Shelga wrote: » What will the impact be on the automotive industry, if they’re determined to be as unaligned to EU regs as possible?
Lemming wrote: » Catastrophic (for the UK arms of said industry) one should imagine. Can't side-step the whole rules of origin regards goods, and that's before even contemplating the knock-on effect to costs regards the impact on JIT caused by customs delays, or the more obviousg costs that tariffs incur on the finished article.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » He said Japan's car industry was an example of a manufacturing sector which found success without following EU rules. Except of course for the recent EU-Japan deal. And cars have to follow the local regs.
Leroy42 wrote: » I do wonder what game the UK are playing here? They continually go on about a close relationship, a FTA within 11 months etc, yet they continually come out with hard line stuff like this; Sajid Javid: no alignment on EU regulations after Brexit https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/18/savid-javid-warns-there-will-be-no-alignment-on-eu-regulations-after-brexit The election is over so what is the point of creating these red lines before the negotiations even begin? First off, its a bit rich to claim that business, or anyone, has known since 2016. The shape of the withdrawal, date etc are still not known! I note as well that his comments that not all business will
SantaCruz wrote: » British consumer car companies:
First Up wrote: » Still clinging to the dream of mutual recognition I assume. Slow learners.
In a sign of the technology’s divisiveness, even the head of a neighboring police force said he opposed it. The South Wales police deployed vans equipped with the technology outside Cardiff stadium this week as part of a long-running trial in which officers scanned people in real time and detained anyone blacklisted from attending for past misbehavior.
Strazdas wrote: » Given that this interview was with the country's finance minister, not some crank backbench MP, the UK is in some trouble.
Thargor wrote: » As if that means anything these days, he could out with the exact 180 deg opposite position the next day and it would be just waved away and forgotten about 24 hours later, theres nobody to challenge them in opposition, the media is complicit and the voters are completely misinformed or apathetic.
Savid Javid 2016 wrote: "The only thing leaving the EU guarantees is a lost decade for British business"
Lemming wrote: » Javid's comments from 2016 are already being wheeled out on twitter as a reminder to people of the contortionist mental gymnastics these people are engaging in to gain positions of power. Whether anybody in the mainstream media decides to - I dunno - maybe act like an actual journalist remains to be seen but I sincerely doubt it.
I was somewhere in West London, meeting with one of the area’s many television companies, when the EU Single Market really began to make more sense. I was Culture Secretary at the time, and the company’s chief executive was explaining why they’d chosen the UK for their main base outside North America. It had a lot to do with wealth of creative talent here. But the clincher was the Single Market – it meant they could broadcast to up to half a billion viewers across 28 countries and only have to deal with regulators in the UK. Thanks to common standards across Europe, they didn’t have to worry about meeting the demands of dozens of different local bureaucrats. It was a similar story when I worked in financial services. If I wanted to seal a deal in, say, Paris, all I had to do was hop on a train, get the paperwork signed and head home again. My biggest worry was whether I’d be back in time to put the kids to bed. I’m a Eurosceptic and proud of it. I think the Euro is a bad idea. I have no time for ever-closer union and I’ve long been a vocal critic of Brussels’ worst excesses. But, just like Bank of England Governor Mark Carney and IMF head Christine Lagarde, I still believe that Britain is better off in. And that’s all because of the Single Market.It’s a great invention, one that even Lady Thatcher campaigned enthusiastically to create. The world’s largest economic bloc, it gives every business in Britain access to 500 million customers with no barriers, no tariffs and no local legislation to worry about.
It’s a great invention, one that even Lady Thatcher campaigned enthusiastically to create. The world’s largest economic bloc, it gives every business in Britain access to 500 million customers with no barriers, no tariffs and no local legislation to worry about.
The remaining EU nations will want to secure a deal that’s good for their economies. So Germany will want to protect its carmakers from British imports. France will want to protect its farmers from UK rivals. Even little Luxembourg will want to protect its financial services industry from the global hub of London. And who could blame them? If I was in their shoes, I’d do the same. If Germany left the EU tomorrow, I’d make damn sure any trade agreement we reached put British businesses first. I’d be failing in my job as Secretary of State if I didn’t. Business leaders from kitchen-table start-ups to vast multi-nationals are already telling me that the uncertainty over the referendum result is causing them to delay investment decisions, to think twice about creating new jobs. If we vote to leave, that uncertainty won’t end the morning after the referendum. Even the most conservative estimates say it could take years to secure agreements with the EU and other countries.
In an interview with the Financial Times, he said: “There will not be alignment, we will not be a rule taker, we will not be in the single market and we will not be in the customs union – and we will do this by the end of the year.
Leroy42 wrote: » Well quite! But that is exactly my point. Barnier showed how strong a united EU is. So faced with that again the UK are going to really struggle to gain any advantage. So anyone would tell you that some change in process is required. It may not work, but it won't end up any worse than if they simply go toe to toe.
Leroy42 wrote: » The key is maintaining the EU mandate. We already see and hear pockets of disagreement with the EU,...
Downing Street said the prime minister had told officials to start discussions with countries including the US, Japan, New Zealand and Australia as soon as the UK leaves the bloc on 31 January.
reslfj wrote: » EU27 countries simply has bigger and more important interests than the UK.
Nody wrote: » I recommend buying popcorn manufacturers; we're in for a treat in the months to come. Beyond the fact both Australia, NZ and Japan will not really want to strike a final deal until the EU deal is done (for obvious reasons; why give away something for free...) the US deal leaks and spins will be a joy to behold (esp. as I believe it's a two fold reason here; first of course to try to get some easy win to announce to the populace about the brilliance of Brexit and how Boris gets things done and the second part being to try to put pressure on EU to make a better deal "or we'll align with America" but the leaked news will not deliver either of those goals and there will be plenty of leaks between Trump's administration with mr Twitter leading the charge and the UK administration).
Imreoir2 wrote: » Is it just that the UK political system has very little experiance of doing deals of its own with larger entities and does not understand how the game works when you are the smaller party? Other than Brexit what was the last major deal the UK did by itself with a partner bigger than itself? They seem to be treating this process as if it were an unbalenced negotiation with them as the bigger party, is it just that this is the only kind of negotiation posture the UK has any experiance of in the modern era and as such is using tactics that do not reflect their position because that is all they have in the bag? They were a big fish within the EU and through the EU were always a big fish in trade deals. Do they just not understand what it is to be the junior partner to a trade negotiation?
Lemming wrote: » I think it's a bit of column A and a bit of column B, with an unhealthy dose of believing that the carry-on & red-top rag paper-esque theatrics in Westminster is how the rest of the world does political business. In any case, article in the Guardian today would appear that Boris Cummings has issued a very public shot across the bows at Cabinet members to wind their necks in and stop running off their mouths to the press lest they be sacked in a reshuffle. Given the timing of Javid's brain-f@rt and then this uncharacteristic warning of a reshuffle, I suspect this was aimed squarely at Javid with a side benefit of setting examples for the rest of them.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » FTSE 100 should be going up. 2/3rd's of income of those companies is in foreign currency. 'No alignment' with EU on regulation, Javid tells business FT linkForget staying close to EU after Brexit, chancellor tells business He said Japan's car industry was an example of a manufacturing sector which found success without following EU rules. Except of course for the recent EU-Japan deal. And cars have to follow the local regs.
McGiver wrote: » And the response...Javid's EU divergence plans provoke industry backlash As expected. And this is quite polite. We all know what they really think is much worse than this.
Infini wrote: » Paywalled Q_Q
Leroy42 wrote: » I think they are being overly influenced by Trump and his ability to say and do anything but have no consequences. The big difference is that Trump is head of the strongest military and economic country in the world. So whilst diplomacy has its place, in reality USA can pretty do what it wants against individual countries. The example of NAFTA is one, IMO, that many in the UK believe is how all things work. Ie that simply demand something and the other side have no option but to give in. The big flaw of course is that the EU has built itself precisely to avoid being taken advantage, as individual countries by the likes of the USA, China and course UK, France and Germany
roosterman71 wrote: » Google the headline. It somehow gets around the paywall
johnnyskeleton wrote: Waved away and forgotten about domestically. But the EU are watching and the more they see people talking out of both sides of their mouths, the more determined they will be to have it in writing with enforceable provisions in the event of breach
First Up wrote: » The EU (as in member states and Commission) understands that politicians have play to their home audience. It goes with the job and is greeted with a knowing smile. Stuff for consumption by the media and electorates is accepted as part of the game but it doesn't carry any weight in Brussels. The EU might help politicians wrap the parcel, but it doesn't change the contents.
johnnyskeleton wrote: » Waved away and forgotten about domestically. But the EU are watching and the more they see people talking out of both sides of their mouths, the more determined they will be to have it in writing with enforceable provisions in the event of breach
