Brexit discussion thread II

ambro25

ambro25 wrote: »

Which is exactly what I said?
EDIT @ Deleted User: yes, and I've long worked with a number of businesses around here (Yorks) which do exactly that (produce to non-EU standards) day-in, day-out for (non-EU) export-only markets, in particular non-EU offshore O&GE and Middle East <other items>. It's not specific or exclusive to the UK by far. There just has to be enough profit in it, to warrant spec'ing the goods and configuring the production line. What they cannot do however, is shelve EU standards in terms of employment, working conditions, etc.

Gotcha. I was imagining children being put to work with mercury rather than measuring things in US measurements rather than metric.

mountaintop

Below spotted in Sunday newspaper:

Post-Brexit Britain in a nutshell: 'Pound sinks to its lowest point since the Neolithic period, not a murmur. Interest rates rise, not a murmur. Despite the Brexit promise, May says no more money for the NHS, not a murmur. 14 children arrive from Calais, country goes f****** mental. Tells you all you need to know about Brexiters.' Matt Scaff - Dorset

Matt had this to say about reaction to his comment:
I have only just seen all these reactions to what was just a throw away comment...I just felt it showed what Brexit was really about. I am essentially a working class male ex scaffolder, hence the name.

I've been on lots of mainly football forums during the vote full of Brexiters, whose main drive was 'darkies out'. Economic consequences of Brexit did not matter. The final straw of proof was no moan about lack of money for NHS.

I am in a hard place myself, ideal candidate to be blaming immigration but if I can see through it, why can't others?

murphaph

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Well, consider for a moment about 90% of UK businesses do not export to the EU (which also happens to translate to about 85-90% of GDP being global or domestic trade), yet 100% of their exports must conform to EU regulatory standards.

That seems like a pretty intrusive system; the very point being made by those economists who advocate for leaving the EU, is that they see protectionism as a barrier to prosperity. Very few people who want to see increased trade see protectionism as being in anybody's economic interests, at least outside the EU.

Even if it was 99.999% of businesses that didn't export anything to anywhere the statistic would be meaningless without knowing what percentage of GDP the 0.001% was responsible for! If the vast majority of businesses are 1man bands then they won't be responsible for much if any of the wealth generated in the UK.

View

First Up wrote: »

ambro25 wrote:

Er, no: if they "do not export to the EU", then logically they need not conform to EU regulatory standards at all.

If they are selling in the UK, they are currently selling in the EU and must meet EU standards. That could change if the UK departs from EU standards after Brexit, but as of now, sales in the UK market are subject to the same standards as sales to anywhere else in the EU.

That’s not quite true.

They must meet EU standards IF there is an EU standard. They don’t have to if it is subject to domestic standards (eg for electric plugs, wiring standards for homes & buildings etc).

Indeed the irony is that the U.K. has actually been one of the stronger advocates of EU standards in many areas - “best before” dates being one of the more obvious ideas they championed, but, they also apply for medical & accounting standards just as much.

murphaph

View wrote: »

That’s not quite true.

They must meet EU standards IF there is an EU standard. They don’t have to if it is subject to domestic standards (eg for electric plugs, wiring standards for homes & buildings etc).

Indeed the irony is that the U.K. has actually been one of the stronger advocates of EU standards in many areas - “best before” dates being one of the more obvious ideas they championed, but, they also apply for medical & accounting standards just as much.

The UK was also behind the rules that standardised naming with regards jams and marmalades.

In Germany ordinary people call all these things "Marmalade" but EU rules driven by the UK forced a change to labelling so that marmalade can only refer to stuff with citrus fruits in it. Strawberry jam is no longer Erdbeermarmelade but Konfitüre.

Apparently the UK was always one of the more enthusiastic "rule makers". You won't read that in the Mail.

GalwayMark

murphaph wrote: »

The UK was also behind the rules that standardised naming with regards jams and marmalades.

In Germany ordinary people call all these things "Marmalade" but EU rules driven by the UK forced a change to labelling so that marmalade can only refer to stuff with citrus fruits in it. Strawberry jam is no longer Erdbeermarmelade but Konfitüre.

Apparently the UK was always one of the more enthusiastic "rule makers". You won't read that in the Mail.

They never held inquiries into the empire's behaviour and therefore all of it was brushed under the carpet. Partly the reasons why explaining things as described above will get you nowhere until the delusions have been cured by reality.

Chips Lovell

I have to admire the energy and stamina of Messrs Davis and Barnier:

Davis and Barnier lunched on pan-fried sea bass with sauteed bacon, followed by roast fillet of Angus beef, with a dessert of pear and chocolate souffle, accompanied by English and French wines.

After a lunch like that, all I'd be good for is a long nap and there they are, negotiating Brexit.

First Up

mountaintop wrote:

I've been on lots of mainly football forums during the vote full of Brexiters, whose main drive was 'darkies out'. Economic consequences of Brexit did not matter. The final straw of proof was no moan about lack of money for NHS.

I wonder did anyone try to point out to these morons that the "darkies" are not from the EU?

Fratton Fred

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I have to admire the energy and stamina of Messrs Davis and Barnier:

After a lunch like that, all I'd be good for is a long nap and there they are, negotiating Brexit.

The art of the politician.

The ability to eat a large lunch, spend the afternoon sleeping it off and still claim to have done a hard day's work.

Igotadose

Deleted User wrote: »

Gotcha. I was imagining children being put to work with mercury rather than measuring things in US measurements rather than metric.

Post-Brexit, am I correct to assume Britain can pass any laws it wants, e.g., bring back the death penalty, citizen ownership of handguns, relax pollution standards, building standards, food standards? Would some of this be tangled up in the complexity around the ECJ and European Court of Human Rights (so, for example, Britain couldn't apply the death penalty to an EU citizen but could to a UK citizen?)

Not trying to troll here, just confirming what I think is possible. Not a UK resident, living in Ireland and watching the trainwreck that is Brexit and the last dying gasps of the UK as a country of some worldwide influence.

jm08

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I have to admire the energy and stamina of Messrs Davis and Barnier:



After a lunch like that, all I'd be good for is a long nap and there they are, negotiating Brexit.

Its worth mentioning that lunch was in the British delegation's building - seemingly EU lunches are much more frugal - certainly no wine at first working lunch.

The Rape of Lucretia

mountaintop wrote: »

I've been on lots of mainly football forums during the vote full of Brexiters, whose main drive was 'darkies out'. Economic consequences of Brexit did not matter. The final straw of proof was no moan about lack of money for NHS.

They were men of conviction. An unpleasantly racist conviction to many of us, but you have to admire their willingness to stick to those convictions and not forsake them for the economic price they would have to pay.

flutered

steddyeddy wrote: »

They still have to sort out border, bill and rights before a transition deal occurs.

the border is the only card may has, i can envisige her jettisoning n.i. as a sop to the eu, it will free up funding that has to be used for customs, free up funding which it has to use to keep the place above water, it will also save the 5b which it promised the dupers, will the eu accept that as part of an agreement, i think they would

ambro25

Igotadose wrote: »

Post-Brexit, am I correct to assume Britain can pass any laws it wants, e.g., bring back the death penalty, citizen ownership of handguns, relax pollution standards, building standards, food standards?

It could do all that whilst still part of the EU. Which would draw judicial challenges, of course (and effectively get neutralised through appeals). But Parliament has at all times been sovereign 'enough' to debate any Bill and vote through any Act doing just those things you mention.

It looks like it's also worth reminding that the EU and ECHR are distinct jurisdictions: you can perfectly well be a signed-up member of the ECHR without being a signed-up member of the EU (but not reciprocally however, I seem to recall: you can't be in the EU without being signed-up to the ECHR; but that's a condition of EU membership amongst so many others, thinki of it as a reference of 'good character' for a country).

But far from the EU and the ECHR themselves, and for the same reason of judicial incompatibility (point above about appeals <etc.> effectively neutralising these Acts to the extent of making them wholly irrelevant), there is a mountain of further international treaties, agreements and conventions, under which the UK can't just "vote whatever it wants". Such as the GATT (WTO), the Vienna Convention, and speaking of those I know best and practice in my own line of work: the Berne Convention, the European Patent Convention, the Patent Cooperation Treaty, the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks, The Hague Agreement Concerning the International Deposit of Industrial Designs <etc.>

Igotadose wrote: »

<...>

Not trying to troll here, just confirming what I think is possible.

Tbh, if the last 16 months have shown anything at all, it's precisely that anything is possible!

Capt'n Midnight

Nody wrote: »

The latest plan now is with hard Brexit is to join Nafta instead according to the telegraph; what was that of focusing on fast growing Asia again?

NAFTA is the best ever.

There's no way a member of that FTA would slap a 300% tariff on another.

In other completely unrelated news BAE Systems to cut almost 2,000 jobs

Orders for the Typhoon jet have slowed down amid stiff competition from the new F-35, part of which is made by BAE Systems, and from France's Rafale and the US F-16.

Remember May's majority depends on the DUP.

Northern Ireland as an entity depends on handouts on top of the local economy. The DUP's Westminster cash still hasn't showed up.

prinzeugen

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

NAFTA is the best ever.

There's no way a member of that FTA would slap a 300% tariff on another.

In other completely unrelated news BAE Systems to cut almost 2,000 jobs


Remember May's majority depends on the DUP.

Northern Ireland as an entity depends on handouts on top of the local economy. The DUP's Westminster cash still hasn't showed up.

What's happening at BAE is nothing whatsoever to do with Britex.

Its been brewing for a while and is thanks to the German government being skint and pulling the plug on upgrades to the typhoon that would allow it to better compete with other aircraft on the market.

murphaph

prinzeugen wrote: »

What's happening at BAE is nothing whatsoever to do with Britex.

Its been brewing for a while and is thanks to the German government being skint and pulling the plug on upgrades to the typhoon that would allow it to better compete with other aircraft on the market.

Lol. German public finances are in excellent shape. But wow at you attempt to blame job losses at BAE on Germany. Worthy of a Daily Mail headline writer!

prinzeugen

murphaph wrote: »

Lol. German public finances are in excellent shape. But wow at you attempt to blame job losses at BAE on Germany. Worthy of a Daily Mail headline writer!

While the public finances may be "great", the money is not going to the forces.

Go into Easons and read any of the aviation periodicals. Its fact.

Sure half the Luftwaffe Eurofighter Typhoons are grounded as they can't afford the spares.

Its why Austria is looking for Eurofighter replacements also.

Germany pulled the plug on the upgrades that would have made a true multirole aircraft and no other country can afford to go it alone.

Also the consortium that builds the Eurofighter (of which BAE is a part) is based in... Germany.

The Rape of Lucretia

Which is all great news ! Europe needing to spend less on military hardware. Money going on better things. Its what we want to hear.

Professor Moriarty

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

NAFTA is the best ever.

There's no way a member of that FTA would slap a 300% tariff on another.

In other completely unrelated news BAE Systems to cut almost 2,000 jobs


Remember May's majority depends on the DUP.

Northern Ireland as an entity depends on handouts on top of the local economy. The DUP's Westminster cash still hasn't showed up.

A headline from Reuters tonight:

U.S. chamber warns of 'existential threat' to NAFTA

Back to the drawing board for the Brexiteers.

Capt'n Midnight

prinzeugen wrote: »

What's happening at BAE is nothing whatsoever to do with Britex.

Its been brewing for a while and is thanks to the German government being skint and pulling the plug on upgrades to the typhoon that would allow it to better compete with other aircraft on the market.

Or it's Boeing & co. queering the pitch ?

And I did say In other completely unrelated news

Regardless it means more aerospace workers chasing fewer jobs.
It means a slight shrinkage of the UK aerospace industry.

Then again considering how deep BAE and Boeing are in each other's pockets only a conspiracy theorist would consider this political.

prinzeugen

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Or it's Boeing & co. queering the pitch ?

And I did say In other completely unrelated news

Regardless it means more aerospace workers chasing fewer jobs.
It means a slight shrinkage of the UK aerospace industry.

Then again considering how deep BAE and Boeing are in each other's pockets only a conspiracy theorist would consider this political.

In terms of military items, BAE and Lockheed are partners.

Boeing are giving out about "state aid". Most of the composite R&D now used in the 787 was paid for by the US state as part of Boeing's JSF bid.

Pot, kettle, black.

steddyeddy

prinzeugen wrote: »

In terms of military items, BAE and Lockheed are partners.

Boeing are giving out about "state aid". Most of the composite R&D now used in the 787 was paid for by the US state as part of Boeing's JSF bid.

Pot, kettle, black.

Indeed they may be, but this highlights how relatively powerless the UK is on the world stage now.

Fratton Fred

steddyeddy wrote: »

Indeed they may be, but this highlights how relatively powerless the UK is on the world stage now.

in what way? Bombardier is a Canadian company and it is up to the Canadian government to fight their case.

And this also has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit.

steddyeddy

Donald Tusk raises possibility of no deal scenario if no progress is made by December. Brexiters dreams come true.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/10/brexit-no-game-michel-barnier-ball-in-his-court?CMP=fb_gu

The Rape of Lucretia

The biggest EU loser in the no deal scenario being Eire, with a border being reinstalled. The EU will help it out economically, but the social and political downside will have no way to mitigate.

steddyeddy

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

The biggest EU loser in the no deal scenario being Eire, with a border being reinstalled. The EU will help it out economically, but the social and political downside will have no way to mitigate.

Of course. That said Britain is free to do what it wants, but Brexit will cripple it economically.

The amount of trouble due to British policy in relation to the North should be indication that a border could end badly. As long as they know who's to blame when trouble, economic, social or political comes and they don't start whinging when it happens.

The Rape of Lucretia

steddyeddy wrote: »

Of course. That said Britain is free to do what it wants, but Brexit will cripple it economically.

The amount of trouble due to British policy in relation to the North should be indication that a border could end badly. As long as they know who's to blame when trouble, economic, social or political comes and they don't start whinging when it happens.

Yes, but while the economic impact of no deal will be milder in the EU, more widely spread, and to some extent, not felt at all by the average Joe/Beppe/Sepp, the most visible and socially disruptive impact will be the Eire/NI border. An element to which the EU will have no remedy. So one it is very strongly motivated to avoid. It may be this threat that the UK is turning to in order to pressure Barnier and Co.

GalwayMark

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Yes, but while the economic impact of no deal will be milder in the EU, more widely spread, and to some extent, not felt at all by the average Joe/Beppe/Sepp, the most visible and socially disruptive impact will be the Eire/NI border. An element to which the EU will have no remedy. So one it is very strongly motivated to avoid. It may be this threat that the UK is turning to in order to pressure Barnier and Co.

The days of London using threats to get its own way are consigned to the 19th century plus it doesn't belong in this day and age. It's time the British government acted like a modern democracy not some country holding another hostage like Putin's thugs bullying Ukraine to back away from Europe. Look if the Brexiteers want a total break they will have to give up NI or stay in the single market.

P.S. Why do you call our state 'Eire' and not say 'Ireland' instead? It's a pathetic colonial relic.

steddyeddy

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Yes, but while the economic impact of no deal will be milder in the EU, more widely spread, and to some extent, not felt at all by the average Joe/Beppe/Sepp, the most visible and socially disruptive impact will be the Eire/NI border. An element to which the EU will have no remedy. So one it is very strongly motivated to avoid. It may be this threat that the UK is turning to in order to pressure Barnier and Co.

Historically the NI/border issues have damaged the UK more. I also don't believe that the UK will be an as important trading partner if its economically crippled by its own self harm.

Do you think they're sick enough to use peace as a bargaining chip?

prinzeugen

GalwayMark wrote: »

The days of London using threats to get its own way are consigned to the 19th century plus it doesn't belong in this day and age. It's time the British government acted like a modern democracy not some country holding another hostage like Putin's thugs bullying Ukraine to back away from Europe. Look if the Brexiteers want a total break they will have to give up NI or stay in the single market.

P.S. Why do you call our state 'Eire' and not say 'Ireland' instead? It's a pathetic colonial relic.

But you are OK with the EU wanting to turn Europe into a superstate? The last lad that had that idea was Hitler.

And you should really ask the folks of NI what they want before you come out with statements like that.

Most people in NI see themselves as Northern Irish.

Not British, Not Irish, but Northern Irish. On both sides of the wall.

But don't let facts get in the way of yet another anti British rant.

FrancieBrady

prinzeugen wrote: »

But you are OK with the EU wanting to turn Europe into a superstate? The last lad that had that idea was Hitler.

And you should really ask the folks of NI what they want before you come out with statements like that.

Most people in NI see themselves as Northern Irish.

Not British, Not Irish, but Northern Irish. On both sides of the wall.

But don't let facts get in the way of yet another anti British rant.

They were asked, they didn't want to leave the EU.

prinzeugen

steddyeddy wrote: »

Historically the NI/border issues have damaged the UK more. I also don't believe that the UK will be an as important trading partner if its economically crippled by its own self harm.

Do you think they're sick enough to use peace as a bargaining chip?

So we are sick? Explain please?

prinzeugen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They were asked, they didn't want to leave the EU.

The referendum was not about citizenship. It was EU, yes or no.

steddyeddy

prinzeugen wrote: »

But you are OK with the EU wanting to turn Europe into a superstate? The last lad that had that idea was Hitler.

And you should really ask the folks of NI what they want before you come out with statements like that.

Most people in NI see themselves as Northern Irish.

Not British, Not Irish, but Northern Irish. On both sides of the wall.

But don't let facts get in the way of yet another anti British rant.

Tell it to the people who voted Brexit. It's them that decided the fate of the Northern Irish people last june. The majority of people there voted remain. Did people care what they wanted then?

steddyeddy

prinzeugen wrote: »

The referendum was not about citizenship. It was EU, yes or no.

And they said yes to remain.

steddyeddy

prinzeugen wrote: »

So we are sick? Explain please?

Yes if people use Northern Irish peace as a bargaining chip they're sick.

prinzeugen

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes if people use Northern Irish peace as a bargaining chip they're sick.

Only Dublin is doing it..

FrancieBrady

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes if people use Northern Irish peace as a bargaining chip they're sick.

And criminally irresponsible

prinzeugen

steddyeddy wrote: »

And they said yes to remain.

Shows how much you know about Britex if you think that is all its about.

GalwayMark

prinzeugen wrote: »

But you are OK with the EU wanting to turn Europe into a superstate? The last lad that had that idea was Hitler.

And you should really ask the folks of NI what they want before you come out with statements like that.

Most people in NI see themselves as Northern Irish.

Not British, Not Irish, but Northern Irish. On both sides of the wall.

But don't let facts get in the way of yet another anti British rant.

I believe in a looser EU not that you wanna know but hey we're not going to indulge your self pity any longer.

Gerry T

solodeogloria wrote:

In a no deal scenario the contributions won't be paid. There are significant reasons to doubt if it is legally enforceable. These are contributions that Britain has chosen to give. Not a "bill" that they "owe".

Hi solo, I think this attitude is why the EU is taking such a hard line with the UK on first agreeing any settlement payment, border and movement of people.
Let's just pretend there's no future trade between the EU and UK. Border goes up and people stop moving. That leaves the settlement payment, as people have suggested the UK has on going liabilities such as pension payments. The EU today has financial commitments, on brexit day these are expected to be circa 724bn, the UK today are part of those commitments, they need to figure out how much they need to pay before leaving. Some of these commitments are in the form of legal binding contracts, others are future payments. So some the UK won't have to pay and others they will. This is the stage we are at.
So saying the acid test is "is the payment of these monies enforceable in a court" is another way of saying "yes we agreed to pay, but if we can wangle our way out, we won't pay" it's like buying a car by taking out a 10yr loan, after 5yrs saying to the bank"here's the keys, your car now, I'm not paying any future loan payments....sure I don't have use of the car, I'll only pay because I'm making very reasonable generous contributions, the banks being unreasonable, I'm being held to ransome as the bank won't give me a loan to buy a new car, I want the 0% interest rate.

The EU is presenting how they see the breakout of these liabilities, they keep asking the UK for their analysis, nothing forthcoming. There available to sit and negoatate but the UKs latest comments are their planning to just walk away, the EU won't discuss future trade.....

Can't you see the UK are going about this all wrong. If they walk, no payment, borders up, people having to move back home to their country of origin. There will be no EU trade deal. Then who's going to sign a deal with the UK, they'll just prove what we all ready are thinking. The UK can't be trusted.

Capt'n Midnight

prinzeugen wrote: »

But you are OK with the EU wanting to turn Europe into a superstate? The last lad that had that idea was Hitler.

Funny that. Anyway the EU has lots of vetos and voting arrangements to prevent one person gaining too much power.

On the UK side if May had a big majority she could have done anything she wanted.

Gerry T

prinzeugen wrote:

But you are OK with the EU wanting to turn Europe into a superstate? The last lad that had that idea was Hitler.

Hitler, that's what the EUs image is to you, bizarre. Are you sure it's not the UKs rampage all around the world. Making the "Empire" of smaller countries and regions around the world, like northern Ireland.

prinzeugen wrote:

And you should really ask the folks of NI what they want before you come out with statements like that.

Well NI did have a say, their voice was heard, 1,260,988 voted and 55.8% said remain in Europe.

prinzeugen wrote:

Most people in NI see themselves as Northern Irish.

That's reassuring, but what does that mean. If given a choice are you suggesting they would wand an independent Republic of NI.

prinzeugen wrote:

Not British, Not Irish, but Northern Irish. On both sides of the wall.

Well they can be Irish, or British or even both.

prinzeugen wrote:

But don't let facts get in the way of yet another anti British rant.

It wasn't an anti British rant.

prinzeugen

Gerry T wrote: »

Hitler, that's what the EUs image is to you, bizarre. Are you sure it's not the UKs rampage all around the world. Making the "Empire" of smaller countries and regions around the world, like northern Ireland.



Well NI did have a say, their voice was heard, 1,260,988 voted and 55.8% said remain in Europe.



That's reassuring, but what does that mean. If given a choice are you suggesting they would wand an independent Republic of NI.



Well they can be Irish, or British or even both.



It wasn't an anti British rant.

Empire.. The use of that word tells me its a waste of time.

And it was a self governing NI state, free of Dublin and London that both Republicans and unionist folks wanted.

It was the RTE/BBC joint live TV show.

prinzeugen

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Funny that. Anyway the EU has lots of vetos and voting arrangements to prevent one person gaining too much power.

On the UK side if May had a big majority she could have done anything she wanted.

Yeah.. Right.. You missed the speech calling for a EU chancellor and finance minister then??

Was in the EU Parliament.

BoatMad

Yeah.. Right.. You missed the speech calling for a EU chancellor and finance minister then??

loads of "calls " in the EU for all sorts of things, member states retain a veto. end of story

Junkyard Tom

prinzeugen wrote: »

Most people in NI see themselves as Northern Irish.

The above statement is wrong.

Also, the term 'northern Irish' is fairly meaningless. Everyone who lives in the northern half of Ireland is geographically northern Irish. There is no 'northern Irish' political party. SF and the SDLP are united Ireland parties, UUP/DUP consider themselves 'British' (politically at least) UK parties.

Red_Wake

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

prinzeugen wrote: »

Most people in NI see themselves as Northern Irish.

The above statement is wrong.

Also, the term 'northern Irish' is fairly meaningless. Everyone who lives in the northern half of Ireland is geographically northern Irish. There is no 'northern Irish' political party. SF and the SDLP are united Ireland parties, UUP/DUP consider themselves 'British' (politically at least) UK parties.

Maybe people vote for parties in NI based on things other than nationalist/unionist reasons?

If one were to disagree on a UI with SF, but agree with their other policies, wouldn't it be unreasonable to not vote for them?

Peregrinus

prinzeugen wrote: »

Shows how much you know about Britex if you think that is all its about.

It's all they were asked.

If, as you seem to think, the 55.8% "Remain" vote in Northern Ireland was not a vote to remain in the EU, would it not follow that the 53.4% vote "Leave" vote in England was not a vote to leave the EU?