CETA dead? Whom should be more worried, UK or Eurozone?
Discussion
With deadlock ongoing with Wallonia preventing signing of CETA, could this a bigger issue for the Eurozones ability to actually ever deliver anything; or a more worrying prophecy of what is to come for the UK. There will never be a deal.
Even more worrying is that David Davis thought CETA would be a model the UK would work on.
Even if pragmatism breaks out this time, we could be well and truly rodded. What if we don't bother to negotiate, just save the money and errrr give to the NHS?
Even more worrying is that David Davis thought CETA would be a model the UK would work on.
Even if pragmatism breaks out this time, we could be well and truly rodded. What if we don't bother to negotiate, just save the money and errrr give to the NHS?
stongle said:
With deadlock ongoing with Wallonia preventing signing of CETA, could this a bigger issue for the Eurozones ability to actually ever deliver anything; or a more worrying prophecy of what is to come for the UK. There will never be a deal.
Even more worrying is that David Davis thought CETA would be a model the UK would work on.
Even if pragmatism breaks out this time, we could be well and truly rodded. What if we don't bother to negotiate, just save the money and errrr give to the NHS?
What's there to worry about? Didn't Canada and the UK agree the deal, and a post-Brexit UK won't have to worry about another 'Wallonia' spoiling the party?!Even more worrying is that David Davis thought CETA would be a model the UK would work on.
Even if pragmatism breaks out this time, we could be well and truly rodded. What if we don't bother to negotiate, just save the money and errrr give to the NHS?
Surely if the trade negotiations produced a reasonable draft deal with Canada that only one nation (Belgium) claims it cannot sign, this can still be a template for the UK to use given we wouldn't have the same objections as Wallonia and that's likely to be the case. The socialists over in Wallonia want stronger safeguards on labour, on environmental protection and consumer standards; the suspicion has to be that if over 25 other EU countries are OK with the draft deal, then a clearly non-socialist Conservative gov't would go ahead as other EU nations want to do now.
There may be a related issue with any future UK-EU deal if Wallonia's socialists want to play silly belugas but not necessarily UK-Canada and beyond.
There may be a related issue with any future UK-EU deal if Wallonia's socialists want to play silly belugas but not necessarily UK-Canada and beyond.
This type of scenario was cited during the referendum campaign as one of the reasons to vote Leave, and in a way it's good of Wallonia to highlight - whatever their reasons may be - how unworkable the EU's approach to existing and working is, with one size not fitting all and never likely to do so. The result is delay and then fudge or failure.
I'm not a leaver.
However, the whole of the EU (population 700 million odd?) being effectively held to ransom / vetoed by a population of 3.1m?
It's like not being able to pass a law because an area with a population of 283k said "no". A lot of leavers voted that way because they don't feel democracy is working in the EU, this proves their case.
To put it in context, it's like having the whole of Britain unable to negotiate because Southend voted no when the entire rest of the country voted yes. That's not democracy working at all.
However, the whole of the EU (population 700 million odd?) being effectively held to ransom / vetoed by a population of 3.1m?
It's like not being able to pass a law because an area with a population of 283k said "no". A lot of leavers voted that way because they don't feel democracy is working in the EU, this proves their case.
To put it in context, it's like having the whole of Britain unable to negotiate because Southend voted no when the entire rest of the country voted yes. That's not democracy working at all.
turbobloke said:
...
There may be a related issue with any future UK-EU deal if Wallonia's socialists want to play silly belugas but not necessarily UK-Canada and beyond.
I think this may have been what the OP was referring to.There may be a related issue with any future UK-EU deal if Wallonia's socialists want to play silly belugas but not necessarily UK-Canada and beyond.
To me, it's a risk but also one of the biggest reasons why I think the EU will fail and why we should be out of it.
turbobloke said:
davepoth said:
turbobloke said:
There may be a related issue with any future UK-EU deal if Wallonia's socialists want to play silly belugas but not necessarily UK-Canada and beyond.
Silly Zebrugges surely?
It highlights the degree to which the EU is virtually crippled by the power individually held by its members. Yet again this demonstrates why fear of being dragged into a superstate or controlled by Brussels was so bloody stupid.
So, does it illustrate that trade negotiations with the EU are a challenge? Yes. Should this fill us with confidence that the UK and EU will easily come to an agreement? No, obviously not. But equally obviously the Canadian and UK negotiation are very different things for the EU.
Canada is a modest economy on the wrong side of the pond, whereas the UK's economy is 50% bigger, much closer and already deeply integrated with supply chains and the EU labour market ... and it is the EU's de facto finance centre.
So the EU and the UK have much, much more skin in the game with the UK negotiation, for better or worse.
Those who seem to be floating the idea that the UK can pick up the failed EU-Canadian negotiation and sign it direct with the Canuks are deluded. Why would the Canadians be interested in doing that? Why for that matter would the UK? The terms that were on the table were the mother of all compromises as usual. In a bilateral deal most of those compromises cease to make any sense. And the Canadians are hardly going to find a 2+ year deferred deal with the UK much of a compensation for a failed deal with an economy 6 times larger than ours.
So, does it illustrate that trade negotiations with the EU are a challenge? Yes. Should this fill us with confidence that the UK and EU will easily come to an agreement? No, obviously not. But equally obviously the Canadian and UK negotiation are very different things for the EU.
Canada is a modest economy on the wrong side of the pond, whereas the UK's economy is 50% bigger, much closer and already deeply integrated with supply chains and the EU labour market ... and it is the EU's de facto finance centre.
So the EU and the UK have much, much more skin in the game with the UK negotiation, for better or worse.
Those who seem to be floating the idea that the UK can pick up the failed EU-Canadian negotiation and sign it direct with the Canuks are deluded. Why would the Canadians be interested in doing that? Why for that matter would the UK? The terms that were on the table were the mother of all compromises as usual. In a bilateral deal most of those compromises cease to make any sense. And the Canadians are hardly going to find a 2+ year deferred deal with the UK much of a compensation for a failed deal with an economy 6 times larger than ours.
ATG said:
Those who seem to be floating the idea that the UK can pick up the failed EU-Canadian negotiation and sign it direct with the Canuks are deluded. Why would the Canadians be interested in doing that? Why for that matter would the UK? The terms that were on the table were the mother of all compromises as usual. In a bilateral deal most of those compromises cease to make any sense. And the Canadians are hardly going to find a 2+ year deferred deal with the UK much of a compensation for a failed deal with an economy 6 times larger than ours.
It was only discussed as a template for an expanded trade agreement for the UK and Canada. We already have services agreements with Canada far in advance of CETA. I believe Canada would find a CETA-like agreement with the UK as very attractive. Its a lot better than nothing. spikeyhead said:
turbobloke said:
davepoth said:
turbobloke said:
There may be a related issue with any future UK-EU deal if Wallonia's socialists want to play silly belugas but not necessarily UK-Canada and beyond.
Silly Zebrugges surely?One of the reasons Canada wanted a deal with the EU was because that was the only way they could improve trade terms with the UK, their largest EU market destination (42% of all of the EU trade) as it is not allowed for an EU member state to negotiate their own deals.
The UK government estimated the CETA deal would increase trade for Canada to the UK by 15%, but would increase UK trade into Canada by 29%, so there is little doubt this deal with have all its EU centric content removed and form the basis of a UK-Canada deal fairly quickly.
Belgium has always been a basket case government, it spent 589 days in 2010-2011 with no government at all. It's quite fitting that the EU chose to base itself in such a politically dysfunctional country.
The UK government estimated the CETA deal would increase trade for Canada to the UK by 15%, but would increase UK trade into Canada by 29%, so there is little doubt this deal with have all its EU centric content removed and form the basis of a UK-Canada deal fairly quickly.
Belgium has always been a basket case government, it spent 589 days in 2010-2011 with no government at all. It's quite fitting that the EU chose to base itself in such a politically dysfunctional country.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff