May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[Khun Han]

32 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It took big concessions to get little Wallonia to agree to CETA.  For obvious reasons, there will be lots more nations balking at giving concessions to the UK

 

We're all going to have to wait and see what the UK government's strategy is. It's convinced Nissan to stay. I can't see a cave-in on free movement getting past the electorate: it would be political suicide.

[Khun Han]

1 hour ago, Ace of Pop said:

Grouse must have smashe the I Phone a while back,an Genuine I Phone show up as this


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

 Grouse just experienced a 'touché' moment.

[Ace of Pop]

Yeh, he cant afford the 30 K for New Apple, recon he just dont like independent oldish folk. Humourless Malcontents abound on  Thai Visa,

[dick dasterdly]

56 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

We're all going to have to wait and see what the UK government's strategy is. It's convinced Nissan to stay. I can't see a cave-in on free movement getting past the electorate: it would be political suicide.

I'd like to think you're right that it would be political suicide to cave in on free movement, but as you say - we have to wait and see.

 

Two years (plus) is a long time in politics and its a brave person who would do anything other than guess at what will happen during that time.

 

Mind you, we've already forgotten who said what (posters, not politicians) in the referendum run-up - which is why I suppose many find it easy now to be so sure about the eventual outcome.

[Grouse]

5 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

small mercies

 

That's an interesting way of describing the difference between economic recession and economic growth.

 

Still ROFLMFAO

 

Do you know what stagflation is?

 

You soon will .....

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'd like to think you're right that it would be political suicide to cave in on free movement, but as you say - we have to wait and see.

 

Two years (plus) is a long time in politics and its a brave person who would do anything other than guess at what will happen during that time.

 

Mind you, we've already forgotten who said what (posters, not politicians) in the referendum run-up - which is why I suppose many find it easy now to be so sure about the eventual outcome.

 

Political life is about negotiation (or caving in as the naive would say).  Extended interim transitional period as mooted by Wolfgang Munchau (FT). First cave Nissan, second cave Carney, third cave .......

[SheungWan]

Just now, Grouse said:

It was an iPhone5. This is an SE in rose gold. Can't decide whether to go for the 7 or not. I don't want Apple's awful Bluetooth headphones and my Bose noise cancelling ones have the standard jack. Adaptor I suppose. In HK so might be tempted. Probably £1000 in U.K. Now....

 

The Brexiteer chaps on this thread would recommend you get a Note 7. You going to buy on Electric Avenue? I'll be in HK in a couple of weeks or so.....

[ilostmypassword]

Here's something I didn't know.  Maybe it's been addressed in this thread but I haven't seen it.  

"Fox told colleagues last week that Britain could avoid negotiating a trade deal with the EU that required unanimous ratification by striking a deal within the 2-year negotiation period, which gets underway once Article 50 is invoked.

He told MPs: "So it’s in the interests, quite clearly, following this experience [CETA], for all concerned to minimise any sort of economic, trade and political disruption, to ensure that’s done with the minimum of fuss and it’s done through that QMV process by council, rather than being negotiated from outside as CETA was done."

By finalising a post-Brexit trade deal with the EU before actually leaving, Fox added, the deal could be pushed through European Council on a qualified majority basis, which would be much easier to achieve compared to trying to secure the approval of every member state."

http://www.businessinsider.com/brexit-european-union-trade-deals-negotiators-theresa-may-government-2016-10

The point of the article is that the UK hasn't even assembled its negotiating team yet.  Anyway, I'm sure that pro-brexiters will say that this puts more pressure on the EU because its members are desperate not to lose the UK market. Others might believe the opposite.

[dick dasterdly]

36 minutes ago, Grouse said:

It was an iPhone5. This is an SE in rose gold. Can't decide whether to go for the 7 or not. I don't want Apple's awful Bluetooth headphones and my Bose noise cancelling ones have the standard jack. Adaptor I suppose. In HK so might be tempted. Probably £1000 in U.K. Now....

And now I'm going to join those that annoy the hell out of me by 'going on' about things that are entirely irrelevant .

 

Who the hell cares about anyones' expensive 'phone?!

 

When AIS changed their (2G?) system so that my old Nokia frequently lost reception, I made the mistake of buying an expensive Samsung something or the other because (according to google reviews) it was easy to use....  It took me 2 days to work out how to answer bloody 'phone calls (i.e. swipe the answer button, don't press it).....

 

I loathe the bloody thing.  The tech. lovers enjoy working out the amazing things I'm sure these things can do, but I just want a 'PHONE!

 

Sorry, rant over.

[Orac]

Here's something I didn't know.  Maybe it's been addressed in this thread but I haven't seen it.  

"Fox told colleagues last week that Britain could avoid negotiating a trade deal with the EU that required unanimous ratification by striking a deal within the 2-year negotiation period, which gets underway once Article 50 is invoked.

He told MPs: "So it’s in the interests, quite clearly, following this experience [CETA], for all concerned to minimise any sort of economic, trade and political disruption, to ensure that’s done with the minimum of fuss and it’s done through that QMV process by council, rather than being negotiated from outside as CETA was done."

By finalising a post-Brexit trade deal with the EU before actually leaving, Fox added, the deal could be pushed through European Council on a qualified majority basis, which would be much easier to achieve compared to trying to secure the approval of every member state."

http://www.businessinsider.com/brexit-european-union-trade-deals-negotiators-theresa-may-government-2016-10

The point of the article is that the UK hasn't even assembled its negotiating team yet.  Anyway, I'm sure that pro-brexiters will say that this puts more pressure on the EU because its members are desperate not to lose the UK market. Others might believe the opposite.

The 'exit' deal could cover this but it would need the EU to play ball which is unlikely given their own political interests of discouraging others from leaving.

Two years is a very short time to agree any trade deal, particularly when there are quite a few other key issues to resolve regarding the UKs exit from the EU as opposed to ongoing trade talks for after we have left - i am not sure but my understanding is that although the 'exit' deal only needs the agreement by QMV, any extension to the two year limit needs unanimous approval by all members.

[Scott]

We have a few members who think that it is perfectly ok to consistently troll.   It is not.   It is OK to disagree with others.  

 

We do not care about your iphone and if you find it difficult to read the nonsense, please stop.

 

Continued trolling will result in suspensions.  

[MJP]

4 hours ago, Grouse said:

 

Do you know what stagflation is?

 

You soon will .....

 

Twas' gonna happen anyways. 

 

But yes, stagflation cometh. 

[MJP]

Carney hanging in there a bit longer, but not as long as usual . . . 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37829069

 

£  Higher? Lower?

 

[SaintLouisBlues]

On 10/30/2016 at 9:35 AM, chiang mai said:

I also read that and agree it's certainly an option. But my take is that the profile of the job, the economy and the people at the head of government were all totally different when he signed on, those changes may make the role seem less interesting and I'm betting he'll go.

Sadly for all those who "bet" on Bloomberg, Carney has just announced that he's sticking around until 2019

[Johnyo]

Sadly for all those who "bet" on Bloomberg, Carney has just announced that he's sticking around until 2019

Sad for everyone not just for those who bet.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[sandyf]

12 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Here's something I didn't know.  Maybe it's been addressed in this thread but I haven't seen it.  

"Fox told colleagues last week that Britain could avoid negotiating a trade deal with the EU that required unanimous ratification by striking a deal within the 2-year negotiation period, which gets underway once Article 50 is invoked.

He told MPs: "So it’s in the interests, quite clearly, following this experience [CETA], for all concerned to minimise any sort of economic, trade and political disruption, to ensure that’s done with the minimum of fuss and it’s done through that QMV process by council, rather than being negotiated from outside as CETA was done."

By finalising a post-Brexit trade deal with the EU before actually leaving, Fox added, the deal could be pushed through European Council on a qualified majority basis, which would be much easier to achieve compared to trying to secure the approval of every member state."

http://www.businessinsider.com/brexit-european-union-trade-deals-negotiators-theresa-may-government-2016-10

The point of the article is that the UK hasn't even assembled its negotiating team yet.  Anyway, I'm sure that pro-brexiters will say that this puts more pressure on the EU because its members are desperate not to lose the UK market. Others might believe the opposite.

This approach has been voiced before and the opinion of some informed sources was that it cannot happen. It was the view that trade would not be included in the negotiations and that it must wait until the UK is out of the EU. The exit negotiations are primarily to wrap up admin processes such as outstanding payments, laws etc.

As a member of the EU, the UK cannot negotiate trade, now if that includes with the EU itself will only be known when it is actually put to the EU.

It is almost certain that there is nothing in the EU constitution regarding members under Article 50 so the matter could very well become a point of law.

There was little consideration given to Article 50 as it was never intended to be used. The text is very vague and open to all forms of interpretation but one point is very clear, any exit arrangement must be passed by the European Parliament. Mr Fox may be a little bit optimistic in his train of thought.

It should also be remembered that Australia has backed off on trade discussions until after the exit because of legal implications. Whichever way you look at it, trade is a potential minefield.

[sandyf]

11 hours ago, Orac said:

 

The 'exit' deal could cover this but it would need the EU to play ball which is unlikely given their own political interests of discouraging others from leaving.

Two years is a very short time to agree any trade deal, particularly when there are quite a few other key issues to resolve regarding the UKs exit from the EU as opposed to ongoing trade talks for after we have left - i am not sure but my understanding is that although the 'exit' deal only needs the agreement by QMV, any extension to the two year limit needs unanimous approval by all members.

 

This is the text of Para 2 of Article 50, not just down to the Council.

 

1. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

[sandyf]

18 hours ago, SheungWan said:

 

'Number 10 and Nissan both denied that the potential closure of Sunderland was discussed at the meeting between Mr Ghosn and the PM'.......'er, there is a letter written by Greg Clark, business secretary to Nissan. 'According to several people familiar with the letter........it contains the same assurances that were offered to Mr Ghosn by the PM - namely that the carmaker would face no change in its trading conditions following Britain's exit from the EU'. (FT Oct 29/30) So, so much for the above limp attempt at an explanation.

Everything hinges on a particular phrase, one that effectively implies the single market.

 

In a Commons statement, Mr Clark repeated that he had assured Nissan the UK would be seeking trade that was "free and unencumbered by impediments" for the motor industry after Brexit.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37827209

[SgtRock]

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

Everything hinges on a particular phrase, one that effectively implies the single market.

 

In a Commons statement, Mr Clark repeated that he had assured Nissan the UK would be seeking trade that was "free and unencumbered by impediments" for the motor industry after Brexit.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37827209

 

That particular phrase actually implies an FTA for car manufacturers and component parts.

 

More here

 

http://news.sky.com/story/nissan-deal-followed-uks-vow-to-fight-for-tariff-free-eu-trade-10638451

 

Note the following

 

Quote

But Business Secretary Greg Clark denied there had been any compensation deal, which would not be possible under World Trade Organisation rules if Britain relinquishes membership of the single market.

 

As a follow on to the paragraph that you highlighted above.

 

Quote

"For the continental European car manufacturers, they export a lot to us, we export a lot to them, components go backwards and forwards.

"If you conduct the negotiations in a serious, constructive and civilised way there is a lot in common that we can establish.

"I was able to reassure Nissan - and other manufacturers - that that is the way we are going to approach it."

 

No need to talk about WTO rules if staying in the single market was the end game.

[Orac]

25 minutes ago, SgtRock said:

 

That particular phrase actually implies an FTA for car manufacturers and component parts.

 

More here

 

http://news.sky.com/story/nissan-deal-followed-uks-vow-to-fight-for-tariff-free-eu-trade-10638451

 

Note the following

 

 

As a follow on to the paragraph that you highlighted above.

 

 

No need to talk about WTO rules if staying in the single market was the end game.

 

Surely an FTA for car manufacturers and component parts would itself not meet WTO rules which state an agreement must cover "substantially all the trade in products originating in such territories".

 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/regatt_e.htm

 

Sorry to mix up quotes but this is how the new quote function appears to work.

[SgtRock]

As a follow up to my previous post.

 

Hot off the press from the Pro EU Guardian

 

Quote

Nissan decision to stay in Britain came with clear signal that No 10 is aiming for a free trade relationship similar to single market

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/01/brexit-weekly-briefing-a-softer-eu-exit-could-yet-be-on-the-cards

 

The EU single market, which is decreasing in size annually is not the way forward.

 

FTA's are.

[SgtRock]

8 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

Surely an FTA for car manufacturers and component parts would itself not meet WTO rules which state an agreement must cover "substantially all the trade in products originating in such territories".

 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/regatt_e.htm

 

Sorry to mix up quotes but this is how the new quote function appears to work.

 

Hopefully this will go some way to answering your question

 

Quote

As our colleague Patrick Wintour noted, Clark’s clear implication was that Britain’s target will be not just to avoid tariff and non-tariff barriers with the EU for carmakers but probably to seek similar deals for other industries in a sector-by-sector approach.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/01/brexit-weekly-briefing-a-softer-eu-exit-could-yet-be-on-the-cards

 

I will reiterate what I said above.

 

Being tied to an ever shrinking EU single market is not the way forward.

 

FTA's are the way ahead.

[Orac]

6 minutes ago, SgtRock said:

 

Hopefully this will go some way to answering your question

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/01/brexit-weekly-briefing-a-softer-eu-exit-could-yet-be-on-the-cards

 

I will reiterate what I said above.

 

Being tied to an ever shrinking EU single market is not the way forward.

 

FTA's are the way ahead.

 

The article you link to also states:

 

 

"The second is that the logical inference from Clark’s remarks is that he believes Britain should stay in the customs union – which is not necessarily the view of Liam Fox at the Department for International Trade."

 

which means adopting the EU external tariff and no other FTA so in this case an FTA with the EU is not so much as a deal similar to the single market as the single market under a different name to all intents and purposes but without financial services.

[Ace of Pop]

Why you Brits Boyer with those Euro Freaks I don't know. Now FIFA HAS BANNED England Football Teams fro warring Poppies to commemorate your Dead Sevicemen who died defending those in Europe from the German Nazi thugs


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[SgtRock]

7 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

The article you link to also states:

 

 

"The second is that the logical inference from Clark’s remarks is that he believes Britain should stay in the customs union – which is not necessarily the view of Liam Fox at the Department for International Trade."

 

which means adopting the EU external tariff and no other FTA so in this case an FTA with the EU is not so much as a deal similar to the single market as the single market under a different name to all intents and purposes but without financial services.

 

We could go around in circles all day with nothing but speculation.

 

My original post was to provide a counter argument to SandyF assertion above, that a particular statement seemed to imply continued membership of the single market.

 

I do not believe that to be the case. continued membership of the single market will mean the continued free movement of people, that is not going to happen.

 

Despite the bluster and garbage that is being thrown about by both the EU and the UK. This is the reality.

 

A50 is invoked and the UK leaves the EU 2 years after that date.

 

At the end of that 2 years the EU / UK can either adopt WTO rules, or they can actually try being adult and using the 2 year leaving period to come up with an agreement that is mutually beneficial to both parties.

 

What is abundantly clear is that the EU market in World trade has halved in 30 years. The UK's trade with the EU has fallen almost 20% in the last 15 years.

 

It is time for change.

 

 

 

[SgtRock]

Article in today's Indie

 

Quote

How could the financial experts have got it so wrong on the economy yet again?

 

Opening and last paragraph.

 

Quote

When you get something wrong you have to figure out why you managed to do so. The economic establishment got the economy’s reaction to the Brexit vote utterly wrong – so wrong that the pre-Brexit predictions now look laughable.

 

Quote

Most of the people whose judgement I would tend to trust come in a bit above the average: for example Capital Economics expects 1.5 per cent and Lombard Street Research at 1.1 per cent. But the big point is surely this: until the forecasters have worked out why they were so wrong, they can hardly expect people to have much faith in their predictions now.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/economy-brexit-bank-of-england-forecasts-spending-outlooks-a7386181.html

[Johnyo]

Why you Brits Boyer with those Euro Freaks I don't know. Now FIFA HAS BANNED England Football Teams fro warring Poppies to commemorate your Dead Sevicemen who died defending those in Europe from the German Nazi thugs


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Wow blaming Europe for a decision made by FIFA. Please Google FIFA.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Orac]

 
We could go around in circles all day with nothing but speculation.
 
My original post was to provide a counter argument to SandyF assertion above, that a particular statement seemed to imply continued membership of the single market.
 
I do not believe that to be the case. continued membership of the single market will mean the continued free movement of people, that is not going to happen.
 
Despite the bluster and garbage that is being thrown about by both the EU and the UK. This is the reality.
 
A50 is invoked and the UK leaves the EU 2 years after that date.
 
At the end of that 2 years the EU / UK can either adopt WTO rules, or they can actually try being adult and using the 2 year leaving period to come up with an agreement that is mutually beneficial to both parties.
 
What is abundantly clear is that the EU market in World trade has halved in 30 years. The UK's trade with the EU has fallen almost 20% in the last 15 years.
 
It is time for change.
 
 
 

But we aren't going around in circles with nothing but speculation. You speculated on there being an FTA specific to automotive products and I quoted the legal requirements for an FTA set by the WTO and furnished a link to them why that was not possible which is not speculation.

[Ace of Pop]

FIFA ain't English it's got some bent wop running it


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Orac]

FIFA ain't English it's got some bent wop running it


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Yawn - yet another attempted to get a brexit thread closed with ridiculous trolling.