Brexit discussion thread II

kingchess · 05-09-2017 05:42PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

This post helpfully identifies the crux.

I don't think there's anything wrong about interim copy and paste deals to maintain as much of the 15% as possible. This is definitely the easier objective to fulfil.

The second objective is to maintain as much trade with the EU as possible. I agree that there will be an impact here, but the aim should be to keep this to a minimum.

The third objective is to sign additional trade deals. The first port of call should be the United States followed by China. Significant increases in exports to both of these destinations should insulate against the shortfall in EU trade that will arise.

Subsequently there's options to expand trade further with other countries.

Nobody is saying there won't be a short to medium term impact from Brexit. Most of the benefits of having control over trade policy are only going to be realised fully after the first three steps are completed.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Not an expert in international trading or any sort of trading,but if 45% of uk exports that go to the EU will be less profitable after Brexit-and even if
the 15% trade deals with other Countries as part of EU trade deals do not incur extra costs(if they can be "cut and pasted"),then it seems to a economic idiot like me that any extra trade deals will only help to make up for lost income from the trade deals that they already have at the moment?or am I missing out on something obvious ??genuine question.

blanch152 · 05-09-2017 05:49PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

that's my point. moderate economic damage to the eu, but it could be devastating for parts of Ireland, but hey, that's fine because as a whole, the eu will still be grand.

When Fine Gael lose all their seats in Cavan, Monaghan, Louth and Donegal and Sinn Fein are knocking on the door of power, the Irish government may start to take a slightly different approach. Meanwhile, Junckers will still pick up his huge pay check and expense allowance.

they aren't though, really. Barnier will never lose his job because the border economy in Ireland goes down the swanny.

so the UK is the German car industry's largest export market. Thanks for clearing that up for us.

By my count FG have 4 TDs in Cavan, Monaghan, Louth and Donegal. Not a lot to lose.

Ireland will suffer from Brexit, but not as much as the UK and Northern Ireland will be worst off. Looking at the trainwreck that is the UK, the Irish will be happy to have a government that at least is attracting jobs from London to replace some of those lost.

We actually have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to use the turbulence in industry to rearrange how this country is organised with the new investment directed to the cities of Limerick and Cork (possibly Galway and Waterford too).

Fratton Fred · 05-09-2017 05:58PM

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

A.) It's Barnier, not Juncker who's leading the EU negotiation.
B.) Barnier is operating under instruction of all 27 remaining member states, including Ireland,
C.) The Irish government has been quite clear that it's supportive of the EU position.
D.) It's been quite clear that it thinks it's a bad idea for Britain to leave the EU.

Not much more we can do beyond that if they really want to go.

Junckers is Barnier's boss, but I think he would agree that the whole thing would be a lot better if JCJ kept his ego out of it and his mouth shut.

solodeogloria · 05-09-2017 06:05PM

blanch152 wrote: »

By my count FG have 4 TDs in Cavan, Monaghan, Louth and Donegal. Not a lot to lose.

Ireland will suffer from Brexit, but not as much as the UK and Northern Ireland will be worst off. Looking at the trainwreck that is the UK, the Irish will be happy to have a government that at least is attracting jobs from London to replace some of those lost.

We actually have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to use the turbulence in industry to rearrange how this country is organised with the new investment directed to the cities of Limerick and Cork (possibly Galway and Waterford too).

Good evening!

So the border doesn't matter. You've just listed two of my ancestral counties in that list. Three if I go a few generations further. Apparently Irish people are willing to kick other Irish people in the gonads and to take a jolly bit of masochism on behalf of the European project. Why? I'm hoping there will be some pushback if the EU insists on a hard border (this isn't the UK's wish) or if it insists on punitive trade terms (this isn't the UK's wish).

Britain is advocating the most open border possible in it's approach.

It is in the EU's interest to negotiate for Ireland. If it fails to argue for an arrangement that will suit Ireland's interests then it will have failed it.

There's no other way about it.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Calina · 05-09-2017 06:06PM

His name is Juncker. Not Junckers.

I really don't think you should be projecting onto Barnier anyway and tbf Juncker and Barnier are both significantly more on top of their respective jobs than May and Davis.

You can see this in reports about the infamous Juncker-May dinner and almost any report on negotiations at present.

Calina · 05-09-2017 06:12PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

blanch152 wrote: »

By my count FG have 4 TDs in Cavan, Monaghan, Louth and Donegal. Not a lot to lose.

Ireland will suffer from Brexit, but not as much as the UK and Northern Ireland will be worst off. Looking at the trainwreck that is the UK, the Irish will be happy to have a government that at least is attracting jobs from London to replace some of those lost.

We actually have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to use the turbulence in industry to rearrange how this country is organised with the new investment directed to the cities of Limerick and Cork (possibly Galway and Waterford too).

Good evening!

So the border doesn't matter. You've just listed two of my ancestral counties in that list. Three if I go a few generations further. Apparently Irish people are willing to kick other Irish people in the gonads and to take a jolly bit of masochism on behalf of the European project. Why? I'm hoping there will be some pushback if the EU insists on a hard border (this isn't the UK's wish) or if it insists on punitive trade terms (this isn't the UK's wish).

Britain is advocating the most open border possible in it's approach.

It is in the EU's interest to negotiate for Ireland. If it fails to argue for an arrangement that will suit Ireland's interests then it will have failed it.

There's no other way about it.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

If you genuinely cared about Ireland solo, you would be screaming for the UK to stay in the single market. But you are not.

Britain is not advocating an open border at all. What they want is total control of their border while having the border in Ireland totally porous. These are mutually conflicting desires and they are British desires.

Either they want control and freedom for negotiating trade agreement outside the EU customs union or they want to stay in the CU. They cannot have it both ways.

The UK is making decisions and those decisions have consequences. This is not the fault of the EU. The gonad kicking as such is being done by the UK.

ancapailldorcha · 05-09-2017 06:17PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Most opposition to TTIP wasn't really in the UK. It was in mainland Europe. There's a lot of scope for discussing things like food. Private contracts are a reality today in the NHS. I don't see why the Americans are any more sinister than anyone else. They aren't going to require free movement or restricting trade policy.

Private contracts in the NHS are still quite limited. US healthcare companies will be pushing for a lot more of it to be open to privatisation which would likely give Jeremy Corbyn a big advantage.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Secondly, Donald Trump is protectionist in respect to free trade deals that lead to undercutting. The US isn't really going to be undercut by Britain in the same way as it would be undercut by Mexico. He's also said that he's interested.

You're missing the whole point of free trade. Free trade is supposed to increase consumer choice while lowering costs. Car companies aren't going to flood back once he leaves NAFTA as US labour is much more expensive than Mexican labour. He's also said that he prioritises a deal with the EU over one with the UK.

solodeogloria · 05-09-2017 06:18PM

Calina wrote: »

If you genuinely cared about Ireland solo, you would be screaming for the UK to stay in the single market. But you are not.

Britain is not advocating an open border at all. What they want is total control of their border while having the border in Ireland totally porous. These are mutually conflicting desires and they are British desires.

Either they want control and freedom for negotiating trade agreement outside the EU customs union or they want to stay in the CU. They cannot have it both ways.

The UK is making decisions and those decisions have consequences. This is not the fault of the EU. The gonad kicking as such is being done by the UK.

Good evening!

Firstly - I think claiming I don't care about my own country is below the belt. Admittedly I didn't grow up on the border but my immediate family is from the border on both sides.

Secondly - staying in the single market isn't the only way to preserve trade. The EU know this also. Countries outside the customs union can have open borders for passenger traffic and light controls for freight looking to the Norway - Sweden border. There is of course the option of a bilateral customs agreement if Brussels would be willing to consider it.

Thirdly - the UK is advocating free travel across the border and free travel for EU citizens into the UK. Just not free rights to work.

Finally - there are two parties in the negotiations. If the UK advocates for a frictionless border and Brussels insists otherwise the only rational conclusion you can come to is that the EU have insisted on it. They bear responsibility if this happens.

There are options to ensure it won't happen. These should be considered. Democracy in the UK needs to be respected at the same time.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Private contracts in the NHS are still quite limited. US healthcare companies will be pushing for a lot more of it to be open to privatisation which would likely give Jeremy Corbyn a big advantage.

You're missing the whole point of free trade. Free trade is supposed to increase consumer choice while lowering costs. Car companies aren't going to flood back once he leaves NAFTA as US labour is much more expensive than Mexican labour. He's also said that he prioritises a deal with the EU over one with the UK.

My point about Donald Trump isn't that I agree with him about Mexico. It's that he favours trade deals with countries like Britain because they won't undercut US workers. I'd need some backup to the claim that he favours an EU trade deal given his criticisms of it being overly protectionist recently.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Calina · 05-09-2017 06:31PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Calina wrote: »

If you genuinely cared about Ireland solo, you would be screaming for the UK to stay in the single market. But you are not.

Britain is not advocating an open border at all. What they want is total control of their border while having the border in Ireland totally porous. These are mutually conflicting desires and they are British desires.

Either they want control and freedom for negotiating trade agreement outside the EU customs union or they want to stay in the CU. They cannot have it both ways.

The UK is making decisions and those decisions have consequences. This is not the fault of the EU. The gonad kicking as such is being done by the UK.

Good evening!

Firstly - I think claiming I don't care about my own country is below the belt. Admittedly I didn't grow up on the border but my immediate family is from the border on both sides.

Secondly - staying in the single market isn't the only way to preserve trade. The EU know this also. Countries outside the customs union can have open borders for passenger traffic and light controls for freight looking to the Norway - Sweden border. There is of course the option of a bilateral customs agreement if Brussels would be willing to consider it.

Thirdly - the UK is advocating free travel across the border and free travel for EU citizens into the UK. Just not free rights to work.

Finally - there are two parties in the negotiations. If the UK advocates for a frictionless border and Brussels insists otherwise the only rational conclusion you can come to is that the EU have insisted on it. They bear responsibility if this happens.

There are options to ensure it won't happen. These should be considered. Democracy needs to be respected at the same time.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

It is not about preserving trade. Trade happens. It is about administering that trade legally. The UK proposal is a smugglers charter.

If the UK falls back on WTO terms the border is a non negotiable hard border. You want a frictionless border you stay in the single market. You want to negotiate your own trade deals you have a hard border with customs requirements to administer trade.

The reason for any hard border is the UK leaving the Single market and customs nion. If the UK does so then a consequence if that is a hard border and decimation specially of the Northern Ireland economy. Caused by a British decision. They want out of the single market and customs union, they own the consequences of which a hard border is one.

Norway is in the single market. Not in the customs union but it has to deal with country of origin paperwork for its exports into the EU. The UK will have to do this too if it is outside the customs union. Just because you think the burden is light between Norway and Sweden doesn't make any guarantees. There are other issues. Check Turkey's issues and the question of permits for freight drivers to drive across different EU countries.

If you really cared about the border in Ireland you would be focusing on retaining single market and customs union membership. You appear to care more about Liam Fox being able to negotiate trade deals however.

ancapailldorcha · 05-09-2017 06:38PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

My point about Donald Trump isn't that I agree with him about Mexico. It's that he favours trade deals with countries like Britain because they won't undercut US workers. I'd need some backup to the claim that he favours an EU trade deal given his criticisms of it being overly protectionist recently.

Sure:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/22/donald-trump-ready-do-trade-deal-eu-ahead-uk/

He's also withdrawn from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. I can't see him pushing for any sort of trade deal with anyone in the remainder of his first presidency.

solodeogloria · 05-09-2017 06:39PM

Calina wrote: »

It is not about preserving trade. Trade happens. It is about administering that trade legally. The UK proposal is a smugglers charter.

If the UK falls back on WTO terms the border is a non negotiable hard border. You want a frictionless border you stay in the single market. You want to negotiate your own trade deals you have a hard border with customs requirements to administer trade.

The reason for any hard border is the UK leaving the Single market and customs nion. If the UK does so then a consequence if that is a hard border and decimation specially of the Northern Ireland economy. Caused by a British decision. They want out of the single market and customs union, they own the consequences of which a hard border is one.

Norway is in the single market. Not in the customs union but it has to deal with country of origin paperwork for its exports into the EU. The UK will have to do this too if it is outside the customs union. Just because you think the burden is light between Norway and Sweden doesn't make any guarantees. There are other issues. Check Turkey's issues and the question of permits for freight drivers to drive across different EU countries.

If you really cared about the border in Ireland you would be focusing on retaining single market and customs union membership. You appear to care more about Liam Fox being able to negotiate trade deals however.

Good evening!

We can both play this game. For example: if you really cared about it you'd be insisting on the EU to consider the UK's proposals and to come to an agreement.

We can both do this. But it would be empty manipulative language.

There are options available that keep Ireland's border open for all intents and purposes. It just depends on people considering them.

I'm very clear that Brexit must work for everyone from Coleraine to Clacton on Sea. In the same way the EU needs to make it work for everyone from Kinsale to Krakow if it takes the concept of European citizenship seriously.

So no, the EU doesn't get away from responsibility.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Billy86 · 05-09-2017 06:42PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

So the border doesn't matter. You've just listed two of my ancestral counties in that list. Three if I go a few generations further. Apparently Irish people are willing to kick other Irish people in the gonads and to take a jolly bit of masochism on behalf of the European project. Why? I'm hoping there will be some pushback if the EU insists on a hard border (this isn't the UK's wish) or if it insists on punitive trade terms (this isn't the UK's wish).

Now that's quite hilariously ironic. Say hi to Scotland for us.

As for an open border, the EU and the hardline Brexiteers won't be having it. After all, one of the bigger reasons for leaving the EU given by UK voters was that they didn't like the supposedly open borders of the EU. While it might wind up hurting the rest of us and deeply to some of your relative, luckily for them it's not something they'll need to worry about and we'll all get to see just how "open" these EU borders really are. After all, if the EU isn't paying attention to why one of it's bigger members just upped and quit by ensuring a hard border, well sure then they'd just be kicking the rest of their members who are still in the EU in the gonads, leading to others quitting and we can't be having that.

These are the types of things usually best thought about by a populace before running face first into the wall voting booth.

Calina · 05-09-2017 06:46PM

I would prefer to see the UK staying in tge EU solo. this is not a game.

And Brexit is not going to work for everyone from Clacton to Coleraine.

All of this is happening on the back of a UK decision. The buck stops there.

The option that keeps the Irish border open is membership of the single market and customs union. The other options such as Davis' idea about letting the SMEs avoid customs checks is juvenile and counter to WTO regs in terms of favoured status. The IT system was less than vapourware.

What were the others?

solodeogloria · 05-09-2017 06:48PM

Good evening!

Last post for today (and potentially for a bit longer, this thread is far far too tempting to reply to!)

Again, the official leave campaign argued for an open Ireland border. It isn't true to say that leavers supported a hard border in Ireland.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Calina · 05-09-2017 06:49PM

Dan Hannan stated that the UK would remain in the single market. So too, initially did Nigel Farage.

Yet here we are.

jm08 · 05-09-2017 07:08PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

that's my point. moderate economic damage to the eu, but it could be devastating for parts of Ireland, but hey, that's fine because as a whole, the eu will still be grand.

I think it will be very tough for all of rural Ireland, not just the border area.

they aren't though, really. Barnier will never lose his job because the border economy in Ireland goes down the swanny.

As soon as the negotiations are over, Barnier's job is gone. At 66 years of age, I doubt if he will be worried about his future job prospects. I'd say he'd be more worried about the legacy he leaves in these negotiations.

so the UK is the German car industry's largest export market. Thanks for clearing that up for us.

Germany is one of the few countries who could cope well with such a loss of trade. You seem to have forgotten that German Business Leaders have said the EU 27/Single Market is their top priority.

Two of Germany’s biggest industry groups have told the Observer that their main concern during the Brexit process is protecting the single market for the remaining 27 members, even if this harms trade with Britain.
Dieter Kempf, president of the BDI, the federation of German industries, said: “Defending the single market, a key European project, must be the priority for the European Union. Europe must maintain the integrity of the single market and its four freedoms: goods, capital, services, and labour.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/08/german-industry-warns-uk-over-brexit

Its kind of amusing that you have no problem believing that the UK is happy to throw over 50% of its trade out the window for ideological reasons while you can't understand that German business are willing to sacrifice an awful lot less.

View · 05-09-2017 07:13PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

A.) It's Barnier, not Juncker who's leading the EU negotiation.
B.) Barnier is operating under instruction of all 27 remaining member states, including Ireland,
C.) The Irish government has been quite clear that it's supportive of the EU position.
D.) It's been quite clear that it thinks it's a bad idea for Britain to leave the EU.

Not much more we can do beyond that if they really want to go.

Junckers is Barnier's boss,

No he isn't.

Barnier's mandate comes directly from the 27 member states. He is not a member of the (Juncker) European Commission. Even were he a member, the Commission operates on a Collegiate system, so the Conmission President would have no authority to "boss" him around.

jm08 · 05-09-2017 07:19PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

My point about Donald Trump isn't that I agree with him about Mexico. It's that he favours trade deals with countries like Britain because they won't undercut US workers. I'd need some backup to the claim that he favours an EU trade deal given his criticisms of it being overly protectionist recently.

I don't know what the hurry is to do a deal with the US since most countries do just fine exporting to the US.

He wants a trade agreement with Germany - Angela has told him 3 times that Germany does not do trade deals and that he needs to talk to the EU about that one.

Thargor · 05-09-2017 07:34PM

Wow David Davis getting laughed out of Parliament there in the exact same way they used to laugh at Corbyn. He made a totally bizarre "Nobody ever said this would be easy" claim then doubled down by listing off basically every issue facing them and claiming progress on all of them, I wish Paxman was still with us to ask him about it.

Jim2007 · 05-09-2017 07:43PM

jm08 wrote: »

I don't know what the hurry is to do a deal with the US since most countries do just fine exporting to the US.

Well not all... UK exports to the US fell 19.1% in June

LeinsterDub · 05-09-2017 07:46PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

We can both play this game. For example: if you really cared about it you'd be insisting on the EU to consider the UK's proposals and to come to an agreement.

Which one's are we meant to take seriously? The UK having free access to the the customs union but no oversight ? NI being both in and out at the same time with small companies being in but large companies out. The border cameras option that was proposed for about a day?

Fratton Fred · 05-09-2017 07:58PM

View wrote: »

No he isn't.

Barnier's mandate comes directly from the 27 member states. He is not a member of the (Juncker) European Commission. Even were he a member, the Commission operates on a Collegiate system, so the Conmission President would have no authority to "boss" him around.

Barrier was appointed by Juncker

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/27/jean-claude-juncker-puts-michel-barnier-in-charge-brexit-talks

Jim2007 · 05-09-2017 08:13PM

jm08 wrote: »

Barnier is in touch though. Unlike Davis, he has actually visited the border between NI & ROI. Simon Coveney met with Barnier (and other Eurocrats) yesterday presumably to hear what Ireland think of the UK's offer.

Don't forget Barnier was also the EU's point man on the Good Friday Agreement. It was not an accident that he was chosen!

jm08 · 05-09-2017 08:13PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Barrier was appointed by Juncker

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/27/jean-claude-juncker-puts-michel-barnier-in-charge-brexit-talks

No, he wasn't. He was appointed by the General Affairs Council with the approval of the Council of Ministers.

http://www.politico.eu/article/meet-the-obscure-eu-council-driving-brexit-negotiations-general-affairs-council-michel-barnier/

The British press get a lot of things wrong. A couple of weeks ago they were reporting that Davis was annoyed because Barnier strings were tightly held by the Council of Ministers.

General Affairs Council (Art. 50)

In the General Affairs Council (Art.50) ministers, who meet in an EU27 format, will discuss any issues dealing with Brexit.

Between the meetings of the European Council (Art.50), the General Affairs Council (Art.50) will ensure that the negotiations are conducted in line with the European Council guidelines and the Council negotiating directives.

The aim of the Estonian presidency during these negotiations, is to maintain the unity of the 27 member states and to facilitate reaching an agreement with the United Kingdom.

Fratton Fred · 05-09-2017 08:23PM

jm08 wrote: »

No, he wasn't. He was appointed by the General Affairs Council with the approval of the Council of Ministers.

http://www.politico.eu/article/meet-the-obscure-eu-council-driving-brexit-negotiations-general-affairs-council-michel-barnier/

The British press get a lot of things wrong. A couple of weeks ago they were reporting that Davis was annoyed because Barnier strings were tightly held by the Council of Ministers.

General Affairs Council (Art. 50)

In the General Affairs Council (Art.50) ministers, who meet in an EU27 format, will discuss any issues dealing with Brexit.

Between the meetings of the European Council (Art.50), the General Affairs Council (Art.50) will ensure that the negotiations are conducted in line with the European Council guidelines and the Council negotiating directives.

The aim of the Estonian presidency during these negotiations, is to maintain the unity of the 27 member states and to facilitate reaching an agreement with the United Kingdom.

You need to go and read that article properly and this time, read this link that was in there http://www.politico.eu/article/michael-barnier-europe-brexit-not-so-supremo-uk-negotiation-deal/

Jim2007 · 05-09-2017 08:23PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Barrier was appointed by Juncker

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/27/jean-claude-juncker-puts-michel-barnier-in-charge-brexit-talks

Go look at the official documents! He was appointed by Junker after the approval by the council and he gets his mandate from the council.

However any agreement must ultimately be approved by the parliament and they have appointed Guy Verhofstadt as their representative. Which is why his pronouncements are also a key factor in this process.

Alles Klar?

jm08 · 05-09-2017 08:39PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You need to go and read that article properly and this time, read this link that was in there http://www.politico.eu/article/michael-barnier-europe-brexit-not-so-supremo-uk-negotiation-deal/

Its the General Affairs Council who is going to decide if enough progress has been made and it will be the Council of Ministers who have the final say.

It was interesting that they said that Barnier has a good grasp of detail such as knowing that 250K UK dogs and cats travel to the EU every year!

LeinsterDub · 05-09-2017 08:39PM

It is also likely to enrage many in Europe who will feel the UK is intending to treat EU nationals as second-class citizens and could invite retaliatory action by the 27-country bloc.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/sep/05/leaked-document-reveals-uk-brexit-plan-to-deter-eu-immigrants

At this point is there any point in continuing negotiations. We've had no progress on any of the 3 core issues.

flutered · 05-09-2017 09:03PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

The inability to sign free trade deals prevents Britain from liberalising trade terms. Brexit permits signing free trade deals. More liberal trade terms provide more opportunities for exporting goods. This is the reason why I believe good free trade agreements will expand export opportunities both to the US and to China.

These two countries make up £100bn in trade together at present. This could be increased significantly given better trade terms.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

could be, question is will it

oppenheimer1 · 05-09-2017 09:14PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/sep/05/leaked-document-reveals-uk-brexit-plan-to-deter-eu-immigrants

At this point is there any point in continuing negotiations. We've had no progress on any of the 3 core issues.

At this point it looks likely that the negotiations will collapse. On the basis that the above document is what the British are after, there will be no transitional deal of any consequence.

It will be interesting to see what the pound does in the morning.

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments