[Politics] Brexit

[cunning fergus]

Of course no company is going to jump at the present time given that Article 50 has yet to be invoked and the outcome of whether we are in the single market or not is unknown.

However if the access to the EU market is not as free as it is currently then those that wish to have full access to the EU will need to establish premises in the EU, so stand by for job losses

I don't disagree with your first point, and this will evidently take some time.

Whether or not the UK has free access to the single market as many other countries already do is a moot point currently, however the developing political environment in the EU is another moving part that will have a significant influence on the nature of a) what the deal will look like and b) what that means for corporates if they want to relocate.

There is no doubt that all is far from well on the continent, and it is likely there will be a new government in France next year and at best a much weaker Merkel government in Germany due to dissatisfaction on a number of matters, including how the migration situation is developing in the EU.

Italy has a huge unresolved banking crisis and is currently dealing with up to 10k migrants from North Africa a day. The country has a referendum in October which if the government loses it will drive a new general election. An anti EU party which has a policy to have a referendum on the euro is currently lying second in the polls.

People can bleat on about how bad it is here in the UK but that does not mean all is well in the EU.........it's not, and far from it.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

I'd think a vote on the terms of exit would be even more damaging to the economy. Imagine if the terms were rejected - that would leave the UK in Limbo - Article 50 already triggered so we're leaving but after two (?) years of negotiation the public reject the deal - where would that leave us ?

Isn't one of the big points about leaving the EU about taking back control, so what would be the problem with a public vote? At the very least there must be parliamentary approval surely so where we'd be if Parliament were to reject the exit deal.
Anyway, we'll have to replace any EU derived legislation that we don't want or is no longer appropriate anyway and from an "unregulated" trading perspective we'd "default" to basic WTO trading arrangements, tariffs etc. That's hardly limbo?
To clarify, are we just discussing the EU exit/disengagement arrangements under Article 50 here? Future trade agreements, single market access, EEA/EFTA arrangements or whatever look to be a very different beast, certainly from a legal perspective, and possibly a non-starter if they were to involve any change to the EU Treaty (other than removal of the UK from the list of MS's).

 

[Lincoln Imp]

You just love taking everything out of context and scaremongering. You must hate being British

I've ALWAYS loved being British. That's why I dislike what is being done to it so much.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Whether or not the UK has free access to the single market as many other countries already do is a moot point currently, however the developing political environment in the EU is another moving part that will have a significant influence on the nature of a) what the deal will look like and b) what that means for corporates if they want to relocate.

OK, not an unreasonable point of view but it's conjecture pure and simple.

However, it is a fact that:
Any post exit trading arrangements between the UK and the EU/EEA have to be ratified by the EU Council (unanimously), the EU Parliament and each and every individual member state.
The proposed arrangement(s) have to be consistent with Treaties of the European Union and if they are not the then the ECJ will strike it/them down.
If the proposed arrangement(s) require changes to the Treaties of the European Union* these have to be ratified by the EU Council, the EU Parliament and each and every individual member state according to national requirements (which could require a referendum in some countries).
*UK free access to the single market as per currently without adopting the Four Freedoms (goods, services, persons and capital) will clearly require this.

 

[pastafarian]

I'd think a vote on the terms of exit would be even more damaging to the economy. Imagine if the terms were rejected - that would leave the UK in Limbo - Article 50 already triggered so we're leaving but after two (?) years of negotiation the public reject the deal - where would that leave us ?

If there is still time in the 2 year timeframe its back to the drawing board to negotiate all over again,if time runs out and The European Council and us cant agree to a time extension we are just OUT OUT and any treaties shall cease to apply to us.
Getting the public to vote on the terms is a bit of a dangerous game to play, it could potentially make us all drag our heels for ages.
Whatever happens invoking Article 50 is a one way ticket to leaving, there is no turning back once its done, just possibly sticking an oar in and poking around a bit.

 

[cunning fergus]

OK, not an unreasonable point of view but it's conjecture pure and simple.

However, it is a fact that:
Any post exit trading arrangements between the UK and the EU/EEA have to be ratified by the EU Council (unanimously), the EU Parliament and each and every individual member state.
The proposed arrangement(s) have to be consistent with Treaties of the European Union and if they are not the then the ECJ will strike it/them down.
If the proposed arrangement(s) require changes to the Treaties of the European Union* these have to be ratified by the EU Council, the EU Parliament and each and every individual member state according to national requirements (which could require a referendum in some countries).
*UK free access to the single market as per currently without adopting the Four Freedoms (goods, services, persons and capital) will clearly require this.

All very reasonable yourself too, however if the EU is to blindly stick to its rules they wouldn't have trade agreements with countries that have the death penalty, yet they do and they were trying to get one one with the US so I will acknowledge your theory but still look to the practice.

The fact that I am highlighting as you know is that the underlying political problems within EU member states are not going away, and as the EU is not a homogeneous politically integrated state the EU will ever affected by them.

At the worst Italy will cause a meltdown either economically because of its banks or politically due to unprecedented concerns with growth and its burden with immigrants. The EU has not solution to either.

At best there will be a realigning of national policies due to demands by electorates to act in national interests, this dynamic is evident in multiple states acros the EU, and this soft nationalism will create more inertia in the EU.

Now I am not saying you are wrong, but money will out and if you think the EU will impose trade penalties on a country that represents its 2nd biggest car market and allows EU fishermen to fish its waters I think you are wrong.

There will be a settlement, it would not be in either the UK or EUs interests to do anything else.......

 

[Seagull58]

"Both Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse this week scrapped their forecasts that the UK would go into recession following the Brexit vote, after the latest PMI for Britain’s dominant services sector showed the biggest monthly gain in the survey in 20 years in August."

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Whatever happens invoking Article 50 is a one way ticket to leaving, there is no turning back once its done, just possibly sticking an oar in and poking around a bit.

Are you certain about this? I have seen various interpretations but my understanding is that, quote, there is nothing in Article 50 formally to prevent a Member State from reversing its decision to withdraw in the course of withdrawal negotiations. Politically it would be difficult - not to say chaotic - but provided that it was done before the rest of the EU had voted on the matter, and before the end of the two-year period, it would be possible. In short, I believe the submission of a withdrawal notice under Article 50 is not irrevocable - but tell me if I am wrong.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Whether or not the UK has free access to the single market as many other countries already do is a moot point currently, however the developing political environment in the EU is another moving part that will have a significant influence on the nature of a) what the deal will look like and b) what that means for corporates if they want to relocate.

I can't imagine us not having free access to the single market in time - as you rightly say many countries already have that. But you'llagree that there is a big different between free access and the full access we have now. Norway has full access in exchange for conditions which the government suggests it won't accept and Switzerland has full access, but only in certain areas, and again in exchange for conditions that would upset hardcore Brexiters. We don't know what is going to happen regarding access and the uncertainty is what is concerning the big inward investors such as Nissan. The fact that Davis and May are employing slightly different language isn't helping.

 

[Soulman]

I've ALWAYS loved being British. That's why I dislike what is being done to it so much.

I agree. This country has changed so much, and not for the better, thankfully we are looking at a brighter future and proud of being British again.

 

[pastafarian]

Are you certain about this? I have seen various interpretations but my understanding is that, quote, there is nothing in Article 50 formally to prevent a Member State from reversing its decision to withdraw in the course of withdrawal negotiations. Politically it would be difficult - not to say chaotic - but provided that it was done before the rest of the EU had voted on the matter, and before the end of the two-year period, it would be possible. In short, I believe the submission of a withdrawal notice under Article 50 is not irrevocable - but tell me if I am wrong.

Have seen two sides to this argument as well.
But in essence all seem to agree to even contemplate saying soz didnt mean it half way through would need a change of government in 2020, who would have stood on an election manifesto banking on one policy, and be prepared to over rule the referendum.
They would also be banking on no exit agreement being able to be reached before any change in government.
I think the Lib Dems might stand on this ticket......can you see them winning in 2020?
It really is a one way ticket.

 

[Simster]

I agree. This country has changed so much, and not for the better, thankfully we are looking at a brighter future and proud of being British again.

I'm curious, what aspect of Brexit is going to fundamentally change this country to such an extent that it will make you proud of being British again?

 

[Soulman]

I'm curious, what aspect of Brexit is going to fundamentally change this country to such an extent that it will make you proud of being British again?

Quick short answer as busy, making our own decisions and governing ourselves, getting back our identity.

 

[Simster]

Quick short answer as busy, making our own decisions and governing ourselves, getting back our identity.

I'd rather read a proper answer when you have time, because you haven't actually explained how Brexit is going to make any of that a reality. I think you're living in a dream world.

1) making our own decisions:

If we want to sell to the EU, we'll have to follow their guidlelines. For example, we manufacture widgets for export and decide to make them from a cheaper material that our laws dicate are not a fire hazard. The EU then decides, "sorry, they are flammable. You can't sell them to us". We then have to do as we are told.

On the flip side, Tory governments will be able to remove the minimum wage without worrying about that troublesome EU social charter nonsense.

2) governing ourselves:

We already make nearly all of our own laws:
https://fullfact.org/europe/two-thirds-uk-law-made-eu/

3) Getting back our identity

I'd be interested to know what you mean by this. I can't think of a single EU policy that has impacted our national identity. Or do you mean "kick out East European migrant workers", in which case don't be so mealy mouthed about it.

 

[The Clamp]

A challenge he has yet to take up I see !!!! Calling [MENTION=33848]The Clamp[/MENTION] ..... where are you ?

Apologies, been busy.
To answer: No, I won't be taking you up on your bet. For two reasons.

One: I rarely bet and if I do I prefer it to be in good spirit without a subtext of goading.

Two: I think using REMF as a platform to play out your personal agendas and goad someone into an argumentative bet is frankly, rather distasteful.

But thank you.

 

[Seagull58]

Apologies, been busy.
To answer: No, I won't be taking you up on your bet. For two reasons.

One: I rarely bet and if I do I prefer it to be in good spirit without a subtext of goading.

Two: I think using REMF as a platform to play out your personal agendas and goad someone into an argumentative bet is frankly, rather distasteful.

But thank you.

You're a ****head. Poor excuse for not taking the bet.

 

[The Clamp]

You're a ****head. Poor excuse for not taking the bet.

I think that's put that one to bed. Cheers.

 

[smeg]

I'd rather read a proper answer when you have time, because you haven't actually explained how Brexit is going to make any of that a reality. I think you're living in a dream world.

1) making our own decisions:

If we want to sell to the EU, we'll have to follow their guidlelines. For example, we manufacture widgets for export and decide to make them from a cheaper material that our laws dicate are not a fire hazard. The EU then decides, "sorry, they are flammable. You can't sell them to us". We then have to do as we are told.

On the flip side, Tory governments will be able to remove the minimum wage without worrying about that troublesome EU social charter nonsense.

2) governing ourselves:

We already make nearly all of our own laws:
https://fullfact.org/europe/two-thirds-uk-law-made-eu/

3) Getting back our identity

I'd be interested to know what you mean by this. I can't think of a single EU policy that has impacted our national identity. Or do you mean "kick out East European migrant workers", in which case don't be so mealy mouthed about it.

:lowdown: But the vote was about being in or out and these guys voted out, they have no other reasons allegedly

 

[beorhthelm]

2) governing ourselves:

We already make nearly all of our own laws:
https://fullfact.org/europe/two-thirds-uk-law-made-eu/

that link seems to argue there is indeed alot of regulation and a significant amount of law imposed by EU, just not the 2/3rds claim. to be honest i didnt hear any solid arguments about specifics laws and regulations we'd regain control of. however if there is so little law and regulation from EU, how come its going to be so difficult to extract ourself from the EU?

what remainers chose to ignore is the medium to long term agenda to increase areas of "cooperation", integrating more and more legislation from EU. we saw with the Euro debt crisis the increased talk of common fiscal policy for the Eurozone, so unless they were going to adopt a twin speed EU that would require some imposition on our fiscal policy too. the fall out from the debt crisis has been to suspend some of the integration roadmap, but they are still activly talking about common foreign and defense policy, EU army etc. the core architects of the EU do not want to stop at trading block and cultrual cooperation, they want a federal states of Europe.

 

[pb21]

Quick short answer as busy, making our own decisions and governing ourselves, getting back our identity.

Yep, I really am pissed off our government cant make a law or are so lightweight and constrained by the shackles of the EU that I cant get a powerful enough vacuum cleaner, my identity really suffers because of this.