Brexit Phase Two - Trade

I
I agree re in or out. But some Brexiteers on here seem to think an agreement (such as Chequers) in not properly out. But it is.
Two separate questions.s
Parliament formulated the question, not the alternatives.

Parliament has made a mess of things since the GFA, Europe has made a mess in it's relationship re the CTA, nor has it ever clarified what "Free movement" means.
Juncker was the one who said out of the CU. In so far as the that means Europe controls ( or tries to) the concept of trade deals-which is counter productive and seems unenforceable. That does not mean a parallel operating customs system cannot work. The sticking areas here are VAT and the customs duties, but it also means that in practice, apart from local variations, these cannot be altered. It has been proved to the EU since the mid nineties that remote LIC/LEC regimes can operate satisfactorily [with certain caveats applicable to all]. This is therefore a smoke screen in relation to Ireland. We keep talking Canada plus, but the reality is there are any number of options. EFTA and EEA, not to mention another options such as UK bespoke.

However the Irish will have to get one thing clear-they need to be very clear what they they wish for. Ultimately any advancement re the 6 counties may loose them other advantages under the 1922 agreement such as loss of the right to vote in UK elections and related matters. They can exercise diplomatic back doors in London. Veradka seems to be intent on losing this at a time when there are serious doubts if the EU can remain in the form they are. Do they really think that a UK Government that perceives Ireland as hostile would not seek payback?

The reason I believe that the EU are getting nervous is the fact that sanctioning Britain is a tight rope, it does not give much in the way flexibility in dealing with us and they know it. More than one source says that the EU is heading for a crisis in the not to distant future. We are part of the IMF and they have to drag Eastern Europe up by the bootstraps, whilst being dependent on Putin's energy.
 
It may have escaped you, but the EU's proposals would result in Northern Ireland being treated differently than the rest of the UK - the first stage of a process that would lead the breakup of the UK, the independence parties from Scotland and Wales trying to follow NI.

Do you think it acceptable for the EU to try and break up the UK?

Wordsmith
I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest with you. The point was made that Tusk didn't give a reason but he did. Whether that reason is right or wrong has nothing to do with it.
On the other hand, May, with the so-called Chequers plan, is trying to break up the EU fundamental point of being a member to stay in the EU.
Do you think that is acceptable?
 
The EU has to make an example of the UK. They cannot allow other member states to see the UK successfully leave, because that would fuel the fires of discontent with the EU. The EU leaders, despite the position of the EU's negotiators, will never agree a deal that allows the UK to enjoy any EU membership privileges without freedom of movement;- that would open an "EU Pandora's box". Many of the current EU leaders would fall, and they know it.

Conversely, I will bet my last pound those voting "leave" in the referendum had securing the sovereignty/UK borders at the front of their minds. PMMay is correct, any deal allowing freedom of movement is not the Brexit anyone voted for.

Quite shamefully, every politician or "talking head" that calls for a "people's vote" reinforces the EU's tactic of forcing a hard brexit and has undermined the position of the UK negotiators.

I guess this heads to a Parlimentary vote. If the majority of MPs place sovereignty/control of borders above all else, then a hard Brexit will occur. If they don't, then I guess we head to a people's vote and the "neverendum" occurs.....

Would the "remainers" accept a second "leave" vote? Would the "leavers" accept a "remain" vote?
Just out of interest, did we ‘make an example’ of Ireland 1921?
 
I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest with you. The point was made that Tusk didn't give a reason but he did. Whether that reason is right or wrong has nothing to do with it.
On the other hand, May, with the so-called Chequers plan, is trying to break up the EU fundamental point of being a member to stay in the EU.
Do you think that is acceptable?
So the commission binds the hands of 27 Nations, acceptable? I think not especially when the top two do exactly what they like. Tail wagging dog springs to mind
 
Have you lived in Cyprus?

The SBAs aren't quite the same thing as living among the natives.
I always remember the unedifying spectacle of those living amongst the natives trying to do a bit of duty free shopping in the pads NAAFI on Episkopi Garrison.

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest with you. The point was made that Tusk didn't give a reason but he did. Whether that reason is right or wrong has nothing to do with it.
On the other hand, May, with the so-called Chequers plan, is trying to break up the EU fundamental point of being a member to stay in the EU.
Do you think that is acceptable?
Theresa May does not agree with you that Tusk gave reasons
Throughout this process, I have treated the EU with nothing but respect. The UK expects the same. A good relationship at the end of this process depends on it.

"At this late stage in the negotiations, it is not acceptable to simply reject the other side’s proposals without a detailed explanation and counter proposals.

"So we now need to hear from the EU what the real issues are and what their alternative is so that we can discuss them. Until we do, we cannot make progress.In the meantime, we must and will continue the work of preparing ourselves for no deal."
Spin Tusk's words as much as you like, they were just weasel words anyway!

The final paragraph is the beauty and music to my ears. No more BOHICA just demands that the EU ante up.
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
On the other hand, May, with the so-called Chequers plan, is trying to break up the EU fundamental point of being a member to stay in the EU.Do you think that is acceptable?
May is not trying to break up the EU - she's trying to get the most advantageous terms on which to trade with it.

The problem is that the single market is protectionist - with high tariffs to lock out manufacturers and service providers from outside of the EU. The EU is fouling its pants at the idea that granting advantageous trading terms to the UK might be the first breach in the dyke that keep more efficient producers from outside the EU putting EU manufactures and service companies out of business.

European Commission : Market Access database : EU Tariffs

If manufacturers and service providers in the EU were as efficient as much of their competition, they wouldn't need high tariffs to keep them out of the single market.

Wordsmith
 
May is not trying to break up the EU - she's trying to get the most advantageous terms on which to trade with it.

The problem is that the single market is protectionist - with high tariffs to lock out manufacturers and service providers from outside of the EU. The EU is fouling its pants at the idea that granting advantageous trading terms to the UK might be the first breach in the dyke that keep more efficient producers from outside the EU putting EU manufactures and service companies out of business.

European Commission : Market Access database : EU Tariffs

If manufacturers and service providers in the EU were as efficient as much of their competition, they wouldn't need high tariffs to keep them out of the single market.

Wordsmith

Just bought a couple of shirts direct from the US. I could have bought them from their EU based distributor, but, even with duty and postage, they cost half the EU retail price. It’s almost as if tge EU imposed excessively high tariffs on foreign clothing to protect EU suppliers.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top