[Politics] Brexit

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Notice the difference. EU trade deals need agreement from 29 nations and drag on for years 6/7/8/9 + years .. bilateral trade deals are concluded much quicker and prioritise only two nations interests.

This has a kind of common-sense appeal. But the evidence points to a rather more complex set of arrangements. And of course there would be an awful lot of bi-lateral deals to establish - just imagine the number of plates that would be spinning. I confess I'm not an international trade expert but some people at the LSE are and there is a link.below.

Some Brexit-related issues are simply very technical (sorry = experts). I really think that the electorate has been ill-served by how simplistically the matter has been presented - the cornerstone being Liam Fox's remarks about the Brexit being the easiest negotiations in history. I think this was disgraceful and is proving to be totally and grotesquely wrong.

Sometimes we all just have to admit things are complicated and cannot be reduced to sound-bites to rally a baying mob. (And yes I also know that sometimes we hide behind technical reasons as a pretext for doing nothing.)

But on this one, it is very very, easy to get out of your depth - as a politician and as a citizen.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/...renegotiating-more-than-100-trade-agreements/

 

[nicko31]

NZ seem very excited at the prospect too - https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/104115092/Lucrative-NZ-EU-trade-talks-set-to-get-under-way

Leaving the CU looks dumber and dumber every day day. Massive risk and questionable rewards with huge costs to business and government red tape. In the meantime years of uncertainty for anyone looking to invest in the UK

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

NHS needs £2,000 in tax from every household to stay afloat – report
https://www.theguardian.com/society...ax-from-every-household-to-stay-afloat-report

Just as well Boris and co are going to give 350m a week to the NHS eh?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Notice the difference. EU trade deals need agreement from 29 nations and drag on for years 6/7/8/9 + years .. bilateral trade deals are concluded much quicker and prioritise only two nations interests.

Too simplistic. Bilateral trade deals are rarely just between two nations because concessions and considerations have to be made with any existing deals. For example if Britain had a deal with Albania they can’t just ignore this when striking up a deal with Peru.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

NHS needs £2,000 in tax from every household to stay afloat – report
https://www.theguardian.com/society...ax-from-every-household-to-stay-afloat-report

Just as well Boris and co are going to give 350m a week to the NHS eh?

I thought I heard that that equates to about 350 million extra per week, strange figure to pull out or is it a swipe that the 350 million promised is just not going to happen, it was just a carrot on a stick.
Dirty work methinks, people now thinking, hang on, I have got to pay 2k extra when that was promised in the first place by our clown of a foreign secretary.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Here's 2 interpretations of the bias of experts/ the Establishment/ vested interests (TUC, CBI)/ the press (Guardian, Independent) etc against Brexit.

a) they are ideologically opposed to Brexit and have manipulated evidence in such a way as to make it look bad - their evidence follows their viewpoint

b) they looked at the Brexit issues and arrived at a conclusion that was overwhelmingly negative in terms of its practical impact - the viewpoint was generated by the evidence

(there's always c) - they haven't got a clue what they are talking about)

Let's be reasonable and put ourselves in the middle-ground between a and b: it doesn't look great.

As a Remainer by instinct myself, if someone could have provided good, robust and convincing evidence that Brexit would work for Britain, I would have voted for it. As it is, things look far worse now than they did at the time of the referendum - forget Project Fear for a minute and just think of all the practical road-blocks and booby-traps that are being encountered that few really anticipated. I'll just name 3 that come to mind - but these are the tip of an iceberg (and we are The Titanic): Northern Ireland border, the virtual impossibility of frictionless trade with the EU and the immense challenge of negotiating new trade deals............and every day seems to bring something new and something bad.

 

[The Clamp]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44232269



Not great news. Galileo is something we need to be at the forefront of. Another failing negotiation.

And this little bonus too

Separately, the UK has outlined the extent of existing law enforcement capabilities which would be lost if a bespoke security deal is not agreed after Brexit.
According to details of a presentation seen by the BBC, the UK says there will be "significant gaps" in a wide range of areas including prisoner transfers, asset recovery, sharing of financial intelligence, victim compensation and access to criminal records for child protection vetting.

 

[BigGully]

Too simplistic. Bilateral trade deals are rarely just between two nations because concessions and considerations have to be made with any existing deals. For example if Britain had a deal with Albania they can’t just ignore this when striking up a deal with Peru.

The point still stands though, if you acknowledge another nations input as a likely drag on striking a deal in a bilateral trade deal then how can you not acknowledge the added complexity of having 29 nations having to do it.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Here's 2 interpretations of the bias of experts/ the Establishment/ vested interests (TUC, CBI)/ the press (Guardian, Independent) etc against Brexit.

a) they are ideologically opposed to Brexit and have manipulated evidence in such a way as to make it look bad - their evidence follows their viewpoint

b) they looked at the Brexit issues and arrived at a conclusion that was overwhelmingly negative in terms of its practical impact - the viewpoint was generated by the evidence

(there's always c) - they haven't got a clue what they are talking about)

Let's be reasonable and put ourselves in the middle-ground between a and b: it doesn't look great.

As a Remainer by instinct myself, if someone could have provided good, robust and convincing evidence that Brexit would work for Britain, I would have voted for it. As it is, things look far worse now than they did at the time of the referendum - forget Project Fear for a minute and just think of all the practical road-blocks and booby-traps that are being encountered that few really anticipated. I'll just name 3 that come to mind - but these are the tip of an iceberg (and we are The Titanic): Northern Ireland border, the virtual impossibility of frictionless trade with the EU and the immense challenge of negotiating new trade deals............and every day seems to bring something new and something bad.

And the U.K. has the weakest, most unstable, most divided and most utterly useless government in living memory trying to negotiate this. Britain is a joke.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Nevermind.

Tick Tock, and all that, until we get to Lemmings Day [emoji38]ol:

 

[Simster]

You believe the hard Marxists that have taken control of the Labour party are the same as social democrats in Europe now this ...

Let's just quickly recap:

* [MENTION=25]Gwylan[/MENTION], a Brexit voter himself, makes the point that you could argue that leaving the EU but staying in the single market and/or customs union does accord with the result of the referendum.

* You put your fingers in your ear and make a laughable comparison with remain winning but Brexiters arguing a rabidly anti-EU agenda was what the remainers voted for.

* Gwylan points out that this is drivel and links a pre-vote Michael Gove speech as evidence that staying inside a free trade zone and quitting the EU was what he was advocating. You obviously didn't bother reading it, so here is what he said:

The core of our new arrangement with the EU is clear. There is a free trade zone stretching from Iceland to Turkey that all European nations have access to, regardless of whether they are in or out of the euro or EU.26 After we vote to leave we will remain in this zone. The suggestion that Bosnia, Serbia, Albania and the Ukraine would remain part of this free trade area - and Britain would be on the outside with just Belarus - is as credible as Jean-Claude Juncker joining UKIP.

* Finally, you post links to videos that don't disprove his point in any way.






It's not hard to see why some remainers view some Brexiteers as "fingers in your ear, la la not listening" types - every time more grim reading comes out is it? Come on, you should be a lot better than that. You might be a bit prickly but I really don't have you down as part of the simpleton/gammon pro-Brexit axis so prominent on this thread.

 

[Blue3]

FFs ... no difference? You and I have little democratic input/influence at a council election ... less at a General Election ... less at a European election ... no difference at EU/ECJ level.

The separation between jurisdictional legislative in most democratic systems are independent of each other this is true of the ECJ where each of the member states puts forward one judge for selection onto the ECJ and it's a requirement that they are suitably qualified to do the job for the six year term plus they cannot hold any other job ie no advisory roles on the boards of large organisations, and their role is to ensure that EU laws are legal and that Nation states applies those laws fairly.

The U.K. System is headed by the Justice Minister who has no requirement to hold any qualifications for the role and can simultaneously hold other outside roles this is changing however and our system will have far more separation in the years to come which is good news.

I stand by my statement that the you or I have little or no influence upon either the ECJ or the British legislative systems.
Finally leaving the ECJ is in name only if we intend to continue to trade with the EU as all goods and services will still need to abide by the ECJ rulings while having no representation on the ECJ.

 

[Simster]

And the U.K. has the weakest, most unstable, most divided and most utterly useless government in living memory trying to negotiate this. Britain is a joke.

Worth pointing out that this weak, useless government is all we have because Labour are just as bad, probably even worse. All they seem interested in is appeasing the small number of extreme socialists that the rest of the country doesn't want.

Neither of them seem capable of a pragmatism needed to re-unite the country. Both abject.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The point still stands though, if you acknowledge another nations input as a likely drag on striking a deal in a bilateral trade deal then how can you not acknowledge the added complexity of having 29 nations having to do it.

But it doesn’t work like that. The EU acts as a single country. The commission prepares, negotiates and proposes trade deals. The council and the parliament decide whether to approve. Each country is indeed represented but they act as a single parliament; think of a country as a parliamentary MP.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

But it doesn’t work like that. The EU acts as a single country. The commission prepares, negotiates and proposes trade deals. The council and the parliament decide whether to approve. Each country is indeed represented but they act as a single parliament; think of a country as a parliamentary MP.

I note you've conveniently ( or should that be purposely ? ) omitted to mention mixed agreements.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I note you've conveniently ( or should that be purposely ? ) omitted to mention mixed agreements.

I’m not sure what you mean?

 

[BigGully]

But it doesn’t work like that. The EU acts as a single country. The commission prepares, negotiates and proposes trade deals. The council and the parliament decide whether to approve. Each country is indeed represented but they act as a single parliament; think of a country as a parliamentary MP.

Isn't that just moving the position of where and when the horse trading is done, whether each nations representation is done firstly within the EU before any trade negotiation or not there still needs at some point agreement between 29 nations, irrespective of the virtues of the EU it must be more difficult than a trade deal between one nation and another.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I’m not sure what you mean?

Many EU trade agreements are what are known as 'mixed agreements' - they require a change of law in member states. These agreements require individual member state approval not just agreement from the council and the parliament.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Many EU trade agreements are what are known as 'mixed agreements' - they require a change of law in member states. These agreements require individual member state approval not just agreement from the council and the parliament.

I see what you mean. Going forward, these will/should be greatly reduced due to article 207 of the Lisbon Treaty.

 

[The Clamp]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...rnational-trade-government-warn-a8242991.html