Dare we speak about "Brexit?"

Status
Closed

Baldtastic

Ad Honorem
Aug 2009
4,976
Londinium
They were mainly in case of a no deal, we don't know if that is what we're getting though.

It would be a vote for the status quo, what might come later is necessarily uncertain in case of either remain or leave.
Agreed, that was my initial point regarding the remain camp.



The single agreement should have come, on the part of the leave people, before the campaign, then it could have been voted for. As it didn't and wasn't people should not pretend that the vote gives a mandate for any particular sort of leaving, rather than just the general idea of no longer being a member.


Agreed. The vote was to leave the EU, not remain in the EU in any way.
 

Haesten

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
2,733
Putin, and around 20 other countries I understand, intend to block what you want. You might get your no deal, but don't think WTO is automatic. We'll have to start buying influence, like doing some deal with Argentina over the Falklands for example. And all this against a backdrop of the world knowing that the UK is desperate for a deal because it hasn't got one from the EU. We'll be taken to the cleaners.
I doubt that, these are schedules negotiated by the EU with individual WTO countries, that the UK wanted to duplicate.

" UK will be able to trade on the provisional set of schedules it has tabled while it negotiates with those who withheld support. The tabling of the disputed schedules will also allow the UK government to liberalise their tariffs and quotas on some products to allow non-EU importers to compete with European importers to the benefit of British consumers in the event of a no-deal Brexit."
 

AlpinLuke

Ad Honoris
Oct 2011
24,138
Lago Maggiore, Italy
The reason I voted to remain, was that i asked my daughter which way to vote, as she will suffer the consequences, not I, as i shall be too old for anything to affect me.. But the weak arguments of "remain" are rapidly turning me against them
Actually the destiny of your daughter [or, just to say, of the English neighbor of my brother and her daughter ... they live and work in Italy, in a EU research center, btw] will depend on how the two sides will manage Brexit, not exactly on Brexit itself. Furthermore, it will depend also on what citizens will do. If a British citizen wants to keep in touch with EU it's enough to collect information about which EU countries allow the double citizenship. For example the neighbor of my brother and her daughter have obtained the Italian citizenship. So they are EU citizens, regardless Brexit.

Brexit is a very simple institutional process, and really brief: Next March 30th UK will be out of EU [in the transition period or not, this is irrelevant].

Period. Nothing else.

The real problem is that we cannot be sure about the consequences of Brexit. But the choice in or out, at the end is just a political choice. How much do you feel "European"? Not enough to be part of a European Union? Well ... the majority of the British electors have showed not to feel enough "European" to stay in a European Union. Or may be EU countries are "too European" !
 

Linschoten

Ad Honoris
Aug 2010
14,475
Wessex
There no great rush, please calm down.

As an existing, independent, member of the WTO the UK can simply keep the same WTO schedules as the EU but, quite literally, change “EU” to “UK” with very little change (after the initial period of uncertainty that all markets indulge in).

This will allow for a transition to occur where the UK can start to negotiate, as you describe, with other parties i.e. change the schedules of trade. IIRC, the US and Aus have already been mooted for “post-WTO deals”. Likely other nations will as well, don’t forget the UK is one of the top 10 largest markets in the world and the City of London handles most international financial transactions. Among other reasons, the UK would be in a good position to enter into those negotiations you describe.

I have no idea what Argentina can offer the UK which would instigate the transfer of Falkland sovereignty, any suggestions?
I was talking with one of my brothers at the weekend who holds a senior postion in the City, and he told me that he is not too worried about the effect of Brexit on the City, since it has a global reach, a concentration of expertise that cannot be matched in in any continental centre, and the benefits of the English legal system, among many other things.(I knew that he had voted remain, but he told me that he had dones so not for economic reasons as I had supposed, but because it might threaten the stability of the union; in the light of all that has happened since, he would vote leave if there was a second referendum.)
 

Baldtastic

Ad Honorem
Aug 2009
4,976
Londinium
I'm not absolutely sure, but are these EU schedules not linked to quotas, which we want to divide pro-rata, which needs agreement?
Don’t worry, I’m not a lawyer in international trade either :)

AFAIK, the EU currently has a range of quotas and tariffs on trading partners outside of the bloc. Both the UK and EU (indeed, all EU member states) are members of the WTO, currently the UK/all member states trade schedules in the WTO essentially says ‘refer to the EU one’. Initially, this can be changed to just read, ‘UK’ and we would in effect have the EU trade system under the UK heading. This would mean that trade tariffs or quotas would go on as before i.e. trade between the EU and China would be on the same lines as trade between the UK and China, using the same agreements without any further change.

Again, AFAIK, the schedules are more like ‘we will put a tariff of 20% on all bottles of beer” rather than “each of the 27 member states will have 1/27th of 20% on bottles of beer”, if this were the case then each new member joining the EU would cause the EU to re-negotiate all the WTO agreements with all other bloc’s and nations, as it would then be “1/28th"and therefore a new agreement.

Personally, I think renegotiating trade deals could be of benefit. I would like to see the focus being on more amenable nations first to get a solid grounding for when other nations start negotiations (get USA and Commonwealth nations to have new agreements before heading into serious discussions with China, for example).

Anyway, trade deals are always negotiated, and the UK has a very long (largely good) track record of doing such.
 
If I consider the history of Great Britain, to stand alone would is quite natural for the British people [and I have to admit that I've been a bit surprised by the majority of young British citizens wanting to remain in EU].
For a cheap drunken weekend, Margate lacks the appeal of Ibiza.

Joking aside, young people tend to be more idealistic & vote for left-wing parties, UKIP were the only party advocating to leave the EU and their reputation doesn't appeal to young professionals. Free movement of people & Erasmus has allowed young British students to fraternise with students from other EU countries, thus building a sense of european solidarity.
Young working class Brits are less enthusiastic about the EU. Most attempts to understand their mindset devolve into condescension pretty fast & I don't want this thread getting closed so I'll just leave it there.
 

AlpinLuke

Ad Honoris
Oct 2011
24,138
Lago Maggiore, Italy
Don’t worry, I’m not a lawyer in international trade either :)

AFAIK, the EU currently has a range of quotas and tariffs on trading partners outside of the bloc. Both the UK and EU (indeed, all EU member states) are members of the WTO, currently the UK/all member states trade schedules in the WTO essentially says ‘refer to the EU one’. Initially, this can be changed to just read, ‘UK’ and we would in effect have the EU trade system under the UK heading. This would mean that trade tariffs or quotas would go on as before i.e. trade between the EU and China would be on the same lines as trade between the UK and China, using the same agreements without any further change.

Again, AFAIK, the schedules are more like ‘we will put a tariff of 20% on all bottles of beer” rather than “each of the 27 member states will have 1/27th of 20% on bottles of beer”, if this were the case then each new member joining the EU would cause the EU to re-negotiate all the WTO agreements with all other bloc’s and nations, as it would then be “1/28th"and therefore a new agreement.

Personally, I think renegotiating trade deals could be of benefit. I would like to see the focus being on more amenable nations first to get a solid grounding for when other nations start negotiations (get USA and Commonwealth nations to have new agreements before heading into serious discussions with China, for example).

Anyway, trade deals are always negotiated, and the UK has a very long (largely good) track record of doing such.
There is a not so easy mechanism about WTO tariffs in EU, anyway I wouldn't be concerned about this point: technicians have already prepared the passage.

I quote what will happen ...

Once the UK leaves the customs union, it will set and apply its own tariffs to its imports. Therefore, the UK needs to create its own schedule of commitments in the WTO. For some goods, the UK can simply replicate the tariffs included in the EU schedule; however, this is not possible for goods subject to tariff rate quotas (TRQs). A TRQ applies for a certain quantity of the good a certain tariff (in-quota tariff) while for quantities of imports beyond that quota level it applies a higher tariff. The TRQs were set in the framework of the WTO to account for the demand of an EU made of 28 Member States. The quota levels, currently foreseen in the EU schedules, will therefore be disproportionate for the UK alone. Considering that the UK is one of the major importers of agricultural goods in the EU, the EU wants to adapt its TRQs to account for the reduced demand in the post-Brexit EU-27.
Legislative train schedule | European Parliament
 
Nov 2008
1,055
England
UKIP rather scuppered themselves, GogLais. Can only be speculation, but if Nige had remained at UKIP’s helm, post-Referendum fervour could have seen them at least finish off the LibDems, displacing them as 3rd Party in seats as well as votes, with a decent shot at becoming the Loyal Opposition. But not only did Nige stand down but there followed the complete farce of selecting his replacement; and then finally selecting an English Nationalist as leader. Things now are getting back into shape under Batten, so there is hope for the future. But the party’s fate might still only be that of the ‘UKIP Factor’ threatening marginal seats.

One of the most exciting news stories for me was Nige and Banks heading to NI to speak at a DUP event. I hoped this would presage a DUP-UKIP merger, and have since been very disappointed that nothing came out of that, whether because no-one had contemplated the idea in the first place or because egos got in the way.

I believe the DUP going national would be a good idea and merging with UKIP would see it having a solid shot at No. 10.
Had Farage remained as leader of UKIP the target was to be the Labour party not the Liberal Democrats, and there were many Labour politicians who knew this. The message from the UKIP was beginning to resonate with ordinary folk, and I mean by that the "blue collar workers". Paul Nuttall, Nigel`s successor, said as much, but he regretfully did not have Nigel`s compelling personality or eloquence to retain the leadership. Furthermore, had Farage remained as leader, UKIP would no doubt have remained a political power and there were some in the Conservative party who would have been willing to form some kind of pact with UKIP. Indeed, my particular political hero, Jacob Rees Mogg actually suggested such an alliance.


I have a confession to make. Many years ago, to my undying shame, I actually joined the Liberal party. However, back then it contained a lot of deceitful, conniving characters so that I quickly became disillusioned, saw the light, and left the party. In fact, I have read that Michael Moorcock, the SF author, came to the same conclusion. A case of "beware the honey tongued politicians" , and the Liberal Democrat party is shot full of them.
 
Likes: Haesten
Jun 2016
1,540
England, 200 yards from Wales
Agreed, that was my initial point regarding the remain camp.
We don't know if no deal is what we're getting because there was no agreed leave policy, and because there's no agreed government policy.
So remain vote had a known immediate effect (status quo) but less clear future.
Leave vote had no clarity either immediately or in the future.

Agreed. The vote was to leave the EU, not remain in the EU in any way.
I don't know what you mean by 'in any way'. The leave vote was simply to stop being a member. That was on the ballot, anything else is unsure because there was no clear agreed leave position. Anything from no deal, through a Free trade agreement (Johnson?) to the favourable mentions of Norway's position by Mr Hannan for one.
 

AlpinLuke

Ad Honoris
Oct 2011
24,138
Lago Maggiore, Italy
We don't know if no deal is what we're getting because there was no agreed leave policy, and because there's no agreed government policy.
So remain vote had a known immediate effect (status quo) but less clear future.
Leave vote had no clarity either immediately or in the future.


I don't know what you mean by 'in any way'. The leave vote was simply to stop being a member. That was on the ballot, anything else is unsure because there was no clear agreed leave position. Anything from no deal, through a Free trade agreement (Johnson?) to the favourable mentions of Norway's position by Mr Hannan for one.
As an external observer, I would say that one of the problems on the British side is that the Conservative government made a referendum campaign to remain in EU [after negotiating a special status for UK and obtaining a particular agreement]. So that the government wasn't ready to manage a Brexit. Cameron resigned, but in the Conservative party they didn't prepare a clear plan for a possible Brexit, so that the new government [leaded by Mrs May] is not that ready to manage Brexit as well.

On the other side, EU is underlining some conditions which are not negotiable according to what UK asks ... if UK wants A,B,C ... UK has to concede J,M and T.

If we knew with accuracy what UK wanted, let's say in summer 2016, now we would have already solved similar problems. But unfortunately we are not sure yet to have understood what UK wants from EU ...
 
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions