How do we think EU negotiations will go?

[anonymous-user]

There has been a consistent message of no negotiation until the article 50 notification has been submitted.

This really is the which comes first, we have no idea of what will be on the table until we say we accept what is on the table. I suspect that most people including the politicians do not understood this or do not want to accept the reality.

The pragmatic approach is to assume nothing is on the table so anything is a bonus but we seem to think it is an equal negotiation which it is not.

[Robertj21a]

gottans said:

There has been a consistent message of no negotiation until the article 50 notification has been submitted.

This really is the which comes first, we have no idea of what will be on the table until we say we accept what is on the table. I suspect that most people including the politicians do not understood this or do not want to accept the reality.

The pragmatic approach is to assume nothing is on the table so anything is a bonus but we seem to think it is an equal negotiation which it is not.

Agreed, very similar to what I said a few posts earlier. It's the other 27 who are likely to get frustrated with the timescale, particularly when they all know that only the UK can decide when to submit the Article 50 papers. We have some excellent, easily understood, reasons for not rushing:-

- the first time it's happened
- need to get it right, for UK
- need to get it right, 'for our friends in Europe'
- political vacuum with loss of PM/election
- political vacuum with loss of credible opposition leader/election

It's highly likely that our inaction (or at best slow, cautious, action) over Section 50 will frustrate at least a few of the other 27 when they find that their on-going EU business is stifled by uncertainty. Although we don't need to upset any of them, we do need to protect ourselves in any negotiations - you start negotiations from your strongest point, not as a meek and mild subordinate.

My guess is that there will soon be more comments from some of the 27 trying to push us into faster action - to which we will give a standard politician's response. A short while later the same issues will rise again, probably with a sound bite from Juncker/Task. We should then remind them how important it is, for us and the EU, to get it right first time - and that '.....it may take until the New Year before we submit S50'. At that point the EU/Merkel will go ballistic about the impact we're having on the whole EU community. We can then say that our timescale could be shortened if there was some framework agreement over our exit plans.

[lostkiwi]

powerstroke said:

lostkiwi said:

s2art said:

lostkiwi said:

Ah yes the ridiculous answer I expected.
Nothing in terms of trade agreements - i.e. WTO and that means tariffs and quotas. So no free trade. No Norway agreement. No Switzerland agreement. No CETA agreement. We are just another country trading on WTO rules.

The BDI has instructed Merkel that there will be no tariff barriers. She vill obey orders!

Much as many believe she is Merkel is not the EU.
Any agreement must be unanimously approved. It only takes one dissent to veto any agreement. Merkel may well do as she is told but how about the other states?

Nothing is guaranteed.

Mr negative !!!!! I can understand why you call yourself lost kiwi!! all the Newzealanders I met when I worked there were proud resorseful people who were proud of their country , please stop running our country down its getting tiresome...

That's not negativity it's reality.

One thing you maybe need to get into your head is that the EU won't do anything for us "because we're British". Once you lose that idea and start looking at rules and personalities you might start to see a more realistic picture of what's ahead.

I've already posted how to best get through Brexit. Go have a read and suggest another plan if you have one. Just make sure you understand the rules we have to play by and how that affects things.

Edited by lostkiwi on Thursday 30th June 06:58

[lostkiwi]

gottans said:

There has been a consistent message of no negotiation until the article 50 notification has been submitted.

This really is the which comes first, we have no idea of what will be on the table until we say we accept what is on the table. I suspect that most people including the politicians do not understood this or do not want to accept the reality.

The pragmatic approach is to assume nothing is on the table so anything is a bonus but we seem to think it is an equal negotiation which it is not.

Absolutely on the money.

[powerstroke]

lostkiwi said:

That's not negativity it's reality.

One thing you maybe need to get into your head is that the EU won't do anything for us "because we're British". Once you lose that idea and start looking at rules and personalities you might start to see a more realistic picture of what's ahead.

I've already posted how to best get through Brexit. Go have a read and suggest another plan if you have one. Just make sure you understand the rules we have to play by and how that affects things.

Edited by lostkiwi on Thursday 30th June 06:58

Simple to me, we trade with them they trade with us , if that don't work for them then fine just watch the door docent hit you on the way out MR Junkers...
Any fool can see our roads full of german cars ,trucks and vans , there are a awful lot of swedish french and Italian ones too and thats just one example of there industial might...
Continental trade is important to us but not as important as it is for them..
Please can we stop this we are in a weak position crap!!!

[powerstroke]

Esseesse said:

The options are:

1) Free market access with no free movement and no contributions. If anything, if they want free access to the UK market, how much are they going to pay us?
2) WTO option, enjoy the dent in your exports EU.

Yes !00% why make things complicated...hopefully the fools on here that think otherwise aren't in positions that could harm business or making decisions for others ....

[lostkiwi]

powerstroke said:

lostkiwi said:

That's not negativity it's reality.

One thing you maybe need to get into your head is that the EU won't do anything for us "because we're British". Once you lose that idea and start looking at rules and personalities you might start to see a more realistic picture of what's ahead.

I've already posted how to best get through Brexit. Go have a read and suggest another plan if you have one. Just make sure you understand the rules we have to play by and how that affects things.

Edited by lostkiwi on Thursday 30th June 06:58

Simple to me, we trade with them they trade with us , if that don't work for them then fine just watch the door docent hit you on the way out MR Junkers...
Any fool can see our roads full of german cars ,trucks and vans , there are a awful lot of swedish french and Italian ones too and thats just one example of there industial might...
Continental trade is important to us but not as important as it is for them..
Please can we stop this we are in a weak position crap!!!

Continental trade with us in not as important to them as it is to us.
Look at the figures as a percentage of exports and imports. As for your argument about all the German vehicles on the roads they know full well we will still buy them no matter what.
From a negotiation perspective we are in a weak position. We need them more than they need us. They have all the cards regarding what is on the table and they can use the deadline against us.
Article 50 is designed to give the EU the stronger hand.
Any agreement MUST be ratified by the ENTIRE remaining 27 states. That's democracy. Merkel can be told what to do but it's not her decision. Essentially we are negotiating with 27 countries in a single agreement. How hard is it to get 27 people out of 27 to agree to something? It's not going to be easy and we have the harder task.

[powerstroke]

lostkiwi said:

Continental trade with us in not as important to them as it is to us.
Look at the figures as a percentage of exports and imports. As for your argument about all the German vehicles on the roads they know full well we will still buy them no matter what.
From a negotiation perspective we are in a weak position. We need them more than they need us. They have all the cards regarding what is on the table and they can use the deadline against us.
Article 50 is designed to give the EU the stronger hand.
Any agreement MUST be ratified by the ENTIRE remaining 27 states. That's democracy. Merkel can be told what to do but it's not her decision. Essentially we are negotiating with 27 countries in a single agreement. How hard is it to get 27 people out of 27 to agree to something? It's not going to be easy and we have the harder task.

Bullshine !! as Germany is the largest contributor to the EU coffers what Germany wants Germany will get,
When it comes to trade it will be about money and a spite match won't be conducted ..
If we have a normal human like John Redwood or Mogg doing the negotiation they will get a trade deal with US !!!!
Never forget they need to do a deal as much as we need to do a trade deal!!!

[anonymous-user]

powerstroke said:

If we have a normal human like John Redwood or Mogg doing the negotiation they will get a trade deal with US !!!!

Serious question: have you looked into why countries have trade deals, how simple/complex they are, how they are negotiated and how long they take to negotiate, and how specialist a job being a trade agreement negotiator is? It's quite eye opening.

[zbc]

powerstroke said:

lostkiwi said:

Continental trade with us in not as important to them as it is to us.
Look at the figures as a percentage of exports and imports. As for your argument about all the German vehicles on the roads they know full well we will still buy them no matter what.
From a negotiation perspective we are in a weak position. We need them more than they need us. They have all the cards regarding what is on the table and they can use the deadline against us.
Article 50 is designed to give the EU the stronger hand.
Any agreement MUST be ratified by the ENTIRE remaining 27 states. That's democracy. Merkel can be told what to do but it's not her decision. Essentially we are negotiating with 27 countries in a single agreement. How hard is it to get 27 people out of 27 to agree to something? It's not going to be easy and we have the harder task.

Bullshine !! as Germany is the largest contributor to the EU coffers what Germany wants Germany will get,
When it comes to trade it will be about money and a spite match won't be conducted ..
If we have a normal human like John Redwood or Mogg doing the negotiation they will get a trade deal with US !!!!
Never forget they need to do a deal as much as we need to do a trade deal!!!

They don't Powerstroke.
If you assume there is no deal at all then we end up with WTO tariffs. Of course this won't kill trade but it will reduce it. Say trade in both directions falls by 10%. EU exports to the UK count for about 8% of their total exports. If this drops by 10% they lose less than 1% of their exports. UK exports to the EU is over 40% of UK exports. If this falls by 10% we lose 4% total of our exports. Who does this hurt more?
German car manufacturers will of course be one of the biggest and most listened to groups but there are other manufacturers on the continent and also there are plenty of companies that struggle with imports from the UK who wouldn't mind a bit of protectionism. Just because German car makers want a deal doesn't make it happen.

[PositronicRay]

lostkiwi said:

powerstroke said:

lostkiwi said:

That's not negativity it's reality.

One thing you maybe need to get into your head is that the EU won't do anything for us "because we're British". Once you lose that idea and start looking at rules and personalities you might start to see a more realistic picture of what's ahead.

I've already posted how to best get through Brexit. Go have a read and suggest another plan if you have one. Just make sure you understand the rules we have to play by and how that affects things.

Edited by lostkiwi on Thursday 30th June 06:58

Simple to me, we trade with them they trade with us , if that don't work for them then fine just watch the door docent hit you on the way out MR Junkers...
Any fool can see our roads full of german cars ,trucks and vans , there are a awful lot of swedish french and Italian ones too and thats just one example of there industial might...
Continental trade is important to us but not as important as it is for them..
Please can we stop this we are in a weak position crap!!!

Continental trade with us in not as important to them as it is to us.
Look at the figures as a percentage of exports and imports. As for your argument about all the German vehicles on the roads they know full well we will still buy them no matter what.
From a negotiation perspective we are in a weak position. We need them more than they need us. They have all the cards regarding what is on the table and they can use the deadline against us.
Article 50 is designed to give the EU the stronger hand.
Any agreement MUST be ratified by the ENTIRE remaining 27 states. That's democracy. Merkel can be told what to do but it's not her decision. Essentially we are negotiating with 27 countries in a single agreement. How hard is it to get 27 people out of 27 to agree to something? It's not going to be easy and we have the harder task.

We need a strong team of legals, negotiators and a clear vision of what we want. A win win situation is what we're aiming for.

It's not just about trade, it's also about which legislation of our own that we accept/rewrite. Some of our legislation refers back to the EU original. Therefore once we leave we may find areas where legislation simply does not exist, unless re-written, and passed by government.

I understand the various treaties run to something like 80,000 pages, I'm guessing each section needs to be discussed. Then a proposal for each section taken to each member state, for review/approval/amendment. Each individual section may have to go back and forth many times before acceptance. It's not like it's a few guys in a room "hammering" out a deal then shaking on it.

Canada has just been through the trade deal thing, wondering if we may use some Canadian expertise?

[Puggit]

Daily Wail proclaiming that the French finance minister has mentioned UK could have immigrant controls - Finish deputy PM says there are no red lines: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3666971/Eu...

Of course, these are 2 elected representatives, who certainly seem to be more friendly than the eurocrats.

[EddieSteadyGo]

My prediction of how the negotiations will go is as follows.

We know that the EU Parliament and the EU commission will want the UK to incur some degree of financial damage in order to discourage other members from leaving.

We also know that there are disparate interests within the EU member states which affects their predisposition to dealing constructively with the UK.

And we also know the freedom of movement is one of their four founding principles of the EU whereas this is likely to be a red line for the UK government.

If we could persuade other member states that it was in their own benefit to adapt the freedom of movement, everything would be much easier.

However, I think this is as about as likely as persuading american politicians on the need for gun control. It is one of those things which seems obvious to us, but really it just shows we don't understand their perspective.

And for these reasons, the two year timeframe for negotiations won't be long enough to reach a proper consensus.

As such, I think we should be prepared to move onto WTO rules initially as the basis for the exit. Then, in the medium term, tariffs and access to the single market would be gradually improved over time.

This would serve as a sufficient deterrent to other EU members leaving. It would also preserve the EU's principles. And it would give trade opportunities in the longer term.

I would imagine this type of arrangement would have the most significant effect on the car industry and financial services (with the often talked about problem of passporting).

Hence it might be possible to see a deal with has the WTO rules as the basis of an agreement, but with a provision for these two sectors specifically.

This would make sense on the basis of the trade imbalance between the UK and the EU.

[Mrr T]

zbc said:

They don't Powerstroke.
If you assume there is no deal at all then we end up with WTO tariffs. Of course this won't kill trade but it will reduce it. Say trade in both directions falls by 10%. EU exports to the UK count for about 8% of their total exports. If this drops by 10% they lose less than 1% of their exports. UK exports to the EU is over 40% of UK exports. If this falls by 10% we lose 4% total of our exports. Who does this hurt more?
German car manufacturers will of course be one of the biggest and most listened to groups but there are other manufacturers on the continent and also there are plenty of companies that struggle with imports from the UK who wouldn't mind a bit of protectionism. Just because German car makers want a deal doesn't make it happen.

You are missing the big one. Any exit plan which loses EU financial services passport will be a disaster for a sector employing more than 2m people. The job loses and fall in tax revenue will have a major impact on the UK economy.

[lockhart flawse]

The thing that I don't hear mentioned is that the EU we will be negotiating with is not the same EU that we were a part of and I wouldn't be surprised if there was to be at least one further exit over the next couple of years. My Dutch supplier is very pleased with the Brexit decision and says Dutch people are grateful to us! He hopes they can have a referendum in Holland as well.

The EU has lost one of it's three strongest members and will immediately have to find our 8 billion net contribution from elsewhere - presumably mostly from Germany and France. I don't think there is any doubt that European industry will want a workable deal with us as much as we want a deal with them. One in five German manufactured cars ends up on British roads so there is no question they will be looking for this to continue.

Personally I don't think any of it will be as bad as the doom sayers make out and I voted to remain.

[Fittster]

Dividing up the city of London's current activities:

"The British seat at the European Union summit had been empty for less than 24 hours before leaders from France and Germany were haggling over one of the U.K. economy’s crown jewels: the business that facilitates trading in euro-denominated derivatives.
French President Francois Hollande said Wednesday that clearing operations belong in a country in the euro zone -- like France. “I hope Europe’s financial market will get ready for the operations that will no longer be possible in the U.K.,” he said in Brussels. German officials countered that Paris is dreaming if it thinks it can beat out Frankfurt, the home of the European Central Bank and Deutsche Boerse AG’s Eurex operations.

“It seems wishful thinking from Hollande that this market would move to Paris,” Michael Fuchs, a deputy head of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union, said in an interview. “It could also move to Frankfurt.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-29/...

I'll leave it to each PHer to decide if a reduction in the size of the UK Financial services industry is a good or bad thing.

[Sway]

lostkiwi said:

trickywoo said:

lostkiwi said:

We have a deadline of two years in which to negotiate a deal otherwise we leave with nothing.

Whats nothing? We never buy an Audi or BMW or French wine again?

Laughable.

Ah yes the ridiculous answer I expected.
Nothing in terms of trade agreements - i.e. WTO and that means tariffs and quotas. So no free trade. No Norway agreement. No Switzerland agreement. No CETA agreement. We are just another country trading on WTO rules.

Or, we can rejoin a club we founded, which the EU has no control over, yet contains some lovely trading partners - and has trade deals that we would then automatically gain, including with the EU...

Step forward EFTA. They've already stated we'd be welcomed back.

Oh, and that also comes with a free trade deal with China. I know that's one way initially, but the two way deal is already signed and a implementation date set.

Other nations we'd gain FTAs with (not exhaustive):

Canada
Bahrain
Kuwait
Oman
Qatar
Saudi
UAE
Hong Kong
Israel
Philippines
Singapore.

Doesn't sound too bad...

[anonymous-user]

Mrr T said:

You are missing the big one. Any exit plan which loses EU financial services passport will be a disaster for a sector employing more than 2m people. The job loses and fall in tax revenue will have a major impact on the UK economy.

A £65bn effect according to figures I saw yesterday.

Still, we have £10bn back, and sovereignty, so let's all be positive!

Where's the grim face emoticon?

[Fittster]

Greg66 said:

Mrr T said:

You are missing the big one. Any exit plan which loses EU financial services passport will be a disaster for a sector employing more than 2m people. The job loses and fall in tax revenue will have a major impact on the UK economy.

A £65bn effect according to figures I saw yesterday.

Still, we have £10bn back, and sovereignty, so let's all be positive!

Where's the grim face emoticon?

I thought rebalancing the UK economy away from domination by Financial Services was a government objective. They are just going down a different route to achieve that goal.

[Puggit]

Sway said:

Or, we can rejoin a club we founded, which the EU has no control over, yet contains some lovely trading partners - and has trade deals that we would then automatically gain, including with the EU...

Step forward EFTA. They've already stated we'd be welcomed back.

Oh, and that also comes with a free trade deal with China. I know that's one way initially, but the two way deal is already signed and a implementation date set.

Other nations we'd gain FTAs with (not exhaustive):

Canada
Bahrain
Kuwait
Oman
Qatar
Saudi
UAE
Hong Kong
Israel
Philippines
Singapore.

Doesn't sound too bad...

Plus apparently NZ, Australia and Malaysia have inquired about new trade deals.