[Politics] Brexit

[5ways]

blah blah blah
you are changing the record

"it is highly highly likely that free movement will be a stipulation of any re-entry into the single market." this is entirely different from you saying previously that we cant trade without accepting free movement. come on own up........you are talking bollocks

If you think we can't trade at all without free movement, not even buy some peanuts on the Eurostar, you've misconstrued what I've said. Or I haven't been clear enough. If we want a deal which offers us the same access to the EU tariff free zone that we presently enjoy, it will very likely come with free movement as part of that deal. This is for practical, economic, social and political reasons.

Any other set-up offers us inferior access, weak legal redress and makes us subject to the whims of European policy. We lose our seat at the table, we gain....'sovereignty'. It doesn't sound sovereign to me.

alternatives:http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/7e0bce28-dbda-11e5-a72f-1e7744c66818.html

 

[5ways]

This is going to be the simplest question you could ever answer,its really yes or no

Can a country have a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the EU that does not involve free movement of people

Yes. Canada has one. But it does not include all aspects of the economy - including agricultural products (allowed in on a quota system as I understand), or financial services.

 

[sparkie]

Which power economies are they then? or are they more broke nations wanting a slice of OUR pie?

I was only making an observation. I believe I read Turkey, and Serbia were 2 countries wanting to join the EU ( presumably 'dickheads' ). My guess is there are more.

Please feel free to correct me, I have no desire to spend time researching it at this moment.

 

[pastafarian]

As an observation, I was under the impression that there is a list of countries who do want to join the EU.

They seem to hold the opposite opinion to you guys. Does this mean they are collective 'dickheads' ?

you seem unable to differentiate between what was initially signed up for ie a trade agreement and what we have now
if you sign up now you know full well the EU will steal your sovereignty

 

[beorhthelm]

Once a deal is inked in the future Bulgaria will have more say our trading relationship with Germany than we would.

on the other hand if we stay, Bulgaria will have more say on our trading with Brazil, India, China than those countries would. this show how bizarre the trade argument is: our trade with the largest, fastest growing countries, is restricted by the conditions set by 20 odd small european neighbors. the trade off of this is free trade with those small, lower growth countries in EU. at its core, the EU is about protectionism, which doesn't work any more (see china and the steel market). there's a certain country in the heart of Europe that's going to find a lot more competition globally in the coming decade, and may not adjust so easily as it expects.

 

[sparkie]

you seem unable to differentiate between what was initially signed up for ie a trade agreement and what we have now
if you sign up now you know full well the EU will steal your sovereignty

I thought the point I was responding to was about signing up now

 

[pastafarian]

Yes. Canada has one. But it does not include all aspects of the economy - including agricultural products (allowed in on a quota system as I understand), or financial services.

so you admit you can trade with the EU,and achieve a free trade agreement without free movement

 

[pastafarian]

I thought the point I was responding to was about signing up now

not sure what conversations are morphing into what to be honest.

 

[cunning fergus]

This is quite an illuminating statement about your mindset.

Go on then i will indulge you.....

Will the people of Europe get a vote on the expansion of the EU to include other countries wanting to join, not just including Turkey?

Such expansion of the EU has never been put to the European or British people before, so what influence have we in the UK had about it to date?

We have had lies about the Lisbon Treaty, lies about its effects on UK sovereignty and lies about the consequences to our labour market......all mainstream parties have done their bit to obsfuscate the truth, it's not a party political point.

 

[KingKev]

Head says "better the devil you know - In".
Heart / gut says "I want my country back and I'm fed up with subsidising an overblown bureacracy, endemic fraud, the Euro experiment and the contrat social; it may even prompt the Scots to exit the UK as a bonus - Out"
Don't know whether head or gut will win out, and probably won't until I'm in the booth...

This decision is as critical for the EU as it is for UK - e.g. you could see the Dutch for one seriously considering whether to follow suit if we leave. The implications of a dual exit of 2 of the biggest other net contributors for Germany, and for the longer term stability, even viability, of the EU could be huge. The danger that it will be decided on whether fear of change is stronger than the weight of personal prejudices is a black comedy.
Hey ho - the people will speak. Let's hope we get it right

 

[5ways]

so you admit you can trade with the EU,and achieve a free trade agreement without free movement

I've never denied that what I have said is that for the UK it is not practical (we're actually in Europe) secondly inferior to our present arrangement (does not include all agricultural products or services).

 

[JC Footy Genius]

On the China one:
"
In July 2014, the free trade agreement signed between China and Switzerland formally took effect. The deal was the culmination of talks that began with a joint feasibility study in 2010, followed by nine rounds of negotiations between 2011-13. The agreement represented the second such deal by China with a European economy, (after Iceland, whose agreement also came into force in July of last year), and one of the largest of Beijing’s free trade agreements with an OECD member state."

That's still four years of negotiation. Even if we are able to push deals through faster than that it takes a long time. Trying to do this with everyone is a gargantuan task and undoubtedly the economy will suffer as a result. We have so many trade deals and more on the horizon now, I just don't think it's worth giving up. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2...switzerlands-free-trade-agreement-with-china/

I agree with you it will take time but disagree that all current trade deals fall to dust immediately we leave. It's all about the transition/negotiation stage 2 years initially. After a Brexit vote all our European partners and every business big and small will have huge incentives to minimise the economic disruption. We know Europe's economy is struggling with serious structural flaws they cannot afford a messy divorce neither can we. Trade deals done with 3rd party countries via the EU will similarly go through transition/renegotiation stages until new settlements are reached. Not saying this is easy or likely not to incur some cost but trade will not fall off a cliff after Brexit.

The many groups you have been quoting throughout these threads will turn their attentions to lobbying all sides ensuring minimal damage to ongoing trade. I don't think this is far fetched or wishful thinking as some will claim, it is how the world works ... ££££€€€€ talks louder than bruised ego's.

On the specifics of the Switzerland example your blog link reinforces my argument.

For more than decade, there was accord between China and the EU that free trade talks should be explored, especially given the growing trade volume between the two economies and Beijing’s interest in developing Europe as an alternative economic pole to the United States and East Asia. Yet the process has frequently been hampered by diplomatic and economic tribulations which have prevented it from evolving beyond the very preliminary stages.

..... widely different levels of enthusiasm among EU member economies for a free trade agreement with China.

....there has been little progress, as the EU has focused on a host of internal problems, with the slow-motion calamity of the Greek debt crisis at the top of the list.

We cannot do a deal with the world's second largest economy (and fastest growing) because some in the EU aren't keen or they are too busy looking inwards trying to rectify self inflicted economic problems. And what a deal it could be ..

The trade volume between China and Switzerland has been growing rapidly over the past decade, with Swiss exports to China rising from CHF 2.5 billion to CHF 8.8 billion, (US$2.7 billion to US$9.4 billion), between 2003-13, and Chinese imports in Switzerland jumping from CHF 2.5 billion to CHF 11.4 billion (US$2.7 billion to US$12.2 billion) during the same time period. It is too early to measure the degree to which the start of the Sino-Swiss free trade agreement will boost overall bilateral trade, but the trading relationship between China and New Zealand, which signed its own free trade agreement with Beijing in 2008, might be a useful indicator.

In 2010, Sino-New Zealand trade stood as NZ$10 billion (US$7.6 billion), and that year the leaders of both states set a target to bring that figure to NZ$20 billion (US$15.1 billion) by 2015. That target was actually reached ahead of schedule, in June 2014. With the Sino-Swiss free trade agreement coming into effect, a similar rise in trade volume is expected in the coming years, to the benefit of many sectors. Even Swiss luxury watch sales in China, which softened during 2012-2013 as the incoming Xi Jinping administration announced sweeping government austerity measures, showed signs of recovery by 2014. According to a June 2014 report by Credit Suisse, China is expected to overtake Germany as Switzerland’s largest trading partner by 2035, based on current figures.

At the end of last year, President Xi announced that China would accelerate its free trade strategy and seek out new free trade agreement partners in the coming years.

The benefits flowing from a bilateral trade deal between the worlds 2nd and 5th biggest economies would obviously be substantial and help offset any loss of access in the European market. Medium turn gains yes but when combined with other potential deals with fast growing markets well worth the potential risk of short term instability. If it's good enough for Switzerland and New Zealand ...

On a different point the Canada free trade deal does include a financial services section.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Alternatively we could go the way of Norway, who were on track to have a trade agreement with China until they rudely awarded a peace prize to a Chinese dissident and China shut the entire process down.

Luckily (?) we don't hand out peace prizes and have a long history of trading with countries with problematic human rights records

 

[5ways]

I agree with you it will take time but disagree that all current trade deals fall to dust immediately we leave. It's all about the transition/negotiation stage 2 years initially. After a Brexit vote all our European partners and every business big and small will have huge incentives to minimise the economic disruption. We know Europe's economy is struggling with serious structural flaws they cannot afford a messy divorce neither can we. Trade deals done with 3rd party countries via the EU will similarly go through transition/renegotiation stages until new settlements are reached. Not saying this is easy or likely not to incur some cost but trade will not fall off a cliff after Brexit.

The many groups you have been quoting throughout these threads will turn their attentions to lobbying all sides ensuring minimal damage to ongoing trade. I don't think this is far fetched or wishful thinking as some will claim, it is how the world works ... ££££€€€€ talks louder than bruised ego's.

On the specifics of the Switzerland example your blog link reinforces my argument.

For more than decade, there was accord between China and the EU that free trade talks should be explored, especially given the growing trade volume between the two economies and Beijing’s interest in developing Europe as an alternative economic pole to the United States and East Asia. Yet the process has frequently been hampered by diplomatic and economic tribulations which have prevented it from evolving beyond the very preliminary stages.

..... widely different levels of enthusiasm among EU member economies for a free trade agreement with China.

....there has been little progress, as the EU has focused on a host of internal problems, with the slow-motion calamity of the Greek debt crisis at the top of the list.

We cannot do a deal with the world's second largest economy (and fastest growing) because some in the EU aren't keen or they are too busy looking inwards trying to rectify self inflicted economic problems. And what a deal it could be ..

The trade volume between China and Switzerland has been growing rapidly over the past decade, with Swiss exports to China rising from CHF 2.5 billion to CHF 8.8 billion, (US$2.7 billion to US$9.4 billion), between 2003-13, and Chinese imports in Switzerland jumping from CHF 2.5 billion to CHF 11.4 billion (US$2.7 billion to US$12.2 billion) during the same time period. It is too early to measure the degree to which the start of the Sino-Swiss free trade agreement will boost overall bilateral trade, but the trading relationship between China and New Zealand, which signed its own free trade agreement with Beijing in 2008, might be a useful indicator.

In 2010, Sino-New Zealand trade stood as NZ$10 billion (US$7.6 billion), and that year the leaders of both states set a target to bring that figure to NZ$20 billion (US$15.1 billion) by 2015. That target was actually reached ahead of schedule, in June 2014. With the Sino-Swiss free trade agreement coming into effect, a similar rise in trade volume is expected in the coming years, to the benefit of many sectors. Even Swiss luxury watch sales in China, which softened during 2012-2013 as the incoming Xi Jinping administration announced sweeping government austerity measures, showed signs of recovery by 2014. According to a June 2014 report by Credit Suisse, China is expected to overtake Germany as Switzerland’s largest trading partner by 2035, based on current figures.

At the end of last year, President Xi announced that China would accelerate its free trade strategy and seek out new free trade agreement partners in the coming years.

The benefits flowing from a bilateral trade deal between the worlds 2nd and 5th biggest economies would obviously be substantial and help offset any loss of access in the European market. Medium turn gains yes but when combined with other potential deals with fast growing markets well worth the potential risk of short term instability. If it's good enough for Switzerland and New Zealand ...

On a different point the Canada free trade deal does include a financial services section.

Good post but just a small caveat on the Canada agreement I was wrong to say there's no services chapter but it is still partial access:

"But arguably the biggest challenge the EU-Canada deal poses as a potential model for UK-EU relations after Brexit is that it only grants limited services liberalisation – by no means comparable to being a member of the single market. While CETA does introduce further openings in areas such as mining, postal services and maritime transport, hundreds of pages are devoted to listing ‘reservations’ to liberalisation commitments – that is, Canadian and EU carve-outs from the deal.

As regards financial services more specifically, CETA does not prevent the EU and Canada from keeping a number of regulatory and licensing requirements in place. In order to take advantage of the EU financial services ‘passport’, for instance, Canadian firms will have to establish a presence in the EU and comply with EU regulations. Therefore, the ‘Canadian model’ could ultimately make it harder for UK-based financial services firms to sell into the EU market."http://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/what-could-the-eu-canada-free-trade-deal-tell-us-about-brexit/

 

[5ways]

Worth looking at:
"
Boris and his co-campaigners are in for a hard confrontation with reality if they think stand-alone Britain could sign better free trade agreements. No doubt it could negotiate a trade deal with India, but what exactly is the evidence or logic behind the notion that India would offer the UK better market access than what the EU got? Stand-alone Britain has so much less to offer India in return for better access and, in bilateral trade agreements, reciprocal exchange of trade benefits is everything. Like Iceland and Switzerland, post-Brexit UK could do a trade agreement with China, but do Brexiteers really want to copy these agreements? Have they even read them?

Iceland’s trade agreement with China is hardly an example because its dominant ambition was to get better openness for its $61 million exports of fish. It couldn’t offer China much in new exports to Iceland, but it had another currency to pay for its small gains: supporting China’s frenetic campaign to get a seat at the table of the new Great Game in the Arctic. The Swiss trade deal with China has largely been inconsequential for bilateral trade. Swiss export growth to China after the deal has been weaker than, for instance, UK export growth to China. And don’t be surprised about that outcome. Switzerland doesn’t have the economic power to open up China’s protected sectors. Nor does Britain. Those who think China, an economy almost five times the size of Britain’s, would liberalise in a trade deal with the UK have another thing coming. Britain’s chief priorities for better market access in China is exactly in those sectors that are highly protected and where the state still dominate.

There is a debate to be had over EU trade policy. But what should worry those who want freer trade for Britain is that Boris and his group are talking nonsense – not on a marginal issue, but one that they have promoted as a central cause for leaving the EU."

conclusion: size matters.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/0...lking-nonsense-about-britains-trade-policies/

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Good post but just a small caveat on the Canada agreement I was wrong to say there's no services chapter but it is still partial access:

"But arguably the biggest challenge the EU-Canada deal poses as a potential model for UK-EU relations after Brexit is that it only grants limited services liberalisation – by no means comparable to being a member of the single market. While CETA does introduce further openings in areas such as mining, postal services and maritime transport, hundreds of pages are devoted to listing ‘reservations’ to liberalisation commitments – that is, Canadian and EU carve-outs from the deal.

As regards financial services more specifically, CETA does not prevent the EU and Canada from keeping a number of regulatory and licensing requirements in place. In order to take advantage of the EU financial services ‘passport’, for instance, Canadian firms will have to establish a presence in the EU and comply with EU regulations. Therefore, the ‘Canadian model’ could ultimately make it harder for UK-based financial services firms to sell into the EU market."http://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/what-could-the-eu-canada-free-trade-deal-tell-us-about-brexit/

Yes Canada negotiated a deal which focused on their trade priorities as we will, which will place financial services front and center of negotiations. I agree we are unlikely to have exactly the same access as now or have as much input on future regulations but any potential loss here could be offset by having the freedom to exploit new market opportunities with less regulation and cost.

As ever there is no one exact template (Norway,Switzerland,Iceland,Canada) that fits our Brexit situation. They are just examples that show how a country with more economic influence/clout than all of them combined could negotiate a bespoke mutually beneficial trade deal with our European friends and other countries around the world.

 

[beorhthelm]

...
Boris and his co-campaigners are in for a hard confrontation with reality if they think stand-alone Britain could sign better free trade agreements. No doubt it could negotiate a trade deal with India, but what exactly is the evidence or logic behind the notion that India would offer the UK better market access than what the EU got? Stand-alone Britain has so much less to offer India in return for better access and, in bilateral trade agreements, reciprocal exchange of trade benefits is everything.

its a straw man constantly going on about the relative size. is UK less then EU? yep of course. is there scope for a bi-lateral trade between UK and India? yep. so why pretend they wouldn't want to trade just because we are smaller than the EU as a whole? does India have no trade agreements with say Brazil because they are smaller than the EU? same goes for China, at the end of the day UK is the 5th largest economy, countries want to buy stuff from here and want to sell stuff to us. trade agreements existed before the EU, they exist outside the EU, this size thing is a red herring.

 

[dibsy]

I was out for many reasons but mainly I think because I felt that the EU was undemocratic, we as a nation weren’t having our voice heard and it cost a lot of money.

I am not fussed about the movement of labour – I think people wanting to come here as opposed to everyone wanting to leave like in the 70s is a good thing.

But having read lots of stuff about it I am now In. I think economically it wouldn’t make much difference. Democratically my voice isn’t heard as it is because my MP in Adur is always a Tory.

But I think the main reason I have decided to vote IN is that the vast majority of younger people want to be in. They want to be part of the ever more connected world. Opting out would be a backwards move. There’s no point going backwards and the youth are looking forwards. We owe it to them to vote in. The world has changed, a lot. So much in fact and now it is so connected you simply can’t opt out.

Are the EU politicians any worse than the UK politicians, probably not.

If we want to be in a more economic EU then it is only a matter of time until an EU wide party comes along pushing that agenda, and then the EU direction can be changed. That’s the way to go IMO. We are part of the EU, part of the modern world and we really should step up and make the EU better.

 

[happypig]

If we weren't already in, and you had the opportunity to vote whether to join the EU or not - how would you vote?

To me that's the clincher - why would anyone look at the EU from the outside and see it as a club that we want to join?

That's a good way of looking at it.

The questions I would be asking, like joining any club, would be:

1. What will it cost us ? - this is fairly easy to find out, £13bn last year.

2. What do we get for our money ? - this is the one that neither side are answering. Bearing in mind that all my adult life has been in telecommunications and I know little of finance, I need it summed up in a few easy to understand paragraphs.
At the moment you have Brexit and the rest saying "If we don't leave we'll be overrun by terrorists but if we do we'll all be millionaires."
Then you have the inners who seem to be saying "Staying in will be good for business and, using the theory of trickle-down economics, good for you"

Neither is particularly convincing

 

[GT49er]

.............and we really should step up and make the EU better.

Ah, paraphrasing the wise words of every incoming Prime Minister since Thatcher in 1979.