Brexit: The Last Stand (No name calling)

[Deleted User] wrote: »

By the time you're contract is up, you may find that a post Brexit UK is a very different place to what it is now (you might even find that you'll be wanting to stay).

Harvey Normal wrote: »

The "removal of rights" from citizens happens not on the the negotiations but later, on the exit from the EU., something that depends on parliamentary actions.

Harvey Normal wrote: »

If the Europeans say there is a two year limit but the British parliament hasn't removed the treaties then they still apply in British law. I mean that seems obvious to me. A ECHR case could be taken and win after the 2 year period unless the treaties pertaining to the ECHR are removed by the British parliament.

Harvey Normal wrote: »

Maybe this explains why they are appealing. If the government was chancing its arm it would have just given up now and sent the vote to parliament.

Harvey Normal wrote: »

If the Europeans say there is a two year limit

Peregrinus wrote: »

And the two million who signed up to fight are long dead. Just like the 200,000 Irish men who served in the British forces in the Great War.

Some people may persuade themselves that the high number of Indian volunteers in the Second World War points to a warm frank love for the British and British institutions that, to this day, the Indians still cherish in their hearts. Those people are not numerous in India, however. From the perspective of today, India's experience of British colonisation is not seen as a positive one, and the Indians do not feel that they have any reason to be grateful to the British, or to trust them. There is certainly nothing in Indian sentiment towards the UK to pave the way for a particularly sweet or easy trade deal between the two countries.

What the UK would most like out of an Indian trade deal is for India to open its services market - banking, finance, accountancy, law - to UK providers. But India is one of the world's fastest growing economies on the back of a highly protected professional services market; they would see no reason to change this state of affairs. Conversely, what India would most like out of a UK trade deal is easier migration, and improved access for Indian workers to the UK labour market. That's not very likely, given that May has said that see she's the referendum result as reflecting greater controls on immigration, not an opening up.

So, yeah, the interests of the two parties are not well-aligned here. And, to compound matters, the UK is in the weaker bargaining position. India, as already noted, is booming. They don't need a trade deal with the UK to solve any of the problems they are facing. But the UK has embarked down an uncertain road, success in which requires it to develop fairly rapidly a network of trade agreements. So they need an agreement here in a way that India does not. That puts India in a good position to drive a hard bargain.

India on an official visit to try and lay the groundwork for a major trade deal between the two nations once the UK has formally left the European Union, but has already hit a brick wall thanks to the Indian government's tough stance on immigration when it comes to any deal.

Essentially, India's demand for doing a deal with Britain — as it has been with other countries in the past — is that more Indian citizens must be allowed to work in the country, in return for increasing trade.

Unfortunately for Britain, putting stronger controls on immigration was the biggest reason people voted for Brexit, so any deal that includes extra immigration seems unlikely to be widely accepted.

Basically, there is a fundamental disconnect between the anti-immigration stance of many Brexiteers, and their desire for free trade deals, given that the movement of people is often a key component in trade agreements. This is especially true of India.

India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi made this point very clear in an appearance with May on Monday morning in India's capital, New Delhi.

"Education is vital for our students and will define our engagement in a shared future," Modi said at a technology summit, according to the BBC.

"We must therefore encourage greater mobility and participation of young people in education and research opportunities," he added, making a thinly veiled criticism of the UK's policy on student visa, something that has long been a sore spot between the two nations.

British government policy currently requires that international students return to their home country, or at least leave the UK, once they have completed their studies. Since the policy was implemented — during May's tenure as Home Secretary — the number of Indian students enrolling in British universities has fallen by 50%.

During the same summit, May defended the policy, saying: "We have a visa system for countries outside the European Union which ensures that the brightest and the best are able to come to the United Kingdom."

"The figures show that we issued more work visas to India than I think the U.S., Australia, Canada and China put together."

The sticking point on immigration in any deal between the UK and India is something that has been raised previously. Last month, Sir Thomas Harris — a trade expert, who was once the British ambassador to Korea, and is former vice chairman of emerging markets-focused bank Standard Chartered — told a conference in London that Britain's will really struggle to do a deal with the likes of India.

During his appearance at the Brexit and Global Expansion Summit, Harris said:

"What’s the single biggest Indian demand for their trade deals? The single biggest demand is reciprocal access in the EU markets for a very significantly enhanced Mode 4 arrangement. That is for greater access for skilled and technical staff from India."

He also used the example of the EU's attempts to strike a trade deal with India to show just how hard each individual trade deal will be, saying:

"Some Brexiteers suggest that we can do deals with major Commonwealth countries like India. What they fail to understand is that the EU has been in negotiations with India for the last eight years, and has failed to conclude a deal. And what were the sticking points in those negotiations?

"The sticking points were over trade in services — in accountancy, banking, insurance, and legal services — where the UK was the primary EU demandeur. The Indians were not prepared to table a serious offer on trade in services.

jmayo wrote: »

Yep we should screw over our most important market for one of our only indigenous industries and one of the most important markets for SMEs to get even for the famine.
Why not tell all those working in agri sector or small manufacturing SMEs that their jobs are fooked because we have finally gotten even for the famine.

Not to mention the fact how many Irish still live and work in the UK.

Lets cut off our nose to spite our face. :rolleyes:

Sad thing is there are some muppets in positions of power in Europe with a similar mindset to yours.

A Little Pony wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_in_World_War_II
What is that idiot on about? India played an important role with Britain in the second world war. Over 2 million of them signing up to fight.