How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 5)

[paulrockliffe]

Davislove said:

there's been no talk of the so called 'common rule book on trade' recently. All the talk is of the Irish border now.

There's been no talk of any of the other concessions May has been wheeling out while the two sides distract the media with the confected rows about the Irish Border.

We've gone from 80% agreement, to 90%, to May claiming 95% this morning, without any discussion or detail of what May has conceded to get that 15%.

My judgement on that is that it'll turn out to be hugely dishonest, but more dishonest than the Conservative Party and Parliament will accept and another episode of May's spectacular poor judgement.

[loafer123]

PurpleMoonlight said:

loafer123 said:

If you like, the comparison is between a tracksuit and a tailored suit.

A lot more tracksuits are sold than tailored suits.

They are poorer quality...

[PurpleMoonlight]

loafer123 said:

They are poorer quality...

Very likely, but which provides the most profit?

[PurpleMoonlight]

paulrockliffe said:

There's been no talk of any of the other concessions May has been wheeling out while the two sides distract the media with the confected rows about the Irish Border.

We've gone from 80% agreement, to 90%, to May claiming 95% this morning, without any discussion or detail of what May has conceded to get that 15%.

My judgement on that is that it'll turn out to be hugely dishonest, but more dishonest than the Conservative Party and Parliament will accept and another episode of May's spectacular poor judgement.

Agreed.

To go from where we were last week to 95% done is a huge leap. She is making a statement to Parliament at 3.30pm.

In other news, the ERG had a meeting with Barnier this morning to try to convince him they have all the answers.

[B'stard Child]

PurpleMoonlight said:

loafer123 said:

They are poorer quality...

Very likely, but which provides the most profit?

Depends on where they are made - sweatshops in India/China probably generate more profit (in total based on volume of units) whereas a Tailor in Saville Row possibly generates more profit per Item (Based on a much smaller volume)

[Nickgnome]

SpeckledJim said:

Nickgnome said:

I do not believe it is a good plan for an economy like ours to be doing lots of relatively small deals with the time and effort that entails, which is broadly similar to undertaking much larger agreements.

Japan, Australia, Singapore, Canada, USA... Call it small if you like, but it's ok for me.

Nickgnome said:

Our position in the economic table is inevitably going to slip as emerging economies grow. We are never going to compete long-term with their much larger workforces.

On mass production I completely agree. And that's already the case, and isn't going to change, EU or not.

As these emerging economies grow we've a much better chance of promoting some mutually beneficial trade with them if we're allowed to pick up the phone and get cracking, rather than wait for a decade for Brussels to double-check what the Walloons think about it all.

On high-tech; luxury brands; knowledge; education; financial services, we're well-placed to do fine. Not least because the world talks our language and London has a claim almost as strong as anywhere to being the capital city of the world.

Edited by SpeckledJim on Monday 22 October 11:56

I am aware that the USA and Japan are much larger than us but there has been significant weight put to potential deals with Commonwealth countries and whilst a few should certainly be targets others in the short to medium term have much less significant to us.

I'm not sure why you believe our government / civil service will be able to carry out complex negations more swiftly than the EU. That was not my experience when involved negotiating government contracts. In the main, this is much to do with the complexity of the negotiation rather than any particular slowness of the parties.

I'd like to understand your experience in contract negotiation as to why you think we will get a good deal with for example the USA when their economy is so much larger. It is against all business logic and experience.

[psi310398]

Nickgnome said:

I am aware that the USA and Japan are much larger than us but there has been significant weight put to potential deals with Commonwealth countries and whilst a few should certainly be targets others in the short to medium term have much less significant to us.

I'm not sure why you believe our government / civil service will be able to carry out complex negations more swiftly than the EU. That was not my experience when involved negotiating government contracts. In the main, this is much to do with the complexity of the negotiation rather than any particular slowness of the parties.

I'd like to understand your experience in contract negotiation as to why you think we will get a good deal with for example the USA when their economy is so much larger. It is against all business logic and experience.

Nickgnome,

This is worth a read to calibrate the scale of whatever task eventually befalls Dr Fox and his merry men.

http://www.theredcell.co.uk/uploads/9/6/4/0/964099...

It considers a range of scenarios from outright hostility after complete breakdown through to the mildest of agreed FTA deals. Helpfully, it analyses what deals there are and what can be cut and pasted, and crucially assesses how easily implementable they are.

If I were drawing up my negotiating strategy and BATNA for a Brexit negotiation, I don't think I'd be sweating too hard. There is a range of very credible and live-able with alternatives to bending over and taking whatever Barnier and co decide to administer to us.

[s2art]

Nickgnome said:

I'm not sure why you believe our government / civil service will be able to carry out complex negations more swiftly than the EU. That was not my experience when involved negotiating government contracts. In the main, this is much to do with the complexity of the negotiation rather than any particular slowness of the parties.

We saw what happened with the Canada trade deal. Many members of the EU had their own axe to grind, including the Walloons. It made the negotiations complex and difficult. By contrast when the USA and Australia did one it took less than 18 months. We will be in a similar position.

[Nickgnome]

psi310398 said:

Nickgnome said:

I am aware that the USA and Japan are much larger than us but there has been significant weight put to potential deals with Commonwealth countries and whilst a few should certainly be targets others in the short to medium term have much less significant to us.

I'm not sure why you believe our government / civil service will be able to carry out complex negations more swiftly than the EU. That was not my experience when involved negotiating government contracts. In the main, this is much to do with the complexity of the negotiation rather than any particular slowness of the parties.

I'd like to understand your experience in contract negotiation as to why you think we will get a good deal with for example the USA when their economy is so much larger. It is against all business logic and experience.

Nickgnome,

This is worth a read to calibrate the scale of whatever task eventually befalls Dr Fox and his merry men.

http://www.theredcell.co.uk/uploads/9/6/4/0/964099...

It considers a range of scenarios from outright hostility after complete breakdown through to the mildest of agreed FTA deals. Helpfully, it analyses what deals there are and what can be cut and pasted, and crucially assesses how easily implementable they are.

If I were drawing up my negotiating strategy and BATNA for a Brexit negotiation, I don't think I'd be sweating too hard. There is a range of very credible and live-able with alternatives to bending over and taking whatever Barnier and co decide to administer to us.

I will give it a read this evening. Not wasting another gloriously sunny day on here.

He is not exactly an unbiased author is he. I prefer my ‘Experts’ to be unbiased.

[Nickgnome]

s2art said:

Nickgnome said:

I'm not sure why you believe our government / civil service will be able to carry out complex negations more swiftly than the EU. That was not my experience when involved negotiating government contracts. In the main, this is much to do with the complexity of the negotiation rather than any particular slowness of the parties.

We saw what happened with the Canada trade deal. Many members of the EU had their own axe to grind, including the Walloons. It made the negotiations complex and difficult. By contrast when the USA and Australia did one it took less than 18 months. We will be in a similar position.

Assuming we have the level of resource with sufficient expertise and experience to carry out several extremely large agreements in parallel. I’d like to understand your background to be able to make such a bold statement.

[amusingduck]

Nickgnome said:

psi310398 said:

Nickgnome said:

I am aware that the USA and Japan are much larger than us but there has been significant weight put to potential deals with Commonwealth countries and whilst a few should certainly be targets others in the short to medium term have much less significant to us.

I'm not sure why you believe our government / civil service will be able to carry out complex negations more swiftly than the EU. That was not my experience when involved negotiating government contracts. In the main, this is much to do with the complexity of the negotiation rather than any particular slowness of the parties.

I'd like to understand your experience in contract negotiation as to why you think we will get a good deal with for example the USA when their economy is so much larger. It is against all business logic and experience.

Nickgnome,

This is worth a read to calibrate the scale of whatever task eventually befalls Dr Fox and his merry men.

http://www.theredcell.co.uk/uploads/9/6/4/0/964099...

It considers a range of scenarios from outright hostility after complete breakdown through to the mildest of agreed FTA deals. Helpfully, it analyses what deals there are and what can be cut and pasted, and crucially assesses how easily implementable they are.

If I were drawing up my negotiating strategy and BATNA for a Brexit negotiation, I don't think I'd be sweating too hard. There is a range of very credible and live-able with alternatives to bending over and taking whatever Barnier and co decide to administer to us.

I will give it a read this evening. Not wasting another gloriously sunny day on here.

He is not exactly an unbiased author is he. I prefer my ‘Experts’ to be unbiased.

Good luck finding an unbiased, expert, prediction of the economic consequences of various Brexit flavours.

[Dr Jekyll]

Nickgnome said:

I'd like to understand your experience in contract negotiation as to why you think we will get a good deal with for example the USA when their economy is so much larger. It is against all business logic and experience.

If it isn't a good deal, we don't sign it. The relative size of the economies isn't really relevant, if it was the EU would be the worlds experts at getting trade deals, better than Switzerland for example.

[don'tbesilly]

Nickgnome said:

psi310398 said:

Nickgnome said:

I am aware that the USA and Japan are much larger than us but there has been significant weight put to potential deals with Commonwealth countries and whilst a few should certainly be targets others in the short to medium term have much less significant to us.

I'm not sure why you believe our government / civil service will be able to carry out complex negations more swiftly than the EU. That was not my experience when involved negotiating government contracts. In the main, this is much to do with the complexity of the negotiation rather than any particular slowness of the parties.

I'd like to understand your experience in contract negotiation as to why you think we will get a good deal with for example the USA when their economy is so much larger. It is against all business logic and experience.

Nickgnome,

This is worth a read to calibrate the scale of whatever task eventually befalls Dr Fox and his merry men.

http://www.theredcell.co.uk/uploads/9/6/4/0/964099...

It considers a range of scenarios from outright hostility after complete breakdown through to the mildest of agreed FTA deals. Helpfully, it analyses what deals there are and what can be cut and pasted, and crucially assesses how easily implementable they are.

If I were drawing up my negotiating strategy and BATNA for a Brexit negotiation, I don't think I'd be sweating too hard. There is a range of very credible and live-able with alternatives to bending over and taking whatever Barnier and co decide to administer to us.

I will give it a read this evening. Not wasting another gloriously sunny day on here.

He is not exactly an unbiased author is he. I prefer my ‘Experts’ to be unbiased.

The examples of your unbiased 'experts' being?

[B'stard Child]

I predict PML going nuts if a few people quote a post from above on here.......

[psi310398]

Nickgnome said:

I will give it a read this evening. Not wasting another gloriously sunny day on here.

He is not exactly an unbiased author is he. I prefer my ‘Experts’ to be unbiased.

No, he is not. I'm afraid experts in this area are as unbiased as economists are. As I said earlier, he has his baggage but he does at least clearly lay out 'facts', which can be tested/verified/challenged etc.

FWIW I did a bit of sampling of his statements on various agreements and couldn't find anything to contradict his positions.

And I can't see anything wrong with his logic.

[PurpleMoonlight]

amusingduck said:

Why use many word when few word do trick?

Quite.

[B'stard Child]

alfaspecial said:

B'stard Child said:

alfaspecial said:

lots of stuff

Please take this in the spirit that's intended - you created a new thread for your post rather than post in here but now you've posted in here as well

I don't think we need both......

I also think you are falling foul of Rule 14. Cross posting across multiple forums is not allowed without prior permission/consent.

JM2pW

Fair enough. Perhaps you would care to delete / arrange to delete the other thread.
If there is repetition then repetition is pretty much the norm for the whole Brexit issue! My 'piece', I hope, adds something to the whole debate.

You could delete the post in here yourself or you could report the other thread yourself and ask for it to be deleted if you wish the discussion to be in this thread.

Personally I'd go for the delete option in this thread

Edited to add - seems already done

[s2art]

Nickgnome said:

s2art said:

Nickgnome said:

I'm not sure why you believe our government / civil service will be able to carry out complex negations more swiftly than the EU. That was not my experience when involved negotiating government contracts. In the main, this is much to do with the complexity of the negotiation rather than any particular slowness of the parties.

We saw what happened with the Canada trade deal. Many members of the EU had their own axe to grind, including the Walloons. It made the negotiations complex and difficult. By contrast when the USA and Australia did one it took less than 18 months. We will be in a similar position.

Assuming we have the level of resource with sufficient expertise and experience to carry out several extremely large agreements in parallel. I’d like to understand your background to be able to make such a bold statement.

Missing the point. We already have people with sufficient expertise and experience and more can be hired if required. IIRC New Zealand offered us their experienced negotiators to assist.I guess that if we are doing a trade deal with the USA we would request experts from Australia as well. There are even back benchers with experience, Peter Lilly for one and probably some Lords. (personally I would rope in Digby Jones even if he has never done a FTA he has plenty of experience in negotiations)

[Nickgnome]

s2art said:

Nickgnome said:

s2art said:

Nickgnome said:

I'm not sure why you believe our government / civil service will be able to carry out complex negations more swiftly than the EU. That was not my experience when involved negotiating government contracts. In the main, this is much to do with the complexity of the negotiation rather than any particular slowness of the parties.

We saw what happened with the Canada trade deal. Many members of the EU had their own axe to grind, including the Walloons. It made the negotiations complex and difficult. By contrast when the USA and Australia did one it took less than 18 months. We will be in a similar position.

Assuming we have the level of resource with sufficient expertise and experience to carry out several extremely large agreements in parallel. I’d like to understand your background to be able to make such a bold statement.

Missing the point. We already have people with sufficient expertise and experience and more can be hired if required. IIRC New Zealand offered us their experienced negotiators to assist.I guess that if we are doing a trade deal with the USA we would request experts from Australia as well. There are even back benchers with experience, Peter Lilly for one and probably some Lords. (personally I would rope in Digby Jones even if he has never done a FTA he has plenty of experience in negotiations)

You’re response indicates you have limited understanding of any sort of contract negotiation let alone a trade deal.

So who are these currently available experts in international negotiations and what have they been doing up until now?

[SpeckledJim]

Nickgnome said:

You’re response indicates you have limited understanding of any sort of contract negotiation let alone a trade deal.

So who are these currently available experts in international negotiations and what have they been doing up until now?

QFP, Professor.