UK’s Trade Future with EU Raises Concerns Over Return to ECJ Jurisdiction

[scottiejohn]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I do hope that’s not you trying to be more precise.

 

 

It is precise enough for those who are not blinkered by your Stammer/labour bias!

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, scottiejohn said:

It is precise enough for those who are not blinkered by your Stammer/labour bias!

It’s not precise enough to back up your earlier claim:

 

4 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

His Party's manifesto!

Bias you say?!

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, RayC said:

 

I don't think that inflation is being ignored. GDP figures quoted by the ONS are real i.e. adjusted for inflation, so I would have thought the OBR uses the same datasets although I can't confirm that for certain.

 

Well you said "as a result of Brexit" but with no mention of Covid at all. 

[nauseus]

32 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

We checked out in 2020 but the question is, 'Is it in our best interests to use some of the hotel's facilities?'

 

Wrt the three 'major' benefits of Brexit, the first, fishing, is almost insignificant in terms of its' economic importance. It represents 0.03% of economic activity in the UK and employs 11k people and these numbers are still declining  Why fishing became such a major issue (for both sides) in the original negotiations is a mystery to me.

 

I also don't understand why the free movement of EU nationals under 30 should present a problem. This is the group who, pre-Brexit, used to be employed in the seasonal, part-time jobs which are now proving so difficult to fill. Moreover, many (most?) of this group will not wish to settle permanently in the UK. If it is considered desirable to reduce the number of 'permanent' immigrants, surely this is one way of doing so?

 

The article suggests that the UK would be st the ECJ in matters relating to Food and Agricultural standards. In practice, currently this wouldn't be a problem. UK food standards are consistent with EU regulations and, in many cases, are stricter than the minimal requirements set by EU regulations. I accept that adhering to EU food and agriculture might be a problem when it comes to negotiating a free trade deal with the US - and if we wanted to amend standards in the future - but I would make the following two points: Firstly, is it desirable to drop our standards in such an important sector such as food and Agriculture? Secondly, given Trump's pronouncements about US trade policy, a free trade deal with the US isn't going to happen any time so in that regard, the issue of food standards is pretty irrelevant.

 

Fishing was not the main benefit of leaving. The EU has retained significant control of it anyway and it will be years before that ends.

 

Free movement has allowed significant migrant travel through continental Europe. For those determined to enter the UK, the Schengen Zone made this far easier than before for them to get as close as the Channel (beaches and ports) after 2015, which is when mass movement began. The end of FoM should have been one of the main benefits of leaving but it has been seemingly willfully mishandled by the post Brexit Conservatives and now by this hopeless Labour mob. This migration is causing several problems in the UK and larger EU. It is now interesting to see that several EU states have now acknowledged this by applying border controls - temporary - I wonder? 

https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen-borders-and-visa/schengen-area/temporary-reintroduction-border-control_en

 

 

Influence of the EU courts over the UK was the biggest reason for the leave vote - i.e. loss of UK sovereignty.

[Maybole]

I was in UK at the time of the referendum. I cannot recall any reference to the ECJ.