Brexit discussion thread II

ancapailldorcha · 18-07-2017 08:14AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

There are of course challenges to Brexit but I would love some of the hard remainers to acknowledge that there are lots of opportunities also.

It would be easy to acknowledge them if you could actually give some specifics instead of just saying that they exist.

solodeogloria · 18-07-2017 08:18AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It would be easy to acknowledge them if you could actually give some specifics instead of just saying that they exist.

Good morning,

I've listed them all on numerous occasions before. To claim that I haven't is lying.

Freedom to have progressive trade deals on goods and services with other countries globally is a huge advantage that Britain will have after leaving.

You claim that this is vague but it isn't. It's a fantastic opportunity for Britain to expand trade with some of its biggest trading partners and to seek trade elsewhere.

Alongside with a free trade deal from the EU and MiFID II equivalence this would be a huge boon for Britain and a great reason why companies would want to set up shop there.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

ancapailldorcha · 18-07-2017 08:20AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

I've listed them all on numerous occasions before. To claim that I haven't is lying.

You haven't. Not once. You've just oscillated between sneering at anyone concerned about Brexit and accusing anyone who disagrees with you of fearmongering or lying.

solodeogloria · 18-07-2017 08:23AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You haven't. Not once. You've just oscillated between sneering at anyone concerned about Brexit and accusing anyone who disagrees with you of fearmongering or lying.

Good morning,

Yes I have. In dozens of posts.

I've posted a huge advantage to you again in respect to trading arrangements with other countries.

Expanding trading arrangements with the £259bn share of UK trade by removing tariffs would be huge. The United States and China make up over £100bn of that together. There are huge opportunities for expanding this with a FTA after being unburdened with EU restrictions.

That is too good an opportunity to turn down.

To claim that that isn't an advantage is a lie. I'm not interested in playing games but in having a discussion based on reality.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

ambro25 · 18-07-2017 08:53AM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Err carrier, singular, not plural.

It's currently in dry dock in Toulon on an 18 month refit.

Unless the UK government demonstrated some sudden bout of negotiating prowess (for a change), and magically managed to shackle itself off from its contractual commitments (under the clauses of which it would cost more to cancel the extra one than to build it: kudos to the private sector negotiators and legal team :pac:), of which I am obviously unaware, the UK is building two Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers, at a combined cost of Â£6.2bn: HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.

Zubeneschamali · 18-07-2017 09:07AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Freedom to have progressive trade deals on goods and services with other countries globally is a huge advantage that Britain will have after leaving.

OK, let's talk about that "freedom".

Firstly, trade deals typically take 5-10 years to negotiate, so even if they start now (and they won't, see below), we might see these deals coming into effect from 2022-2027. The UK economy will be very, very badly damaged in the interim.

Secondly, trade deals require that the UK has a team of trade negotiators. Right now, they have none since they ceded that role to the EU 40 years ago. Any they can get will be busy negotiating Brexit for the next 2-5 years.

Thirdly, the UK has a very weak hand in any such negotiation. We have already seen India state baldly that there will be no such deal without increased access for Indians to the UK labour market, precisely what the UK is leaving the EU to limit.

Fourthly, the UK has a big trade deficit in goods, and make up the difference in services. Free trade deals do not generally include services. Such manufacturing as is left is in things like Airbus wings (hosed), nuclear (hosed), Japanese/German/Indian cars for Europe (hosed). Pharma (very mobile) and electronics (likewise) are liable to move for EU access. Pharma, electronics, space and especially nuclear will all be badly affected by hostility to immigration and international co-operation.

Defence is probably a banker - outside the EU, the UK can build up their arms dealing industries, a traditional industry for countries trying to go it alone like South Africa, Israel, and to a lesser degree Sweden before the EU.

Peregrinus · 18-07-2017 09:19AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning,

I've listed them all on numerous occasions before. To claim that I haven't is lying.

Freedom to have progressive trade deals on goods and services with other countries globally is a huge advantage that Britain will have after leaving.

You claim that this is vague but it isn't. It's a fantastic opportunity for Britain to expand trade with some of its biggest trading partners and to seek trade elsewhere.

Alongside with a free trade deal from the EU and MiFID II equivalence this would be a huge boon for Britain and a great reason why companies would want to set up shop there.

This doesn't really stack up, solo. By leaving the EU, the UK is leaving the largest and freest free trade deal the world has ever seen. Fully half of the UK's trade is done under this deal. Anyone who thinks that free trade deals are a Good Thing should be instinctively opposed to Brexit.

But that's not all. Of the other half of the UK's foreign trade, a large chunk is done under the EU's network of free trade agreements with the rest of the world. Brexit means pulling out of those free trade deals as well.

All of which means that the UK is going to have to do a huge amount of reinventing of wheels, simply in order to get back to the level of free trade that it currently enjoys. Actually improving the position regarding the UK's trade requires the UK to negotiate a better network of free trade deals than the EU has negotiated, and that's counting the European Treaties themselves.

Given that the UK is not going to participate in the Single Market, so the 50% of its trade that it conducts with the EU-27 is going to be conducted on more restrictive terms than at present and the only question is how much more more restrictive it can be, and given that in negotiating with the rest of the world the UK has much less negotiating muscle than the EU has and holds rather fewer cards, the notion that the UK will, overall, end up in a better position as regards freedom of trade seems rather far-fetched. No offence, but it's little more than wishful thinking.

I've seen lots of Brexiters - yourself included - express confidence in this happy outcome, but I have yet to see any of them explain in a plausible way how they think this can be achieved, or why the are so confident that it will be. When you raise the question they either adopt a Liam Fox-like belief in the Triump of the Will, or they fall strangely silent.

First Up · 18-07-2017 09:38AM

Meanwhile Davies treated yesterday's start of Brexit negotiations as a photo opportunity and only stayed an hour.

The photo sums it up; EU team with their papers in front of them, ready to go. The UK team grinning inanely with nothing (both literally and metaphorically) on the table.

Zubeneschamali · 18-07-2017 09:44AM

First Up wrote: »

The photo sums it up; EU team with their papers in front of them, ready to go. The UK team grinning inanely with nothing (both literally and metaphorically) on the table.

First Up · 18-07-2017 09:46AM

Peregrinus wrote:

But that's not all. Of the other half of the UK's foreign trade, a large chunk is done under the EU's network of free trade agreements with the rest of the world. Brexit means pulling out of those free trade deals as well.

This is the bit lost on many Brexiteers. Britain will negotiate its new trade agreements with about 10% of the negotiating strength it had as part of the EU.

Why should China or Japan offer Britain better terms than they have the EU?

It is more nonsensical fantasy - just like expecting former colonies thousands of miles away to fill the hole in their exports after they are turfed out of the single market.

swampgas · 18-07-2017 11:07AM

The EU is preparing to call the UK out on their inability to get their act together - and may state they will stall the negotiations until the UK bring something realistic to the table.
http://www.politico.eu/article/michel-barnier-prepared-to-stall-brexit-talks-over-uk-bill/

"According to the diplomats, the message Barnier planned to deliver, while not quite an ultimatum, was intended to convey his view that negotiations were futile without better engagement by the British side.

'Financial settlement is the priority,' one EU diplomat said. 'The EU will not walk away from talks but will stall them.' The diplomat added, 'The impression we got so far is that the U.K. is not ready for these talks.'"

DaniilKharms · 18-07-2017 11:15AM

swampgas wrote: »

The EU is preparing to call the UK out on their inability to get their act together - and may state they will stall the negotiations until the UK bring something realistic to the table.
http://www.politico.eu/article/michel-barnier-prepared-to-stall-brexit-talks-over-uk-bill/

"According to the diplomats, the message Barnier planned to deliver, while not quite an ultimatum, was intended to convey his view that negotiations were futile without better engagement by the British side.

'Financial settlement is the priority,' one EU diplomat said. 'The EU will not walk away from talks but will stall them.' The diplomat added, 'The impression we got so far is that the U.K. is not ready for these talks.'"

It's the impression EVERYONE has.

Sure, the UK team is on par with Trump Co for undercutting their own positions on a daily basis and for looking like amateurs in a world of professionals.

DaniilKharms · 18-07-2017 11:17AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

This doesn't really stack up, solo. By leaving the EU, the UK is leaving the largest and freest free trade deal the world has ever seen. Fully half of the UK's trade is done under this deal. Anyone who thinks that free trade deals are a Good Thing should be instinctively opposed to Brexit.

But that's not all. Of the other half of the UK's foreign trade, a large chunk is done under the EU's network of free trade agreements with the rest of the world. Brexit means pulling out of those free trade deals as well.

All of which means that the UK is going to have to do a huge amount of reinventing of wheels, simply in order to get back to the level of free trade that it currently enjoys. Actually improving the position regarding the UK's trade requires the UK to negotiate a better network of free trade deals than the EU has negotiated, and that's counting the European Treaties themselves.

Given that the UK is not going to participate in the Single Market, so the 50% of its trade that it conducts with the EU-27 is going to be conducted on more restrictive terms than at present and the only question is how much more more restrictive it can be, and given that in negotiating with the rest of the world the UK has much less negotiating muscle than the EU has and holds rather fewer cards, the notion that the UK will, overall, end up in a better position as regards freedom of trade seems rather far-fetched. No offence, but it's little more than wishful thinking.

I've seen lots of Brexiters - yourself included - express confidence in this happy outcome, but I have yet to see any of them explain in a plausible way how they think this can be achieved, or why the are so confident that it will be. When you raise the question they either adopt a Liam Fox-like belief in the Triump of the Will, or they fall strangely silent.

Add to that the team responsible for making POST-Brexit a success is the same one that can't seem to even make the lead up to the negotiations a success.

Gross incompetence doesn't inspire confidence.

Professor Moriarty · 18-07-2017 11:32AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

This makes perfect sense. Davies didn't bring any position papers because the EU wouldn't read them. Barnier will hand over those stacks of papers to Davies. They are the terms under which Britain can leave the UK. They will be told to take it or leave it.

Chips Lovell · 18-07-2017 11:58AM

We've removed a few posts that weren't up to the standard expected of this forum. Please read the charter, in particular:

High standards of debate and quality posts / threads are required. Repeated one liner, low quality style posts will result in a ban. Threads (and posts) that are not based on serious and legitimate Political discussion will be deleted without warning.

Bushmanpm · 18-07-2017 12:20PM

Professor Moriarty wrote:

This makes perfect sense. Davies didn't bring any position papers because the EU wouldn't read them. Barnier will hand over those stacks of papers to Davies. They are the terms under which Britain can leave the UK. They will be told to take it or leave it.

"...because the EU wouldn't read them" ???
Well THATS constructive and helpful! Yet he's being criticised for NOT bringing anything. Can't win can he?

"...will be told to take it or leave it"
Wow! That's quite some negotiating tactic right there! And the UK are being criticised d by THEIR approach? Quite the tunnel vision going on. If both sides here on boards could at least agree that there's a fair amount of sabre rattling and brinkmanship going on with BOTH sides (not just the one you disagree with) that would be a better approach.

And as for that photo, oldest trick in the book: get a clipboard or some paperwork and look busy and important.

First Up · 18-07-2017 12:22PM

Bushmanpm wrote:

And as for that photo, oldest trick in the book: get a clipboard or some paperwork and look busy and important.

As opposed to looking what?

solodeogloria · 18-07-2017 12:25PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

This makes perfect sense. Davies didn't bring any position papers because the EU wouldn't read them. Barnier will hand over those stacks of papers to Davies. They are the terms under which Britain can leave the UK. They will be told to take it or leave it.

Good afternoon!

If that's how a "negotiation" works with the EU, I'm more than happy to say au revoir, adiós and auf wiedersehen to it.

If that's how the EU works then I'm delighted that the UK is going out and hope it stays out.

Unlike you - I think the UK has a stronger hand than you think. The EU needs continued relations with the UK, in trade, in security and in diplomacy.

I'm also pretty sure that Davis had documents. It's a good idea to put them away for photos due to the risk of leaks. There have been quite a lot in Whitehall lately. Also officials were still negotiating when Davis left so it's a moot point.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Professor Moriarty · 18-07-2017 12:29PM

Bushmanpm wrote: »

"...because the EU wouldn't read them" ???
Well THATS constructive and helpful! Yet he's being criticised for NOT bringing anything. Can't win can he?

"...will be told to take it or leave it"
Wow! That's quite some negotiating tactic right there! And the UK are being criticised d by THEIR approach? Quite the tunnel vision going on. If both sides here on boards could at least agree that there's a fair amount of sabre rattling and brinkmanship going on with BOTH sides (not just the one you disagree with) that would be a better approach.

And as for that photo, oldest trick in the book: get a clipboard or some paperwork and look busy and important.

What is there to negotiate? Britain wants to leave - here's the terms. If they don't like it, who cares? What are they going to do? They have three options:
1. Flounce off with no deal.
2. Stay under current arrangements.
3. Agree to the EU's terms.

Professor Moriarty · 18-07-2017 12:32PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

If that's how a "negotiation" works with the EU, I'm more than happy to say au revoir, adiós and auf wiedersehen to it.

If that's how the EU works then I'm delighted that the UK is going out and hope it stays out.

Unlike you - I think the UK has a stronger hand than you think. The EU needs continued relations with the UK, in trade, in security and in diplomacy.

I'm also pretty sure that Davis had documents. It's a good idea to put them away for photos due to the risk of leaks. There have been quite a lot in Whitehall lately. Also officials were still negotiating when Davis left so it's a moot point.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Indeed the UK has a strong hand. But the EU's is infinitely stronger because Britain has far more to lose than the EU. So they will accept the EU's terms. They've being doing exactly that to date.

Regarding how things work politically in relation to Brexit. How's the EU doing? How's Britain getting on?

Calina · 18-07-2017 12:42PM

I think that is an over simplified view of matters.

The first item on the agenda which is very negotiable is the exit settlement.

The default no negotiations is crash out. Mitigation for both sides can be negotiated. The issue is the the UK desperately needs help from soneone who has a clue.

I am fully in favour of the EU negotiating strongly in its interest. That is its role. But while the UK has a very poor position, there are still details to be worked out. The UK can negotiate those if they can find a detail oriented negotiator.

ambro25 · 18-07-2017 01:58PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

<big pic>

I prefer Ben Jennings' interpretation:

DE9bBjwW0AAKbOX.jpg:large

:pac::D

Calina wrote: »

<...>

The first item on the agenda which is very negotiable is the exit settlement.

The default no negotiations is crash out. Mitigation for both sides can be negotiated. The issue is the the UK desperately needs help from soneone who has a clue.

<...>

From the various UK position papers output by -one presumes- Whitehall about the core issues of the exit settlement, I pretty much doubt that "someone who has a clue" and a "details-oriented negotiatior" would suffice, in the circumstances.

Particularly given the deal-notionally-agreed-by-October-2018 timescale, once you've factored in the delaying factor of the GE, and 2 Parliamentary summer recesses (why aren't they foregoing their holidays to continue Parliamentary work about something as important to the UK as Brexit?)

Fratton Fred · 18-07-2017 02:45PM

First Up wrote: »

This is the bit lost on many Brexiteers. Britain will negotiate its new trade agreements with about 10% of the negotiating strength it had as part of the EU.

Why should China or Japan offer Britain better terms than they have the EU?

It is more nonsensical fantasy - just like expecting former colonies thousands of miles away to fill the hole in their exports after they are turfed out of the single market.

The logic is and one that I believe has some merits, is that the UK can negotiate a deal with China (or whoever) that doesn't need to reflect the needs of the Flemish Farming community or Czech Visa requirements.

Trade deals aren't just based on the size of the party involved, like any commercial transaction, they reflect the commercial value of each party to the other.

For example, a coffee shop in Cork might get a 20% discount off the local dairy because they use 50 litres of milk per day. Apple may also buy milk off the local dairy, but despite them being the biggest company on the planet, only buy 10 litres of milk per day, so the dairy only gives them a 5% discount.

As we all know lads, size isn't everything.

murphaph · 18-07-2017 02:55PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Trade deals aren't just based on the size of the party involved, like any commercial transaction, they reflect the commercial value of each party to the other.

For example, a coffee shop in Cork might get a 20% discount off the local dairy because they use 50 litres of milk per day. Apple may also buy milk off the local dairy, but despite them being the biggest company on the planet, only buy 10 litres of milk per day, so the dairy only gives them a 5% discount.

As we all know lads, size isn't everything.

What would the UK buy more of from China than the EU?

Your coffee shop example is not valid here anyway. The UK government when negotiating the FTA can't guarantee to buy anything from China and the EU is always more likely being 9 times the size of the UK to "buy more Chinese stuff", so we're back to size mattering.

Fratton Fred · 18-07-2017 03:11PM

murphaph wrote: »

What would the UK buy more of from China than the EU?

Your coffee shop example is not valid here anyway. The UK government when negotiating the FTA can't guarantee to buy anything from China and the EU is always more likely being 9 times the size of the UK to "buy more Chinese stuff", so we're back to size mattering.

China is probably a bad example, because it is such a massive market for pretty much everyone.

Not necessarily more of something, but the eu has very protectionist policies when it comes to imports from outside the eu, so it may be that the UK is just a far more attractive market for certain goods.

Peregrinus · 18-07-2017 03:34PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

China is probably a bad example, because it is such a massive market for pretty much everyone.

Not necessarily more of something, but the eu has very protectionist policies when it comes to imports from outside the eu, so it may be that the UK is just a far more attractive market for certain goods.

Yes, that's true. But given the scale of the free trade agreements that the UK is walking away from through Brexit, both in terms of the size of the markets and the range of goods and services covered, the notion that they can compensate for this through good deals focussed on the "certain goods" for which the UK is a more attractive market than the EU is not very plausible. Off-hand, I can't think of any goods for which UK imports would exceed EU-27 imports, except maybe good for which the UK is a net importer and the EU-27 is a next exporter, like wine. And if the UK's trade deal strategy amounts to doing deals with China and India on the basis that they'll buy lots of Chinese and Indian wine, well, good luck with that.

View · 18-07-2017 03:35PM

Calina wrote: »

I think that is an over simplified view of matters.

The first item on the agenda which is very negotiable is the exit settlement.

Actually the ONLY items on the agenda all relate to the exit settlement. There aren't going to be any negotiations on a possible transition period, much less a possible post-Brexit deal, until the majority of the exit settlement is agreed with only a few minor points left over.

View · 18-07-2017 03:41PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

This makes perfect sense. Davies didn't bring any position papers because the EU wouldn't read them. Barnier will hand over those stacks of papers to Davies. They are the terms under which Britain can leave the UK. They will be told to take it or leave it.

Good afternoon!

If that's how a "negotiation" works with the EU, I'm more than happy to say au revoir, adiós and auf wiedersehen to it.

That's how negotiations with all major economic players work. When "Team USA" walk in the room, they are there to maximise the deal they can get for the USA; they are not going to throw any part of the US economy under a bus so that the UK's Brexit politicians can have an easy win.

Professor Moriarty · 18-07-2017 03:43PM

Further to the idea that 'No deal is better than a bad deal', Moody's paint a very grim picture of that scenario:

For the UK, such a “no deal” scenario would result in weaker macroeconomic outturns, including slower growth or outright recession as well as higher unemployment and inflation.

Possible restrictions on immigration could also exacerbate skill shortages in certain sectors. One key adjustment channel in these circumstances would be the exchange rate, which was likely fall sharply, Moody’s said.

On a corporate level, UK firms would be severely hit by trade disruption. “A weaker economy would clearly weigh on corporate credit metrics, with reduced domestic demand eroding revenues and profitability,” it said.

Companies reliant on “just-in-time supply chains” could also be severely affected by increased border inspections.

Infrastructural operators in the UK, it said, would be hit in different ways with some only suffering moderately with others more severely impacted.

While domestically regulated networks and water companies would be insulated from cyclical developments, an economic slowdown might negatively affect UK bus and rail companies, for instance, albeit the impact would be partly mitigated by limited direct EU exposure.

For airports, aviation and ports, however, Moody’s said the impact could be more substantial “or even dramatic”, reflecting the loss of institutional arrangements that the UK enjoys as an EU member.

Reports like this simply strengthen the EU's hand.

Fratton Fred · 18-07-2017 03:49PM

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes, that's true. But given the scale of the free trade agreements that the UK is walking away from through Brexit, both in terms of the size of the markets and the range of goods and services covered, the notion that they can compensate for this through good deals focussed on the "certain goods" for which the UK is a more attractive market than the EU is not very plausible. Off-hand, I can't think of any goods for which UK imports would exceed EU-27 imports, except maybe good for which the UK is a net importer and the EU-27 is a next exporter, like wine. And if the UK's trade deal strategy amounts to doing deals with China and India on the basis that they'll buy lots of Chinese and Indian wine, well, good luck with that.

Don't knock Indian wine

That's the principle, I didn't say it was water tight.

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments