How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 11)

[mike9009]

Tankrizzo said:

mike9009 said:

It depends on whether you use a JIT ( ) delivery type system for your insulin? Before I renew a prescription I usually have about two weeks insulin left. I am planning to have a minimum of 8 weeks available during the Brexit period.

Yeah I usually have about a month's worth of Novorapid penfills left when I reorder - I use the NHS app these days so it takes 2 mins and my interaction with the clinic receptionists is thankfully minimal....

I am going to have to enter the modern world - my repeat prescriptions take an absolute age to come through (last one took five days to complete - aaarggghhh!) and require a physical visit. Must check it out.... I think you may have acted as the catalyst - thanks!!

[anonymous-user]

crankedup said:

But just look at the future benefits!!
When the E.U. is imploding in on itself we, in the U.K. will be out of its reach with its begging bowl for cash bailouts.

If there is a systemic crisis in the Eurozone’s major economies it’s going to hit us in the pocket no matter what.

To think we are immune because we have left the EU is naive.

[crankedup]

sunbeam alpine said:

andymadmak said:

quick question:

If the Remainers on here are so convinced that there can be no solution to the NI Backstop/Border issue, why are they so keen for the UK to sign up to the Backstop, knowing full well that do so would lock the UK into a colony status in perpetuity? (or at least until the UK rolled over and gave the EU everything they want)

Sorry, but you're asking the wrong question - Remainers don't have to answer this. The real question should be - if Brexit supporters are so convinced that there is a solution to the Backstop/Border issue (technological or otherwise), why are they so opposed to signing the WA?

Perhaps it is considered that the E.U. would play the ‘it’s unacceptable, not robust enough’. Not sure if an independant adjudicator would be involved, I expect so.

[crankedup]

jakesmith said:

crankedup said:

But just look at the future benefits!!
When the E.U. is imploding in on itself we, in the U.K. will be out of its reach with its begging bowl for cash bailouts.

Also, my coworker is getting really excited about a hard deadline for all the local Somalian taxi drivers to leave the UK

Nah, they can stay.

[Sway]

mike9009 said:

Sway said:

mike9009 said:

How are you dealing with your DOA's??

We don't manufacture DOA listed components - as far as I can see, it's about the one area where a lack of grown up politicians can cause everyone issues...

To sell/ manufacture under Form 1 you must have a DOA (its part of the regulations). The DOA must have an office within the EU under a No-Deal Brexit. Hence why many DOAs are moving or creating offices within the EU (including Rolls)

You maybe selling/ manufacturing under C of C only?? Are the parts you manufacture directly fitted to Aircraft or do your customers perform subsequent work before fitment?

We have used this DOA in the past, see the extension of their operations in Ireland.

https://aesglobal.co.uk/NEWS-and-EVENTS.php

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/business/rol...

Edited by mike9009 on Tuesday 20th August 20:06

Parts directly fitted to aircraft are manufactured in the US. So no change for them.

Our UK manufacturing (about 60% of our total manufacturing side) provide different products for the industry, with little of our output going to EU nations. There is a bunch of stuff made for aviation that isn't subject to Form 1 or it's FAA equivalent.

[mike9009]

crankedup said:

jakesmith said:

crankedup said:

But just look at the future benefits!!
When the E.U. is imploding in on itself we, in the U.K. will be out of its reach with its begging bowl for cash bailouts.

Also, my coworker is getting really excited about a hard deadline for all the local Somalian taxi drivers to leave the UK

Nah, they can stay.

Agreed, not sure Somalia is part of the EU, although Boris has warned it could happen unless we Brexit
I suspect the Euro will just devalue rather than begging bowls being out?

[Sway]

Brooking10 said:

crankedup said:

But just look at the future benefits!!
When the E.U. is imploding in on itself we, in the U.K. will be out of its reach with its begging bowl for cash bailouts.

If there is a systemic crisis in the Eurozone’s major economies it’s going to hit us in the pocket no matter what.

To think we are immune because we have left the EU is naive.

Separation as far as possible (and regaining full control of many excellent fiscal levers) is surely a good thing though in that event?

Big range between immunity and being conjoined.

[anonymous-user]

Sway said:

Brooking10 said:

crankedup said:

But just look at the future benefits!!
When the E.U. is imploding in on itself we, in the U.K. will be out of its reach with its begging bowl for cash bailouts.

If there is a systemic crisis in the Eurozone’s major economies it’s going to hit us in the pocket no matter what.

To think we are immune because we have left the EU is naive.

Separation as far as possible (and regaining full control of many excellent fiscal levers) is surely a good thing though in that event?

Big range between immunity and being conjoined.

We aren’t conjoined currently as far as currency is concerned

I’m not suggesting it’s a reason not to leave but the pre-emptive celebration of detachment in the event of a Euro crash is misguided.

[mike9009]

Sway said:

mike9009 said:

Sway said:

mike9009 said:

How are you dealing with your DOA's??

We don't manufacture DOA listed components - as far as I can see, it's about the one area where a lack of grown up politicians can cause everyone issues...

To sell/ manufacture under Form 1 you must have a DOA (its part of the regulations). The DOA must have an office within the EU under a No-Deal Brexit. Hence why many DOAs are moving or creating offices within the EU (including Rolls)

You maybe selling/ manufacturing under C of C only?? Are the parts you manufacture directly fitted to Aircraft or do your customers perform subsequent work before fitment?

We have used this DOA in the past, see the extension of their operations in Ireland.

https://aesglobal.co.uk/NEWS-and-EVENTS.php

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/business/rol...

Edited by mike9009 on Tuesday 20th August 20:06

Parts directly fitted to aircraft are manufactured in the US. So no change for them.

Our UK manufacturing (about 60% of our total manufacturing side) provide different products for the industry, with little of our output going to EU nations. There is a bunch of stuff made for aviation that isn't subject to Form 1 or it's FAA equivalent.

Ah that makes sense - hence why your risk guys aren't seeing any risk as you are not under the jurisdiction of EASA - it is completely irrelevant to your business I know the GKN site locally to me are spending huge amounts of money sorting this out. <just across the water from you...>

I am not experienced in 8130-3 as most our product is PMA into the US and Japan. We are a 100% aerospace supplier at the moment, but mainly export to the US/ Japan.

Sway said:

We aren't opening a single EU based entity irrespective of what happens with Brexit, you'd think from your post it's an absolute must - yet our compliance and risk guys are entirely comfortable not doing so risks nothing in the context of our billion in revenue per year business operating in 9 countries under EASA oversight, including in non-EASA member nations..

Edited by mike9009 on Tuesday 20th August 20:33

[Sway]

mike9009 said:

Sway said:

mike9009 said:

Sway said:

mike9009 said:

How are you dealing with your DOA's??

We don't manufacture DOA listed components - as far as I can see, it's about the one area where a lack of grown up politicians can cause everyone issues...

To sell/ manufacture under Form 1 you must have a DOA (its part of the regulations). The DOA must have an office within the EU under a No-Deal Brexit. Hence why many DOAs are moving or creating offices within the EU (including Rolls)

You maybe selling/ manufacturing under C of C only?? Are the parts you manufacture directly fitted to Aircraft or do your customers perform subsequent work before fitment?

We have used this DOA in the past, see the extension of their operations in Ireland.

https://aesglobal.co.uk/NEWS-and-EVENTS.php

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/business/rol...

Edited by mike9009 on Tuesday 20th August 20:06

Parts directly fitted to aircraft are manufactured in the US. So no change for them.

Our UK manufacturing (about 60% of our total manufacturing side) provide different products for the industry, with little of our output going to EU nations. There is a bunch of stuff made for aviation that isn't subject to Form 1 or it's FAA equivalent.

Ah that makes sense - hence why your risk guys aren't seeing any risk as you are not under the jurisdiction of EASA - it is completely irrelevant to your business I know the GKN site locally to me are spending huge amounts of money sorting this out. <just across the water from you...>

I am not experienced in 8130-3 as most our product is PMA into the US and Japan. We are a 100% aerospace supplier at the moment, but mainly export to the US/ Japan.

Sway said:

We aren't opening a single EU based entity irrespective of what happens with Brexit, you'd think from your post it's an absolute must - yet our compliance and risk guys are entirely comfortable not doing so risks nothing in the context of our billion in revenue per year business operating in 9 countries under EASA oversight, including in non-EASA member nations..

Edited by mike9009 on Tuesday 20th August 20:33

Oh the services side is definitely under the jurisdiction of EASA - including under third nation approval for some years in a couple of our locations...

We're not opening any new entities though, or reducing/redeploying into mainland EU.

In fact, it prompted some thinking, and reduced our overall cost (while adding some value for the customer base). Necessity being the mother of invention.

I don't work compliance, but work with them quite closely.

[slow_poke]

JNW1 said:

+1

If as they claim the EU would never want to see the backstop used - and if it was then only for a short period of time - why they won't contemplate either independent arbitration and/or any sort of reasonable time limit? Signing-up to the backstop arrangement in the current WA would be tantamount to writing the EU a blank cheque....

Because a backstop with a time limit is not a backstop. They've stated this many many times. They want a backstop, one with a time limit is no good to them. Or they want Ireland appeased in any other way. Which is fair enough, it's their club and they run it as they please.

I'm starting to think Boris is going to throw the DUP under the bus first chance he gets and puts the SM/CU border down the Irish Sea.

[anonymous-user]

slow_poke said:

JNW1 said:

+1

If as they claim the EU would never want to see the backstop used - and if it was then only for a short period of time - why they won't contemplate either independent arbitration and/or any sort of reasonable time limit? Signing-up to the backstop arrangement in the current WA would be tantamount to writing the EU a blank cheque....

Because a backstop with a time limit is not a backstop. They've stated this many many times. They want a backstop, one with a time limit is no good to them. Or they want Ireland appeased in any other way. Which is fair enough, it's their club and they run it as they please.

I'm starting to think Boris is going to throw the DUP under the bus first chance he gets and puts the SM/CU border down the Irish Sea.

He would like to no doubt. But he needs their votes to prop up the BrexitErr government. We’re a few billion £ down to achieve this. So he won’t get the chance..

[slow_poke]

Jimboka said:

slow_poke said:

JNW1 said:

+1

If as they claim the EU would never want to see the backstop used - and if it was then only for a short period of time - why they won't contemplate either independent arbitration and/or any sort of reasonable time limit? Signing-up to the backstop arrangement in the current WA would be tantamount to writing the EU a blank cheque....

Because a backstop with a time limit is not a backstop. They've stated this many many times. They want a backstop, one with a time limit is no good to them. Or they want Ireland appeased in any other way. Which is fair enough, it's their club and they run it as they please.

I'm starting to think Boris is going to throw the DUP under the bus first chance he gets and puts the SM/CU border down the Irish Sea.

He would like to no doubt. But he needs their votes to prop up the BrexitErr government. We’re a few billion £ down to achieve this. So he won’t get the chance..

Here's how he may do it:

He delivers the hard Brexit. Its currently the default, isn't it?

After, he calls a GE and goes to the people claiming Brexit is delivered. The Brexit Party is neutralised, he wins his majority cos the alternative is Corbyn as PM.

So now he has to negotiate a trade deal with the EU. But their red lines remain the same and have to be sorted out before they'll talk about trade.

Which is fine by Boris, he now has a majority in Parliament. He'll cough up the 39Billion, stick the CU/SM border down the Irish Sea and get in with the trade deal.

Easy peasy, he hopes.

Pure speculation by me, of course.

[JNW1]

slow_poke said:

JNW1 said:

+1

If as they claim the EU would never want to see the backstop used - and if it was then only for a short period of time - why they won't contemplate either independent arbitration and/or any sort of reasonable time limit? Signing-up to the backstop arrangement in the current WA would be tantamount to writing the EU a blank cheque....

Because a backstop with a time limit is not a backstop. They've stated this many many times. They want a backstop, one with a time limit is no good to them. Or they want Ireland appeased in any other way. Which is fair enough, it's their club and they run it as they please.

I'm starting to think Boris is going to throw the DUP under the bus first chance he gets and puts the SM/CU border down the Irish Sea.

And a backstop arrangement which is open ended and has no facility to be able to refer to independent arbitration clearly isn't going to fly with the UK (and nor should it IMO).

Therefore, if there's going to be a deal there needs to be a compromise and if a time limit is a problem to the EU - even though they say they'd never want the backstop to be used for long - then they need to consider including a facility to refer to independent arbitration. They can't realistically expect the UK to sign-up to something which leaves us completely at the whim of the EU with no means of redress if we feel things aren't progressing satisfactorily.

[crankedup]

Sway said:

Brooking10 said:

crankedup said:

But just look at the future benefits!!
When the E.U. is imploding in on itself we, in the U.K. will be out of its reach with its begging bowl for cash bailouts.

If there is a systemic crisis in the Eurozone’s major economies it’s going to hit us in the pocket no matter what.

To think we are immune because we have left the EU is naive.

Separation as far as possible (and regaining full control of many excellent fiscal levers) is surely a good thing though in that event?

Big range between immunity and being conjoined.

I recall the pressure that the E.U. applied to the U.K. for financial assistance during 2008/9 crash, fortunately out then Chancellor stood firm, no chance.

[anonymous-user]

crankedup said:

I recall the pressure that the E.U. applied to the U.K. for financial assistance during 2008/9 crash, fortunately out then Chancellor stood firm, no chance.

However, UK bailed Ireland out at that time, good to see that favour being returned by Leo.

[usn90]

what are the chances we are going to have another referendum?

[isaldiri]

Sway said:

Separation as far as possible (and regaining full control of many excellent fiscal levers) is surely a good thing though in that event?

what additional financial levers are going to return to UK control that do not currently exist in the EU? And unless one means to cut off the EU as far as possible in all respects, seperation just isn't going to happen to a much greater extent.

[Ridgemont]

isaldiri said:

Sway said:

Separation as far as possible (and regaining full control of many excellent fiscal levers) is surely a good thing though in that event?

what additional financial levers are going to return to UK control that do not currently exist in the EU? And unless one means to cut off the EU as far as possible in all respects, seperation just isn't going to happen to a much greater extent.

Sway may be referring to fiscal (not financial as you interpreted) levers including VAT and tariffs. Both of which return to full UK control on exit.

As to the rest of your paragraph, well that’s entirely the point of the argument for the last several volumes.

[psi310398]

slow_poke said:

Here's how he may do it:

He delivers the hard Brexit. Its currently the default, isn't it?

After, he calls a GE and goes to the people claiming Brexit is delivered. The Brexit Party is neutralised, he wins his majority cos the alternative is Corbyn as PM.

So now he has to negotiate a trade deal with the EU. But their red lines remain the same and have to be sorted out before they'll talk about trade.

Which is fine by Boris, he now has a majority in Parliament. He'll cough up the 39Billion, stick the CU/SM border down the Irish Sea and get in with the trade deal.

Easy peasy, he hopes.

Pure speculation by me, of course.

Not sure that it stacks up. If he leaves without a deal and the world doesn’t collapse, won’t he have shown that an FTA with the EU (which will take years to agree, if ever) is merely a “nice to have”?

And if there is too much turmoil, he won’t be allowed to stick around to sort it, so why do you think this is his strategy?