How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 2)

[barryrs]

edh said:

Liam Fox in 2012

"What should be done? I believe that the best way forward is for Britain to renegotiate a new relationship with the European Union – one based on an economic partnership involving a customs union and a single market in goods and services."

https://www.liamfox.co.uk/news/dr-fox-mail-sunday

Didnt we try that already?

[cb31]

edh said:

Liam Fox in 2012

"What should be done? I believe that the best way forward is for Britain to renegotiate a new relationship with the European Union – one based on an economic partnership involving a customs union and a single market in goods and services."

https://www.liamfox.co.uk/news/dr-fox-mail-sunday

You can only negotiate with someone on the other side who is willing. The EU's stance is full EU or nothing seemingly, consequently our position has to change.

[edh]

barryrs said:

edh said:

Liam Fox in 2012

"What should be done? I believe that the best way forward is for Britain to renegotiate a new relationship with the European Union – one based on an economic partnership involving a customs union and a single market in goods and services."

https://www.liamfox.co.uk/news/dr-fox-mail-sunday

Didnt we try that already?

No

but we could do it now, from outside the EU, but in CU and SM

[Sway]

ElectricSoup said:

Sway said:

No, he's showing that some backwards nations are crap to deal with regardless of Customs Union.

The EU isn't that bad to deal with as a third nation - anyone importing from outside the EU today realises this. It certainly doesn't pose too many difficulties once the agreement is made on clearance procedures (which isn't the huge deal remain supporters are making it out to be).

The opposing example is Norway/Sweden. Customs border, but pretty damned seamless thanks to will on both sides.

The proposals Davepoth has articulated as being HMRC's plans are the next generation on from that implemented in Scandanavia.

And you are 100% certain that this will resolve all problems either political or economic around our land border with the EU?

No. Only an idiot would state absolutisms.

However, remaining in doesn't resolve all problems, either political or economic. No option does.

[Tuna]

edh said:

barryrs said:

edh said:

Liam Fox in 2012

"What should be done? I believe that the best way forward is for Britain to renegotiate a new relationship with the European Union – one based on an economic partnership involving a customs union and a single market in goods and services."

https://www.liamfox.co.uk/news/dr-fox-mail-sunday

Didnt we try that already?

No

but we could do it now, from outside the EU, but in CU and SM

You mean a CU where the EU has specified that no third party negotiation is permitted? And that as an external entity, we'd have no say in future regulation?

How does that even remotely sound like a good deal to you? In order to retain an unquantified trading benefit with one group, we forfeit control over trade with all the others?

[ElectricSoup]

Sway said:

ElectricSoup said:

Sway said:

No, he's showing that some backwards nations are crap to deal with regardless of Customs Union.

The EU isn't that bad to deal with as a third nation - anyone importing from outside the EU today realises this. It certainly doesn't pose too many difficulties once the agreement is made on clearance procedures (which isn't the huge deal remain supporters are making it out to be).

The opposing example is Norway/Sweden. Customs border, but pretty damned seamless thanks to will on both sides.

The proposals Davepoth has articulated as being HMRC's plans are the next generation on from that implemented in Scandanavia.

And you are 100% certain that this will resolve all problems either political or economic around our land border with the EU?

No. Only an idiot would state absolutisms.

However, remaining in doesn't resolve all problems, either political or economic. No option does.

You're not getting my point. We are creating an unnecessary and probably irresolvable problem at the Irish border, which carries huge political and economic risks, by trying to implement brexit. It's simply not worth all this aggro. There is no dividend nor benefit to be had from taking these massive risks. It's, quite frankly, mental.

[Sway]

ElectricSoup said:

Sway said:

ElectricSoup said:

Sway said:

No, he's showing that some backwards nations are crap to deal with regardless of Customs Union.

The EU isn't that bad to deal with as a third nation - anyone importing from outside the EU today realises this. It certainly doesn't pose too many difficulties once the agreement is made on clearance procedures (which isn't the huge deal remain supporters are making it out to be).

The opposing example is Norway/Sweden. Customs border, but pretty damned seamless thanks to will on both sides.

The proposals Davepoth has articulated as being HMRC's plans are the next generation on from that implemented in Scandanavia.

And you are 100% certain that this will resolve all problems either political or economic around our land border with the EU?

No. Only an idiot would state absolutisms.

However, remaining in doesn't resolve all problems, either political or economic. No option does.

You're not getting my point. We are creating an unnecessary and probably irresolvable problem at the Irish border, which carries huge political and economic risks, by trying to implement brexit. It's simply not worth all this aggro. There is no dividend nor benefit to be had from taking these massive risks. It's, quite frankly, mental.

It's a bit early for hyperbole.

It's far from irresolvable. The risks are far from huge - political or economic. There is no aggro.

The 'Troubles' ended in any meaningful sense on September 11th, 2001. They aren't going to flare up due to a few ANPR cameras. There is already a border.

The fact you cannot see a single potential benefit of leaving shows how closed minded you are to the whole debate - see my post you've quoted about those stating absolutisms...

[EddieSteadyGo]

Sway said:

It's a bit early for hyperbole.

It's far from irresolvable. The risks are far from huge - political or economic. There is no aggro.

The 'Troubles' ended in any meaningful sense on September 11th, 2001. They aren't going to flare up due to a few ANPR cameras. There is already a border.

The fact you cannot see a single potential benefit of leaving shows how closed minded you are to the whole debate - see my post you've quoted about those stating absolutisms...

Have to agree with Sway on this. Of course we need to be sensitive to the politics, and we all know that sectarism hasn't gone away just because the Good Friday agreement was signed.

But it can't be the correct logic that we have to stay in the EU because of the Irish border. IMHO we will look back on the perceived border issues and realise it was just a bump in the road.

[The Dangerous Elk]

EddieSteadyGo said:

Have to agree with Sway on this. Of course we need to be sensitive to the politics, and we all know that sectarism hasn't gone away just because the Good Friday agreement was signed.

But it can't be the correct logic that we have to stay in the EU because of the Irish border. IMHO we will look back on the perceived border issues and realise it was just a bump in the road.

Just the latest part of "Project Fear"

[ElectricSoup]

The denial in here is spectacular. The real Project Fear was all about Turkey joining and our border effectively being with Syria and Iraq. I've still got the leaflets with the diagrams pointing this out. Accusations of Project Fear were simply Project Projection.

There *may* be some benefits after brexit, which, in the opinion of all analyses carried out by all respected and valued sources, will most likely be outweighed by the downsides. Can't believe this has to be repeated so often.

[Mrr T]

davepoth said:

Link the two together. The bonded area will be the whole UK. No border posts at the ports, in effect.

As for what happens in the EU, that's the EU's responsibility. As I've said the UK will be able to have open roads for arriving vehicles, but if the EU wants to have sentry posts then that's for them to decide.

It might be that when it is built but your link showed at the moment it just a prove of concept document. Anyone with any experience of projects knows the time between a POC and a working system is a very long time.

[Mrr T]

davepoth said:

As I've mentioned, they have. The nuts and bolts of it really aren't that complicated - ANPR cameras at the major crossings, weight limits on the smaller roads, and a box on the EAD for the registration number of the truck. Truck comes across, system checks database. Truck has a declaration for the journey? Mark it as having crossed the border and bill the appropriate deferment account. If you get away from the mindset that the lion's share of customs work has to be done at the border then it's quite simple.

No declaration on file? Pass the details on to the enforcement division. It's likely all undeclared HGVs would get pulled, and any vans with odd movements would too. Bung in a generous turnover threshold for business before customs is enforced (maybe £100,000) on the basis that the trade would be roughly symmetrical, and you're most of the way there.

I agree it’s easy. Link up the new CDS system to ANPR, I am sure there is no link at the moment. Roll out the new process to hundreds of companies, across the rEU. They would need to link the original declaration to the order, and then allowing the logistic company to assign to a lorry. Which I am sure will involve the logistic companies changing their software. Install ANPR that works accurately, which we know it does not. Link it all up SAT then UAT. Recruit and train lots of new customs officers. Yes I am sure a tanned PH company director wold do all this in a weekend on a Sinclair ZX81. But in the real world.

[powerstroke]

ElectricSoup said:

The denial in here is spectacular. The real Project Fear was all about Turkey joining and our border effectively being with Syria and Iraq. I've still got the leaflets with the diagrams pointing this out. Accusations of Project Fear were simply Project Projection.

There *may* be some benefits after brexit, which, in the opinion of all analyses carried out by all respected and valued sources, will most likely be outweighed by the downsides. Can't believe this has to be repeated so often.

Hmm ... if we as a country had never taken any risks where would we be or where
do you think the rest of the world would be ??? we have a great chance now we are
out of the strange 40 years plus of red tape ,and foreign rule ,
I feel so positive and excited about our future we are a great trading nation and we are no longer in the EU straight jacket the world is out there for us , lets grab the opportunity ...

[Dr Jekyll]

But suppose the system doesn't work? That just means that trucks from the EU will get into the UK without being examined by customs, in other words exactly as they do now. What exactly is the problem?
How can anyone insist that customs checks at Dover will be a disaster and we should stay in the CU so we can continue to wave trucks through without inspection, and simultaneously insist that if we do leave the EU those same trucks must be individually inspected or some kind of disaster will occur?

[p1stonhead]

powerstroke said:

ElectricSoup said:

The denial in here is spectacular. The real Project Fear was all about Turkey joining and our border effectively being with Syria and Iraq. I've still got the leaflets with the diagrams pointing this out. Accusations of Project Fear were simply Project Projection.

There *may* be some benefits after brexit, which, in the opinion of all analyses carried out by all respected and valued sources, will most likely be outweighed by the downsides. Can't believe this has to be repeated so often.

I feel so positive and excited about our future we are a great trading nation and we are no longer in the straight jacket the world is out there for us , lets grab the opportunity ...

Is this satire or do I need a whoosh? It just really reads as satire.....

[Sway]

ElectricSoup said:

The denial in here is spectacular. The real Project Fear was all about Turkey joining and our border effectively being with Syria and Iraq. I've still got the leaflets with the diagrams pointing this out. Accusations of Project Fear were simply Project Projection.

There *may* be some benefits after brexit, which, in the opinion of all analyses carried out by all respected and valued sources, will most likely be outweighed by the downsides. Can't believe this has to be repeated so often.

Name a 'projection' that came true.

Name one of the 'respected and valued sources' that has ever predicted the economic future anywhere near reality over a fifteen year period.

The denial is clear - you raised some crap about Ireland. Now it's something else.

I've acknowledged risks of leaving, and potential mitigations.

Where has been your acknowledgement of the risks of remaining? I'm not talking about bullst like Turkey joining, even the EU isn't that stupid. Proper risks, like Target2 causing EZ implosion. Reckon the respected and valued crystal ball glazers priced that in?

[powerstroke]

p1stonhead said:

powerstroke said:

ElectricSoup said:

The denial in here is spectacular. The real Project Fear was all about Turkey joining and our border effectively being with Syria and Iraq. I've still got the leaflets with the diagrams pointing this out. Accusations of Project Fear were simply Project Projection.

There *may* be some benefits after brexit, which, in the opinion of all analyses carried out by all respected and valued sources, will most likely be outweighed by the downsides. Can't believe this has to be repeated so often.

I feel so positive and excited about our future we are a great trading nation and we are no longer in the straight jacket the world is out there for us , lets grab the opportunity ...

Is this satire or do I need a whoosh? It just really reads as satire.....

Don't be nasty to Soup everyone is entitled to venture an opinion ...

[edh]

Tuna said:

edh said:

barryrs said:

edh said:

Liam Fox in 2012

"What should be done? I believe that the best way forward is for Britain to renegotiate a new relationship with the European Union – one based on an economic partnership involving a customs union and a single market in goods and services."

https://www.liamfox.co.uk/news/dr-fox-mail-sunday

Didnt we try that already?

No

but we could do it now, from outside the EU, but in CU and SM

You mean a CU where the EU has specified that no third party negotiation is permitted? And that as an external entity, we'd have no say in future regulation?

How does that even remotely sound like a good deal to you? In order to retain an unquantified trading benefit with one group, we forfeit control over trade with all the others?

..and now we're back to "making our own trade deals" as if this was the only thing that mattered..and without it we will suddenly be unable to export to the world. I notice the disgraced Dr Fox wrote "a" customs union and "a" single market

[Sway]

edh said:

Tuna said:

edh said:

barryrs said:

edh said:

Liam Fox in 2012

"What should be done? I believe that the best way forward is for Britain to renegotiate a new relationship with the European Union – one based on an economic partnership involving a customs union and a single market in goods and services."

https://www.liamfox.co.uk/news/dr-fox-mail-sunday

Didnt we try that already?

No

but we could do it now, from outside the EU, but in CU and SM

You mean a CU where the EU has specified that no third party negotiation is permitted? And that as an external entity, we'd have no say in future regulation?

How does that even remotely sound like a good deal to you? In order to retain an unquantified trading benefit with one group, we forfeit control over trade with all the others?

..and now we're back to "making our own trade deals" as if this was the only thing that mattered..and without it we will suddenly be unable to export to the world. I notice the disgraced Dr Fox wrote "a" customs union and "a" single market

You've put "making our own trade deals" in quotation marks - yet the posts you've quoted don't say that.

That's a tad disengenious.

"Forfeit control over trade with all others [groups/nations]" does not equate solely to "making our own trade deals". It also includes the recognition of standards, and setting of inward tariff regimes to suit our own needs.

[anonymous-user]

edh said:

..and now we're back to "making our own trade deals" as if this was the only thing that mattered..and without it we will suddenly be unable to export to the world. I notice the disgraced Dr Fox wrote "a" customs union and "a" single market

Let's face it, the rest of the world are being punished by the evil EU and we are the Knights in shining armour who are setting them free. They will show their appreciation by buying lots of stuff from us while not expecting us to increase our trade deficit by buying from them.