The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)

[PurpleMoonlight]

Sway said:

Further, the agreement comes about as part of Article 50 negotiations, which do not (as per for example, the Canadian/EU FTA) require unanimity, instead QMV applies which makes life far easier as there's a few countries we can effectively ignore...

I can easily see the EU insisting on seperate agreements because of the difference in approval proceedures.

[Sway]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Sway said:

Further, the agreement comes about as part of Article 50 negotiations, which do not (as per for example, the Canadian/EU FTA) require unanimity, instead QMV applies which makes life far easier as there's a few countries we can effectively ignore...

I can easily see the EU insisting on seperate agreements because of the difference in approval proceedures.

That would not be inferred from the Article 50 terms...

The negotiation period and agreement is to define the future relationship between the remaining EU states and the leaving nation. That would by definition include the agreement for trade in the future - even if the end result agreed is a reversion to WTO MFN recognition.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Sway said:

That would not be inferred from the Article 50 terms...

The negotiation period and agreement is to define the future relationship between the remaining EU states and the leaving nation. That would by definition include the agreement for trade in the future - even if the end result agreed is a reversion to WTO MFN recognition.

No, it doesnt say that.

Its a withdrawal agreement not a trade agreement. The agreement takes into account the future relationship but does not itself establish it.

[Murph7355]

Mrr T said:

I hope you are right. What i do not understand is that team leave say one of the problems of the EU is that it takes so long to negotiate FTA because 28 countries had to agree. However, they think the rEU can agree the most complex trade agreement ever in 18 months.

My fear remains train crash Brexit.

You're not comparing apples though.

Many of the truly "complicated" aspects are already in force between us and the other 27 member states. We already know the standards that need to be applied explicitly, and we are already well aware of the respective positions of each of the member states. And getting a sensible deal is in the interests of both sides.

Also, when Article 50 was drafted (Treaty of Lisbon I believe) one assumes that "experts" from the EU settled on the timeline through some sort of logical process?

None of which is a guarantee of course. But then if rEU act....illogically....about the whole thing, it'll underscore the bigger reasons that I voted out for.

[Mrr T]

Murph7355 said:

You're not comparing apples though.

Many of the truly "complicated" aspects are already in force between us and the other 27 member states. We already know the standards that need to be applied explicitly, and we are already well aware of the respective positions of each of the member states. And getting a sensible deal is in the interests of both sides.

The truly complicated bits are not current standards but mutual recognition of standards compliance arrangements, how futures standards will be implemented, and a dispute resolution process. This is all part of the SM so if we leave the SM these all need to be agreed separately.

[Murph7355]

Mrr T said:

...
The truly complicated bits are not current standards but mutual recognition of standards compliance arrangements, how futures standards will be implemented, and a dispute resolution process. This is all part of the SM so if we leave the SM these all need to be agreed separately.

Other than an SM "badge", why would this have to be difficult for organisations who have operated this way for a number of decades?

This is VERY different to EU <> non-EU organisations who haven't been working that way explicitly for that length of time. You can see that difference presumably?

It only becomes a major headache if the people on either side of the table want it to be.

If your assertion is that the EU will want it to be, then I'll simply note that is why we are better off out of it. Politics getting in the way of common sense.

I also suspect the real reasons deals have taken so long historically have been little/nothing to do with the actual trading too. States using the desire to trade as leverage for non-trade matters (such as rights of movement for example) will have been a major blocker. Maybe they will be for us too...in which case I'll repeat that we are better off out of it.

[///ajd]

Must confess I didn't know D Davis spent 17 years at Tate and Lyle.

Master of importing sugar cane, the story is one of supporting brexit to help reduce tariffs on cane.

But less well know is that this is a threat to British Sugar and home grown sugar beet in East Anglia.

So taking back control is about importing cheaper sugar cane at the expense of home grown beet?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/27/b...

Yes its a guardian link. But is it true?

And I didn't mention the slavery links. Opps.

[anonymous-user]

As a semi-retired remain voter, i'm doing rather nicely in £ thanks to brexit trashing the pound, so boosting the stock market. A big boost to my investments etc. Thanks guys
I will still have EU passport thanks to an Irish born grand parent I never met, so no worries about overseas property. Altjough that will be OK anyway as part of EU nationals remaining here deal.

Here hoping that we are able to negotiate a deal as good as we have today! It all makes perfect sense.... brexit is brexit : take back control : brexit drivel : repeat

[loafer123]

Poor remoaners...everyone is just ignoring them!

Keep going, your increasingly desperate rantings are amusing me at least.

[FN2TypeR]

///ajd said:

Must confess I didn't know D Davis spent 17 years at Tate and Lyle.

Master of importing sugar cane, the story is one of supporting brexit to help reduce tariffs on cane.

But less well know is that this is a threat to British Sugar and home grown sugar beet in East Anglia.

So taking back control is about importing cheaper sugar cane at the expense of home grown beet?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/27/b...

Yes its a guardian link. But is it true?

And I didn't mention the slavery links. Opps.

What point are you trying to make? Clegg worked for the commission and was an MEP, is it hypocritical or dubious of him to campaign for remain, out of interest?

[Troubleatmill]

///ajd said:

Must confess I didn't know D Davis spent 17 years at Tate and Lyle.

Master of importing sugar cane, the story is one of supporting brexit to help reduce tariffs on cane.

But less well know is that this is a threat to British Sugar and home grown sugar beet in East Anglia.

So taking back control is about importing cheaper sugar cane at the expense of home grown beet?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/27/b...

Yes its a guardian link. But is it true?

And I didn't mention the slavery links. Opps.

Woohoo ///ajd Guardian bingo is back..
What publication will he quote from next......

[///ajd]

FN2TypeR said:

///ajd said:

Must confess I didn't know D Davis spent 17 years at Tate and Lyle.

Master of importing sugar cane, the story is one of supporting brexit to help reduce tariffs on cane.

But less well know is that this is a threat to British Sugar and home grown sugar beet in East Anglia.

So taking back control is about importing cheaper sugar cane at the expense of home grown beet?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/27/b...

Yes its a guardian link. But is it true?

And I didn't mention the slavery links. Opps.

What point are you trying to make? Clegg worked for the commission and was an MEP, is it hypocritical or dubious of him to campaign for remain, out of interest?

If the story is true then his aims are counter the UK indigenous sugar industry. I don't know how big the UK home grown beet industry is, but it seems davis cares more for importing cane cheaper from the colonies, rather than see our own beet farmers protected. Taking back control of tories shafting industries when it suits them.

Wasn't that obvious, did it really need explaining?

[FiF]

FN2TypeR said:

///ajd said:

Must confess I didn't know D Davis spent 17 years at Tate and Lyle.

Master of importing sugar cane, the story is one of supporting brexit to help reduce tariffs on cane.

But less well know is that this is a threat to British Sugar and home grown sugar beet in East Anglia.

So taking back control is about importing cheaper sugar cane at the expense of home grown beet?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/27/b...

Yes its a guardian link. But is it true?

And I didn't mention the slavery links. Opps.

What point are you trying to make? Clegg worked for the commission and was an MEP, is it hypocritical or dubious of him to campaign for remain, out of interest?

So anxious to smear a Brexiter by claiming that his actions are simply to the benefit of Tate and Lyle with direct threat to British Sugar. Comedy gold, British Sugar seem quite happy over Brexit

Then the anti Brexiters wonder why people laugh at their increasing desperation which makes no mention of the positive view by the sugar beet industry nor the issues of quotas imposed from Brussels. Although quotas do end in September this year, mentioned in the interest of balance.

[///ajd]

FiF said:

So anxious to smear a Brexiter by claiming that his actions are simply to the benefit of Tate and Lyle with direct threat to British Sugar. Comedy gold, British Sugar seem quite happy over Brexit

Then the anti Brexiters wonder why people laugh at their increasing desperation which makes no mention of the positive view by the sugar beet industry nor the issues of quotas imposed from Brussels. Although quotas do end in September this year, mentioned in the interest of balance.

Its not that simple FIF and you know it. The NFU have been concerned for beet producers in the UK, but perhaps they should just be ignored as they are not "on message".

[FiF]

///ajd said:

Its not that simple FIF and you know it. The NFU have been concerned for beet producers in the UK, but perhaps they should just be ignored as they are not "on message".

So why are NFU Sugar and British Sugar issuing joint press releases saying the future's bright for the sugar beet industry? One minute you're saying you know little about the sugar beet industry, next claiming it's all very complicated. Of course you probably have some special insight, bit like the meeting between May and Ghosn, I forgot to consider such insight.

Bye bye.

[Smiler.]

FiF said:

///ajd said:

Its not that simple FIF and you know it. The NFU have been concerned for beet producers in the UK, but perhaps they should just be ignored as they are not "on message".

So why are NFU Sugar and British Sugar issuing joint press releases saying the future's bright for the sugar beet industry? One minute you're saying you know little about the sugar beet industry, next claiming it's all very complicated. Of course you probably have some special insight, bit like the meeting between May and Ghosn, I forgot to consider such insight.

Bye bye.

Well it's not exactly rocket science, it it.

[FN2TypeR]

///ajd said:

FN2TypeR said:

///ajd said:

Must confess I didn't know D Davis spent 17 years at Tate and Lyle.

Master of importing sugar cane, the story is one of supporting brexit to help reduce tariffs on cane.

But less well know is that this is a threat to British Sugar and home grown sugar beet in East Anglia.

So taking back control is about importing cheaper sugar cane at the expense of home grown beet?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/27/b...

Yes its a guardian link. But is it true?

And I didn't mention the slavery links. Opps.

What point are you trying to make? Clegg worked for the commission and was an MEP, is it hypocritical or dubious of him to campaign for remain, out of interest?

If the story is true then his aims are counter the UK indigenous sugar industry. I don't know how big the UK home grown beet industry is, but it seems davis cares more for importing cane cheaper from the colonies, rather than see our own beet farmers protected. Taking back control of tories shafting industries when it suits them.

Wasn't that obvious, did it really need explaining?

UK firms seem quite upbeat about Brexit, but I guess you know better, as per

[Sway]

Drip, drip, drip, go the special interest groups, or those wishing to virtue signal for perceived ones...

[B'stard Child]

///ajd said:

Must confess I didn't know D Davis spent 17 years at Tate and Lyle.

Master of importing sugar cane, the story is one of supporting brexit to help reduce tariffs on cane.

But less well know is that this is a threat to British Sugar and home grown sugar beet in East Anglia.

So taking back control is about importing cheaper sugar cane at the expense of home grown beet?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/27/b...

Yes its a guardian link. But is it true?

And I didn't mention the slavery links. Opps.

Have you ever tried Sugar Beet Molasses??

I spent many years working for British Sugar - great company to work for but I bet they won't be the slightest bit concerned

Indeed a quick search reveals

http://www.fwi.co.uk/arable/why-british-sugar-boss...

British Sugar MD said:

British Sugar managing director Paul Kenward is bullish on the beet industry’s future outside the European Union because UK growers produce some of the world’s highest yields and the country has the globe’s most efficient processor. Already the sugar beet crop area is set to rise by almost a third this spring as EU quotas are swept away, and Mr Kenward is looking to grow his sugar business when outside the 28-nation bloc.

Whoda thunk it!!!

[Burwood]

You realise British sugar is a subsidiary of a much larger conglomerate?