Brexit - merged threads

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, oowee said:

Is it reasonable to expect free trade where in future are standards do not match those of the EU?

Yes - in that IF we supply goods to another standard, they can take it or leave it.  If we supply goods to their standard - free trade.

 

2 minutes ago, oowee said:

What are we doing with the Irish border in this scenario?

Just what we do now where there are different taxes, laws, VAT, excise duty, currency etc.  LOTs of laws are not the same.  If they want a harder border, that is up to them.

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

What EU rules put the EU at a disadvantage?

I don't know - but one of their agrumants is that being outside their rules would give us an 'unfair advantage'.  I see it more that their rules give them a disadvantage of their own making.

 

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

I would agree with you about looking to boost trade but surely it's not trade at any cost?

No - it would be up to US - no one else to decide at what cost

 

6 minutes ago, oowee said:

I hope we have morals and standards (even if we bend them now and again) that we encourage others to adopt through our trade policies? 

I wouldn't wish our politicians morals and standards on my worst enemy

[oowee]

9 minutes ago, Dave-G said:

The UK public were very happy to join a common market - but the underhanded EU snidely added so many slippery attachments to it that us too tolerant Brits did'nt kick off about till it got to be too up close and personal. Now we realise we need a serious kick off to get the load of carp sorted out properly.

I am with you on this but ultimately we agreed those changes. We could have put barriers in place that would have stopped (reduced) exploitation of our systems if they had also applied to UK citizens. We do need a serious kick off but up to now no Government is prepared to face the reality of what that means. It's a bit like a phony war. This way we can blame the EU for our own demise. 

[yod dropper]

The proposal

A better alternative - a “Super Canada” Free Trade Deal The European Research Group (ERG) has argued for some time for a far better alternative which is an advanced Free Trade Deal, known as ‘Super Canada’ (or Canada+++). The Group has spent months trying to persuade the Prime Minister and senior pro EU officials in 10 Downing Street that this would present a superior alternative for the United Kingdom to Chequers and what is now the draft withdrawal agreement. However, these efforts have proved unsuccessful to date – and the Prime Minister appears completely wedded to the current proposals.

The ERG published a paper explaining the case for its alternative at the 2018 Conservative Party Conference. (‘Why an advanced Free Trade Deal – Super Canada – is superior to the Chequers proposal’). In addition, the Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA) has also published a highly detailed 134 page report this autumn, explaining in precise economic terms, how such an arrangement (which they call PlanA+) would work in practice.

In essence, Super Canada would involve taking an existing EU Canada trade agreement, which was signed in 2016 and updating this framework by adding on some additional elements, such as a security protocol and a protocol on data. The EU Canada agreement took several years to negotiate but this means that most of the ‘heavy lifting’ has already been done and many of the key issues have previously been thrashed out in a manner the EU has already agreed to.

A Super Canada trade agreement would not involve being in the Single Market or Customs Union and would not leave the UK subject to the authority of the European Court of Justice. It would therefore honour the spirit of the 2016 referendum and the clear instruction to politicians from 17.4 million people that we should leave the European Union.

It would also, incidentally, comply with the Conservative Party’s 2017 General Election Manifesto commitment, on which almost every sitting Conservative MP was elected to Parliament by their constituents. (A handful of Conservative MPs qualified their election addresses on this issue).

[oowee]

Just now, JohnfromUK said:

Yes - in that IF we supply goods to another standard, they can take it or leave it.  If we supply goods to their standard - free trade.

So why would they want that from us when they do not take it from anywhere else it would undermine their own industry? 

 

Just what we do now where there are different taxes, laws, VAT, excise duty, currency etc.  LOTs of laws are not the same.  If they want a harder border, that is up to them.

What about people movement I thought we wanted control of our borders?

I don't know - but one of their agrumants is that being outside their rules would give us an 'unfair advantage'.  I see it more that their rules give them a disadvantage of their own making. 

 

No - it would be up to US - no one else to decide at what cost That's what I said but it's not trade at any cost is it? 

 

I wouldn't wish our politicians morals and standards on my worst enemy They are still standards. 

 

6 minutes ago, yod dropper said:

The proposal

A better alternative - a “Super Canada” Free Trade Deal The European Research Group (ERG) has argued for some time for a far better alternative which is an advanced Free Trade Deal, known as ‘Super Canada’ (or Canada+++). The Group has spent months trying to persuade the Prime Minister and senior pro EU officials in 10 Downing Street that this would present a superior alternative for the United Kingdom to Chequers and what is now the draft withdrawal agreement. However, these efforts have proved unsuccessful to date – and the Prime Minister appears completely wedded to the current proposals.

The ERG published a paper explaining the case for its alternative at the 2018 Conservative Party Conference. (‘Why an advanced Free Trade Deal – Super Canada – is superior to the Chequers proposal’). In addition, the Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA) has also published a highly detailed 134 page report this autumn, explaining in precise economic terms, how such an arrangement (which they call PlanA+) would work in practice.

In essence, Super Canada would involve taking an existing EU Canada trade agreement, which was signed in 2016 and updating this framework by adding on some additional elements, such as a security protocol and a protocol on data. The EU Canada agreement took several years to negotiate but this means that most of the ‘heavy lifting’ has already been done and many of the key issues have previously been thrashed out in a manner the EU has already agreed to.

A Super Canada trade agreement would not involve being in the Single Market or Customs Union and would not leave the UK subject to the authority of the European Court of Justice. It would therefore honour the spirit of the 2016 referendum and the clear instruction to politicians from 17.4 million people that we should leave the European Union.

It would also, incidentally, comply with the Conservative Party’s 2017 General Election Manifesto commitment, on which almost every sitting Conservative MP was elected to Parliament by their constituents. (A handful of Conservative MPs qualified their election addresses on this issue).

What would it mean for the Irish border? What would it mean for the Fishing industry, what standards would be agreed for farming?

[yod dropper]

6 minutes ago, oowee said:

What would it mean for the Irish border?

Internal NI/GB border: The backstop provides for an all UK Customs Union and regulatory and other alignment in Northern Ireland. This would mean that goods from Northern Ireland entering the EU market via Ireland would be EU compliant. Goods from Great Britain would not be. This would entail checks on GB goods going into Northern Ireland to ensure they do not enter the EU’s single market.

[oowee]

4 minutes ago, yod dropper said:

Internal NI/GB border: The backstop provides for an all UK Customs Union and regulatory and other alignment in Northern Ireland. This would mean that goods from Northern Ireland entering the EU market via Ireland would be EU compliant. Goods from Great Britain would not be. This would entail checks on GB goods going into Northern Ireland to ensure they do not enter the EU’s single market.

So Northern Ireland would be treated differently? The NI goods would be subject to EU standards agreements?  What about protecting the UK from free movement of people?

Edited November 18, 2018 by oowee

[old man]

53 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I would expect;

• Control over our borders for work/residency ....... not necessarily exclusion at all - just the right to 'do it our way' and have/exclude who WE choose.
• Our own sovereignty - i.e. laws set by the Westminster, and Edinburgh Parliaments and the Belfast (when operating) and Cardiff assemblies, and laws upheld by similar UK courts.  No dominant or overriding role for European Parliaments, Commissions, Courts.
• Free trade and travel for leisure (i.e. short term stays, short term work etc.) both ways
• The FULL ability to make our own worldwide trade without EU interference/veto
• A 'divorce bill' that recognises out liabilities (e.g. some pension commitments etc.) and our 'assets' (i.e. a share in some projects, installations and facilities.  I would expect the balance to be in their favour, but to MUCH less than £40 billion.
• FULL control over fishing in our waters
• Co-operation on security and criminal pursuit (extradition etc.) matters (both ways)

I would hope for:

• A friendly and co-operative future relationship in all matters

I would not expect a continual 'winging' about us gaining advantages by not following all of their 'rules'.  If we gain an advantage, it is most likely because the 'rules' are overbearing and over complex (or just plain wrong).  They should look at removing rules that put them at a disadvantage rather than blaming us for gaining an advantage.  That is how we, they, and every country in the world needs to be looking to boost trade and do 'better' in the world markets.

T

Just don't be holding you breath, it's been obvious from the start that our politicos aren't up to the job, other than keeping snouts in trough.

[yod dropper]

1 minute ago, oowee said:

So Northern Ireland would be treated differently? What about protecting the UK from free movement of people?

Are you saying we can't leave the single market with its four freedoms?

[JohnfromUK]

7 minutes ago, oowee said:

So why would they want that from us when they do not take it from anywhere else it would undermine their own industry?

They might not want it - but they must also make compromises.  We need to stand up for what WE WANT - not offer them what they would like best.

 

8 minutes ago, oowee said:

What about people movement I thought we wanted control of our borders?

That is a bit more of a problem - however it was pointed out by someone else that all refugees should be stopped when the first enter the EU - which is almost never Eire.  For EU citizens, they would be able to come on holiday/business trips anyway, but not for long term employment/residency without permission.

 

11 minutes ago, oowee said:

That's what I said but it's not trade at any cost is it?

It is up to us to set the standards we apply.  Pre EU - we had British Standards - and well respected they were.

 

12 minutes ago, oowee said:

They are still standards.

Hmmm.

[oowee]

No not at all. What I am trying to get to is govt has a deal which we dont like. The alternatives require at some point difficult decisions to be made re the NI border. 

[12gauge82]

1 minute ago, oowee said:

No not at all. What I am trying to get to is govt has a deal which we dont like. The alternatives require at some point difficult decisions to be made re the NI border. 

 the UK government has stated under no circumstances would they put a hard border in, so has the EU, as has Ireland, so in the words of JRM, who is the magical person that is going to come along and put one in?

[oowee]

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

They might not want it - but they must also make compromises.  We need to stand up for what WE WANT - not offer them what they would like best.

So at the point where the EU say no compromise on standards (ie now if not a few months back) we have to take the next step out of there. No government wants to be the one to deliver the coup degras. 

That is a bit more of a problem - however it was pointed out by someone else that all refugees should be stopped when the first enter the EU - which is almost never Eire.  For EU citizens, they would be able to come on holiday/business trips anyway, but not for long term employment/residency without permission.

We would not want the EU to manage our border so we have to stop movement. No government wants to be the one to deliver the coup degras. 

 

It is up to us to set the standards we apply.  Pre EU - we had British Standards - and well respected they were.

Unless we want to sell to another market at which point we have to meet there standards in the same way that we would make them meet our standards to sell to us. Where it gets difficult is that the bigger the market the easier it is to make changes to standards.

 

Hmmm.  there are some easy ones like lead paint on children's toys 

 

4 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

 the UK government has stated under no circumstances would they put a hard border in, so has the EU, as has Ireland, so in the words of JRM, who is the magical person that is going to come along and put one in?

How are we going to protect our borders from free movement of people post brexit? Do we want the EU to do it for us? They are not so good at it maybe?

[12gauge82]

18 minutes ago, oowee said:

 

How are we going to protect our borders from free movement of people post brexit? Do we want the EU to do it for us? They are not so good at it maybe?

We've had an open border with Ireland for many years and it's never been a problem, if it became one, a simple passport check at the port between northern Ireland and the mainland would be fine by me, although that could be looked at, at a later date.

[oowee]

Just now, 12gauge82 said:

We've had an open border with Ireland for many years and it's never been a problem, if it became one, a simple passport check at the port between northern Ireland and the mainland would be fine by me, although that could be looked at, at a later date.

It's not been a problem whilst we have been in the EU. Now I thought we wanted some sort of border control on people (points system or similar) A border in the Irish Sea would surely not be in the interests of the UK. We have to have borders on our borders do we not? If the border is in the Irish Sea we will get immigrants arriving in Britain unchallenged asking for asylum? Surely we are all trying to duck the unpalatable truth. 

[12gauge82]

8 minutes ago, oowee said:

It's not been a problem whilst we have been in the EU. Now I thought we wanted some sort of border control on people (points system or similar) A border in the Irish Sea would surely not be in the interests of the UK. We have to have borders on our borders do we not? If the border is in the Irish Sea we will get immigrants arriving in Britain unchallenged asking for asylum? Surely we are all trying to duck the unpalatable truth. 

Not at all, how are illegal immigrants going to get to Ireland in the first place?

[TriBsa]

23 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

We've had an open border with Ireland for many years and it's never been a problem, if it became one, a simple passport check at the port between northern Ireland and the mainland would be fine by me, although that could be looked at, at a later date.

Well, apart from allowing access to their members of the Caravan Club.

[JohnfromUK]

44 minutes ago, oowee said:

No government wants to be the one to deliver the coup degras. 

No government wants (or should) be the appeaser either.  Chamberlain's reputation never recovered.

1 minute ago, TriBsa said:

if it became one, a simple passport check at the port between northern Ireland and the mainland would be fine by me, although that could be looked at, at a later date.

There MUST be no border within the UK.  A border between the UK and Eire already exists.  That might require some additional checks, but remember we already have different VAT and excise duty.  Smuggling has been an issue for years.

[Newbie to this]

 

British Standards were always better than any EU ones (anybody been on holiday in the EU can see they have little to no standards) British Standards were what the rest of the World strived to meet, and were accepted everywhere.

http://www.technologystudent.com/prddes1/kite1.html

https://youtu.be/NsPpHjFdJ1o

 

There is a reason all fire extinguishers are now Red, I'll give you a clue it's NOT because it is safer!

Edited November 18, 2018 by Newbie to this

[TIGHTCHOKE]

4 minutes ago, TriBsa said:

Well, apart from allowing access to their members of the Caravan Club.

And they ALL seem to be in Peterborough!

[oowee]

21 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Not at all, how are illegal immigrants going to get to Ireland in the first place?

Europe lets them in they walk over to Ireland and then claim asylum in the UK. 

[Newbie to this]

31 minutes ago, oowee said:

It's not been a problem whilst we have been in the EU.

We've had an open border with Eire for people since 1923, way before the EU

[oowee]

11 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

No government wants (or should) be the appeaser either.  Chamberlain's reputation never recovered.

There MUST be no border within the UK.  A border between the UK and Eire already exists.  That might require some additional checks, but remember we already have different VAT and excise duty.  Smuggling has been an issue for years.

So if we don' appease and we don't bite the bullet we get the deal on the table 

[Newbie to this]

2 minutes ago, oowee said:

they walk over to Ireland

Are they all the second coming of Jesus, Eire is an island

[oowee]

Just now, Newbie to this said:

We've had an open border with Eire for people since 1923, way before the EU

But now we want to stop illegal's.

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, oowee said:

So if we don' appease and we don't bite the bullet we get the deal on the table 

We have bitten and chewed on too many bullets; the EU needs to learn negotiation - and give up dictation.