Dare we speak about "Brexit?"

Status
Closed

authun

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
4,927
The maximum of 2 years?

Those 2 years start when a EU member communicates to EU the will to leave.
By 2 year maximum, I was referring to the period after article 50 has been invoked, not a delay in invoking article 50.

My point was, if the UK was prepared to leave without a deal, it could have done so at any time since 2016. The only reason why we haven't is because we want a deal. Theresa May invoked article 50 because her back benchers were agitating for it. If she hadn't, they would have unseated her. As it turned out, her decision to hold a general election was disasterous.

The DUP's views are not May's only problem. Leavers and Remainers don't like her plan and I can't see her getting it through Parliament even if she gets an agreement with Brussels. If she doesn't get it through, there'll be a general election.
 

Haesten

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
2,865
Am quite calm thankyou despite you not being familiar with WTO.

We already have a WTO agreement with Argentina which, given your comment, will come as a surprise to you. There is only one country that trades solely on WTO terms and that is Mauretania. Like most WTO member countries, the UK has to agree a trade deal with any country that it wants to trade with on WTO terms. The UK will only have 24 WTO trading partners as it will lose the 68 other partners that it has as a member of the EU. The 24 include Russia and Argentina who will be able to apply pressure to any trade deal the UK proposes to have with a new country by claiming discrimination against their goods and having it referred to the Court of Dispute Resolution. We will be able to trade with 24 countries only under WTO and effectively will have to get their agreement to trade with any new country under WTO. If we want to expand our business under WTO, we face 24 new negotiations with the 24 existing partners. If we seek to expand our trade deal under WTO terms with China for example, any of the other 23 can object. They have to state their case and prove it but, it takes time even if they have no grounds.
Trade with Argentina is very small and Argentina has a trade surplus with the UK, before we joined the EU, Argentina not Ireland supplied the majority of imported beef to the UK. The EU has just increased quotas of beef from Argentina, they of course would like to get back to pre 1972 levels of beef exports to UK. No present trade will be disrupted while this is negotiated.
 

authun

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
4,927
Trade with Argentina is very small and Argentina has a trade surplus with the UK, before we joined the EU, Argentina not Ireland supplied the majority of imported beef to the UK. The EU has just increased quotas of beef from Argentina, they of course would like to get back to pre 1972 levels of beef exports to UK. No present trade will be disrupted while this is negotiated.
The present trade with the 24 will carry on as before, but what will replace the loss of the 68 WTO EU affiliates and what will replace the EU business? The claim that these losses can be easily be renegotiated is nonesense. It will take many years of renegotiation. Meanwhile, the 24 countries with whom we have current trade deals will agitate for an advantage, knowing that the UK is in a position of weakness.

The UK produces 75% of its own beef and of the 25% that is imported, 70% comes from Ireland and the nearly all rest from the Netherlands, France, Poland and Germany. Without a deal, what happens to those 25% of imports of beef is uncertain. Argentina, as you say, want to increase their sales but the USA, who are also one of the 24, will also want to sell more beef and beef products. The USA put a ban on british beef in 1998 due to the BSE crisis and we reciprocted by banning US beef. In 2016 the USA and UK signed an agreement to lift the ban due to start in 2018.

The USA currently claim they are being discriminated against because of the EU wide ban on hormone impregnated beef and cloned beef products. When we are out of the EU, the USA will push for those to be part of an agreement and Argentina will compete by selling 'clean beef'. If the UK decides on one or the other, the losing competitor will claim discrimination and the whole thing will end up in a WTO court taking years.

The problem for british beef producers is that the hormone impregnated beef is from cattle reared with growth hormone. Per kilogram, it is cheaper to produce. They will face cheaper competition from the USA and have no option but to lobby the government to allow the practice in the UK. If we don't want to go down that line but still allow imports from the USA some of our beef farmers will go out of business. If we ban those imports, the USA will take us to a WTO Court. Argentina of course will look for a position to take avantage of. If we allow the practice, the british beef exports will suffer as many other countries do not allow it to be imported.

It's the same situation with AquAdvantage Salmon from Canada. It is genetically modified farmed salmon to grow twice as fast and twice as big as conventionally
farmed salmon. Scottish salmon farmers will face a situation similar to the beef farmers and lobby the government to ban those imports. If they do, Canada are sure to object. It is all time consuming with uncertain outcomes and not the easy step onto WTO trading with things carrying on as normal as many people claim.
 

Haesten

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
2,865
We do not have to accept hormone reared beef under WTO any more than the EU does, the WTO has at present allowed the health angle to stand. It's quite clearly an EU protectionist measure btw.
The WTO say trade will continue as present while the quota schedules are agreed, the Falklands will not come into the negotiations with Argentina, the WTO is not the UN.
 
Jul 2016
929
Dengie Peninsula
I was quite proud of this thread Nao! !300 replies and no further forward than where we started! Which is approximately where the British Government is with negotiations. So you might as well pack the thread up and we shall see what happens on March 29th 2019! "Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish," Is a quote from which book?
 

Haesten

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
2,865
I was quite proud of this thread Nao! !300 replies and no further forward than where we started! Which is approximately where the British Government is with negotiations. So you might as well pack the thread up and we shall see what happens on March 29th 2019! "Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish," Is a quote from which book?
Hitchhiker's Guide to CETA that removed the 15% tariff on Canadian salmon?
 

GogLais

Ad Honorem
Sep 2013
4,840
Wirral
You ain’t seen nothing yet! Wait until the proposed agreement that won’t satisfy anyone comes out. Maybe we should have a referendum on whether to have another referendum.
 
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions