Brexit discussion thread II

joeysoap · 26-07-2017 10:59AM

I was on a airport transfer bus yesterday in Portugal. Two young Welsh people in the seat beside me (minibus). He was at Bristol university and she was waiting on A level results. Educated and young. Chat evolved to Brexit. They were 100% for it. Both thought that it would take 'maybe' 30 years (I'm not kidding) before it would affect them.

And no, they definitely didn't want a 2nd referendum.

Water John · 26-07-2017 11:24AM

Wait until they are in the passport control queue and you walk on. Their view may change quickly.

oppenheimer1 · 26-07-2017 11:30AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I'm sticking to one reply to the thread a day now. I think I serve a useful purpose in providing some balance to the thread, so I will keep posting for now, but in a more limited fashion.

That's very selfless of you. Much thanks.

ancapailldorcha · 26-07-2017 11:47AM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

That's very selfless of you. Much thanks.

Stop making snide digs at other posters.

Sam Russell · 26-07-2017 12:09PM

joeysoap wrote: »

I was on a airport transfer bus yesterday in Portugal. Two young Welsh people in the seat beside me (minibus). He was at Bristol university and she was waiting on A level results. Educated and young. Chat evolved to Brexit. They were 100% for it. Both thought that it would take 'maybe' 30 years (I'm not kidding) before it would affect them.

And no, they definitely didn't want a 2nd referendum.

Two years ago, the GBP was at 70p to the Euro and today it is heading fot 90p. That is a 28% decline, directly attributed to Brexit. I would assume an 18 year old and a twenty year old travelling abroad would have noticed this, particularly if they were highly educated. Unless of course their very existence id funded by the Bank of Mum and Dad and they are not funding themselves.

They will learn the truth well within those thirty years. Particularly if they are force fed chlorinated chicken and hormone fed beef.

I suspect it will not be long before the UK joins the Euro - by reaching parity with it.

Professor Moriarty · 26-07-2017 01:25PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Two years ago, the GBP was at 70p to the Euro and today it is heading fot 90p. That is a 28% decline, directly attributed to Brexit. I would assume an 18 year old and a twenty year old travelling abroad would have noticed this, particularly if they were highly educated. Unless of course their very existence id funded by the Bank of Mum and Dad and they are not funding themselves.

They will learn the truth well within those thirty years. Particularly if they are force fed chlorinated chicken and hormone fed beef.

I suspect it will not be long before the UK joins the Euro - by reaching parity with it.

Add in WTO tariffs and things will become very expensive.

joeysoap · 26-07-2017 01:46PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Two years ago, the GBP was at 70p to the Euro and today it is heading fot 90p. That is a 28% decline, directly attributed to Brexit. I would assume an 18 year old and a twenty year old travelling abroad would have noticed this, particularly if they were highly educated. Unless of course their very existence id funded by the Bank of Mum and Dad and they are not funding themselves.

They had been in Portugal for 3 weeks. Her mum owns an apartment in Lagos in the Algarve and his dad has a place in Los Gigantes in Tenerife. So definitely bank of mum and dad. They were like a lot of young people nowadays, they were constantly checking the route the driver was taking on their phones. (As if it was going to make any difference)

Sam Russell · 26-07-2017 02:28PM

joeysoap wrote: »

They had been in Portugal for 3 weeks. Her mum owns an apartment in Lagos in the Algarve and his dad has a place in Los Gigantes in Tenerife. So definitely bank of mum and dad. They were like a lot of young people nowadays, they were constantly checking the route the driver was taking on their phones. (As if it was going to make any difference)

I would also add that Bank of M&D requires the beneficiaries to fully subscribe the the political views of the shareholders of the Bank of M&D, and therefore they are brainwashed in this regard. Probably all their friends from school are in the same position. Not surprising so, but I think in five years time, reality will take hold of them, but too late - pity.

However, on the good side for them - there will be plenty of jobs for them cleaning hotels, picking fruit and working in take-away outfits flipping burgers.

First Up · 26-07-2017 02:32PM

Sam Russell wrote:

I would also add that Bank of M&D requires the beneficiaries to fully subscribe the the political views of the shareholders of the Bank of M&D, and therefore they are brainwashed in this regard.

I would have thought that Mums and Dads who had invested in property in Portugal would have the sense to want to Remain.

murphaph · 26-07-2017 02:46PM

First Up wrote: »

I would have thought that Mums and Dads who had invested in property in Portugal would have the sense to want to Remain.

LOL. Even expat Brits who LIVE permanently in such places voted in numbers for Brexit. You just can't account for the stupidity of some people. Now their pensions are already worth significantly less and Brexit hasn't even happened.

Sam Russell · 26-07-2017 03:03PM

murphaph wrote: »

LOL. Even expat Brits who LIVE permanently in such places voted in numbers for Brexit. You just can't account for the stupidity of some people. Now their pensions are already worth significantly less and Brexit hasn't even happened.

Not only smaller pensions but their E111 cards will soon be history, and they will have to fork out for private health insurance, and could well be planning to be on the boat home as well by October if there is no progress in Brexit talks. Expect Spanish and French property to be on sale soon.

They sell The Sun, Daily Express, and The Daily Mail in these ex-pat British enclaves. It feeds their prejudices.

sondagefaux · 26-07-2017 03:52PM

murphaph wrote: »

But what's to stop a Northern Irish food firm importing chlorine washed chicken, making curries out of it and exporting those south of the border?

Customs checks are definitely coming IMO, and not just because of potential lower food standards.

I just hope our dear government has a contingency plan to rapidly expand capacity at our southern ports. We may need urgent assistance from our EU partners also to make sure we can still ship product directly to France as I believe there will be chaos at British ports and again at EU ports receiving ferries from the UK. The big problem will be in sourcing ferries I suspect.

Stupid Brexit.

Unless the UK remains in the Single Market and signs a Customs Union Agreement with the EU (Turkey has one with the EU, although it excludes a lot of product types), there will be customs checks along the border between NI and the republic.

Every 'third country' (EU jargon for states that are either not in the EU or in the Single Market) have customs checks applied on their products.

The checks for food are particularly strigent and each consignment of animal-derived food (including meat, fish, dairy products etc) from a non-EU country that enters the EU has to be accompanied by a veterinary certificate.

Apart from that, the consignments of food from non-EU countries can only enter the EU at specified locations, previously known as Border Inspection Posts, now known as Border Control Posts.

There are none of these along the border between NI and the republic (no need since both have been in the EEC/EU since 1973) and the nearest one to NI is at Dublin Port.

Long before food even gets to the EU's borders, the EU must be satisfied that the country of origin's food safety inspection standards and regime are up to EU standards and the EU sends its own inspectors to, for example, meat plants to ensure they comply with EU standards.

Only food processing plants that meet EU standards and are authorised by the EU can export to the EU.

It takes a minimum of six months for the EU to assess the food safety inspection regime of a 'third country', during which time no food processing plants in the UK will be authorised to send food of animal origin (and much food of plant origin too) to the EU.

About 25% of the milk produced in Northern Ireland is sent across the border for processing.

Without some agreement between the UK and EU, whether transitional or permament, or without a UK decision to remain in the Single Market, that will come to a halt on Brexit day, set for 30 March 2019.

Likewise consignments of meat, fish etc from NI (and the rest of the UK) will come to a halt on Brexit day, without some agreement between the UK and the EU.

Even if there is an agreement (which would have to an agreement including tariffs as EU tariffs on many imported foodstuffs are quite high, except for imports from very poor countries, set at 0% under the EU's 'Everything But Arms' initiative, and for imports from countries the EU has free trade deals with), the infrastructure to check good coming into the EU from the UK is simply not there.

At present, there's no need for it, since the UK is obviously in the EU. After it leaves, the customs infrastructure will have to be built by the EU states, but who's going to pay for it?

Why should Ireland and France etc have to pay for customs facilities to help UK firms import stuff into the EU which competes with their domestic suppliers?

My guess is that the UK will end up paying for much of the new infrastructure required, and this will come in the form of regular ongoing payments into the EU's budget.

sondagefaux · 26-07-2017 04:03PM

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/motors/car-buyers-can-save-up-to-9-500-by-shopping-up-north-1.3161704

Kiss goodbye to that major perk after Brexit.

If you are already living in an EU country, and you wish to import a car you bought outside the EU, it is treated just like any other imported goods. You will have to pay customs duty and import VAT, unless any reliefs apply.

Consult your country’s customs and VAT authorities for how to make the customs declaration and pay the tax or whether you qualify for any relief.
You will also have to register the car and pay any associated registration or road taxes.
Legal base: Article 30 of VAT Directive

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/individuals/car-taxation/buying-selling-cars_en

Capt'n Midnight · 26-07-2017 10:14PM

swampgas wrote: »

I thought this comment was accurate though, and (IMO) it reflects the way mainland Europe sees the history of WW2 through a very different prism to the UK. The EU project is far more than a trading area. It was from its inception a political project, something that Brexit supporters seem to forget over and over again.

For the rest of Europe defeat by Hitler meant occupation, real national humiliation, ethnic cleansing and collaboration in genocide. It was so bad it left everyone, Left or Right, saying 'Never again'. The French won't make a heroic film about 1940, there is no Greek version of Allo Allo, and no Polish Dad's Army. For them the Second World War is no triumphant tale, and certainly no joke.

For the ex-Soviet Bloc , including part of Germany, there are also bad memories that are more recent.

Similarly for the ex Yugoslavian countries.

For Greece and Cyprus , Turkey is a powerful neighbour and interesting times.

When the UK joined the EU , Spain and Portugal were still dictatorships. In 1981 the Spanish parliament was taken over in a coup attempt.

Neither ourselves nor Malta want to be ruled by the UK again.

Ask any jet buff to identify which was the first Western European supersonic jet to be deployed ?
Could fly at twice the speed of sound and was designed to climb fast to intercept Russian bombers , Avon Engine, went supersonic in a climb on it's first flight ?

It's not the UK Lightning , it's the Swedish Saab Drakken. Sweden wasn't invaded during WWII but has had lots of run-ins with the Russians over the years.

So that's pretty much the EU27.

Jim2007 · 27-07-2017 12:30AM

Unless the UK remains in the Single Market and signs a Customs Union Agreement with the EU (Turkey has one with the EU, although it excludes a lot of product types), there will be customs checks along the border between NI and the republic.

Not necessarily no. There are already precedence within the EU which which would allow NI to remain within the customs union after BREXIT so it is not a new idea at all, although NI would be the biggest so far. We will have to wait and see.

solodeogloria · 27-07-2017 07:40AM

Good morning!

Let's have today's Brexit roundup.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

And? Every time you say that people voted for sovereignty or immigration control or whatever, you forget that you're describing minorities. More people voted to remain than any individual segment of the leave vote.

I don't think a minority wants to leave the EU. I don't think a minority want a half in half out approach to the EU either. I'll deal with your tweet later, it doesn't say what you want it to say.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You're back to the strawmen. Nobody said that there would be no clout whatsoever. CETA took 7 years to negotiate and does not include services.

It isn't a straw man. You're saying it's either a choice between single market membership or trading with the rest of the world. CETA is a good model and if a good Brexit takes 7 years to negotiate I'm happy to spend that long to get the right deal.

The UK isn't going for the EU-lite option because that is worse than it has now. A better option is to seek maximum freedom to enable it to expand global trade with less restrictive trade terms.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

So why has Liam Fox been dispatched to various countries then?

Hold up. Let's remember how it started. You claim that Liam Fox has done nothing. I tell you that there are constraints on what he can do because of European Union law. You now ask why he's had informal discussions with other countries?

Do you see how this train of discussion doesn't make sense?

In short informal discussion is permitted but negotiations are not. This is why he's been in the Asia Pacific region and in America amongst other places this year. What's good about what he is doing is that he's determining if there is a desire for free trade deals and there are. That's a very useful job despite what people claim.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

And trade with the EU (and EFTA) is worth more than the rest of the world combined.

Why are you repeating this when I demonstrated that this was false in my last post? The EU and EFTA together based on 2015 export figures still make up a minority of trade.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The EU was pressured into it by protests. Odd that it seems to be more responsive than Westminster.

Free trade with America is in Britain's national interest. Yes there are things to be discussed but perhaps I'm a complete Thatcherite free marketeer but I think that chlorinated chicken and private contracts in the NHS can and should be discussed. Michael Gove disagrees with me on the chicken, but I think it's entirely safe and the consumer having a choice wouldn't be the worst outcome.

If concessions like those led to a significant easing of import terms of British goods and services into the US and a significant increase in British exports to America as a result I'd be all for it.

Besides - they aren't asking for American laws to take primacy over British ones, they aren't asking for fishing rights in British waters or free movement of Americans to the UK.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Except that we are. As I posted before, UK public opinion is favouring single market membership now which entails both the customs union and the ECJ. Without the customs union, many companies will leave as their "Just-in-time" manufacturing model is dependent on the customs union.

You need to read your tweet more carefully. It is referring to "single market access" not "single market membership".

It doesn't mean that most British people support EEA membership. It means that most British people would consider free movement secondary to good access to the single market in a free trade deal like CETA.

I agree with them in fact. Market access is obviously much more important.

This is why I only support migration controls to for low wage sectors such have been putting pressure in British workers. For skilled migration, provided they can demonstrate that they are working in a skilled area I've got no issues with continued rights of movement.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

IS. Presently, as in not prevented by EU membership. What would the UK have to give up to sign such a deal. The NHS? Food standards?

I'm not opposed to considering importing chlorinated chicken and allowing the British consumer to decide. I'm also not opposed to considering American firms to have access to NHS contracts provided the NHS remains free at the point of entry.

Both of these demands would require a lot less of the UK than EU membership or EEA membership.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The EU counts for a disproportionally high amount of that trade. You have to take literally every other country on Earth to make it a minority.

So now you finally agree with me? 44% of goods and services go to the EU? The EU share has been decreasing also.

Again, you're presenting my position as either or. I support a comprehensive free trade deal. Meaning a majority of the trade into the EU will be maintained while the UK expands into other markets.

This is the best of both worlds and it's a genuine option.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Sorry but that's a crock when you see the amount of working people stuck in poverty because of high rents and low wages. My point isn't US companies running NHS services, it's that they'll want much great access to win contracts for those service. We simply don't know because this deal will be conducted in secret with no referendum from the public.

How do you link poverty to a US trade deal?

High rents and low wages exist for a number of reasons. High rents are down to a housing shortage in the south east and across England and low wages are a result of a number of pressures including uncontrolled low wage labour migration.

More trade with America will mean more business opportunities for people in the UK and that will mean more jobs and better career opportunities.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Which means, solo, this isn't about a "huge expansion" of UK imports to to the US; it's about an expansion of US exports of chicken to the UK. Almost certainly the US will be pressing the UK not to require that chlorine-washed chicken be labelled as such, which means that UK consumers won't, in practice, find it easy to choose between chlorine-washed and unchlorinated chicken. But the downside is not just to UK consumers; it's also to UK chicken producers, who will face competition from cheap American imported chicken meat, and who may not be able to compete on quality if the consumer can't distinguish between chlorine-treated and chlorine-untreated meat.

I never said this. What I said was that if importing chlorinated chicken and allowing American firms to compete for NHS contracts is a cost of a free trade deal with better trading terms for the UK which expands US imports of British goods and services then I'm all for it.

I'm confused as to how you thought my post was about the UK exporting chlorinated chicken to the US! :pac:

Sam Russell wrote: »

Two years ago, the GBP was at 70p to the Euro and today it is heading fot 90p. That is a 28% decline, directly attributed to Brexit. I would assume an 18 year old and a twenty year old travelling abroad would have noticed this, particularly if they were highly educated. Unless of course their very existence id funded by the Bank of Mum and Dad and they are not funding themselves.

They will learn the truth well within those thirty years. Particularly if they are force fed chlorinated chicken and hormone fed beef.

I suspect it will not be long before the UK joins the Euro - by reaching parity with it.

Currency depreciation of sterling isn't entirely bad. It was also predicted by the IMF in 2015. Sterling was overvalued two years ago. Sterling is now at a competitive level which is good for exporters but a strain on consumers.

As trade terms become clear it should ease up.

On this anecdotal story, it's worth pointing out that by and large wealthier people in Britain voted to remain. It's also worth pointing out that the referendum communicated very strongly real concerns that working class people had in the UK particularly about migration. The Prime Minister is working on those concerns by dealing with them in the negotiations rather than pretending they weren't there.

Perhaps instead of dismissing Leave voters as stupid it's time for people to deal with their real concerns.

sondagefaux wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/motors/car-buyers-can-save-up-to-9-500-by-shopping-up-north-1.3161704

Kiss goodbye to that major perk after Brexit.

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/individuals/car-taxation/buying-selling-cars_en

Well seeing that VRT is seen by the European Commission as going against the spirit of the single market, it might get abolished and it might look more competitive.

In any case currency perks for Irish car buyers were never guaranteed.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

listermint · 27-07-2017 08:27AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

Let's have today's Brexit roundup.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I've one question, are you not Irish? Or are you not English living in Ireland. So I'm perplexed why you are happy to wait seven years for complete brexit surely being English living in the EU you are getting a raw deal here. I don't really get your pro brexit stance from a personal basis.

Because regardless of what way you voted you are ultra pro brexit right now with no real reason given your situation.

Intrigued?..

steddyeddy · 27-07-2017 10:05AM

Immigration minister Brandon Lewis said this morning that freedom of movement will end on March 2019. Great, I should be gone then! The racists who voted Brexit should be delighted with this. Not all Brexit voters are racist mind, but it's certainly likely that all racists are Brexit voters.

Freedom of movement of workers between Britain and the European Union will end when Britain withdraws from the bloc, UK immigration minister Brandon Lewis said this morning. From RTE and the BBC.

Free movement of labour ends when we leave the European Union in spring 2019," Mr Lewis told BBC radio.

Mr Lewis also said a new immigration system would be in place by spring 2019.

Britain is due to leave the EU in March 2019.

In an article in the Financial Times, Interior Minister Amber Rudd said: "Once we have left the EU, this government will apply its own immigration rules and requirements that will meet the needs of UK businesses, but also of wider society.

"I also want to reassure businesses and EU nationals that we will ensure there is no 'cliff edge' once we leave the bloc," Ms Rudd added.

Professor Moriarty · 27-07-2017 10:12AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

Let's have today's Brexit roundup.

I don't think a minority wants to leave the EU. I don't think a minority want a half in half out approach to the EU either. I'll deal with your tweet later, it doesn't say what you want it to say.

Wrong. 54% would vote remain today.

It isn't a straw man. You're saying it's either a choice between single market membership or trading with the rest of the world. CETA is a good model and if a good Brexit takes 7 years to negotiate I'm happy to spend that long to get the right deal.

Wrong. You are comparing two very different economies.

"A British departure from the EU and its single market would be the largest programme of re-regulation and re-protection of trade in advanced economies since the Smooth-Hawley tariffs in 1930. Substituting single-market access with a CETA-style trade agreement would not change that. CETA works for Canada – an economy that is distant from Europe and with an export profile based on commodities. For the UK, whose trade with the EU are in sectors highly exposed to regulatory protection (finance, nuclear power equipment, pharmaceuticals, et cetera) it would lead to a serious loss of market access and commercial integration."

The UK isn't going for the EU-lite option because that is worse than it has now. A better option is to seek maximum freedom to enable it to expand global trade with less restrictive trade terms

.

Wrong. The UK can ask for what it wants. The EU will tell it what it's getting.

Hold up. Let's remember how it started. You claim that Liam Fox has done nothing. I tell you that there are constraints on what he can do because of European Union law. You now ask why he's had informal discussions with other countries?

Do you see how this train of discussion doesn't make sense?

In short informal discussion is permitted but negotiations are not. This is why he's been in the Asia Pacific region and in America amongst other places this year. What's good about what he is doing is that he's determining if there is a desire for free trade deals and there are. That's a very useful job despite what people claim.

Wrong. The UK has no credible and experienced trade experts. Also, they haven't been told the conditions under which they will be leaving the EU so they can't discuss trade in any meaningful way. They might as well be talking about the weather. Bluff and bluster for the Torygraph.

Why are you repeating this when I demonstrated that this was false in my last post? The EU and EFTA together based on 2015 export figures still make up a minority of trade.

Free trade with America is in Britain's national interest. Yes there are things to be discussed but perhaps I'm a complete Thatcherite free marketeer but I think that chlorinated chicken and private contracts in the NHS can and should be discussed. Michael Gove disagrees with me on the chicken, but I think it's entirely safe and the consumer having a choice wouldn't be the worst outcome.

If concessions like those led to a significant easing of import terms of British goods and services into the US and a significant increase in British exports to America as a result I'd be all for it.

Besides - they aren't asking for American laws to take primacy over British ones, they aren't asking for fishing rights in British waters or free movement of Americans to the UK.

Wrong. Aside from the impact on animal welfare, chlorinated chicken does increase risk to human health. A race to the bottom with the USA on workers' rights and health standards? Enjoy that.

You need to read your tweet more carefully. It is referring to "single market access" not "single market membership".

It doesn't mean that most British people support EEA membership. It means that most British people would consider free movement secondary to good access to the single market in a free trade deal like CETA.

Wrong. CETA won't work for the UK. Read up on it.

It doesn't mean that most British people support EEA membership. It means that most British people would consider free movement secondary to good access to the single market in a free trade deal like CETA.

I agree with them in fact. Market access is obviously much more important.

Then stay in the EU.

This is why I only support migration controls to for low wage sectors such have been putting pressure in British workers. For skilled migration, provided they can demonstrate that they are working in a skilled area I've got no issues with continued rights of movement.

Wrong. A study by the LSE refutes this myth.

I'm not opposed to considering importing chlorinated chicken and allowing the British consumer to decide. I'm also not opposed to considering American firms to have access to NHS contracts provided the NHS remains free at the point of entry.

Both of these demands would require a lot less of the UK than EU membership or EEA membership.

Both of these demands would require a lot less of the UK than EU membership or EEA membership.

So in defence of a possible US/UK trade deal you offer the importing of chlorinated chicken and the opening up of the NHS to American healthcare companies. Yup, as you said, you're a Thatcherite.

So now you finally agree with me? 44% of goods and services go to the EU? The EU share has been decreasing also.

Again, you're presenting my position as either or. I support a comprehensive free trade deal. Meaning a majority of the trade into the EU will be maintained while the UK expands into other markets.

This is the best of both worlds and it's a genuine option.

Wrong. The four freedoms are indivisible. Out of one means out of all.

How do you link poverty to a US trade deal?

High rents and low wages exist for a number of reasons. High rents are down to a housing shortage in the south east and across England and low wages are a result of a number of pressures including uncontrolled low wage labour migration.

More trade with America will mean more business opportunities for people in the UK and that will mean more jobs and better career opportunities.

So a new trade with the US which entails exhaustive negotiations (Britain has no experienced negotiators), different tariffs, different regulations and 2000 miles travel is better than an existing FTA with harmonised tariffs, harmonised regulations and 30 miles travel to your biggest customer.

Brexit is really dumb isn't it?

I never said this. What I said was that if importing chlorinated chicken and allowing American firms to compete for NHS contracts is a cost of a free trade deal with better trading terms for the UK which expands US imports of British goods and services thenI'm all for it.

I'm confused as to how you thought my post was about the UK exporting chlorinated chicken to the US! :pac:

How is American healthcare for Joe Soap doing these days? You're going to need all those American corporations 'taking care of you' after the chlorinated chicken

Currency depreciation of sterling isn't entirely bad. It was also predicted by the IMF in 2015. Sterling was overvalued two years ago. Sterling is now at a competitive level which is good for exporters but a strain on consumers.

As trade terms become clear it should ease up.

Wrong. Nobody wants their currency involuntarily devalued.

On this anecdotal story, it's worth pointing out that by and large wealthier people in Britain voted to remain. It's also worth pointing out that the referendum communicated very strongly real concerns that working class people had in the UK particularly about migration. The Prime Minister is working on those concerns by dealing with them in the negotiations rather than pretending they weren't there.

Perhaps instead of dismissing Leave voters as stupid it's time for people to deal with their real concerns.

Wrong. The rich lied to the poor. Brexit was and is a lie.

Well seeing that VRT is seen by the European Commission as going against the spirit of the single market, it might get abolished and it might look more competitive.

In any case currency perks for Irish car buyers were never guaranteed.

Wrong. Sterling is predicted to drop further over the next year.

Thomas__ · 27-07-2017 10:48AM

listermint wrote: »

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

Let's have today's Brexit roundup.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I've one question, are you not Irish? Or are you not English living in Ireland. So I'm perplexed why you are happy to wait seven years for complete brexit surely being English living in the EU you are getting a raw deal here. I don't really get your pro brexit stance from a personal basis.

Because regardless of what way you voted you are ultra pro brexit right now with no real reason given your situation.

Intrigued?..

Whether he´s Irish or English, he and his posts are the perfect display for the many Brexiteers of his mindset. Loving it to hang on to be deluded by that Brexit propaganda like so many others. They don´t care about the consequences and still believe that in the end of the day, the EU will bow to the UK and fulfilling all their wishes which will neither come to pass nor will it even be considered by the EU at all.

Some couple of weeks ago, I read in the guardian about some bloke who is already in his early 60s and got married to a Spanish woman. They both are about to move to Spain but the Brit himself still thinks that Brexit is OK just that he likes to benefit from the advantages he still has as a UK citizen in Spain for as long as the UK is still a member of the EU and likes to have that sustained after Brexit as well. Many of his fellow citizens living in Spain for years are left in limbo regarding their future residence status once the UK has left the EU and damn all this Brexit nonsense. I don´t have the link to the article available atm, but this is just another example of the mindset of these people which is quite insane. I really takes something to be that stupid and deluded like such Brexiteers.

Mezcita · 27-07-2017 01:09PM

Thomas__ wrote: »

Whether he´s Irish or English, he and his posts are the perfect display for the many Brexiteers of his mindset. Loving it to hang on to be deluded by that Brexit propaganda like so many others. They don´t care about the consequences and still believe that in the end of the day, the EU will bow to the UK and fulfilling all their wishes which will neither come to pass nor will it even be considered by the EU at all.

Some couple of weeks ago, I read in the guardian about some bloke who is already in his early 60s and got married to a Spanish woman. They both are about to move to Spain but the Brit himself still thinks that Brexit is OK just that he likes to benefit from the advantages he still has as a UK citizen in Spain for as long as the UK is still a member of the EU and likes to have that sustained after Brexit as well. Many of his fellow citizens living in Spain for years are left in limbo regarding their future residence status once the UK has left the EU and damn all this Brexit nonsense. I don´t have the link to the article available atm, but this is just another example of the mindset of these people which is quite insane. I really takes something to be that stupid and deluded like such Brexiteers.

In fairness though, it is interesting to get the views of someone who thinks that Brexit will go well for the UK even if the majority of us don't agree with him.

There was a great article in the Guardian a few weeks ago about how (even though it's shaping up to be an absolute car crash) Brexit has to happen. Primarily because any attempt to stop it will be seen as stopping democracy but it would also give the rapid UKIP types more ammunition. It's the only way that people there will learn that they had a pretty good deal as their normal lives are affected by the decision over the next few years. But it also should make the average Joe Bloggs really question how badly their elected government is representing them. Once the dust settles after what I think will be a hard Brexit with no deal in place then the reality will really start to sink in.

Strangest thing for me is that in my London office over here nobody talks about this stuff. Almost as if Brexit is not going to happen. Basically sleep walking off the cliff.

Thomas__ · 27-07-2017 01:32PM

Mezcita wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

Whether he´s Irish or English, he and his posts are the perfect display for the many Brexiteers of his mindset. Loving it to hang on to be deluded by that Brexit propaganda like so many others. They don´t care about the consequences and still believe that in the end of the day, the EU will bow to the UK and fulfilling all their wishes which will neither come to pass nor will it even be considered by the EU at all.

Some couple of weeks ago, I read in the guardian about some bloke who is already in his early 60s and got married to a Spanish woman. They both are about to move to Spain but the Brit himself still thinks that Brexit is OK just that he likes to benefit from the advantages he still has as a UK citizen in Spain for as long as the UK is still a member of the EU and likes to have that sustained after Brexit as well. Many of his fellow citizens living in Spain for years are left in limbo regarding their future residence status once the UK has left the EU and damn all this Brexit nonsense. I don´t have the link to the article available atm, but this is just another example of the mindset of these people which is quite insane. I really takes something to be that stupid and deluded like such Brexiteers.

In fairness though, it is interesting to get the views of someone who thinks that Brexit will go well for the UK even if the majority of us don't agree with him.

There was a great article in the Guardian a few weeks ago about how (even though it's shaping up to be an absolute car crash) Brexit has to happen. Primarily because any attempt to stop it will be seen as stopping democracy but it would also give the rapid UKIP types more ammunition. It's the only way that people there will learn that they had a pretty good deal as their normal lives are affected by the decision over the next few years. But it also should make the average Joe Bloggs really question how badly their elected government is representing them. Once the dust settles after what I think will be a hard Brexit with no deal in place then the reality will really start to sink in.

Strangest thing for me is that in my London office over here nobody talks about this stuff. Almost as if Brexit is not going to happen. Basically sleep walking off the cliff.

To engange oneself with some representative poster from the Brexiteers camp is up to those who like to do that. I for my part have read enough and the many of them write the same stuff (more or less) always repeating what they always bring forth to back up their pov. Facts are of no interest to them nor are any concernes resulting form this clumsy Brexit negotiations which will lead to exactly what you said, the Exit of the UK without a deal and this will the Point where it really will get very tough for the Brits themselves and the breaking up of the UK is more a real prospect then as of today. But it´s not only them, it has further complications in it:

http://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/northern-ireland-would-be-collateral-damage-if-brexit-talks-between-ireland-and-uk-fail-35950750.html

Global players of the financial market are already moving or prepare to move out from London to other places, like Dublin. Well, I welcome that as far as the Republic of Ireland can get her benefits out of it for herself. As usual, it´s nothing that bothers the Brexiteers at all. Other economical sections will be affected by moving out of companies as well. Again, nothing to worry about in the mindset of the Brexiter.

It will be as you, me and many others who are not supporters of this Brexit nonsense see and predict it, the Brits will be on the losing end in this and this for the sake of democracy where the very people who insist on respecting the result of that BrexitRef are strongheaded refusing another Referendum when the Brexit negotiations are completed. How this goes conform with democracy is beyond me, really. What is even worse is that they are so stubborn and determined to ruin their own country and drag the others with them. This is political and economical suicide and has nothing to do with democracy at all. It has more to do to Keep a result from a Referendum which was only achieved by lying to people, guided by false hopes false promises, illusions combined with some silly nostalgic picture from long gone eras and making people believe that they will return in all that "supposed glory" from the past, which won´t happen.

This is no democracy, this is holding the other half which voted against Brexit in ransom, to make sure that the disaster will have its way.

The reasons for why there is no talk about Brexit at your workplace is probably because if there would be such debates, it would have certain negative effects on the whole work and that is what nobody wants.

One has to stand up to those UKIP bullies and not to give them the tool of driving the UK govt into insane decisions and thus giving them the "indirect" opportunity to hold the country in ransom for fear that they might win more seats in elections. But as it is evident by now, the Tories and Labour fell to this tactic and that´s because the leaders of both parties are Brexiteers themselves, each one in their own ways.

Fratton Fred · 27-07-2017 01:49PM

Thomas__ wrote: »

To engange oneself with some representative poster from the Brexiteers camp is up to those who like to do that. I for my part have read enough and the many of them write the same stuff (more or less) always repeating what they always bring forth to back up their pov. Facts are of no interest to them nor are any concernes resulting form this clumsy Brexit negotiations which will lead to exactly what you said, the Exit of the UK without a deal and this will the Point where it really will get very tough for the Brits themselves and the breaking up of the UK is more a real prospect then as of today. But it´s not only them, it has further complications in it:

So you don't want this to be a discussion forum on Brexit, you want it to be an echo chamber where people simply agree with your position?

Thomas__ wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/northern-ireland-would-be-collateral-damage-if-brexit-talks-between-ireland-and-uk-fail-35950750.html

Global players of the financial market are already moving or prepare to move out from London to other places, like Dublin. Well, I welcome that as far as the Republic of Ireland can get her benefits out of it for herself. As usual, it´s nothing that bothers the Brexiteers at all. Other economical sections will be affected by moving out of companies as well. Again, nothing to worry about in the mindset of the Brexiter.

You are incorrect there. No financial company has indicated that it is moving out of London, they are setting up a european base elsewhere. There is a massive difference. For example, Goldman Sachs have purchased a propoerty that will allow it to increase its Dublin workforce from 500 to up to 1000 people. They currently emply 14,000 people in the UK.

Thomas__ wrote: »

It will be as you, me and many others who are not supporters of this Brexit nonsense see and predict it, the Brits will be on the losing end in this and this for the sake of democracy where the very people who insist on respecting the result of that BrexitRef are strongheaded refusing another Referendum when the Brexit negotiations are completed.

This seems pretty pointless at the moment, because the UK government is not in a position to unilaterally decide it is remaining in the eu now that article 50 has been invoked. However, there may be something in the negotiations that allows this further down the line.

Thomas__ wrote: »

How this goes conform with democracy is beyond me, really. What is even worse is that they are so stubborn and determined to ruin their own country and drag the others with them. This is political and economical suicide and has nothing to do with democracy at all. It has more to do to Keep a result from a Referendum which was only achieved by lying to people, guided by false hopes false promises, illusions combined with some silly nostalgic picture from long gone eras and making people believe that they will return in all that "supposed glory" from the past, which won´t happen.

This is no democracy, this is holding the other half which voted against Brexit in ransom, to make sure that the disaster will have its way.

The UK Parliament voted to hold a referendum. Only the SNP voted against it. Not respecting the result of that referendum is undemocratic. The Genie is out of the bottle, so to speak.

Thomas__ wrote: »

The reasons for why there is no talk about Brexit at your workplace is probably because if there would be such debates, it would have certain negative effects on the whole work and that is what nobody wants.

the general rule with multinational companies is not to talk about politics. It certainly leads to a better working environment. I regularly speak with colleagues in Tel Aviv, Saudi, Boston and Belfast. I think we can all agree that a political discussion amongst that group would not end well.

Thomas__ wrote: »

One has to stand up to those UKIP bullies and not to give them the tool of driving the UK govt into insane decisions and thus giving them the "indirect" opportunity to hold the country in ransom for fear that they might win more seats in elections. But as it is evident by now, the Tories and Labour fell to this tactic and that´s because the leaders of both parties are Brexiteers themselves, each one in their own ways.

Theresa May is not a Brexiteer.

Nate--IRL-- · 27-07-2017 02:03PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Theresa May is not a Brexiteer.

This is not true.

Nate

Fratton Fred · 27-07-2017 02:23PM

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

This is not true.

Nate

yes it is

Fred

http://www.euronews.com/2016/07/12/what-is-theresa-may-s-view-on-brexit

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/17/theresa-may-mess-isnt-proper-brexiteer-next-prime-minister-must/

sondagefaux · 27-07-2017 02:28PM

Jim2007 wrote: »

Not necessarily no. There are already precedence within the EU which which would allow NI to remain within the customs union after BREXIT so it is not a new idea at all, although NI would be the biggest so far. We will have to wait and see.

The only non-EU state in the EU's Customs Union is Monaco, which has had a customs union with France that long predates the existince of the EEC/EU.

Andorra, San Marino and Turkey have Customs Union agreements with the EU, but they are not part of the EU's Customs Union.

This article explains the differences between being in the EU's Customs Union and having a Customs Union agreement with the EU:

https://www.scer.scot/database/ident-2923

If NI remains part of the UK, how could it have a customs union agreement with the EU unless the rest of the UK does too?

sondagefaux · 27-07-2017 02:33PM

sondagefaux wrote: »

Unless the UK remains in the Single Market and signs a Customs Union Agreement with the EU (Turkey has one with the EU, although it excludes a lot of product types), there will be customs checks along the border between NI and the republic.

Every 'third country' (EU jargon for states that are either not in the EU or in the Single Market) have customs checks applied on their products.

The checks for food are particularly strigent and each consignment of animal-derived food (including meat, fish, dairy products etc) from a non-EU country that enters the EU has to be accompanied by a veterinary certificate.

Apart from that, the consignments of food from non-EU countries can only enter the EU at specified locations, previously known as Border Inspection Posts, now known as Border Control Posts.

There are none of these along the border between NI and the republic (no need since both have been in the EEC/EU since 1973) and the nearest one to NI is at Dublin Port.

Long before food even gets to the EU's borders, the EU must be satisfied that the country of origin's food safety inspection standards and regime are up to EU standards and the EU sends its own inspectors to, for example, meat plants to ensure they comply with EU standards.

Only food processing plants that meet EU standards and are authorised by the EU can export to the EU.

It takes a minimum of six months for the EU to assess the food safety inspection regime of a 'third country', during which time no food processing plants in the UK will be authorised to send food of animal origin (and much food of plant origin too) to the EU.

About 25% of the milk produced in Northern Ireland is sent across the border for processing.

Without some agreement between the UK and EU, whether transitional or permament, or without a UK decision to remain in the Single Market, that will come to a halt on Brexit day, set for 30 March 2019.

Likewise consignments of meat, fish etc from NI (and the rest of the UK) will come to a halt on Brexit day, without some agreement between the UK and the EU.

Even if there is an agreement (which would have to an agreement including tariffs as EU tariffs on many imported foodstuffs are quite high, except for imports from very poor countries, set at 0% under the EU's 'Everything But Arms' initiative, and for imports from countries the EU has free trade deals with), the infrastructure to check good coming into the EU from the UK is simply not there.

At present, there's no need for it, since the UK is obviously in the EU. After it leaves, the customs infrastructure will have to be built by the EU states, but who's going to pay for it?

Why should Ireland and France etc have to pay for customs facilities to help UK firms import stuff into the EU which competes with their domestic suppliers?

My guess is that the UK will end up paying for much of the new infrastructure required, and this will come in the form of regular ongoing payments into the EU's budget.

Satisfying the EU's requirements might be a hell of a lot more difficult for the UK after Brexit:

The UK is "overwhelmingly reliant" on EU workers to enforce animal welfare and food hygiene standards in abattoirs, a group of peers has warned.

The Lords EU Environment Committee said it was concerned 90% of slaughterhouse vets were EU nationals and it was vital they stayed in the UK after Brexit.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40703369

Chips Lovell · 27-07-2017 02:50PM

Hi everyone,
Please read the charter. If you're here just to take swipes at other people, this isn't the forum for you.

swampgas · 27-07-2017 02:55PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

yes it is

Fred

http://www.euronews.com/2016/07/12/what-is-theresa-may-s-view-on-brexit

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/17/theresa-may-mess-isnt-proper-brexiteer-next-prime-minister-must/

Here's an alternative point of view, describing how the PMs approach to the Brexit negotiations have been the opposite of someone who was looking to minimise Brexit, in fact she would appear (by her actions) to be on the extreme end of the Brexit spectrum.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/27/hardliners-soft-brexit-tough-negotiate-properly

When the public voted to leave the EU last year, there was no evidence that it wanted rid of the single market or cared about the European court of justice. The EU was never an election issue. The vote to leave was a proxy for voters’ immigration concerns. It must be honoured. But who could tell which Brexit was preferred, indeed, what the vote meant?

Since the government was strongly for a minimalist interpretation at the time of the vote, it should have gone immediately to Brussels with a problem. It should have explained that it had to withdraw, but believed it in the nation’s best interest to stay as close to Europe as possible. So which of the “softest” options might form the most constructive basis for negotiation?

As it was, Theresa May did the opposite. She ignored Henry Kissinger’s diplomatic maxim, of building confidence by negotiating from areas of agreement towards those of disagreement. She exaggerated disagreement from the start. Like some remainers I know, she seemed to want hard Brexit just to teach the leavers a lesson. She appointed three loud-mouthed Brexiters as her negotiators, hoping that hanging tough at the start would “win” more at the end. She cried hard Brexit at every turn. Inevitably, the EU retorted in kind. It was bad tactics.

We are told that behind the terrible trio of David Davis, Liam Fox and Boris Johnson are 80 of Whitehall’s brightest and best, burning the midnight oil on a deal under sherpa-in-chief Oliver Robbins. We are told they have a deal just around the corner, “the easiest in human history” (Fox). We “can have our cake and eat it” and the EU can “go whistle” (Johnson).

Nate--IRL-- · 27-07-2017 02:55PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

yes it is

Fred

http://www.euronews.com/2016/07/12/what-is-theresa-may-s-view-on-brexit

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/17/theresa-may-mess-isnt-proper-brexiteer-next-prime-minister-must/

Her actions tear those opinion pieces to, eh, pieces.

Nate

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments