How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 13)

[soupdragon1]

Garvin said:

soupdragon1 said:

Sway said:

soupdragon1 said:

I think putting such a short timescale on a deal Boris has painted himself (and therefor, all of us) into a corner.

He would do better scrapping the deadline, and playing the long game, IMO.

Do it once, and do it right. Why should Brexit be like some Saturday night game show where you've got 60 seconds to grab as many shiny tokens as you can?

Boris choosing to make it like that has me very suspicious of his motives.

What does "right" look like to you?

Whilst "doing it right", does that not come across as having our cake and eating it, as we 'enjoy' all the benefits of membership whilst being able to persue an independent trade policy?

3 people have quoted me so I'll just reply the once.

My personal opinion is that we look at every section of trade on it's own merit, one by one, stroke them off. It would take several years but overall, give businesses time to adapt and adjust.

The current timescale just feels a bit 'press the nuke button' to me. We'll deal with the fall out.

It's just my opinion though, right of wrong. Haven't really got time to get into any debates today unfortunately.

I'm afraid that your opinion does not reflect the historical approach of the EU which has always been to leave things to the very last minute. Therefore it is absolutely logical to move the last minute as close as possible. The tight timescale is a negotiation tactic borne of understanding the nature of the EU beast as well as the obvious pressure being applied whereby Boris and his government have a strong mandate and the wherewithal to move and manoeuvre quickly and Barnier et al do not.

For the last few years Barnier has revelled somewhat in the confusion and dithering of the UK and has not been in any way helpful in allowing the UK to leave the EU in an orderly fashion . . . . . . and why should he have, after all he was seeking the best outcome for the EU.

The tables have now turned and Boris is now seeking the best outcome for the UK, and so he should, and is using all and every tactic to do so. What goes around comes around and is, in no small amount, been brought about by Barnier and the EU and, in no small measure, backed up by the rhetoric currently being espoused by Macron and his lieutenants.

I'm not going to argue against that. The question I'm asking myself is:

Will it work?

That's where my doubt lies. It's a bold strategy, and like you've outlined above, EU are well versed in digging their heals in.

We're still in the same place where we've always been - Mexican stand off. We're just wearing a different costume in 2020

[Sway]

Brooking10 said:

Blackpuddin said:

Brooking10 said:

We won’t get it done in 12 months

I wish I knew how people outside the negotiations have become so certain about this.

Basing it on some small snippets of understanding

Plus lots of precedent

Likely outcome, IMO, is a phased approach supported by an extension covering various areas

Very happy to take a bet and revisit in Jan

I don't disagree - what I struggle to reconcile is that's the opposite to what the EU put in the WA, and how they have since demanded the negotiations go (whilst also wanting an extension before they've even started!).

[FiF]

Sway said:

Brooking10 said:

Blackpuddin said:

Brooking10 said:

We won’t get it done in 12 months

I wish I knew how people outside the negotiations have become so certain about this.

Basing it on some small snippets of understanding

Plus lots of precedent

Likely outcome, IMO, is a phased approach supported by an extension covering various areas

Very happy to take a bet and revisit in Jan

I don't disagree - what I struggle to reconcile is that's the opposite to what the EU put in the WA, and how they have since demanded the negotiations go (whilst also wanting an extension before they've even started!).

Being generous I could interpret that as recognising a shift change, wind blowing in a different direction, leading to goal posts needing to be be moved, but still not quite understanding that different tactics required

[jamoor]

Murph7355 said:

Alternative view - we've decided that our path doesn't align with a political construct that is no longer primarily about trade, and would like to revert to a trading arrangement only.

No hate. No invective. Choice. As provisioned for, albeit very poorly, within the political construct's own rules.

Why does everything have to be extreme?

That's fine if that's what we want but we can't force our views on others, it's ridiculous.

We are free to tell them what we want and they are just as free to stick their fingers in their ears and not listen. As they wish.

[Blib]

As I mentioned above. If you'd like an insight into what the UK government's basic gameplay is then read chief UK negotiator David Frost's recent speech as reproduced in the Telegraph.

It is simple and straightforward.

[Blackpuddin]

Sway said:

Brooking10 said:

Blackpuddin said:

Brooking10 said:

We won’t get it done in 12 months

I wish I knew how people outside the negotiations have become so certain about this.

Basing it on some small snippets of understanding

Plus lots of precedent

Likely outcome, IMO, is a phased approach supported by an extension covering various areas

Very happy to take a bet and revisit in Jan

I don't disagree - what I struggle to reconcile is that's the opposite to what the EU put in the WA, and how they have since demanded the negotiations go (whilst also wanting an extension before they've even started!).

Yes, I find that interesting. Are we seeing the early signs of EU fracture with the French side openly becoming quite emotional and panicky, perhaps because they are concerned about what the Germans might be thinking in this new situation? What with the 'UK is the first to leave but won't be the last' statements that have been floating around in recent weeks, with even Germany being quoted in that context, you've got to think that every country in the EU will now be feeling less secure in the EU, weighing up their options and increasingly looking out for themselves.

[Sway]

Blib said:

As I mentioned above. If you'd like an insight into what the UK government's basic gameplay is then read chief UK negotiator David Frost's recent speech as reproduced in the Telegraph.

It is simple and straightforward.

It is. It's also very pointed about the "reasonableness" of the EU's position. Which considering the challenges they have domestically is very brave of them - potentially turning away pretty much their biggest market.

[amusingduck]

Blackpuddin said:

What with the 'UK is the first to leave but won't be the last' statements that have been floating around in recent weeks, with even Germany being quoted in that context

Do you have a link perchance?

[FiF]

Blib said:

As I mentioned above. If you'd like an insight into what the UK government's basic gameplay is then read chief UK negotiator David Frost's recent speech as reproduced in the Telegraph.

It is simple and straightforward.

Is that only in the print edition? Not in my app. There's the lead story where the key points are quoted but not the full text unless my skillz are lacking, which is likely tbf.

[Earthdweller]

Brooking10 said:

Basing it on some small snippets of understanding

Plus lots of precedent

Likely outcome, IMO, is a phased approach supported by an extension covering various areas

Very happy to take a bet and revisit in Jan

As was pointed out in the speech last night, the Treaty of Rome was all done and dusted in 9 months !

If they can form the European Economic Community in 9 months then I’m sure they can sort out one member leaving the club in 12

That included the Common Agricultural Policy and loads more.

It now known as the foundation of the European Union ... all in 9 months

[Earthdweller]

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2020/02/full-text-to...

Full text of Frost’s speech last night

[Blib]

FiF said:

Blib said:

As I mentioned above. If you'd like an insight into what the UK government's basic gameplay is then read chief UK negotiator David Frost's recent speech as reproduced in the Telegraph.

It is simple and straightforward.

Is that only in the print edition? Not in my app. There's the lead story where the key points are quoted but not the full text unless my skillz are lacking, which is likely tbf.

My bad. As mentioned above, it's in the Spectator, not the Telegraph.

[stongle]

Brooking10 said:

Cheeky misquote and re-contextualising there Chief !

Save your economics 101 for the idiots, I can just about keep up

You know I agree with you that this all about the money but interestingly you’ll find many who STILL see it as about politics, on both sides. The politics is done, finishes and isn’t going back in the bottle.

It’s that that we need to move on from and it’s that that underpins the schism.

The politics of triumphalism on one side and revisionism on the other don’t do any of our correspondents any favours.

Yep, I know cheeky. Its sts & giggles. It amuses me to read and post. Some people are even informative.

Once you involve politics, rational discussion goes out the window. What is worse, is when economics gets warped or incorrectly weaponised.

Evidently, the drop on a Canada style trade deal is 3-4% GDP. Seems excessive, but OK. Conservative fiscal drop = 5% we are up in anyone's school of math.

Arguing the case for the EU, or even negotiations is a nonsense if you dont understand whack a mole.

We are going to get somewhat schooled in these trade negotiations, and like you agree it's going to phase but we are already seeing the breakdown of how trade friction losses are (more than) compensated.

If we are (and should be) looking at the global picture, there are 3 massive global issues to face - low to negative yielding debt (so that's retirements fked), lack of inflation (so that's Govts budgets fked). Wealth inequality (so that's 99% fked). Trade friction is whimsical.

If you hopefully agree with those 3, whose policy toolkit would you want?

If however you put political survival in front of those aims (or believe you can get 400m to buy into that collective), my honest opinion is that you've been at the disco biscuits.

[Dont like rolls]

Earthdweller said:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2020/02/full-text-to...

Full text of Frost’s speech last night

Well that will make a good number of EU heads explode in confusion. One day, one day they just might understand.

[Mrr T]

Earthdweller said:

Brooking10 said:

Basing it on some small snippets of understanding

Plus lots of precedent

Likely outcome, IMO, is a phased approach supported by an extension covering various areas

Very happy to take a bet and revisit in Jan

As was pointed out in the speech last night, the Treaty of Rome was all done and dusted in 9 months !

If they can form the European Economic Community in 9 months then I’m sure they can sort out one member leaving the club in 12

That included the Common Agricultural Policy and loads more.

It now known as the foundation of the European Union ... all in 9 months

Remember the saying if a politician speaks its only half the truth. While the Treaty of Rome was agreed quite quickly it relied heavily on the Treaty of Paris. While the Treaty of Rome proposed many ideas including the CAP it did not include any of the details all of which where negotiated later.

[FiF]

Blib said:

My bad. As mentioned above, it's in the Spectator, not the Telegraph.

Cheers, no worries, we've all been there at one time.

[jamoor]

Sway said:

Blib said:

As I mentioned above. If you'd like an insight into what the UK government's basic gameplay is then read chief UK negotiator David Frost's recent speech as reproduced in the Telegraph.

It is simple and straightforward.

potentially turning away pretty much their biggest market.

How did you arrive at that conclusion?

With Brexit we can make our own trade deals meaning cheaper imports from outside the EU and avoiding their punitive tariffs.

[Sway]

jamoor said:

Sway said:

Blib said:

As I mentioned above. If you'd like an insight into what the UK government's basic gameplay is then read chief UK negotiator David Frost's recent speech as reproduced in the Telegraph.

It is simple and straightforward.

potentially turning away pretty much their biggest market.

How did you arrive at that conclusion?

With Brexit we can make our own trade deals meaning cheaper imports from outside the EU and avoiding their punitive tariffs.

Excellent snip, and complete lack of understanding of the point I made...

I'm not talking about our imports - we choose our import tariffs, and they'll be the same for any nation without a FTA.

The EU cannot set "punitive tariffs" on our imports.

Indeed, they cannot set "punitive tariffs" on our exports to them either. If we don't agree a FTA, then our imports have tariffs levied under their WTO Most Favoured Nation schedules.

The point, is that they're demanding things that have never been demanded by anyone for a FTA. Without those things, they're saying they won't agree a FTA with us.

As we've been told, when it comes to trade involving the EU, tariffs have a massively disproportionate effect on business levels - and we're the largest market for many of their key industries. Industries in economies that are facing huge challenges.

So, why are they risking such negative impacts on themselves, by demanding such unreasonable things?

[sisu]

DeepEnd said:

Earthdweller said:

And now Nissan is looking at closing factories in Spain and France and moving their production to Sunderland

At this moment in time I think the U.K. is looking far stronger and much more stable than the EU

What is the UK phobia?

Nissan are looking to withdraw to Japan as part of a free trade agreement to bring manufacturing back home #Gohsen

The FT article that the guardian rehashed said..
"Nissan has reportedly drawn up contingency plans to pull out of manufacturing in mainland Europe in the event of a hard Brexit in favour of ramping up its production in the UK. If a trade deal is struck between the UK and the EU that leads to tariffs on car exports, the Japanese carmaker would focus on selling more cars in Britain, the Financial Times reported, citing two people involved.
Under the proposal drawn up towards the end of last year, Nissan would maintain its factory in Sunderland and aim to boost its 4% UK market share to about 20%. At the same time, it would shut its struggling van factory in Barcelona and stop manufacturing in France. Car industry could see price war on hybrid vehicles in 2020" (This was before the UK Gov 2035 no hybrid petrol diesel announcement) "The contingency plan is said to be one of several drawn up in preparation for post-Brexit tariffs and was drafted before Makoto Uchida became Nissan’s chief executive on 1 December 2019"
"Nissan denied having made such a plan, however, and said its Sunderland plant would be under threat along with its European operations if the UK fails to ensure tariff-free access to the EU market. After the UK’s departure from the EU on Friday, both sides are expected to set out their negotiating positions on Monday before trade talks next month. A Nissan spokesman said on Monday: “We deny such a contingency plan exists. We’ve modelled every possible ramification of Brexit and the fact remains that our entire business both in the UK and in Europe is not sustainable in the event of WTO [World Trade Organization] tariffs"

[Stay in Bed Instead]

Earthdweller said:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2020/02/full-text-to...

Full text of Frost’s speech last night

Hmmm.

It's all well and good him claiming that the EU doesn't understand where we are comming from, when there appears little understanding on his part where the EU is comming from. He demands that the trade agreement be sorted within 9 months so we can have our full independence, but the EU have never concluded a trade agreement in that time before.