How do we think EU negotiations will go?
Discussion
richie99 said:
If we have no deal on anything then there world trade rules which relate largely to the trade in goods. So far not so bad.
As has hit the headlines recently, they say nothing about aircraft access to each others territories so you won't be able to fly to the EU.
Which probably doesn't matter because without an agreement about a visa regime in place you won't be able to enter the country when you get there.
WTO doesn't say much about services so doesn't help us much with services export. Services are only about 80% of the UK economy so no biggie.
WTO says nothing at all about the ability to transfer personal data between countries. No deal on anything means no transfer across borders. UK data centres processing EU data have to move. UK tech industry suffers.
These just a few highlights. Hope that helps. There is no sensible scenario under which there can be no deal at all.
"project hysteria" rather than "project fear" I see. When remoaners start claiming we wont be able to visit the EU, or fly there, it is getting a bit desperate.As has hit the headlines recently, they say nothing about aircraft access to each others territories so you won't be able to fly to the EU.
Which probably doesn't matter because without an agreement about a visa regime in place you won't be able to enter the country when you get there.
WTO doesn't say much about services so doesn't help us much with services export. Services are only about 80% of the UK economy so no biggie.
WTO says nothing at all about the ability to transfer personal data between countries. No deal on anything means no transfer across borders. UK data centres processing EU data have to move. UK tech industry suffers.
These just a few highlights. Hope that helps. There is no sensible scenario under which there can be no deal at all.
There is indeed a sensible scenario where we leave with no deal. Which is as follows
We accept there will be some short term economic disruption around the transition point and use the so called "divorce" settlement to fund targeted infrastructure works and otherwise support the economy either side of the leaving date.
Breadvan72 said:
Without an agreement on airspace you will have to take a ferry when you want to go and talk loudly to foreigners. Access to airspace is not one of the things that can be magicked up by British pluck and determination.
Good God man, have you forgotten the Battle of`Britain?We shall boost manufacturing by building factories to make Spitfires. And then we shall go on our holidays in said Spitfires. Woe betide any Johnny Foreigner who gets in our way then. Because we’re British!
Breadvan72 said:
Without an agreement on airspace you will have to take a ferry when you want to go and talk loudly to foreigners. Access to airspace is not one of the things that can be magicked up by British pluck and determination.
NATS said:
Up to 80% of all Oceanic traffic passes through the Shanwick Oceanic Control Area (OCA), which is airspace controlled by the United Kingdom
We’re in a reasonable negotiating position WRT airspace. Air traffic control services should not be confused with the ownership of airspace. Shanwick provides ATC services to aircraft in international airspace (and UK airspace too). This is indeed a useful resource and a factor in negotiations, but the UK could not prevent aircraft from flying in the non UK airspace serviced by Shanwick. By contrast, aircraft from the UK will need permission to fly into the airspace of EU member states. I expect that a deal will be done on this, but it is incorrect to suggest that no deal will be a minor matter with regard to travel.
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 20th October 07:13
JagLover said:
"project hysteria" rather than "project fear" I see. When remoaners start claiming we wont be able to visit the EU, or fly there, it is getting a bit desperate.
There is indeed a sensible scenario where we leave with no deal.
"No deal" means "no deal" - not "no deal except the things you find useful"There is indeed a sensible scenario where we leave with no deal.
rxe said:
Dr Jekyll said:
How did we manage to get to France before we joined the EEC?
When I was little, I went on a hovercraft. It was ace!Do you think we can go back to hovercraft when we leave?
It would be possible, but expensive for Oceanic European traffic to avoid the London and Scottish FIRs to enter Shanwick, but at an extra cost not just limited to fuel. We’re, geographically, very lucky and that gives us a useful negotiating position. It’s not just the use of the Shanwick OCA, you also have to consider how you get there.
ETA:
ETA:
Edited by pushthebutton on Friday 20th October 07:17
JagLover said:
richie99 said:
If we have no deal on anything then there world trade rules which relate largely to the trade in goods. So far not so bad.
As has hit the headlines recently, they say nothing about aircraft access to each others territories so you won't be able to fly to the EU.
Which probably doesn't matter because without an agreement about a visa regime in place you won't be able to enter the country when you get there.
WTO doesn't say much about services so doesn't help us much with services export. Services are only about 80% of the UK economy so no biggie.
WTO says nothing at all about the ability to transfer personal data between countries. No deal on anything means no transfer across borders. UK data centres processing EU data have to move. UK tech industry suffers.
These just a few highlights. Hope that helps. There is no sensible scenario under which there can be no deal at all.
"project hysteria" rather than "project fear" I see. When remoaners start claiming we wont be able to visit the EU, or fly there, it is getting a bit desperate.As has hit the headlines recently, they say nothing about aircraft access to each others territories so you won't be able to fly to the EU.
Which probably doesn't matter because without an agreement about a visa regime in place you won't be able to enter the country when you get there.
WTO doesn't say much about services so doesn't help us much with services export. Services are only about 80% of the UK economy so no biggie.
WTO says nothing at all about the ability to transfer personal data between countries. No deal on anything means no transfer across borders. UK data centres processing EU data have to move. UK tech industry suffers.
These just a few highlights. Hope that helps. There is no sensible scenario under which there can be no deal at all.
There is indeed a sensible scenario where we leave with no deal. Which is as follows
We accept there will be some short term economic disruption around the transition point and use the so called "divorce" settlement to fund targeted infrastructure works and otherwise support the economy either side of the leaving date.
The "we can go back to how things were before we joined" arguments miss the point that since then various systems such as the European airspace system have developed. Much the same can be said of something like pharmaceutical regulation. We can't just default back to the pre-EEC system for supply of the NHS. We don't have to like reality, but we do have to deal with it.
pushthebutton said:
It would be possible, but expensive for Oceanic European traffic to avoid the London and Scottish FIRs to enter Shanwick, but at an extra cost not just limited to fuel. We’re, geographically, very lucky and that gives us a useful negotiating position. It’s not just the use of the Shanwick OCA, you also have to consider how you get there.
I agree. I was addressing the (daft) notion that not getting a deal wouldn't matter. Look at the breezy spin above. Let's count the money not spent on a divorce payment as a windfall and save the economy with that money! Hey! We must free ourselves from managerialism and socialism and so on, so that we can have an economy that's dependent on State inputs!
Brexiteer positions do at least have the virtue of being self-satirising.
Breadvan72 said:
pushthebutton said:
It would be possible, but expensive for Oceanic European traffic to avoid the London and Scottish FIRs to enter Shanwick, but at an extra cost not just limited to fuel. We’re, geographically, very lucky and that gives us a useful negotiating position. It’s not just the use of the Shanwick OCA, you also have to consider how you get there.
I agree. I was addressing the (daft) notion that not getting a deal wouldn't matter. Look at the breezy spin above. Let's count the money not spent on a divorce payment as a windfall and save the economy with that money! Hey! We must free ourselves from managerialism and socialism and so on, so that we can have an economy that's dependent on State inputs!
Brexiteer positions do at least have the virtue of being self-satirising.
The only way I see this getting sorted is signing up to EASA open skies, which causes May a major problem with the ECJ.
jonnyb said:
Breadvan72 said:
pushthebutton said:
It would be possible, but expensive for Oceanic European traffic to avoid the London and Scottish FIRs to enter Shanwick, but at an extra cost not just limited to fuel. We’re, geographically, very lucky and that gives us a useful negotiating position. It’s not just the use of the Shanwick OCA, you also have to consider how you get there.
I agree. I was addressing the (daft) notion that not getting a deal wouldn't matter. Look at the breezy spin above. Let's count the money not spent on a divorce payment as a windfall and save the economy with that money! Hey! We must free ourselves from managerialism and socialism and so on, so that we can have an economy that's dependent on State inputs!
Brexiteer positions do at least have the virtue of being self-satirising.
The only way I see this getting sorted is signing up to EASA open skies, which causes May a major problem with the ECJ.
ky aviation way I call it a chart). But I think that your point might be better directed at one of the "don't worry, everything will be fine" leaver types.Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 20th October 07:39
jonnyb said:
Do you have a map of British sovereign airspace? I think we can only stop aircraft flying in our own sovereign airspace, and while we control large areas, we would have no control over access.
The only way I see this getting sorted is signing up to EASA open skies, which causes May a major problem with the ECJ.
I’d think that the pic I posted in my edit above gives a reasonable approximation. It’s clear to me that any sort of a ‘no deal’ WRT aviation is a lose lose scenario for both sides. Maintaining the status quo is the only reasonable outcome. The only way I see this getting sorted is signing up to EASA open skies, which causes May a major problem with the ECJ.
Wiki said:
Air traffic management in the European Union is largely undertaken by member states, co-operating through EUROCONTROL, an intergovernmental organisation that includes both the EU member states and most other European states as well.
So, according to the above (lazy researching on my part) Eurocontrol already includes non-member states. Single European Skies seems to have several teething problems at the moment, but I’m not that familiar with the timeline and it seems progress is slow. On a tangent, it should be mentioned that most U.K. pilots see EASA regulations as a backward step in overall safety. They were challenged at the time for having little foundation in scientific research. If anything, they are an improvement for the more loosely regulated states, but a backward step for the UK IMO.
Well according to the front page of today’s Times, our chief negotiator [sic], DD, has instructed his “team” (that must be quite something to behold) to examine a no deal exit, which Davis will talk up on Hallowe’en.
Yes, that’s right. On the night of horrors, our chief negotiator will be telling us how wonderful things will be when he fails in his single task.
We have a bunch of third rate journeymen Conservative MPs who were never any good in the first place squeezing the balls of the party as hard as they can, and a fking rag and bone man with a hardcore Marxist sidekick waiting in the wings to take over. We have a PM pleading with EU leaders to help her out and the same EU leaders taking pity - and that is the right word - on a British PM because her domestic position is so precarious. By comparison, Major’s battle with his rebels in the 1990s look about as rocky as the immediate aftermath of the Falklands War was for Thatcher.
There is always, in any negotiation, a point usually in the first third of the process at which the parties appear almost completely irreconcilable. Then, with both of them having to contemplate the abyss of the negotiation failing, they recoil and start to move closer together. One can only hope that that is where we are right now. Because the alternative is deeply unpalatable.
Yes, that’s right. On the night of horrors, our chief negotiator will be telling us how wonderful things will be when he fails in his single task.
We have a bunch of third rate journeymen Conservative MPs who were never any good in the first place squeezing the balls of the party as hard as they can, and a f
king rag and bone man with a hardcore Marxist sidekick waiting in the wings to take over. We have a PM pleading with EU leaders to help her out and the same EU leaders taking pity - and that is the right word - on a British PM because her domestic position is so precarious. By comparison, Major’s battle with his rebels in the 1990s look about as rocky as the immediate aftermath of the Falklands War was for Thatcher. There is always, in any negotiation, a point usually in the first third of the process at which the parties appear almost completely irreconcilable. Then, with both of them having to contemplate the abyss of the negotiation failing, they recoil and start to move closer together. One can only hope that that is where we are right now. Because the alternative is deeply unpalatable.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff