How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 13)
Discussion
SpeckledJim said:
Whatever that cost is, it's utter nit-s
t in comparison to the prizes on offer.
Especially since a UK-specific trade deal shouldn't take us the EU-style decade-long festival of coffee and biscuits in order to either get it done, or finally call the whole thing off.
In your opinion how long will a comprehensive trade deal take with the likes of the USA and say China?t in comparison to the prizes on offer. Especially since a UK-specific trade deal shouldn't take us the EU-style decade-long festival of coffee and biscuits in order to either get it done, or finally call the whole thing off.
Do you have a view on second tier agreements?
SpeckledJim said:
I can't see how 28 parties on one side of a table can be better than just one? No statues to committees, and all that...
You and I could, I dare say, choose a holiday destination we were both happy with inside a few minutes. Trying that same exercise with a group of 28, each of whom holds a veto over the whole trip for everyone, would be a total nightmare.
You sound like you’ve been handed the poison chalice of organising the odd golf/shooting/driving trip in the past You and I could, I dare say, choose a holiday destination we were both happy with inside a few minutes. Trying that same exercise with a group of 28, each of whom holds a veto over the whole trip for everyone, would be a total nightmare.
The reverse of that position is assuming we could all be persuaded the discount and incentives to do repeat business would likely be more significant.
There’s no way to definitively prove either as being the best approach yet and time will tell.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 20th January 17:22
Nickgnome said:
SpeckledJim said:
They variously wouldn't/couldn't (doesn't matter which) do important trade deals that would aid the UK in its international trade.
You need to pick a note, Nick. Either trade deals are good, in which case it's bad that the EU stops us making them in the wider world where the money is. Or, trade deals are not good, in which case it really doesn't matter that we may lose one with the EU.
At the moment you're arguing it's bad that we may lose the deal with the EU, and yet say its not material that because of the EU we don't have a deal with, say, the USA, which is a contradictory position to adopt.
There seems to be a huge disconnect between my words and your understanding of them. I apologise if they are not clear.You need to pick a note, Nick. Either trade deals are good, in which case it's bad that the EU stops us making them in the wider world where the money is. Or, trade deals are not good, in which case it really doesn't matter that we may lose one with the EU.
At the moment you're arguing it's bad that we may lose the deal with the EU, and yet say its not material that because of the EU we don't have a deal with, say, the USA, which is a contradictory position to adopt.
Trade deals = good. Not automatically so is it?
I will reiterate. As part of the Eu we have a set of arrangements. It is highly likely that our trade relationship with the Eu, for a while at least, will be worse. Hence a trade shortfall.
Trade deals with new countries will only be agreed if both parties consider them to be advantageous, unless of course political imperative pressures a deal which is not optimal. I’m sure you can work out why that may be.
I also reiterate. Do you think those nations with whom we currently have an agreement as part of the Eu but now wish to renegotiate, do it with a view to be more generous to us, the U.K.?
Nickgnome said:
I’ll ask again. Can you explain where and how the Eu prevented you from trading globally?
The EU prevents my company from trading internationally every time a potential customer in a country without an EU trade deal (because the Bulgarians had a bee in their bonnet about honey, or whatever) considers the paperwork and duties involved in buying from me and thinks "nope, too much hassle and/or too expensive".That's extremely difficult to quantify, because those people don't write to tell me they didn't buy. They just didn't buy.
SpeckledJim said:
Brooking10 said:
SpeckledJim said:
I would expect so, for the most part, since they won't have to accommodate the requirements of countries other than the UK and individual partner country.
Wouldn't you expect a better-tailored deal when it's 1:1 than 1:28?
And those deals already in place through the EU have the potential for C+P that would make sense for both sides as a starting point. Then, if it turns out that something the (for example) French insisted on actually suits neither the UK nor the other party, then we just strike it out.
Only time will tell and I think “better” is going to about more than volume with a whole host of underlying prices potentially (and I stress that word rather than declare any absolutes) that may need to be paid.Wouldn't you expect a better-tailored deal when it's 1:1 than 1:28?
And those deals already in place through the EU have the potential for C+P that would make sense for both sides as a starting point. Then, if it turns out that something the (for example) French insisted on actually suits neither the UK nor the other party, then we just strike it out.
The obvious inverse of the 1 is better than 28 is that 28 is better than one. It all depends on perspective and what is trying to be achieved. Neither is a guarantee of the best outcome.
You and I could, I dare say, choose a holiday destination we were both happy with inside a few minutes. Trying that same exercise with a group of 28, each of whom holds a veto over the whole trip for everyone, would be a total nightmare.
If you want to see what negotiation by committee looks like - check out the vid of the Canadian Trade envoy, as she emotionally explained Canada was walking away from CETA due to the EU not negotiating in good faith.
Nickgnome said:
SpeckledJim said:
Whatever that cost is, it's utter nit-st in comparison to the prizes on offer.
Especially since a UK-specific trade deal shouldn't take us the EU-style decade-long festival of coffee and biscuits in order to either get it done, or finally call the whole thing off.
In your opinion how long will a comprehensive trade deal take with the likes of the USA and say China?t in comparison to the prizes on offer. Especially since a UK-specific trade deal shouldn't take us the EU-style decade-long festival of coffee and biscuits in order to either get it done, or finally call the whole thing off.
Do you have a view on second tier agreements?
Whatever the answer, it'll should be a damn sight quicker than the EU's half-a-career cul-de-sac.
SpeckledJim said:
Nickgnome said:
SpeckledJim said:
Whatever that cost is, it's utter nit-st in comparison to the prizes on offer.
Especially since a UK-specific trade deal shouldn't take us the EU-style decade-long festival of coffee and biscuits in order to either get it done, or finally call the whole thing off.
In your opinion how long will a comprehensive trade deal take with the likes of the USA and say China?t in comparison to the prizes on offer. Especially since a UK-specific trade deal shouldn't take us the EU-style decade-long festival of coffee and biscuits in order to either get it done, or finally call the whole thing off.
Do you have a view on second tier agreements?
Whatever the answer, it'll should be a damn sight quicker than the EU's half-a-career cul-de-sac.
We will see how long they take and how good those deals are. Probably not that soon though.
Sway said:
We've already signed continuity agreements with virtually all the Free Trade partners we currently operate under an EU/partner FTA. With no changes to terms...
If you want to see what negotiation by committee looks like - check out the vid of the Canadian Trade envoy, as she emotionally explained Canada was walking away from CETA due to the EU not negotiating in good faith.
Latest from the department.If you want to see what negotiation by committee looks like - check out the vid of the Canadian Trade envoy, as she emotionally explained Canada was walking away from CETA due to the EU not negotiating in good faith.
Not quite virtually all yet.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-trad...
Nickgnome said:
Sway said:
We've already signed continuity agreements with virtually all the Free Trade partners we currently operate under an EU/partner FTA. With no changes to terms...
If you want to see what negotiation by committee looks like - check out the vid of the Canadian Trade envoy, as she emotionally explained Canada was walking away from CETA due to the EU not negotiating in good faith.
Latest from the department.If you want to see what negotiation by committee looks like - check out the vid of the Canadian Trade envoy, as she emotionally explained Canada was walking away from CETA due to the EU not negotiating in good faith.
Not quite virtually all yet.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-trad...
SpeckledJim said:
Nickgnome said:
Sway said:
We've already signed continuity agreements with virtually all the Free Trade partners we currently operate under an EU/partner FTA. With no changes to terms...
If you want to see what negotiation by committee looks like - check out the vid of the Canadian Trade envoy, as she emotionally explained Canada was walking away from CETA due to the EU not negotiating in good faith.
Latest from the department.If you want to see what negotiation by committee looks like - check out the vid of the Canadian Trade envoy, as she emotionally explained Canada was walking away from CETA due to the EU not negotiating in good faith.
Not quite virtually all yet.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-trad...
Contract Novation is not uncommon.
Brooking10 said:
SpeckledJim said:
I can't see how 28 parties on one side of a table can be better than just one? No statues to committees, and all that...
You and I could, I dare say, choose a holiday destination we were both happy with inside a few minutes. Trying that same exercise with a group of 28, each of whom holds a veto over the whole trip for everyone, would be a total nightmare.
You sound like you’ve been handed the poison chalice of organising the odd golf/shooting/driving trip in the past You and I could, I dare say, choose a holiday destination we were both happy with inside a few minutes. Trying that same exercise with a group of 28, each of whom holds a veto over the whole trip for everyone, would be a total nightmare.
The reverse of that position is assuming we could all be persuaded the discount and incentives to do repeat business would likely be more significant.
That'll do me for now... Still another 11 months to go...
On lead times to new FTAs, the EU takes more than twice as long as the developed world average lead time to FTA.
Four years on average for developed world.
US is one and a half years average.
EU is seven years on average.
I'll be happy with four.
Sway said:
That'll do me for now... Still another 11 months to go...
On lead times to new FTAs, the EU takes more than twice as long as the developed world average lead time to FTA.
Four years on average for developed world.
US is one and a half years average.
EU is seven years on average.
I'll be happy with four.
75%. Why not 100% for carry over agreements.
I wonder what the roadblocks are. I’d certainly want to know.
As to the timetable.
Anything can be done quickly if excellence is not a priority and scope is limited or vague.
Been there enough times to see the result is oft not what as intended.
Hope we have engaged enough seasoned trade negotiators and lawyers to meet the schedule. I wonder if they have a detailed brief.
Do we have a list of expectations per nation yet. I doubt it.
Nickgnome said:
SpeckledJim said:
I would expect so, for the most part, since they won't have to accommodate the requirements of countries other than the UK and individual partner country.
Wouldn't you expect a better-tailored deal when it's 1:1 than 1:28?
And those deals already in place through the EU have the potential for C+P that would make sense for both sides as a starting point. Then, if it turns out that something the (for example) French insisted on actually suits neither the UK nor the other party, then we just strike it out.
Do you mean like trading fishing rights for U.K. fishermen against some other U.K. producer. The UK’s internal wrangling is going to be interesting. Wouldn't you expect a better-tailored deal when it's 1:1 than 1:28?
And those deals already in place through the EU have the potential for C+P that would make sense for both sides as a starting point. Then, if it turns out that something the (for example) French insisted on actually suits neither the UK nor the other party, then we just strike it out.
Yes it should be less complicated, but presumably we now need the continued overhead of trade negotiators, contracted from wherever.
REALIST123 said:
Nickgnome said:
SpeckledJim said:
I would expect so, for the most part, since they won't have to accommodate the requirements of countries other than the UK and individual partner country.
Wouldn't you expect a better-tailored deal when it's 1:1 than 1:28?
And those deals already in place through the EU have the potential for C+P that would make sense for both sides as a starting point. Then, if it turns out that something the (for example) French insisted on actually suits neither the UK nor the other party, then we just strike it out.
Do you mean like trading fishing rights for U.K. fishermen against some other U.K. producer. The UK’s internal wrangling is going to be interesting. Wouldn't you expect a better-tailored deal when it's 1:1 than 1:28?
And those deals already in place through the EU have the potential for C+P that would make sense for both sides as a starting point. Then, if it turns out that something the (for example) French insisted on actually suits neither the UK nor the other party, then we just strike it out.
Yes it should be less complicated, but presumably we now need the continued overhead of trade negotiators, contracted from wherever.
I wonder where they all come from?
Nickgnome said:
I will reiterate. As part of the Eu we have a set of arrangements. It is highly likely that our trade relationship with the Eu, for a while at least, will be worse. Hence a trade shortfall.
Hi Nick, can I ask a quick question? I’ve read this topic with interest over the last few volumes and I only joined as a poster when I took early retirement ( one of your favourite subjects
) My question is, you mention that trading arrangements are likely to change and therefore trade will be worse?
If a company in the UK currently make a production component/ product for use in another EU country then I guess they are the chosen company due to quality and cost as we all work under the same regs so I’m interested in your thoughts as to what the threshold, percentage wise, would be as far as any possible tariffs that would force the ( going forward ) the EU based company to switch to a possibly lesser component/ product?
Genuine question as my own company could be considered to be a quality supplier at the high end of its market and so far we have not been made aware of any issue, more over is actually led to closer working relationships when costing and planning forward, mainly as most of our projects span 12 to 24 months.
166 MM Barchetta said:
Nickgnome said:
I will reiterate. As part of the Eu we have a set of arrangements. It is highly likely that our trade relationship with the Eu, for a while at least, will be worse. Hence a trade shortfall.
Hi Nick, can I ask a quick question? I’ve read this topic with interest over the last few volumes and I only joined as a poster when I took early retirement ( one of your favourite subjects
) My question is, you mention that trading arrangements are likely to change and therefore trade will be worse?
If a company in the UK currently make a production component/ product for use in another EU country then I guess they are the chosen company due to quality and cost as we all work under the same regs so I’m interested in your thoughts as to what the threshold, percentage wise, would be as far as any possible tariffs that would force the ( going forward ) the EU based company to switch to a possibly lesser component/ product?
Genuine question as my own company could be considered to be a quality supplier at the high end of its market and so far we have not been made aware of any issue, more over is actually led to closer working relationships when costing and planning forward, mainly as most of our projects span 12 to 24 months.
I suspect the bigger issue will be companies coming to terms with and planning for a currently amorphous set or rules.
It will help when there are real terms and to some extent the fixity will offset what my be less preferential arrangements.
If you find that your product for various administrative reasons takes longer to reach its destination., then that may be an issue.
It appears your company and it’s Eu counterparts are proactively seeking to ensure there are no roadblocks, which is a sensible and collegiate approach. However without knowing what the rules will be I assume you are looking at a unchanged relationship until you know different.
I have no doubt all of this will shake out in time. How much time has yet to be seen.
stongle said:
Snip.. hope you do not mind...
In other news, seems that UK Houseprice growth / domestic real estate market (Rightmove index) also disagrees with you. We just posted the largest January gain EVER; in UK Houseprice growth up 2.3%. Now that's seems pretty directly correlated to BJ winning and putting the malaise behind us. Should be on the news shortly.
It seems only the Guardian are covering it although I might have missed the others.In other news, seems that UK Houseprice growth / domestic real estate market (Rightmove index) also disagrees with you. We just posted the largest January gain EVER; in UK Houseprice growth up 2.3%. Now that's seems pretty directly correlated to BJ winning and putting the malaise behind us. Should be on the news shortly.
Edited by stongle on Monday 20th January 08:53
The Guardian said:
The average price of properties coming on to the market jumped by 2.3%, the biggest rise for the period since the property website started its house price index in 2002.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/20/u...This is what they said last month...
the guardian said:
UK house price growth will remain subdued next year at between 1% and 3%, according to Halifax, with the market held back by young buyers struggling to afford deposits.
Despite talk of a “Boris bounce” after the election result, most major property institutions are forecasting that price rises in 2020 will be limited
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/dec/19/uk-h...Despite talk of a “Boris bounce” after the election result, most major property institutions are forecasting that price rises in 2020 will be limited
Experts and their forecasts
Vanden Saab said:
stongle said:
Snip.. hope you do not mind...
In other news, seems that UK Houseprice growth / domestic real estate market (Rightmove index) also disagrees with you. We just posted the largest January gain EVER; in UK Houseprice growth up 2.3%. Now that's seems pretty directly correlated to BJ winning and putting the malaise behind us. Should be on the news shortly.
It seems only the Guardian are covering it although I might have missed the others.In other news, seems that UK Houseprice growth / domestic real estate market (Rightmove index) also disagrees with you. We just posted the largest January gain EVER; in UK Houseprice growth up 2.3%. Now that's seems pretty directly correlated to BJ winning and putting the malaise behind us. Should be on the news shortly.
Edited by stongle on Monday 20th January 08:53
The Guardian said:
The average price of properties coming on to the market jumped by 2.3%, the biggest rise for the period since the property website started its house price index in 2002.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/20/u...This is what they said last month...
the guardian said:
UK house price growth will remain subdued next year at between 1% and 3%, according to Halifax, with the market held back by young buyers struggling to afford deposits.
Despite talk of a “Boris bounce” after the election result, most major property institutions are forecasting that price rises in 2020 will be limited
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/dec/19/uk-h...Despite talk of a “Boris bounce” after the election result, most major property institutions are forecasting that price rises in 2020 will be limited
Experts and their forecasts
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff