Brexit negotiations thread

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

The official Leave.EU account are encouraging its members to infiltrate the Conservatives in order to put a pro-Leave leader in place. Tory membership is estimated to be 70 to 100k (they haven't given official figures for years) so it wouldn't that that many people to sign up and tip them further to a hard Brexit position.

 

[rigsby]

but it kind of is the point. we're better informed about the realities now. the first referendum was done with lack of insight. a good democracy would recognise this.

Fully agree Napster. No one back in the 70s thought we would end up with this corrupt mess. We had a look for 40 years and Second time around voted out.
In another 40 years we could have another look....

 

[rigsby]

Shall we not talk about what might be and the halcyon days of the 1970s? We no longer live in the 1970s, flared trousers are a no no, Noel Edmonds isn't on Radio 1 and deep fried avocado isn't something the "in crowd" eat anymore?

On Thursday the UK will start to issue their Technical Notices, which will be the first part of preparing society for a D1ND scenario. At that point we will all get to see what Government thinking is. I've no inkling as to what they say.

However, I can share this... https://ec.europa.eu/info/brexit/brexit-preparedness/preparedness-notices_en These are the Technical Notices from the EU, explaining how the EU is going to handle a D1ND Brexit. This is how the EU WILL handle the UK if a Transitional Period or a Withdrawl Agreement is not in place.

You can find the information on international trade at the end of the page, under the heading TAXUD. (these are the only ones relevant to the trade discussion)

The one you need to look at is "Preferential rules of origin" - essentially this is techtalk for "Trade Deals". The fourth paragraph makes thing clear... the trade deals wont apply to the UK. To get back to your post, we have 57 different trade deals, including with trading blocs in Central / South America and Africa. (http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/ is an index page to those deals) People need to understand that it not just goods moving between the UK and EU that are effected. So, food imported from those countries which is currently duty free, but post Brexit will not be as we wont be party to the Trade Deals. Of course the UK has three options.

1. remove tariffs and make everything duty free. We can do this, but we would have to make goods duty free from everywhere - otherwise you contravene WCO rules on favoured nation - and of course we wouldn't get the tax stream from import duty.

2. roll over trade deals. This is HMG's favoured option. However, this is extremely difficult because it means changing all the Rules of Origin (I've explained before how a car made in Sunderland isn't British).

3. Charge duty on what were previously duty free goods and put the price of food up in the process.

Later on in Section 3 it talks about removing UK goods from the rules of origin. This will have a direct effect on UK exporters as their goods may then remove certain products out of trade deals as the Rules of Origin would have changed

The other important document is the one headed "Customs and indirect taxation". This pretty much sets out how the EU will trade with the UK in the future, and its not pretty reading.

Sorry, this is all really technical. Possibly accepting I am in a no win situation and am now likely to be accused of elitism or patronising - if anyone wants any of what is in the EU documents explaining, I'll be happy to do so.

I don’t think you are being elite or patronising, you just can’t answer my points

 

[Benfleet A1]

I don’t think you are being elite or patronising, you just can’t answer my points

You sir, are a idiot. It has been spelled out in plain nice and simple bite size english and you come out with completely brainless tosh, as per usual. Try this....

WE LEAVE WITH A DEAL, IT WONT BE ANYTHING BETTER THAN WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE.

WE LEAVE WITH NO DEAL AND WE, AND OUR CHILDREN WILL BE ****ED FOR YEARS TO COME.

 

[rigsby]

You should trying running a business before you trap off at others.

Anyone who has will tell you no deal is better than a bad deal in any circumstances......IF YOU SPEND 90b MORE WITH TEM THEY WILL COME BACK TO YOU.

IF YOU PUT YOUR ANSWER IN CAPITALS DOES IT PROVES YOUR POINT.

 

[Benfleet A1]

You should trying running a business before you trap off at others.

Anyone who has will tell you no deal is better than a bad deal in any circumstances......IF YOU SPEND 90b MORE WITH TEM THEY WILL COME BACK TO YOU.

IF YOU PUT YOUR ANSWER IN CAPITALS DOES IT PROVES YOUR POINT.

What? Like a buy to let landlord.

 

[Lord Football]

I don’t think you are being elite or patronising, you just can’t answer my points

Actually, I did. I told you we don't live in the 1970s anymore and then I took the time to explain how free trade works because you hadn't appreciated it was more than just EU only. Furthermore, I pointed you, via a series of indesputable links, to explain what the EU position is. None of it was opinion, all of it is cold hard fact.

So I am not sure what you mean by "you can't answer my points" because clearly I have. And then some.

Thing is, anyone who reads my post can see that. They'll also see I've gone over and beyond what is reasonable on an internet forum to make a complicated subject as simple as possible to understand whilst also offering to clarify anything.

I am really not sure what you want or are trying to achieve. But I spent my lunchtime posting that for you. I wont bother again, much like the other thread you've not given me the curtesy of bothering to read it or simply ignored it - instead preferring to attempt to score an internet point. Only you know in your mind whether you scored that point and whether it was worth it.

 

[Benfleet A1]

Here's an interesting fact. To renegoiate the 700+ trade deals we already have would take 13 years at one a week and 58 years at one a month. But I'm sure if I asked someone who has ever run a business would know that.

 

[Lord Football]

Here's an interesting fact. To renegoiate the 700+ trade deals we already have would take 13 years at one a week and 58 years at one a month. But I'm sure if I asked someone who has ever run a business would know that.

We have 57 trade deals (FTAs) and a series of bilateral arrangements. There are also over 2000 international agreements we are signed up to as a member of the EU. All of which we potentialy cease to be a member of, in our right, on 30 March.

Whilst it may be possible to do some negotiations ahead of 30 March, especially with regards to international treaties etc the amount of work require is mindbendingly immense.

Whilst it may be possible to do some "quick and dirties", if we are going to make our own deals, they generally take 7 years - some significantly longer.

Of course all the trade deals we currently have were negotiated by the EU using EU negotiators. We don't have any experience of doing these for ourselves.

 

[rigsby]

So let’s get this straight. We can’t leave because some idiots with pens would take 13 years to do there job.

No problem we will sack them, employ some decent young people who can and the companies who want to sell their £300b worth of good from the EU will pay for it all with a tax.

Now Lordy instead of sulkinging why not answer the very point you...not me brought up.......Why was JC such a staunch leaver for all his political career until he become Leader of the Labour Party.

 

[Benfleet A1]

So let’s get this straight. We can’t leave because some idiots with pens would take 13 years to do there job.

No problem we will sack them, employ some decent young people who can and the companies who want to sell their £300b worth of good from the EU will pay for it all with a tax.

Now Lordy instead of sulkinging why not answer the very point you...not me brought up.......Why was JC such a staunch leaver for all his political career until he become Leader of the Labour Party.

Trolling, you must be trolling and on a wind-up. Either that or you truly are a stupid as you sound.

 

[rigsby]

Trolling, you must be trolling and on a wind-up. Either that or you truly are a stupid as you sound.

I guess by your last 4 posts you think your in your tipper truck and going to intimidate us cyclists/ Brexit voters off the road.....because we shouldn’t even have the right to be on here.

So back to Lordy’s point.... Why was JC such a staunch leaver. Ben Embury, who Lordy has met, explained it well. I did post ithe article once, but if not I’m sure Lordy would be happy to repost the it.

The basis of the article was if you take one countries young adults on mass, to work in another country on cheap wages. It achieves nothing for the working classes in either country. It puts countless social strains in both countries.

 

[Lord Football]

So let’s get this straight. We can’t leave because some idiots with pens would take 13 years to do there job.

No problem we will sack them, employ some decent young people who can and the companies who want to sell their £300b worth of good from the EU will pay for it all with a tax.

Now Lordy instead of sulkinging why not answer the very point you...not me brought up.......Why was JC such a staunch leaver for all his political career until he become Leader of the Labour Party.

Two things Riggers.

1. You can't sack "idiots with pens" on the basis that you can't sack someone you've not yet employed to do the job. That is, even by your standards its a childish thing to say.

2. You are absolutely fixated with Jeremy Corbyn to the point you've imagined me talking about him. I've not mentioned JC in this discussion because, frankly, he isn't relevant. What is relevant is why Theresa May is now overseeing a hard Brexit when she campaigned for remain? I did mention the left wing argument, but that's

3. Finally, I think it's telling that when faced with post like my one of the previous page that sets out the difficulties we are going to face, you decided to completely ignore that and instead make assenine comments about "idiots with pens" and Jeremy Corbyn.

 

[Lord Football]

Two things Riggers.

1. You can't sack .....

2. You are absolutely ......

3. Finally, .......

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition.....

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I really don’t want to get too involved in this, especially as the debate is going so well (!)...

But, it seems to me firstly that ultimately it is highly likely a deal of some kind of deal will be done in the end primarily because it is in everyone’s interests to have one and secondly because that is the way EU negotiations always are. All the talk will reach a crescendo of noise all the way up to the last minute and then, as usual, they will all stay up all night in brussels ordering in pizzas and Ferrero Rocher and magically about 5am the deal will be done. It happens every time.

The no deal talk is largely a negotiating tactic by both sides to pressure the other to make concessions. Fairly normal in negotiations, particularly where those negotiations are contentious. The main reason for the contention is in my view the desire by the EU to make leaving look impossible to try to scare others who might want to leave into line. As such, they are playing hard ball by saying x or y can’t be done when often the reason for that boils down to clause 52b sections 4-78, line 2 in some article or other says so, rather than because it’s actually impossible to do.

On trade deals, not being in the EU would clearly mean we would not be a party to existing EU trade deals with other countries. However, if there is a will between us and those other countries to do a deal then he quickest way initially is to replicate exactly what is there now as a bilateral deal and then negotiate a new one in slower time if we both wish to do so. Also, I think someone said it takes 7 years plus to do a trade deal. That’s not fully accurate I don’t believe - it takes the EU that amount of time, not individual countries. That is because the EU has to cater for 28 countries all with particular interests, protectionisms, local interest groups and varying National processes for approving any deal (as can be seen from the time recently where a small Belgian locality forced a delay to CETA with Canada over a small specific local protectionism concern). We could, and should, be able to do trade deals much more quickly than that.

It is quite possible to live inside, or outside, the EU. It boils down to a choice about where you want your democracy to come from and your laws decided. That is why ‘take back control’ resonated with part of the voting community. It isn’t that people don’t want immigration, or trade, or close friendship and partnership with European neighbours. It is more that they want their own elected politicians in this country to have the power to decide and manage those things in ways that are suitable for this country. Fruit pickers will still come here once they realise they still can - and it will be done on a similar basis to that which we had (and it worked very well) before we joined the EU. I’d need to look up the full details but it was essentially a short term work permit type scenario that would be tailored to the requirements of the work they were coming to do. It was all managed by one person would you believe!

 

[Benfleet A1]

I guess by your last 4 posts you think your in your tipper truck and going to intimidate us cyclists/ Brexit voters off the road.....because we shouldn’t even have the right to be on here.

Oh, you're a cyclist as well now. The talents are endless, pals with big business, expert in immigration, trade deals, legal matters, I'm in awe.

I give plenty of room when passing cyclists but for you, I'll make an exception.

 

[Lord Football]

I really don’t want to get too involved in this, especially as the debate is going so well (!)...

But, it seems to me firstly that ultimately it is highly likely a deal of some kind of deal will be done in the end primarily because it is in everyone’s interests to have one and secondly because that is the way EU negotiations always are. All the talk will reach a crescendo of noise all the way up to the last minute and then, as usual, they will all stay up all night in brussels ordering in pizzas and Ferrero Rocher and magically about 5am the deal will be done. It happens every time.

The no deal talk is largely a negotiating tactic by both sides to pressure the other to make concessions. Fairly normal in negotiations, particularly where those negotiations are contentious. The main reason for the contention is in my view the desire by the EU to make leaving look impossible to try to scare others who might want to leave into line. As such, they are playing hard ball by saying x or y can’t be done when often the reason for that boils down to clause 52b sections 4-78, line 2 in some article or other says so, rather than because it’s actually impossible to do.

On trade deals, not being in the EU would clearly mean we would not be a party to existing EU trade deals with other countries. However, if there is a will between us and those other countries to do a deal then he quickest way initially is to replicate exactly what is there now as a bilateral deal and then negotiate a new one in slower time if we both wish to do so. Also, I think someone said it takes 7 years plus to do a trade deal. That’s not fully accurate I don’t believe - it takes the EU that amount of time, not individual countries. That is because the EU has to cater for 28 countries all with particular interests, protectionisms, local interest groups and varying National processes for approving any deal (as can be seen from the time recently where a small Belgian locality forced a delay to CETA with Canada over a small specific local protectionism concern). We could, and should, be able to do trade deals much more quickly than that.

It is quite possible to live inside, or outside, the EU. It boils down to a choice about where you want your democracy to come from and your laws decided. That is why ‘take back control’ resonated with part of the voting community. It isn’t that people don’t want immigration, or trade, or close friendship and partnership with European neighbours. It is more that they want their own elected politicians in this country to have the power to decide and manage those things in ways that are suitable for this country. Fruit pickers will still come here once they realise they still can - and it will be done on a similar basis to that which we had (and it worked very well) before we joined the EU. I’d need to look up the full details but it was essentially a short term work permit type scenario that would be tailored to the requirements of the work they were coming to do. It was all managed by one person would you believe!

Some really good points in here Spiff.

The Trade Deals are a good point. But, in most cases we are dealing with trading blocs who have the same problems that the EU have. The real problem is the rules of origin. These are horribly complicated, but let me have a go.....

The rules identify where something comes from. So, if I grow a potato in my garden, it originates in the UK. I then send that potato to Italy, where it is cut up, deep fried, salted and put in a crisp packet, I have a product that originates in the EU. Post Brexit, it is unclear where the goods originate from. The UK or Italy. This is what the RoO explain. And they will differ from trade agreement to trade agreement.

Trade deals are based on what each party can offer the other. So we have a Trade Deal with Shrimperland who are particularly keen to tap into UK scotch and Italian olives. When we negotitate as the UK, we cannot offer Italian olives in the deal because they don't originate here, so we have less to offfer. It stands to reason then that Shrimperland may then want better terms than they had under the EU arrangement. Conversley, Shrimperland may not have much that we want, but our Scotch exporters need tariff free access to the Shrimperland market.

Shrimperland may like importing our cars. However, whilst these cars are made in factory in Sunderland, the engine comes from Germany, tyres from Sweden and the glass from Romania. Under the exisiting RoO the car comes from the EU. After Brexit, the casr is simply assembled in the UK, but all the constituent bits from the the EU. So the car actually originate from the EUs and would be excluded from any trade deal.

Very briefly, and almost accidently, I've mapped out a basic plan for a trade mission.

And whilst there is some leeway in how you construct rules of origin, they are underpinned by the WTO which means you have to work within a universally accepted framwork.

So, back in the real world. If a country is desperate to do a deal with UK, it may be possible to do that quicker than seven years. However, if you want to do a deal with some of our partners, you will need to start again with trade missions and consultations with UK businesses.. I don't see a quick way of doing those.

I know Liam Fox is keen for deals to be rolled over. That is aspirational and if achieved would certainly be a tick in the plus column.

My personal view is that we wont get an overall deal from the EU. However, we could make a series of side deals that would mitigate some of the real difficulties. But that's just my opinion.

 

[rigsby]

Two things Riggers.

1. You can't sack "idiots with pens" on the basis that you can't sack someone you've not yet employed to do the job. That is, even by your standards its a childish thing to say.

2. You are absolutely fixated with Jeremy Corbyn to the point you've imagined me talking about him. I've not mentioned JC in this discussion because, frankly, he isn't relevant. What is relevant is why Theresa May is now overseeing a hard Brexit when she campaigned for remain? I did mention the left wing argument, but that's

3. Finally, I think it's telling that when faced with post like my one of the previous page that sets out the difficulties we are going to face, you decided to completely ignore that and instead make assenine comments about "idiots with pens" and Jeremy Corbyn.

Post 2271 is where you Lordy mentioned the ‘left wing’ arguement for leaving. I was teminding you that JC was one of those you mentioned.

In fact there’s some good stuff on YouTube of JC, back in the day and in between attending IRA funerals. Where he clearly explains why the EU is such a bad thing for us the ‘workers’.....something you should be proud of?

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Thanks Lordy. As you have set out there are a number of technical challenges that come with a change of governance at any level (from a small business to international relations).

None of the above is insurmountable, but taken as a whole it is a lot of work for Government which is certainly putting the wind up a few in Whitehall! I see it first hand every day :)

The two things which stand out to me (in the whole public discourse I mean, not you personally Lordy) overall are:

1. A dislike of change and possibly also a fear of the unknown (clearly, what we are talking about is not unknown overall it’s just that many of those joining the debate don’t remember life before the EU); and
2. Ultimately, no one person has the breadth or depth of knowledge in a subject with so many aspects, or possible aspects, to it so in the end it comes down to what individuals believe or want.

Remainers tens to see the difficulty and risk in each change, and do not seem to ever believe that any form of upside is possible. Mainly because in their heart of hearts they want us to remain. This is not to say those folks are wishing for difficulty, it’s just that they can’t possibly believe in any other outcome but remain is all good and leave means ruin.

Leavers equally see things through a prism called ‘EU = bad’ and can’t wait for the sunny day when we arent pushed around by France and Germany, let alone the Maltese pipsqueak or Berk-in-chief Guy Verhofstadt any longer.

Anyone who has ever implemented change, project managers for example, has seen point 1 above in action on a daily basis on a micro level. This is a huge, macro level version of the same principle.

Those are the basic perceptions and all debate is conducted with those filters on, it seems to me.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Another thought comes to mind - some of the perceived negative effects of leaving often quoted when it comes to trade, jobs and the economy are the very same things people (outside the Brexit debate, or before it) have been complaining about for years as exactly what’s wrong with the economy at present.

A few bankers might leave if we left the EU (and, in overall terms, it is quite literally a few). Would we miss those few? Not really. The entire banking system won’t leave, nor indeed any proportion of it which is statistically significant.

Our UK supply chain was decimated inside the EU. Some of that might need to be sourced elsewhere. How about doing it in the UK? There’s a thought! Like anything, it won’t happen overnight but that could well (and should, with the right policy implemented) begin to happen.

Cheap overseas labour, on tap and unrestricted, might no longer be there to the same extent. We might have to start doing what we used to do: invest in training up our own people properly and properly invest in innovations in production. That costs money and it’s far easier to import a freebie that someone else trained up. No wonder business is worried that they might be removed from the teet :) I’m not talking about fruit pickers, although it isn’t beyond the wit of man to find a solution there including the past system I already mentioned, I mean in the wider economy. Every day jobs, the ones most of us do. The big reason our productivity is so low is that it is currently cheaper and easier to employ more people ‘off the peg’ to do the work than it is to invest in making what we have more productive. This has been suppressing wages for years and is, I think, where Corbyn’s objection to the EU comes from.