Brexit Referendum Superthread

First Up

demfad wrote:

Barnier wants a soft Brexit, or better still, no Brexit. Any efforts by the UK along these lines will be accommodated. Brexit can be reversed for instance.

Perhaps, but the outcome of the negotiations is not going to be a choice of which sort of Brexit the UK would like.

An Ciarraioch

On a lighter note:

http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/News/1.3018117

Capt'n Midnight

So EU and Japan have announced that free trade deal
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-40520218

In other news that'll affect the UK car industry.
Since the acquisition hasn't made a profit since 1999 there may be some re-organisation on the cards,as in job losses. Especially if some of the business units attract a tariff and less political pressure for saving them.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-40511283

The European Commission has given the go-ahead to the takeover of Vauxhall and Opel brands by France's PSA Group, maker of Peugeot and Citroen cars.

...
Vauxhall employs 4,500 people in the UK at plants in Ellesmere Port and Luton.

Elsewhere in Europe, Opel employs about 33,500 staff in Germany, Poland, Hungary, Austria, Spain and Italy.

If the UK left the EU and allowed China to dump steel it would reduce some UK costs, but would the EU then be able to put tariffs on products produced that way ?

swampgas

First Up wrote: »

Perhaps, but the outcome of the negotiations is not going to be a choice of which sort of Brexit the UK would like.

Another issue is that if the negotiations don't make rapid progress, more and more organizations will start assuming a highly probable hard Brexit and will start implementing whatever changes they feel are needed to protect themselves.

If it goes to the wire and hard Brexit is averted at the very last minute, a lot of damage will have already been done.

And having invested in the changes to deal with a hard Brexit, companies might not be in the mood to revert to their previous configurations all that quickly, indeed they may want to wait until they are sure that whatever soft Brexit deal is cobbled together will survive, and that could mean waiting for another general election.

If we get to April 2018 without a prospective deal then I really think matters will escalate significantly, as companies are forced to start implementing hard Brexit contingency plans.

recedite

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

So EU and Japan have announced that free trade deal
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-40520218

Can somebody explain how the EU finds it so easy to have a free trade deal with the likes of Japan and Canada, but when it comes to Brexit its "Oh no, we couldn't have anything like that, not without also having the free movement of people".

First Up

recedite wrote:

Can somebody explain how the EU finds it so easy to have a free trade deal with the likes of Japan and Canada, but when it comes to Brexit its "Oh no, we couldn't have anything like that, not without also having the free movement of people".

The free movement of people is a condition of membership of the Single Market.

swampgas

recedite wrote: »

Can somebody explain how the EU finds it so easy to have a free trade deal with the likes of Japan and Canada, but when it comes to Brexit its "Oh no, we couldn't have anything like that, not without also having the free movement of people".

From the news article:

"The European Union and Japan have formally agreed an outline free-trade deal.
The agreement paves the way for trading in goods without tariff barriers between two of the world's biggest economic areas.
However, few specific details are known and a full, workable agreement may take some time.
Two of the most important sectors are Japanese cars and, for Europe, EU farming goods into Japan."

and
"Even once the agreement is fully signed, the deal is likely to have in place long transition clauses of up to 15 years to allow sectors in both countries time to adjust to the new outside competition."


Doesn't sound like it's all that easy or all that quick. Also from the same article, the negotiations have been ongoing/stalled since 2012!

Capt'n Midnight

recedite wrote: »

Can somebody explain how the EU finds it so easy to have a free trade deal with the likes of Japan and Canada, but when it comes to Brexit its "Oh no, we couldn't have anything like that, not without also having the free movement of people".

That what the "have your cake and eat it" crowd are saying. :rolleyes:

But there are many restrictions still, these deals are still far below what the UK needs.

CETA means visa free travel both ways, and took 7 years.

the Japanese deal took 4 years to get this far and there may be up to another 15 years for some transitions.

Also Brexit means they loose these third party deals and anyone who thinks the EU is evil should have no problem believing the EU will lean on Turkey/Canada/Japan/EFTA and others ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/agreements
map http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/june/tradoc_149622.pdf

Zubeneschamali

recedite wrote: »

Can somebody explain how the EU finds it so easy to have a free trade deal with the likes of Japan and Canada, but when it comes to Brexit its "Oh no, we couldn't have anything like that, not without also having the free movement of people".

I'm sure a trade deal wil happen, eventually. 2 years is far too little time to agree it, though, especially when you call disastrous elections instead of negotiating.

Professor Moriarty

The CBI wants to maintain the Customs Union and membership of the Single Market indefinitely until a deal is done. Wonder how the Little Englanders will play this.

Calina

They are screaming blue murder on twitter about the CBI trying to block the will o'de people. And saying Brexit was the people's decision, not the corporates.

So pretty much predictable. A very big factory is going to have to close before they see sense.

Enzokk

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The CBI wants to maintain the Customs Union and membership of the Single Market indefinitely until a deal is done. Wonder how the Little Englanders will play this.

Which makes sense from a business perspective. We have to remember that business didn't want to leave the EU in the first place, so for them a deal where they are in the EU single market until a free trade deal that looks and smells and sounds like single market access is what they will push for.

The people didn't listen to business leaders in the run up to the vote and I doubt they will listen to them now. If a deal like this is done and there is no apparent return of control, whatever that means, even if it is the best deal for the UK and the EU people will still rant and rave against the horrible EU. The only way for people to appreciate the EU and what it means for the country is for the UK to experience a economic shock from Brexit like the GFC. The only way this will happen is if they actually go nuclear and go for a hard Brexit. This is like that slow car crash that you don't want to look at, but you know it is coming and there is nothing you can do but look and there is nothing you can do to stop it.

whatstherush

Calina wrote: »

They are screaming blue murder on twitter about the CBI trying to block the will o'de people. And saying Brexit was the people's decision, not the corporates.

So pretty much predictable. A very big factory is going to have to close before they see sense.

Sure in their fantasy world it was meant to be the German car industry forcing the German/EU position to bend over for the neo colonialist empire 2.0 GB.

solodeogloria

recedite wrote: »

Can somebody explain how the EU finds it so easy to have a free trade deal with the likes of Japan and Canada, but when it comes to Brexit its "Oh no, we couldn't have anything like that, not without also having the free movement of people".

Good evening!

This was too tempting not to reply to.

Of course if the EU were being consistent - there's no reason why the UK could not have a free trade agreement on a similar basis. People are confusing this with single market membership again. Neither of these deals are single market memberships. Rather they are free trade deals that provide access to the single market.

The negotiations are in an early stage and some people are taking the words that fall out of Barnier's mouth as gospel. They are nothing of the sort. It seems like the hard remainers are expecting the UK to back down at the first sign of disagreement.

That's not how negotiating works.

When the EU finally understand that the UK is serious about leaving I suspect we'll see this kind of posturing less.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

murphaph

Sorry but this is delusional. The EU is not going to concede much if anything. The leavers made a huge mistake in thinking that German car makers would be able (or willing) to force through a favourable deal for the UK.

It's a fundamental failure to understand that to Germans the EU is not mostly about trade but about peace in Europe.

solodeogloria

Good evening!

How does Brexit threaten peace in Europe?

The British government are clear both in word and deed about supporting EU countries militarily through NATO. British deployment in Estonia is a recent example of this.

I think let's see what comes out of the discussion. I think the British government are clear that they don't want to be in the single market and the customs union.

There are options outside of these parameters. Let's see what they are.

The recent offers of remaining in the EU by Brussels are pathetic. They need to respect the vote last year and work with that assumption.

There's no point prophesying Armageddon both sides are far too pragmatic for this. I'm not a jot worried. The emotional hysterics on both sides will stop eventually.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Zubeneschamali

solodeogloria wrote: »

I think the British government are clear that they don't want to be in the single market and the customs union.

If that is what they want, the negotiations will be very short.

"We want out of the single market and customs union!"

"OK, thx, Bye."

"But we want no customs and free trade!"

"Non".

PeadarCo

solodeogloria wrote:

The recent offers of remaining in the EU by Brussels are pathetic. They need to respect the vote last year and work with that assumption.

They are respecting last year's vote they aren't stopping Brexit. The job of the EU is to get the best deal possible for its members and citizens. That doesn't include the UK citizens who voted in the Brexit vote. That those voters might consider the EU offers pathetic is irrelevant if the EU considers those offers in its best interest.

Its the job of the UK to negotiate the best deal for it's citizens. Its not the EUs fault that the UK hasn't decided what it actually wants from brexit.

Sam Russell

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It's a fundamental failure to understand that to Germans the EU is not mostly about trade but about peace in Europe.

The EU (or EEC) was founded to ensure peace in Europe to make sure that the disasters of the two previous wars could not happen again. In that they have been successful.

The fall out from the massive movements of population following the end of hostilities in 1945 caused starvation and mass poverty. The Common Agriculture policy of the EEC and the Iron and Steel Community were part of the solution to these problems.

There is no way the EU will forget its origins. The Irish will never forgive or forget the famine of 1846 and nor will the original members of the EEC forget their founding principles. The UK do not understand either.

murphaph

You've completely misunderstood. The EU is about ever closer union of the peoples of Europe. It's right there written into the Treaty of Rome. Germany will sacrifice trade to preserve the pillars of the EU. Make no mistake.

The UK has simply misunderstood what it's all about (NOT sodding trade) and is going to learn through a terribly economically destructive lesson that the EU means something to most Europeans on the continent. Trade was the mechanism to achieve the goal of making a war between European neighbours inconceivable. Trade was never the end goal.

It's why Barnier even today is struggling to get the message across that the EU will indeed endure financial pain to ensure the EU is not diluted down into a trading bloc.

solodeogloria

PeadarCo wrote: »

They are respecting last year's vote they aren't stopping Brexit. The job of the EU is to get the best deal possible for its members and citizens. That doesn't include the UK citizens who voted in the Brexit vote. That those voters might consider the EU offers pathetic is irrelevant if the EU considers those offers in its best interest.

Its the job of the UK to negotiate the best deal for it's citizens. Its not the EUs fault that the UK hasn't decided what it actually wants from brexit.

Good evening!

The bolded statement is hard remainer nonsense.

The Prime Minister highlighted what she wanted in the Lancaster House speech in January.

The Brexit Whitepaper published before the Article 50 vote in March also provided details.

The Article 50 letter also communicated the type of relationship that Britain desires with the EU.

This isn't "not knowing what they want". We've got a lot of detail.

Do you mean that the UK Government doesn't know what they want because they've not divulged every last detail about their negotiation position?

That's just nonsense.

Edit:

Sam Russell wrote: »

There is no way the EU will forget its origins. The Irish will never forgive or forget the famine of 1846 and nor will the original members of the EEC forget their founding principles. The UK do not understand either.

Or - that the EU didn't work for a country like Britain. In which case it's better to find a more appropriate relationship.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Enzokk

solodeogloria wrote: »

This was too tempting not to reply to.

Of course if the EU were being consistent - there's no reason why the UK could not have a free trade agreement on a similar basis. People are confusing this with single market membership again. Neither of these deals are single market memberships. Rather they are free trade deals that provide access to the single market.

The negotiations are in an early stage and some people are taking the words that fall out of Barnier's mouth as gospel. They are nothing of the sort. It seems like the hard remainers are expecting the UK to back down at the first sign of disagreement.

That's not how negotiating works.

When the EU finally understand that the UK is serious about leaving I suspect we'll see this kind of posturing less.

The EU and Japan deal will take many years to sort out before it will be implemented. They started negotiations in 2011 and only now have signed the agreement and there will still be many years before it is implemented in full. So the UK is free to negotiate a free trade agreement with the EU, but don't expect it to be functional for many more years after they have left the EU. That is the history of FTA with the EU from other countries.

So what and who are we to believe? We have had consistent EU remarks that the UK seems ill prepared for the negotiations so far. We also have stories that the UK didn't have the negotiation paper prepared for the EU until they started the negotiations (have they passed theirs on to the EU?). Then we have David Davis who capitulated on the first point of negotiations already within a few hours of the start.

It would take a brave man to think the UK is putting on a show of weakness and hurting the economy to strengthen their hand. It is possible, but I don't know if those negotiating for the UK is that smart.

solodeogloria wrote: »

How does Brexit threaten peace in Europe?

The British government are clear both in word and deed about supporting EU countries militarily through NATO. British deployment in Estonia is a recent example of this.

I think let's see what comes out of the discussion. I think the British government are clear that they don't want to be in the single market and the customs union.

There are options outside of these parameters. Let's see what they are.

The recent offers of remaining in the EU by Brussels are pathetic. They need to respect the vote last year and work with that assumption.

There's no point prophesying Armageddon both sides are far too pragmatic for this. I'm not a jot worried. The emotional hysterics on both sides will stop eventually.

If you don't know how the break up of the EU threatens war in Europe then you have not studied history. If the major countries in Europe are all pulling in the same direction in regards to their economies then there is less reason to start a conflict.

If anything the EU have been the most sensible in offering the UK a chance to reverse article 50. People are beginning to realize that Brexit will hurt but it seems that some still want to see the world burn for some ideological reason rather than work towards prosperity for all.

I think the noises from the EU has been a warning to the UK, it will get even worse than those that negotiate for you believe if they think they can have friction less trade.

whatstherush

solodeogloria wrote: »

People are confusing this with single market membership again.

You got to be kidding me, this was the kind of clap trap you were trying to push a few months ago. I'm on the phone right now but I'll dig up the posts if you insist. Oh and it's not people who are confused it's brexiters exclusively.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Neither of these deals are single market memberships. Rather they are free trade deals that provide access to the single market.

Yep and like every other third country FTA, they require custom checks (jit flows anyone) and don't include services.

solodeogloria wrote: »

It seems like the hard remainers are expecting the UK to back down at the first sign of disagreement.

Ah sorry to burst your bubble, but the UK already backed down, remember Davis row of the summer on the dual divorce and trade talks, how did that work out?

LeinsterDub

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

This was too tempting not to reply to.

Of course if the EU were being consistent - there's no reason why the UK could not have a free trade agreement on a similar basis. People are confusing this with single market membership again. Neither of these deals are single market memberships. Rather they are free trade deals that provide access to the single market.

The negotiations are in an early stage and some people are taking the words that fall out of Barnier's mouth as gospel. They are nothing of the sort. It seems like the hard remainers are expecting the UK to back down at the first sign of disagreement.

That's not how negotiating works.

When the EU finally understand that the UK is serious about leaving I suspect we'll see this kind of posturing less.

Much thanks,
solodeogloris

Aren't the a large number of brexit MPs against the free movement of people? If you've got a free trade agreement with free movement of people your basically describing the EU. So why leave?

PeadarCo

solodeogloria wrote:

The bolded statement is hard remainer nonsense.

The UK doesn't have a position on Brexit. There are clear divisions within the British cabinet. Particularly between the chancellor and people like Boris Johnson. Depending on who you listen to you get a different answer. Even within the Labour party who have a leader who is pro brexit but its mps are split depending on where they are based. The two big parties are divided on Brexit. Its a lot clearer within the Tories because they are in power. There has been alot of talking but as I said even the current cabinet doesn't agree with what's been said.

As for the rest of my point why should the EU put the citizens of a non member country which the UK will be post Brexit ahead of its own. It's ludicrous to think the EU will do that or the UK is in a position to force that.

LeinsterDub

solodeogloria wrote: »

Or - that the EU didn't work for a country like Britain. In which case it's better to find a more appropriate relationship.

In what way has the EU not worked for UK? And give me actual examples not some vague guff about wanting to take back control.

murphaph

LeinsterDub wrote: »

In what way has the EU not worked for UK? And give me actual examples not some vague guff about wanting to take back control.

Indeed. The UK was in a precarious position when it became a member.

solodeogloria

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Aren't the a large number of brexit MPs against the free movement of people? If you've got a free trade agreement with free movement of people your basically describing the EU. So why leave?

Good evening,

Where did I mention free movement?

recedite's point was that other countries have free trade agreements without free movement. You're confusing a third country free trade arrangement with single market membership.

I'm not "describing the EU". I believe that Britain isn't suited to be a member of the European Union. I think it does work well for countries like Ireland.

PeadarCo wrote: »

The UK doesn't have a position on Brexit.

This isn't true. The UK has a very clear position defined in the speeches and documents I've cited. We've received quite a lot of detail. It's dishonest to say the UK doesn't have a position.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Zubeneschamali

solodeogloria wrote: »

I believe that Britain isn't suited to be a member of the European Union.

Why did you vote Remain then?

murphaph

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening,

Where did I mention free movement?

recedite's point was that other countries have free trade agreements without free movement. You're confusing a third country free trade arrangement with single market membership.

I'm not "describing the EU". I believe that Britain isn't suited to be a member of the European Union. I think it does work well for countries like Ireland.


This isn't true. The UK has a very clear position defined in the speeches and documents I've cited. We've received quite a lot of detail. It's dishonest to say the UK doesn't have a position.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The bloody cabinet is deeply divided on Brexit!