Brexit discussion thread III

mickoneill31 · 26-06-2018 8:50am

VinLieger wrote: »

Of course they would be welcomed back, however the issue is they would be starting from scratch and entrance at this stage can potentially take just as long as leaving

That's a whole new can of worms. Taking the Euro, no more opt outs, increased fees etc. etc.

Unless there was an exception. But the EU (rightly) doesn't like those. The next third country to negotiate would be looking for exceptions and previous entrants might start looking at their terms.

listermint · 26-06-2018 8:51am

Trasna1 wrote: »

Because it will generally cause loss of confidence in the system, and losses of confidence lead to stock market crashes, which in turn lead to recessions. The market is at an all time high, so the correction is coming.

If people think that the loss of billions from the value of British companies and the seizing up of London as it gets mired in new financial rules won't cause a global recession then they are mistaken.

Confidence?

Companies are planning on this 2 years out. There's no shock to it. Investors will be pruned to make money on it. This won't trigger a global recession that's nonsense

Zubeneschamali · 26-06-2018 8:51am

VinLieger wrote: »

Of course they would be welcomed back, however the issue is they would be starting from scratch and entrance at this stage can potentially take just as long as leaving

Oh no, I didn't mean we would let them back into the EU on a fast track.

I just meant we would dictate the terms of a practical Free Trade Agreement to them.

They can join the back of the queue for membership.

Leroy42 · 26-06-2018 8:55am

What would the the UK expect from any fast track deal with the US?

It seems that one of the main arguments for Brexit is the ability to get 3rd party trade deals. I was always under the impression that being in the EU gave us (the EU) greater power in terms of trade deals not less. Now, of course the requirements f Poland from a trade deal with US would be different to the UK so there is always the possibility that freed from having to compromise with 27 others the UK can focus on what is best for them.

Just wondering, as I have yet to actually see anything but could have missed it, what are the current issues with trade that the UK would be looking to fix in a US, or indeed any other, trade deal?

Peregrinus · 26-06-2018 8:56am

mickoneill31 wrote: »

How long would you see that "no deal" scenario remaining for? It's not months.

I wouldn’t see this as an all-or-nothing thing; I don’t see the crash-out no deal period being terminated in one bound with a comprehensive bells-and-whistles deal.

Rather, it would be a process, starting more or less immediately with quite focussed, specific agreements to deal, at least provisionally, with urgent matters - keeping planes in the air, ensuring continuance of essential supplies, reciprocally regulating the migration status of UK citizens in the EU and Union citizens in the UK, that kind of thing.

Then, when you’ve stabilised the situation, you get to work on bigger deals - a financial agreement dealing with the financial consequences of Brexit; some confidence-building measures dealing with UK participation (as non-members) in specific programmes. Then you get on to a trading/economic relationship. Perhaps a UK Association Agreement with the EU.

In other words, the process that should be going on right now, but (a) with the UK in a much more straitened situation, and (b) with a saner UK government.

This does require a change of UK government but, frankly, that will happen pretty quickly. Once Brexit actually happens the doctrinaire Brexiters have got what they most want, and have no further use for Teresa May. Everyone else will regard her as having made a complete hames of the Brexit process. She’ll have no support on either side and, politically, she’ll be a dead woman walking. She won’t walk for very long. If the present parliament runs for its full term and Teresa May is still Prime Minister at the end of it, I will buy you a pint.

Where the discussions will actually go with a new PM and/or a new government is hard to say, except we can be confident that they will go towards a deal with the EU (since, really, from a crash-out Brexit, there is no other possible direction). How close the deal will be and how long it will take to get there is harder to say. But I don’t think anything like 10 years. The UK cannot wait that long. The things the EU wants out of the deal - an open border in Ireland; protection for the integrity of the single market, etc - won’t change; why would they?

mickoneill31 wrote: »

Look at their negotiating skills so far when then do have some control of the process. Brexit was voted for 2 years ago and today, the UK still can't agree on what it wants. Now the EU really wants to negotiate. After "no deal" we will be busy mitigating the damage and moving on. The Tories will be arguing with themselves and Labour will be naval gazing.
Although it could be "probably sooner" as the EU could give take it or leave it type of deals. But then we're back to square one in the UK with "it's all the EUs fault"

You say “we will be busy mitigating the damage and moving on” but, actually, the damage to us will be huge, and won’t easily be mitigated, except by a good UK/EU deal. For the same reason that the EU is always going to be the UK’s most important trading partner - geography, basically - the UK will always be ours (after the EU, of course). We suffer really badly if (a) there are trade barriers between us and the UK, and (b) the UK is in a slump; a crash-out Brexit will have both of these effects. Plus, of course, the social and political harm inflicted by a hard border in Ireland can only be mitigated by, well, an open border. And that’s only going to be achieved by an EU/UK deal. If there is a crash-out Brexit, our national priority is going to be getting the UK back to the table.

Nody · 26-06-2018 8:56am

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That is all possible, but it won't be the end of the story. This would bring about a crushing recession, mass unemployment, trade disruption meaning food and fuel shortages, sterling devaluation meaning spiraling inflation...

It would be impossible for any British Government to preside over such a disaster for many years. The next Government in would have as their top priority fixing their broken relationship with Europe.

First of all there will be no issues with food or fuel; in fact any imports is the easiest thing for UK to get done because they set the rules and will simply let the trucks rolling in without checks; some speciality items such as radio active materials etc. not included.

Secondly the mass unemployment will not hit on March 30th; it will be staggered over years, possibly even a full decade. There is a great inertia in business in general and most companies have not moved significant production out of the UK yet. Rather they will simply stop investing in existing lines and they will slowly wither away instead until a small core part at most is left to serve the domestic market. It's going to be a death by a thousand cuts rather than a bullet to the head. Yes you will see the big headline moves such as Airbus etc. but honestly they are not even going to be the tip of the iceberg because the real job losses are those that never got started; the new factory that was not built, the small company that has to cut one person every six months until they go bankrupt etc. Those items will never show up in a headline but that's where the real cost to jobs will be.

Third you forget that not only are the Brexiteer laying the ground work for the pain (short to medium term pain but long term gain is a common mantra) but many Brexiteers inc. people who've been told their job is on the line such as with Airbus still support Brexit because sovereignty. They all expect "it will work out somehow" and they are not alone in that attitude; it's prevalent among many UK businesses as well. Hence cut by a thousand blades as those companies will slowly unwind overtime due to lack of business etc.

sink wrote: »

I don't expect a new party, just the same old ones. When the world the brexiteers have been promising turns out to be a mirage, the public will not be so daft as to drink the sand. The first thing they will do is kill the leaders who led them into a desert and then look for new leaders who promise to lead them back to water.

Except they have done nothing of the sort to date while shown how horrible the outcome will be. People who've been told they will lose their job has still said they support Brexit and are ready to take the pain. That is why I'm stating that this is not a short term pain and things goes back to normal; it will be years during which the Brexiteers will talk about the short term hit, long term gain, all the new wonderful FTAs they are working on etc. so toughen that upper lip and let us get on with it. It will be years before people will start to question the lies they are being told now in preparation for the pain to come and years after that before they will accept that they were actually lied to. The blame game will be that May was a poor leader but under the new Shiny Leader it will be milk and honey in a few years, just give us a chance. And since neither major party have any interest in admitting that they spent the last three decades lying to the public about what EU actually did and supported vs. what they claimed as policy and easy scapegoating there is no real way to turn around the anti EU wave that's running in the UK either.

mickoneill31 · 26-06-2018 8:59am

Leroy42 wrote: »

What would the the UK expect from any fast track deal with the US?

It seems that one of the main arguments for Brexit is the ability to get 3rd party trade deals. I was always under the impression that being in the EU gave us (the EU) greater power in terms of trade deals not less. Now, of course the requirements f Poland from a trade deal with US would be different to the UK so there is always the possibility that freed from having to compromise with 27 others the UK can focus on what is best for them.

Just wondering, as I have yet to actually see anything but could have missed it, what are the current issues with trade that the UK would be looking to fix in a US, or indeed any other, trade deal?

I think its more that the UK doesn't like negotiating as part of a club. Aspects of a deal that protects fruit from Spain is of no benefit to the UK so they like to focus on the negatives rather on the aspects that benefit the UK. They haven't really thought it through. Yes they'll focus on aspects relevant to them but they'll get worse deals. Maybe some areas will get a boost but I'm not sure which.

Trasna1 · 26-06-2018 9:00am

mickoneill31 wrote: »

How long would you see that "no deal" scenario remaining for? It's not months.

After a March 29th with no deal, the UK would have no negotiating power. They'd be desperate. Other countries (including the EU) wouldn't and shouldn't give them favourable deals. The US certainly won't, they'd bleed them dry.

And these deals will take years. Several, if the examples of previous trade deals are anything to go by.
It might be transient and it may get resolved in X years but those X years would be catastrophic for the UK. I put X there as that'd be a point for debate. Personally, I'd guess at X being 10.

You say it'd be "probably sooner" for a deal if they crashed out.
Look at their negotiating skills so far when they do have some control of the process. Brexit was voted for 2 years ago and today, the UK still can't agree on what it wants. Now the EU really wants to negotiate. After "no deal" we will be busy mitigating the damage and moving on. The Tories will be arguing with themselves and Labour will be naval gazing.
Although it could be "probably sooner" as the EU could give take it or leave it type of deals. But then we're back to square one in the UK with "it's all the EUs fault"

If no deal results in food and medicine shortages then no deal will last weeks, not months. The EU and other trading blocks would be in a hurry to do a deal as it would be the time when the most advantageous one would be on offer - you extract the best deal when you have your opponent over a barrel, you don't wait for them to recover.

If you have empty shelves and mass layoffs in April, the pragmatists will take control. The reason they haven't yet is that a sudden sharp shock hasn't been delivered to the UK because everyone still expects the UK to abandon its red lines and expects a deal that will facilitate trade in much the same way as today

mickoneill31 · 26-06-2018 9:04am

Peregrinus wrote: »

I wouldn’t see this as an all-or-nothing thing; I don’t see the crash-out no deal period being terminated in one bound with a comprehensive bells-and-whistles deal....

You say “we will be busy mitigating the damage and moving on” but, actually, the damage to us will be huge, and won’t easily be mitigated, except by a good UK/EU deal. For the same reason that the EU is always going to be the UK’s most important trading partner - geography, basically - the UK will always be ours (after the EU, of course). We suffer really badly if (a) there are trade barriers between us and the UK, and (b) the UK is in a slump; a crash-out Brexit will have both of these effects. Plus, of course, the social and political harm inflicted by a hard border in Ireland can only be mitigated by, well, an open border. And that’s only going to be achieved by an EU/UK deal. If there is a crash-out Brexit, our national priority is going to be getting the UK back to the table.

What you say implies that there is a competent government in the UK. During this process there hasn't really been. Maybe there will be after March but I wouldn't be holding my breath.

I don't doubt that the effect on us is huge. But if there's no deal we have to work on that basis until a new deal comes along. I know Irelands priority will be to get the UK back but that may not be the priority of the other 26 and probably some of them will hinder new UK deals.

mickoneill31 · 26-06-2018 9:05am

Nody wrote: »

First of all there will be no issues with food or fuel; in fact any imports is the easiest thing for UK to get done because they set the rules and will simply let the trucks rolling in without checks; some speciality items such as radio active materials etc. not included.

How would the WTO like that? The UKs ability to make new deals if that was the case would be non existant, sure we can just roll our goods into the UK as they need them. Actually that'd be great for us, we wouldn't need a deal so in regards to food. Our exports would be doing great. No tariffs and probably able to increase the prices.

Zubeneschamali · 26-06-2018 9:07am

Nody wrote: »

First of all there will be no issues with food or fuel; in fact any imports is the easiest thing for UK to get done because they set the rules and will simply let the trucks rolling in without checks;

Illegal under WTO rules. They could do this for a week or a month, but not for years.

People who've been told they will lose their job has still said they support Brexit and are ready to take the pain.

It is easy to say that when you think it is just scaremongering. Not so easy when you actually lose your job.

I do agree with you that at this stage only actually experiencing Brexit will convince the public that Brexit is bad. I do not think the UK can keep calm and carry on after a crashout - I think riots, mounted police charging crowds, the army on the streets in London is more likely.

It doesn't take that much - a miners strike, an unpopular poll tax, whatever it was set it off in 2011...

A Brexit crashout will be worse than all 3 put together.

Trasna1 · 26-06-2018 9:10am

listermint wrote: »

Confidence?

Companies are planning on this 2 years out. There's no shock to it. Investors will be pruned to make money on it. This won't trigger a global recession that's nonsense

A major write down of the value of UK assets won't have a major impact? If no deal results in UK exports coming to a near halt, then that's exactly what will happen, and it will be keenly felt here.

Leroy42 · 26-06-2018 9:13am

mickoneill31 wrote: »

I think its more that the UK doesn't like negotiating as part of a club. Aspects of a deal that protects fruit from Spain is of no benefit to the UK so they like to focus on the negatives rather on the aspects that benefit the UK. They haven't really thought it through. Yes they'll focus on aspects relevant to them but they'll get worse deals. Maybe some areas will get a boost but I'm not sure which.

But that is exactly my point.
I understand that fruit protection in Spain is of no use to the UK but are there any specific areas that they have alluded to that they will achieve better results in?

I haven't seen, or heard them. All I have heard is that great deals await, that Fox is working around the clock on getting them. I assume that they are using the same line as with BRexit, can't tell you anything as that will ruin the negotiations.

It is clear that leaving the EU will have impact on trade, and whilst I understand that trade is not the driving factor (although I think this is because people simply did not think about this much rather than they weighted up the costs and considered sovereignty as worth it) but haven't seen what areas the UK are going to increase trade to make up the losses.

Peregrinus · 26-06-2018 9:16am

mickoneill31 wrote: »

What you say implies that there is a competent government in the UK. During this process there hasn't really been.

No argument from me there!

mickoneill31 wrote: »

Maybe there will be after March but I wouldn't be holding my breath.

Well, for the reasons already given I am pretty confident that a crash-out Brexit will be followed by a change of PM and/or an election. And any new government could hardly be less competent than the present shower. So I don't think a hope of some modest increase in competence is completely unrealistic.

But it's not just that I hope or expect a more competent government. I also expect a government which will have to respond to the disaster facing the country. If we do end up with a crash-out Brexit it will be because of imcompetence, brinksmanship, a refusal to recognise reality. But reality is easier to face when its present reality, and people tend to stop practising brinksmanship when they have already fallen over the brink. Vanishingly few people in the UK political establishment actually want a hard Brexit, and if they end up with one they will know that they played this badly, their tactics have failed, etc. So there will be an appetite to steer a new course - especially if you can blame the necessity for doing so on the foolishness/incompetence of the previous shower.

mickoneill31 wrote: »

I don't doubt that the effect on us is huge. But if there's no deal we have to work on that basis until a new deal comes along. I know Ireland's priority will be to get the UK back but that may not be the priority of the other 26 and probably some of them will hinder new UK deals.

Just as nobody in the UK wants a crash-out Brexit, so nobody in the EU does either. The UK is not an insignificant market. There'll be some argy-bargy about the precise terms of a UK deal, but starting from a crash-out position all of the EU-27 stand to benefit from virtually any reasonable deal.

Peregrinus · 26-06-2018 9:20am

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Illegal under WTO rules. They could do this for a week or a month, but not for years.

Is this illegal under WTO rules? As long as they apply zero tariffs/zero regulatory requirements to imports from every country equally, what WTO rule do they break?

mickoneill31 make the point that such a strategy pretty much puts the kibosh on any notion of negotiating attractive trade deals, and he's quite right - it's hard to bargain when you have conceded every thing up front. But would it actually infringe WTO rules?

mickoneill31 · 26-06-2018 9:23am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Just as nobody in the UK wants a crash-out Brexit, so nobody in the EU does either. The UK is not an insignificant market. There'll be some argy-bargy about the precise terms of a UK deal, but starting from a crash-out position all of the EU-27 stand to benefit from virtually any reasonable deal.

I'm not disagreeing with most of what you write. I hope you're correct. I'm pessimistic (about this) though.

I think that if the UK crashes out then huge costs will start to be realised in the other EU states (obviously us being most affected). If that happens and then the UK comes back with cap in hand, if it was me and it's obviously not, I'd screw them. I think a couple of member states would have a similar opinion. They're the ones that can throw a spanner in the works.
Before March 29th is when the UK has it's strongest hand. Actually that was over the last couple of years. As we get closer to the 29th their hand weakens.

mickoneill31 · 26-06-2018 9:31am

Leroy42 wrote: »

But that is exactly my point.
I understand that fruit protection in Spain is of no use to the UK but are there any specific areas that they have alluded to that they will achieve better results in?

I'm in a similar position to yourself, I haven't heard anything that stands up to more than 30 seconds of scrutiny.

Most of the world isn't in the EU and gets along fine.
Most of the world works under WTO rules.
We'll have a great deal with the US.
We can do a great deal with Australia.
Germany will want to sell us cars and France will want to sell us wine.

I won't bother putting any arguments against any of them. They're old news and if you spend more than 10 seconds thinking about any of them you can see their weaknesses.

But then the argument shifts to "sovereignty" or "take back control" or "immigrants" or the "Brexit dividend" or the "unelected EU representatives" etc. etc. etc.

Leroy42 · 26-06-2018 9:33am

I agree with Nody, there won't be a 'bomb' go off at midnight (although apparently there is even disagreement over exactly what time they officially leave due to time zones!). For the majority of people things will be exactly the same the next morning, the next week.

You will Sky NEws etc have crews at the airports and ports reporting that nothing really is happening (think back to when Romania got access and the media thought that Day 1 would see 1000's flooding the airports), since many businesses will have pre-ordered or postponed orders to limit any possible damage.

And we can already see the effects. Inflation has increased, growth had slowed. But due to the boiling frog people seem not to have noticed, certainly not to have joined the dots.

But as Nody points out, and it is already well under way, investment will reduce. The shopping centre/cinema/factory etc that was in the process of being planned will be put on hold. There won't be any announcements, there won't be job losses as nobody had the job, but Sadie in year 11 will now have no job when leaving school/college. She will be forced to move to London to get work.

I don't expect food shortages, certain types yes, but not overall. They will either pay the higher process due to tariffs or they will get a quick trade deal with Russia to take all their cereals etc.

But overtime, the benefits of being in the EU will become more apparent. When people go to travel they will need a visa, which involves cost and time. The family holiday will be put in jeopardy as Daddy forget to get the visas as they had been in Brittany last year and didn't need them so he just didn't think about it. Cue TV shots of little Brian crying as the ferry pulls away!

And then people will start to notice that some buildings in the CoL are not being let anymore. Wasn't that full only a few months ago? What happened to Indycorpglobalbanking Inc?

And then auntie Nora, who has lived in Spain for 15 years, breaks her hip and the Spanish refuse to treat her without insurance. So she needs to fly home, but her son Tim can't fly out for two weeks as he needs a visa, Cue Sky news in Tim's house as he demands to know why someone in the foreign office isn't helping him.

But then eventually Nora gets home but she gets free treatment even though she hasn't paid taxes for 15 years. Cue BBC News covering the story that Mary has waiting 6 weeks for a doctors appointment yet Nora got seen straight away. Bloody expats. If they loved Spain so much why not stay there.

Then the Falklands will be looking for help as well. Argentina will see an opportunity to start making inroads with the Falklands and offer to help them out, at which point the UK government demand the Argies stay out of it and promise money to the islands. This money will be on top of the 20bn being put into the NHS.

NI and Gibraltar will come looking for extra funds to cover the fall off in trade, and now the 20bn for NHS is down to 10bn. And Mary, still waiting for her replacement hip, starts demanding to know why the PM seems to care more about these foreign places then she does her own people. Spain will offer to help Gibraltar, at which point the UK sends some warships and promises to increase spending. NI demands the same and to avoid further political meltdown the government agree. We are down to 1bn now.

Then things start to go a bit wrong!

trellheim · 26-06-2018 9:35am

And the Auntie Nora, who has lived in Spain for 15 years, breaks her hip and the Spanish refuse to treat her without insurance.

AFAIR dont the brits already pay the spaniards direct for this in a side deal outside EHIC ?

Peregrinus · 26-06-2018 9:36am

mickoneill31 wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing with most of what you write. I hope you're correct. I'm pessimistic (about this) though.

I think that if the UK crashes out then huge costs will start to be realised in the other EU states (obviously us being most affected). If that happens and then the UK comes back with cap in hand, if it was me and it's obviously not, I'd screw them. I think a couple of member states would have a similar opinion. They're the ones that can throw a spanner in the works.
Before March 29th is when the UK has it's strongest hand. Actually that was over the last couple of years. As we get closer to the 29th their hand weakens.

If their hand is weaker, and they have a more realistic government, they are more likely to accept a reasonable deal.

The danger that I see is slightly different. If there's a crash-out Brexit there may be a tendency in the EU to think that "OK, we have to work towards a deal, but we are back to square 1, so we start negotiating afresh. And since, now, the Irish border is already hard, maybe keeping the border open isn't quite such a big deal, maybe this time we don't put this front and centre of our negotiating strategy." On one view, it was nifty footwork by the lads and lasses in Iveagh House that got the Irish border such priority last time round; it didn't have to be that way. So we may need to work hard to keep the focus there.

Nody · 26-06-2018 9:37am

mickoneill31 wrote: »

How would the WTO like that? The UKs ability to make new deals if that was the case would be non existant, sure we can just roll our goods into the UK as they need them. Actually that'd be great for us, we wouldn't need a deal so in regards to food. Our exports would be doing great. No tariffs and probably able to increase the prices.

WTO will hate it if course; but the UK government will happily piss off WTO in 5 to 10 years over riots tomorrow.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Illegal under WTO rules. They could do this for a week or a month, but not for years.

A WTO dispute easily takes over a decade to resolve esp. if you start counter filling BS disputes about unfair trade advantage as reason; they can run it for years before having to deal with the consequences of it which by the time will be another government's problem anyway and they would/should have been able to stabilize the situation by then.

mickoneill31 · 26-06-2018 9:39am

trellheim wrote: »

AFAIR dont the brits already pay the spaniards direct for this in a side deal outside EHIC ?

Replace Spain with Germany, France, Italy etc.
I did a quick Google. On the NHS site it says you need the EHIC for Spain.
https://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/Healthcareabroad/countryguide/Pages/healthcareinSpain.aspx

They can get around that anyway by taking Spanish citizenship, they'd just need to renounce their UK citizenship. Some Brexiteers might not be too fond of that, then they'd lose their blue passport.

mickoneill31 · 26-06-2018 9:43am

Nody wrote: »

WTO will hate it if course; but the UK government will happily piss off WTO in 5 to 10 years over riots tomorrow.

A WTO dispute easily takes over a decade to resolve esp. if you start counter filling BS disputes about unfair trade advantage as reason; they can run it for years before having to deal with the consequences of it which by the time will be another government's problem anyway and they would/should have been able to stabilize the situation by then.

But then you're looking at 5 - 10 years before deals with other countries can begin. Not saying you're wrong but then they're shagged*.

*In nearly all scenarios they're shagged anyway. It's just a level of how much.

Nody · 26-06-2018 9:46am

mickoneill31 wrote: »

But then you're looking at 5 - 10 years before deals with other countries can begin. Not saying you're wrong but then they're shagged*.

*In nearly all scenarios they're shagged anyway. It's just a level of how much.

Yes but you're dealing with a government who has to choose between long term success of the country vs. risking being ousted tomorrow due to riots the choice for any government inc. sane one tends to be short term over long term. Add in the general ineptitude of UKs parties at the moment on top of that and I have no qualms to make such a statement as a highly likely outcome. I could easily even see the government brag about how they "have reduced the banana tax from 50% to 0% due to Brexit" when in reality all they have done is reduce the controls and removed tariffs to reduce the cost of food from any source (which is a key driver in ensuring they are seen in a good light) as a short term solution to their problems (driving a bulldozer over their own regulation and farmers in the process). That way they get a quick "proof" out there how Brexit was good for UK when in reality they are simply feeling the warmth of pissing in their pants for short term gain over long term pain.

Sam Russell · 26-06-2018 9:54am

trellheim wrote: »

AFAIR dont the brits already pay the spaniards direct for this in a side deal outside EHIC ?

mickoneill31 wrote: »

Replace Spain with Germany, France, Italy etc.
I did a quick Google. On the NHS site it says you need the EHIC for Spain.
https://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/Healthcareabroad/countryguide/Pages/healthcareinSpain.aspx

They can get around that anyway by taking Spanish citizenship, they'd just need to renounce their UK citizenship. Some Brexiteers might not be too fond of that, then they'd lose their blue passport.

The problem the UK has with the EHIC is that all (afaik) EU countries bill for health treatment, and most have health insurance. The UK does not - hospitals have no way of billing patients. So when Nigel or Joan turn up at a Spanish hospital looking for treatment they are asked for 'Health Insurance details or Credit Card and EHIC card, please!' but when Pedro turns up at a NHS hospital he is asked 'Where does it hurt, and a doctor will see you soon - but s/he might be some time as s/he is very busy'.

Also the NHS people in the hospital will facilitate the avoidance of billing because they are not familiar with how to go about billing - or even if billing is possible. That is beginning to change.

VinLieger · 26-06-2018 10:00am

Leroy42 wrote: »

I agree with Nody, there won't be a 'bomb' go off at midnight (although apparently there is even disagreement over exactly what time they officially leave due to time zones!). For the majority of people things will be exactly the same the next morning, the next week.

You will Sky NEws etc have crews at the airports and ports reporting that nothing really is happening (think back to when Romania got access and the media thought that Day 1 would see 1000's flooding the airports), since many businesses will have pre-ordered or postponed orders to limit any possible damage.

And we can already see the effects. Inflation has increased, growth had slowed. But due to the boiling frog people seem not to have noticed, certainly not to have joined the dots.

But as Nody points out, and it is already well under way, investment will reduce. The shopping centre/cinema/factory etc that was in the process of being planned will be put on hold. There won't be any announcements, there won't be job losses as nobody had the job, but Sadie in year 11 will now have no job when leaving school/college. She will be forced to move to London to get work.

I don't expect food shortages, certain types yes, but not overall. They will either pay the higher process due to tariffs or they will get a quick trade deal with Russia to take all their cereals etc.

But overtime, the benefits of being in the EU will become more apparent. When people go to travel they will need a visa, which involves cost and time. The family holiday will be put in jeopardy as Daddy forget to get the visas as they had been in Brittany last year and didn't need them so he just didn't think about it. Cue TV shots of little Brian crying as the ferry pulls away!

And then people will start to notice that some buildings in the CoL are not being let anymore. Wasn't that full only a few months ago? What happened to Indycorpglobalbanking Inc?

And then auntie Nora, who has lived in Spain for 15 years, breaks her hip and the Spanish refuse to treat her without insurance. So she needs to fly home, but her son Tim can't fly out for two weeks as he needs a visa, Cue Sky news in Tim's house as he demands to know why someone in the foreign office isn't helping him.

But then eventually Nora gets home but she gets free treatment even though she hasn't paid taxes for 15 years. Cue BBC News covering the story that Mary has waiting 6 weeks for a doctors appointment yet Nora got seen straight away. Bloody expats. If they loved Spain so much why not stay there.

Then the Falklands will be looking for help as well. Argentina will see an opportunity to start making inroads with the Falklands and offer to help them out, at which point the UK government demand the Argies stay out of it and promise money to the islands. This money will be on top of the 20bn being put into the NHS.

NI and Gibraltar will come looking for extra funds to cover the fall off in trade, and now the 20bn for NHS is down to 10bn. And Mary, still waiting for her replacement hip, starts demanding to know why the PM seems to care more about these foreign places then she does her own people. Spain will offer to help Gibraltar, at which point the UK sends some warships and promises to increase spending. NI demands the same and to avoid further political meltdown the government agree. We are down to 1bn now.

Then things start to go a bit wrong!

What a bleak but ultimately likely and very accurate portrayal of the UK over the next 3-4 years

Imreoir2 · 26-06-2018 10:08am

mickoneill31 wrote: »

That's a whole new can of worms. Taking the Euro, no more opt outs, increased fees etc. etc.

Unless there was an exception. But the EU (rightly) doesn't like those. The next third country to negotiate would be looking for exceptions and previous entrants might start looking at their terms.

I don't think the UK will be applying for membership when it is forced back to the table after a no-deal Brexit. It will be forced to take the deal on offer now, or possibly an even less favorable form of that deal.

It remains to be seen if the folly that is Brexit, when the consequences are there for all to see, will result in the UK wanting to rejoin the Union, but that is definitely a long term prospect once they are out.

I don't see much chance of a no-deal scenario lasting too long, it is too damaging to the UK, if they let it happen I think there will be a general election and the next government can blame it all on May and take the deal on offer.

J Mysterio · 26-06-2018 10:09am

I work in Brussels alongside the EU Brexit negotiators and I find it incredible how little the UK government understands

Are we really being serious when we ask the EU to give the UK, as a third country, the same level of access as a member to sensitive information like satellite development and criminal databases?

"Being an MEP is a bit like being a DHL package: no sooner have I arrived in Brussels for meetings with businesses, NGOs and sometimes bigwigs like Guy Verhofstadt (the European parliament Brexit coordinator), than I’m being shipped off again to London for marches, rallies and occasionally some rest in my garden in Oxford (very occasionally). Being shipped back and forth across the English Channel isn’t always easy – but it does give you some great perspective on Brexit.

Everyone I meet, wherever I am these days, asks me the same thing: “What are the Brits doing?” Even Brits ask me what we’re doing. And I wish I knew what we were doing, I really do. The trouble is that all we’ve received from the British government in the last year and a half has been overused slogans, half-baked threats and undercooked plans. Just one thing has been resoundingly clear from the government: Brexit means Brexit"

Catherine Bearder UK MEP - Independent UK

Zubeneschamali · 26-06-2018 10:15am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Is this illegal under WTO rules? As long as they apply zero tariffs/zero regulatory requirements to imports from every country equally, what WTO rule do they break??

Oh, well, I was assuming we were talking about keeping things exactly as they are - letting lorries roll in from the EU to keep food and medicines stocked. Those lorries mostly leave the UK empty today, so not much change in that direction either.

But if we are talking about applying this regime to all imports from everywhere, the WTO would have nothing to say, at least until they were able to stop rolling around laughing.

If the UK were to unilaterally drop all import barriers to trade from everywhere - China, India, Asia generally, South America, Africa, without reciprocal agreements, the UK would be flooded with cheap imports destroying all local farming and manufacturing, and no-one would have any incentive to reciprocate, assuming that the UK had any reciprocal exports to bargain with, which they wouldn't soon after this regime was put in place.

J Mysterio · 26-06-2018 10:16am

Investment in UK car industry halves as Brexit uncertainty bites

New figures released weeks after CBI warned motor sector faces 'extinction' if Britain leaves customs union

"Investment in the UK motor industry has halved in the first half of 2018, as uncertainty about the future post-Brexit hits spending, according to the latest research from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders(SMMT).

... In the first six months of this year, the SMMT reported that investment has “stalled”, with just £347.3m earmarked for new models, equipment and facilities in the UK, which is around half the sum announced in the same period last year."

Brexit discussion thread III

Comments