WTO rules.

Does anyone in the Tory government actually know how the EU works?

 

[Simster]

The EU Draft response published yesterday seems fairly clear that there is no room for special deals or unique treatment for specific sectors such as finance. Yet still Theresa May and her crew talk about a special free trade deal as though there's a chance it might be on the cards.

Not only have the EU appeared to rule it out, but they also have to consider the terms they've agreed with other international trade partners who will be up in arms if the UK gets special treatment, not to mention members of the 27 who would otherwise have gained had the UK been forced to adopt WTO rules.

Does anyone in the Tory government actually know how the EU works?

No, they are useless. This is a circular from the macro economist at the firm I work. It is entitled "Train wreck Theresa". He is an economist by trade though (and thus an expert) so it won't cut any ice with some of the resident Brexit thickies on here. (I'm not saying all Brexit people are thickies by the way, but lots of them on this thread are)

Train wreck Theresa

A remarkable and historic day yesterday as the UK triggered Article 50. Depending on your point of view one to celebrate Britain ‘taking back control’ of its own destiny, or one to mourn the symbolism of the UK turning its back on Europe.
Theresa May’s letter to President Tusk was ostensibly warm and conciliatory: “we are leaving the European Union, but we are not leaving Europe - and we want to remain committed partners and allies to our friends across the continent.”
But this was a pretext for arguing that negotiations about Britain’s new relationship with the EU should be conducted simultaneously with the divorce negotiations.
“We want to make sure that Europe remains strong and prosperous and is capable of projecting its values, leading in the world, and defending itself from security threats. We want the United Kingdom, through a new deep and special partnership with a strong European Union, to play its full part in achieving these goals. We therefore believe it is necessary to agree the terms of our future partnership alongside those of our withdrawal from the European Union.
In her letter she stated this four times. But the EU-27 has already made it very clear that it wants a sequential approach to the negotiations where the divorce is agreed first, and the accounts settled, and only then can a new relationship be discussed. This was explicitly laid out in a speech by the EU-27’s lead negotiator Michel Barnier last week. Yesterday Angela Merkel flatly rejected parallel negotiations. Article 50 was written in such a way so that the country applying to leave has no say in the format of the negotiations.
It gets worse for Theresa May. Hardline Brexiteers in her Cabinet want the divorce bill capped at £2-3bn, a huge gulf from the figures of around £50bn being bandied around from EU sources. Our base case is that this number will eventually come down to something in the £20-30bn range, but that is still ten times mor than the hardliners want to pay.
This means big trouble ahead for Theresa May. If she accedes to EU-27 sequencing and a formula implying a divorce bill in the tens of billions of euros, the hardliners in the Tory Party and the Tory Press (Mail, Express, Sun, Telegraph) will turn on her. The fact that she is currently the subject of adulation from the Brexiteers counts for nothing.
They like her because she is doing what they say. If or when she tries to face them down all hell will let loose. Because they are much more loyal to their cause than anyone individual – Theresa May – who admitted in a TV interview yesterday that she voted Remain – as we suspected all along. This of course means she is taking the country on a course against here better judgement, and therefore against the ‘National Interest.’
So either she tries to face down the Rabid Right or she runs into the proverbial brick wall with the EU and negotiations break down. Remember how David Cameron naively claimed he was on a mission to reform the EU and extract significant concessions on free movement and sovereignty? And remember how far he got? If Theresa May and her negotiators hit that proverbial brick wall the clock won’t stop ticking.
So, either way Theresa May is headed for a train wreck. A train wreck with the nationalist euro-phobes in her own party and right wing press or a train wreck with the EU. For Theresa May it looks like ‘lose-lose.’
Theresa May has another problem reflecting her appalling judgement, or the appalling judgement of advisers who are inept, inexperienced and clearly have a poor understanding of the European Union.
Yesterday we postulated that the UK, realising that the EU-27 hold all the cards, would row back from issuing dark threats, which can only weaken its position even further. Clearly the penny hasn’t dropped, as Mrs May issued another dark threat on security cooperation:
If, however, we leave the European Union without an agreement the default position is that we would have to trade on World Trade Organisation terms. In security terms a failure to reach agreement would mean our cooperation in the fight against crime and terrorism would be weakened.
The implicit threat is to withdraw security cooperation in for example the fight against terrorism. The UK’s alleged ‘security surplus’/’world-beating’ counter-terrorism capabilities is a card that Theresa May has already played aggressively, and his has gone down badly in other EU capitals. She clearly hasn’t learned anything. So if MI5, MI6 or GCHQ obtain intelligence that ISIS is going to bomb Paris, does that mean the UK might choose to withhold that information??
The implicit threat to withhold security cooperation elicited an angry reaction in Brussels. Gianni Pittella, the leader of the Socialist bloc in the European parliament, said: “It would be outrageous to play with people’s lives in these negotiations. This has not been a good start by Theresa May. It feels like blackmail, but security is a good for all our citizens and not a bargaining chip. We still hope that Theresa May can get back on the right track … This was not a smart move.”
Once the negotiations get underway – probably in early June – we may start to see FX market volatility pick up, which could be exploited by 3 month put spreads in sterling against the dollar and the euro now that FX implied volatility has come down.

I must say I feel particularly confident about the bit that says May wants a simultaneous new trade/divorce settlement which the EU has said is a non-starter and which is enshrined in article 50. She is a gutless coward and the chickens will come home to roost shortly.

 

[lawros left foot]

No need. We're selling them £100m worth of fighter jets and, Inshallah, once we're free of the evil, repressive tyranny aka The EU, our agricultural sector can be saved and our crops harvested by nice Turkish men like Erdogan, as part of one of these comprehensive, free trade agreements with our new best friends in The Bosphorus. It's quite horrendous the visa and work restrictions imposed by those evil people in Brussels.

View attachment 83351

Apparently, there is 80 million of them that wants to come here, well that's what the leave campaign told us, so it must be true

 

[ManOfSussex]

Apparently, there is 80 million of them that wants to come here, well that's what the leave campaign told us, so it must be true

It's blatantly unfair that 500m EU citizens from horrible places, with extreme, Europhile Governments such as Poland and The Czech Republic can come here and work the strawberry fields of Kent, but 80m Turks can't. They're in Europe, but not ruled by Europe and they were the first to be called 'The sick man of Europe' too, so we've so much in common and there's so much to admire.

 

[BigGully]

No one has said it is punitive. We have a membership we pay for that entitles us to trade under certain rules. You can't expect to come out of that agreement, retain similar access to trade without paying a similar contribution. Nonsensical to think that will be the case.

Well as a net contributor of half a trillion pounds since 1973, our own military sacrifices on behalf of ourselves and Europe are security expertise and a massive trade deficit with the EU, we reasonably demand some preference, anything else is punitive and then can simply be reciprocated.

.

 

[nicko31]

Must admit I didn't realise how complicated undoing EU law was going to be. Anyway Monarch May has a plan...

Seems there are so-called "Henry VIII clauses" in the Great Repeal Bill, these will give ministers and civil servants sweeping authority to comb through the vast EU legislative soup and decide which bits to keep, which to amend, and which to repeal in their entirety. Crucially, ministers can wave the decisions through without recourse to the House of Commons.

Tories at it again. Just tweeted Gina Miller, you can't trust this lot...

 

[ManOfSussex]

The EU Draft response published yesterday seems fairly clear that there is no room for special deals or unique treatment for specific sectors such as finance. Yet still Theresa May and her crew talk about a special free trade deal as though there's a chance it might be on the cards.

Not only have the EU appeared to rule it out, but they also have to consider the terms they've agreed with other international trade partners who will be up in arms if the UK gets special treatment, not to mention members of the 27 who would otherwise have gained had the UK been forced to adopt WTO rules.

Does anyone in the Tory government actually know how the EU works?

I must say I feel particularly confident about the bit that says May wants a simultaneous new trade/divorce settlement which the EU has said is a non-starter and which is enshrined in article 50. She is a gutless coward and the chickens will come home to roost shortly.

The EU Trade Commissioner Malmstrom said all this back in June after the vote, but nobody listened or took her seriously then.

 

[Simster]

Well as a net contributor of half a trillion pounds since 1973, our own military sacrifices on behalf of ourselves and Europe are security expertise and a massive trade deficit with the EU, we reasonably demand some preference, anything else is punitive and then can simply be reciprocated.

So you think we'll get a reasonable deal after Davis walks in and says "may I remind you who won the war" and point out our net contribution as if we've had nothing in return?

That'll go down a TREAT. Looking forward to low taxes and a better health service already.

 

[lawros left foot]

edit

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

So you think we'll get a reasonable deal after Davis walks in and says "may I remind you who won the war" and point out our net contribution as if we've had nothing in return?

That'll go down a TREAT. Looking forward to low taxes and a better health service already.

“I don’t know who Mr Juncker thinks he is in this context,” said Sir Bill. “Actually, it is not a good idea to threaten the United Kingdom.

“It never has been, and that is part of this bigger political landscape – just as the London Debt Agreement of 1953 actually remitted a large amount of German war debt.

Jesus.Christ.

 

[BigGully]

So you think we'll get a reasonable deal after Davis walks in and says "may I remind you who won the war" and point out our net contribution as if we've had nothing in return?

That'll go down a TREAT. Looking forward to low taxes and a better health service already.

So you do not think recent and future conflicts, their sacrifices and current security expertise is relevant ?

Whilst I didnt mention the WW's, for you to flippantly use it as some jokey worthless event that has no relevance to Europe and the UK just about sums you up.

 

[Two Professors]

No need. We're selling them £100m worth of fighter jets and, Inshallah, once we're free of the evil, repressive tyranny aka The EU, our agricultural sector can be saved and our crops harvested by nice Turkish men like Erdogan, as part of one of these comprehensive, free trade agreements with our new best friends in The Bosphorus. It's quite horrendous the visa and work restrictions imposed by those evil people in Brussels.

View attachment 83351

Coo,what are all those pretty stars in the background?Some sort of flag?

 

[Simster]

So you do not think recent and future conflicts, their sacrifices and current security expertise is relevant ?

Whilst I didnt mention the WW's, for you to flippantly use it as some jokey worthless event that has no relevance to Europe and the UK just about sums you up.

You're an idiot if you think any of what you say will have any bearing on negotiations. It won't. Why would it?

What sacrifices are you referring to if not WWII?

 

[Two Professors]

The EU Draft response published yesterday seems fairly clear that there is no room for special deals or unique treatment for specific sectors such as finance. Yet still Theresa May and her crew talk about a special free trade deal as though there's a chance it might be on the cards.

Not only have the EU appeared to rule it out, but they also have to consider the terms they've agreed with other international trade partners who will be up in arms if the UK gets special treatment, not to mention members of the 27 who would otherwise have gained had the UK been forced to adopt WTO rules.

Does anyone in the Tory government actually know how the EU works?

Does anyone in the EU know how it works,if indeed it does?

 

[Two Professors]

No, they are useless. This is a circular from the macro economist at the firm I work. It is entitled "Train wreck Theresa". He is an economist by trade though (and thus an expert) so it won't cut any ice with some of the resident Brexit thickies on here. (I'm not saying all Brexit people are thickies by the way, but lots of them on this thread are)




I must say I feel particularly confident about the bit that says May wants a simultaneous new trade/divorce settlement which the EU has said is a non-starter and which is enshrined in article 50. She is a gutless coward and the chickens will come home to roost shortly.

That's a bit nasty.I'm sure she would speak very highly of you