How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)

[anonymous-user]

Elysium said:

That just means that the revocation must be 'clear' and 'without conditions'. Neither of those things make it permanent.

Exactly.

[davepoth]

Elysium said:

That just means that the revocation must be 'clear' and 'without conditions'. Neither of those things make it permanent.

Absolutely. There's nothing in the ruling that stops us from enacting and revoking Article 50 like a rubbish verse of the Hokey Cokey, other than that we need to mean it at the point of revocation.

The issue is of course that if we revoked and then re-enacted it 18 months later with the aim of doing a better deal, the rest of the EU is unlikely to be particularly happy with us.

[Elysium]

davepoth said:

Elysium said:

That just means that the revocation must be 'clear' and 'without conditions'. Neither of those things make it permanent.

Absolutely. There's nothing in the ruling that stops us from enacting and revoking Article 50 like a rubbish verse of the Hokey Cokey, other than that we need to mean it at the point of revocation.

The issue is of course that if we revoked and then re-enacted it 18 months later with the aim of doing a better deal, the rest of the EU is unlikely to be particularly happy with us.

No-one likes a revoky-cokey

[Vanden Saab]

Variomatic said:

Vanden Saab said:

and the top 10 countries we have a trade deficit with...

Germany: $41.5 billion
China: -$38.3 billion
Netherlands: -$24 billion
Norway: -$19.8 billion
Belgium: -$14.4 billion
Italy: -$10.9 billion
Canada: -$8.8 billion
Poland: -$7.1 billion
Spain: -$6.8 billion
Vietnam: -$6.3 billion

I would be fascinated to know why so many countries that sell far more to us than we do to them will not want a trade deal ... may be you can explain?

Take out the ones in bold, because they're all part of the EU. So no deal with the EU means no deal with any of them. Because, by definition, they can't set up trade deals on their own.

China will trade, but any deals will be on their terms and very unlikely to match (let alone exceed) their terms with the far larger EU market. Basic rule of business: smaller customers get worse terms.

Norway and Canada might strike deals, but it took 7 years to get CETA agreed and it's unlikely we'd be able to do it any quicker. That's a LONG time for the economy

That leaves Vietnam. Great plan - give up all the ready-negotiated EU deals to trade freely with Vietnam.

The EU has already agreed to a Canada + deal with us, trading under WTO rules will sharpen their desire to agree ASAP. also
have a look at the long list of countries China already has FTAs with. Despite being in negotiations for 11 years The EU is still nowhere near completing a trade deal. It is very likely we will have signed a FTA many years before the EU even get close....

[Variomatic]

jsf said:

bks. The Canada deal was in a large part to get access to the UK market. It would take very little time to sort that one out, just a copy and paste exercise of CETA.

The reason CETA took so long was because of the crazy issues of getting 28 countries, and their regional parliaments (Walloon FFS) to agree after being bribed.

Average time for an FTA with bilateral deals is 18 months.

yes, and an EU trade deal will be the "easiest in history"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/20/l...

Outside the EU we are in a WEAK position. Not just "weaker, but WEAK. We produce almost nothing (except arms), what we do produce is mostly foreign companies using us for a cheap foothold inside the EU. Services can move anywhere at the press of a button. We have nothing to trade except for selling ourselves as some tax haven knock-off shop.

We are no longer a Great World Power - most of our resources historically came from the countries we conquered - and we have no realistic chance of catching up with the rest of the world.

[saaby93]

Variomatic said:

We are no longer a Great World Power - most of our resources historically came from the countries we conquered

Like the Romans, Britain didnt really conquer countries it worked with the inhabitants to trade their goods so that everyone in the chain made something out of it.
It's one the reasons the Commonwealth still has an affinity today
Look at the Eastern Block countries and where they are today if you want a different example

[John145]

Variomatic said:

yes, and an EU trade deal will be the "easiest in history"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/20/l...

Outside the EU we are in a WEAK position. Not just "weaker, but WEAK. We produce almost nothing (except arms), what we do produce is mostly foreign companies using us for a cheap foothold inside the EU. Services can move anywhere at the press of a button. We have nothing to trade except for selling ourselves as some tax haven knock-off shop.

We are no longer a Great World Power - most of our resources historically came from the countries we conquered - and we have no realistic chance of catching up with the rest of the world.

The reason the EU trade deal will not be easy is because a good trade deal harms the EU (read ‘The Project’). However a good trade deal massively helps the people of the EU.

However as the EU is an autocracy and therefore unaccountable to the people they will not give a hoot and happily punish everyone in their Project delusion.

I would love to know which services will just up and leave.

Services are made up of individual talent not machines. Good luck demanding entire workforces to relocate or attempting to move whole businesses into foreign lands where English is not the business language.

Hey do you fancy moving to Frankfurt where you'll pay a st load more tax for a boring city to live in?

Also dont forget we contribute more to the nations in Africa than any other nation on Earth other than the US.

Yes this really stinks of a weak country harking back to the days of empire.

Outside of the EU we could be an extreme low tax economy attracting talent from the world and exporting goods and services. We may pay tariffs to get into the EU market but they will pay to get into ours. As we buy more from them we have surplus cash for reinvestment locally.

Tbh i voted leave expecting a hard time for the economy. However since the vote to leave pretty much all important indicators point in only one direction therefore I'm entirely confident we will do well.

Must be a shame to be on the otherside of the fence. And really quite stressful too. Life is easier if you relax and be optimistic

[Vanden Saab]

Variomatic said:

yes, and an EU trade deal will be the "easiest in history"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/20/l...

Outside the EU we are in a WEAK position. Not just "weaker, but WEAK. We produce almost nothing (except arms), what we do produce is mostly foreign companies using us for a cheap foothold inside the EU. Services can move anywhere at the press of a button. We have nothing to trade except for selling ourselves as some tax haven knock-off shop.

We are no longer a Great World Power - most of our resources historically came from the countries we conquered - and we have no realistic chance of catching up with the rest of the world.

More bks we produce almost nothing? what have you been reading … we are the 8th largest manufacturer in the world.

[anonymous-user]

Vanden Saab said:

List of the top 10 countries we have a trade surplus with...

Switzerland: $6.8 billion
United Arab Emirates: $6.8 billion
Ireland: $6.4 billion
Hong Kong: $3.6 billion
Singapore: $3.3 billion
Saudi Arabia: $2.7 billion
Oman: $2.2 billion
South Korea: $2.1 billion
Qatar: $1 billion
Macedonia: $950 million

and the top 10 countries we have a trade deficit with...

Germany: $41.5 billion
China: -$38.3 billion
Netherlands: -$24 billion
Norway: -$19.8 billion
Belgium: -$14.4 billion
Italy: -$10.9 billion
Canada: -$8.8 billion
Poland: -$7.1 billion
Spain: -$6.8 billion
Vietnam: -$6.3 billion

I would be fascinated to know why so many countries that sell far more to us than we do to them will not want a trade deal ... may be you can explain?

I've never seen this list before - really interesting.

Presume the surplus is in Arms (Middle East Countries) and Services in Switzerland? Is anything else driving the surplus?

And what do we buy from Vietnam to produce that deficit?

[Mothersruin]

Vietnam - I'd guess textiles were a large chunk.

[Vanden Saab]

desolate said:

Vanden Saab said:

List of the top 10 countries we have a trade surplus with...

Switzerland: $6.8 billion
United Arab Emirates: $6.8 billion
Ireland: $6.4 billion
Hong Kong: $3.6 billion
Singapore: $3.3 billion
Saudi Arabia: $2.7 billion
Oman: $2.2 billion
South Korea: $2.1 billion
Qatar: $1 billion
Macedonia: $950 million

and the top 10 countries we have a trade deficit with...

Germany: $41.5 billion
China: -$38.3 billion
Netherlands: -$24 billion
Norway: -$19.8 billion
Belgium: -$14.4 billion
Italy: -$10.9 billion
Canada: -$8.8 billion
Poland: -$7.1 billion
Spain: -$6.8 billion
Vietnam: -$6.3 billion

I would be fascinated to know why so many countries that sell far more to us than we do to them will not want a trade deal ... may be you can explain?

I've never seen this list before - really interesting.

Presume the surplus is in Arms (Middle East Countries) and Services in Switzerland? Is anything else driving the surplus?

And what do we buy from Vietnam to produce that deficit?

UK's exports to Switzerland amounted to
$20.1 billion or 4.5% of its overall exports.

1. Gems, precious metals: $14.1 billion
2. Collector items, art, antiques: $1.5 billion
3. Pharmaceuticals: $644.6 million
4. Machinery: $622.3 million
5. Vehicles: $597.5 million
6. Organic chemicals: $481.2 million
7. Electronic equipment: $352.3 million
8. Medical, technical equipment: $308.9 million
9. Clocks, watches: $293.4 million
10. Perfumes, cosmetics: $132.4 million

Top UK exports to the UAE (2017):
machinery and mechanical appliances
electrical machinery and equipment
precious stones and metals
motor vehicles
optical, photographic, cinematographic and medical equipment

From January until the end of April, Việt Nam mainly exported telephones and spare parts, footwear, garments and aquatic products, with the respective export values exceeding $705 million, $201 million, $215 million and $78 million.

At the same time, Việt Nam imported $67 million worth of machineries, equipment and spare parts, $45 million worth of pharmaceuticals and more than $13 million worth of chemicals.

Vietnam is now the 20th largest economy in the world...

[anonymous-user]

Vanden Saab said:

UK's exports to Switzerland amounted to
$20.1 billion or 4.5% of its overall exports.

1. Gems, precious metals: $14.1 billion
2. Collector items, art, antiques: $1.5 billion
3. Pharmaceuticals: $644.6 million
4. Machinery: $622.3 million
5. Vehicles: $597.5 million
6. Organic chemicals: $481.2 million
7. Electronic equipment: $352.3 million
8. Medical, technical equipment: $308.9 million
9. Clocks, watches: $293.4 million
10. Perfumes, cosmetics: $132.4 million

Top UK exports to the UAE (2017):
machinery and mechanical appliances
electrical machinery and equipment
precious stones and metals
motor vehicles
optical, photographic, cinematographic and medical equipment

From January until the end of April, Vi?t Nam mainly exported telephones and spare parts, footwear, garments and aquatic products, with the respective export values exceeding $705 million, $201 million, $215 million and $78 million.

At the same time, Vi?t Nam imported $67 million worth of machineries, equipment and spare parts, $45 million worth of pharmaceuticals and more than $13 million worth of chemicals.

Vietnam is now the 20th largest economy in the world...

Interesting stuff - thanks.
Wasn't aware of the relative importance of Vietnam and the number 1 export to Switzerland is a surprise as well.
Will be interested to see the margin we make on those.

[PurpleMoonlight]

The question is, is Parliament competent enough to avoid a no deal brexit?

I haven't seen any evidence that it is.

[Oilchange]

Why are people so st scared of a no deal brexit?

[PurpleMoonlight]

Oilchange said:

Why are people so st scared of a no deal brexit?

From an Irish perspective:

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/brexit...

[powerstroke]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Oilchange said:

Why are people so st scared of a no deal brexit?

From an Irish perspective:

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/brexit...

Great article so what we Leavers have said all along a sensible trade deal would be the best option a WTO deal would hurt
EU members ,
Mind for the EU its never been about anything but maintaining power over its members ..
A no deal would be best for Britain... and as the article says very bad for the ROI ...

[Dr Jekyll]

braddo said:

Dr Jekyll said:

In the medium to long run a no deal Brexit would be best of all. The EU are terrified of it because they would have no way to prevent the UK out performing them. The current so called 'deal', actually a demand, is designed to stop the UK getting a competitive advantage.

Wrong.
The UK has outperformed because of its access to the EU (as a member). The EU are not bullying, they are just preventing someone who wants to leave a club from still having preferential access to the club's facilities. Access will cost... That is why the UK has almost no negotiating power in this whole saga. And then there is the Good Friday Agreement....

Benefits from being out of the EU and somehow making that up with new trade deals are a myth. Go and try to find any evidence whatsoever of those trade deal benefits which can make up for lost access to the EU single market.

Same old discussion as in 2016 and still the Brexiters on PH are no wiser...

he point isn't that the EU want to prevent us getting access to some mythical 'facilities'. They want to prevent us forming trade deals with ROW or even just lowering tariffs because they know that by doing so we can prosper and show up their protectionist racket.

US Ambassador to the EU said:

The Commission in particular is out of touch with reality. They are off in a cloud, regulating to the heart’s content — and regulating some things that don’t even need to be regulated, because they haven’t even occurred yet — while stifling growth and innovation.

Not only that, but the EU uses the inevitable economic failures caused by their policies as a pretext for even more interference, it's a vicious circle.

Barmier himself has admitted that he wants to prevent the UK gaining a 'competitive advantage', IE getting richer.

[Coolbanana]

Oilchange said:

Why are people so st scared of a no deal brexit?

Is it so hard for you to understand? Really?

Personally, I still don't think the long term prospects should be scary, I would be very surprised if the UK couldn't reach a similar level to what it enjoyed within the EU albeit I don't believe it will do better, nor will any of the perceived EU 'problems' go away, hence my preference for Remain and enjoy the benefits.

But...it is a gamble. Not everyone has such confidence and I, nor anyone else with confidence, can make any guarantees that the UK won't sttuggle and see a marked decrease in GDP and a rung down the ladder in terms of general standard of living.

Being optimistic and shouting 'tally ho, chaps' as you go over the wall is all very well but for many, the unknowns that cannot be proven are simply not worth the risk when it has been a cushy gig as part of the EU; and it has, 5th largest economy etc. etc.

Leaving on WTO is a risk. Regardless of what anyone says. Indeed, no-one can categorically state that all will be the same, slightly worse or better without being a liar.

Anyway, TM's Deal is the Leavers best option for the most Brexit they will get. Anything other than TM's Deal will be closer ties to the EU. WTO is dead.

Leavers need to cross their fingers she gets her concessions. Squeaky bum time for ya'll today!

[PurpleMoonlight]

powerstroke said:

Great article so what we Leavers have said all along a sensible trade deal would be the best option a WTO deal would hurt
EU members ,
Mind for the EU its never been about anything but maintaining power over its members ..
A no deal would be best for Britain... and as the article says very bad for the ROI ...

A sensible trade deal would have been, but thanks to the UK (via May) rubbishing that and wanting more we are where we are now.

[Coolbanana]

powerstroke said:

Great article so what we Leavers have said all along a sensible trade deal would be the best option a WTO deal would hurt
EU members ,

Errr, duh! Both sides have been stating WTO would hurt each of them from day one! It isn't something 'you Leavers' made up.

A sensible deal has been the goal for the last 2 years and TM got one.

You will not get better. The 27 European States have collectively offered their best deal. It is that or WTO. They are prepared to accept, albeit reluctantly, WTO.

They have factored in the cost of WTO into their collective decision. They have done extensive research. As they always do.

The UK, on the otherhand, has used WTO as a bluff. It will not call it. It does not want it. Why? Because it does not believe it is in its best interests and that the 27 can absorb the impact better than it can.

The EU have provided a decent Brexit deal in TM's Deal. Take it, or leave it. Naturally, WTO being dead now for the UK barring an unlikely 2nd Ref win, it will either take it or seek closer ties if it fails.

The endgame is close. Enjoy.