Brexit Discussion Thread.

[Alf Bentley]

It would be nice to see that in a country by country breakdown Alf, I can't find it at the minute. Obviously some countries have more sway/power within the EU, what percentage of Germany's exports do we buy for example?

I found this from a little while back, it doesn't give percentages but shows that we might have a stronger hand than you give credit for, we buy strong from the German powerhouses and I'm not sure they can afford to put many barriers up.

http://www.cityam.com/1415361850/uk-deficit-widens-brits-cant-get-enough-those-german-goods

 

 

I haven't got much time today, but here's a Wiki list of Germany's trading partners by volume (2013), which gives a rough idea:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_Germany

 

So, in 2013 we were Germany's 3rd biggest destination for exports, behind France and USA, just ahead of Netherlands and China. But, if you look at the figures, Germany's exports were reasonably well spread, so not massively vulnerable to any single trading partner (inc. UK).

 

I've no doubt Germany - and the EU generally - will want to do a deal. I'm just challenging the idea of some Brexiters that we're in a strong negotiating position. Yes, Germany might be one of the nations that is prepared to be more flexible. But we won't be negotiating with Germany. We'll be negotiating with the EU, after all 27 nations have agreed a joint negotiating stance (without us in the room)....and that's before you consider the political dimension. The EU faces an upsurge of Euroscepticism and doesn't want to encourage this by handing out generous deals to countries that leave....particularly not when Hollande & Merkel both face elections next year, and are hard-pressed by Eurosceptic/nationalist parties in their own countries.

 

I did read somewhere else that, in the EU, we actually only have a trade deficit with Germany and the Netherlands. We have a surplus with every other EU member. According to Brexiter logic, then, France, Italy, Ireland and the rest are in a strong negotiating position compared to us and we'll be obliged to offer them all a generous deal to protect our exports. I disagree.

 

Take Ireland as an example: I don't think the Irish are in a strong position because we send them more exports than they send us (Brexiter logic). I think they're in a vulnerable position because a much larger percentage of Irish trade is with the UK, compared to the percentage of UK trade that is with Ireland. Likewise, our trade deficit with the EU is less significant than the comparative importance of that trade to the UK and the EU. Taking exports alone, as Brexiters like to focus on German car exports: 16% of EU exports go to the UK; 45% of UK exports go to the EU, All will want a deal, but that's not a strong negotiating position, particularly with a 2-year clock running once Article 50 is triggered.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Indeed Alf, the need for 'speed' is a weak position to have in a negotiation - as we all know from life if you want things quicker, you end up having to pay an increased price.

[Alf Bentley]

We buy a lot of stuff from the EU because it's tariff free and tariffs are imposed on other countries. It could soon be the other way around.

 

 

"Soon" is optimistic. 

 

Most trade deals take many years to negotiate, so as to consider the interests of different sectors in each nation/bloc. We also have almost no experienced negotiators of such trade deals, as the EU has negotiated our trade deals for several decades.

If we leave the single market to obtain control of our borders, renegotiating a trade deal with the EU will be top priority, as we do about half our trade with the EU (45% of UK exports; 53% of UK imports). Alongside that, you say we will "soon" negotiate deals with other nations worldwide....despite how long and complex such negotiations usually are, despite the fact we'll have to replace about 50 EU external trade deals that will expire for us when we leave the EU and despite the fact that we have almost no experienced negotiators. 

 

You seem to imply that tariffs will quickly disappear in UK trade around the world. American farmers will quickly accept tariff-free competition from UK farmer, Russian gas suppliers will quickly accept tariff-free competition from the North Sea etc.

Mind you, apparently tariffs aren't the major obstacle to trade deals. What takes so long to negotiate is apparently non-tariff barriers - product regulations, standards and specifications.

 

Ah, well! I look forward to the imminent dawning of a new era of cheap Icelandic Beaujolais, cheap Senegalese Porsches and cheap Russian Guinness. 

[Guest]

UE will probably agree a deal where the UK get the same trade agreements and modified movement of people but pay an extra £2bn on top of what they were paying before.

 

Will the UK masses be happy with that bill?

[Strokes]

UE will probably agree a deal where the UK get the same trade agreements and modified movement of people but pay an extra £2bn on top of what they were paying before.

 

Will the UK masses be happy with that bill?

For now it would be OK. We could then set up global trade deals and renegotiate when we are less reliant.

[Thracian]

But a lot of leave supporters won't be happy to hear that. They want johnny Foreigner out.

 

 

You're speaking for a lot of people you don't know and a stance which I do't honestly think has been reflected in general. You just seem happy to give that impression.  

[Guest]

You're speaking for a lot of people you don't know and a stance which I do't honestly think has been reflected in general. You just seem happy to give that impression.  

 

It was reflected in all the news I watched.

[Alf Bentley]

The Foreign Secretary on pending trade/Brexit negotiations: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3678776/Britain-needs-boost-trade-negotiating-resources-says-Hammond.html

 

On lack of trade negotiators:

"The government will have to acquire additional trade negotiation resources ... We will look to friendly governments to assist us, as well as seeking to hire the best resources available on the open market," Hammond told a committee of lawmakers.

He said the economic and fiscal impact of Brexit in the short term would reduce government revenues, making it unlikely his department would receive a significant funding boost".

 

 

On our "strong negotiating position" vis-à-vis the 2-year negotiating deadline:

"Hammond also said he hoped an early agreement could be reached on reciprocal residency rights for EU citizens in Britain and Britons living in the EU.

He said that while he had not heard any EU partners say they would not agree to this, there was an "Article 50 stand off".

Other EU states saying they will not hold preliminary talks before the formal process for leaving is triggered is preventing progress being made on this and other issues, he said".

[Thracian]

It was reflected in all the news I watched.

 

 

 

Ummmmmm - enough said! 

[GaelicFox]

Feckers can't send me home LOL

http://irishpost.co.uk/ireland-act-1949-mean-everything-irish-britain/

[Strokes]

Feckers can't send me home LOL

http://irishpost.co.uk/ireland-act-1949-mean-everything-irish-britain/

God damn it! My vote was wasted

[LanguedocFox]

The expats issue is an interesting one. From an economic standpoint, many of these expats are collecting a uk pension, but then spending it abroad in Spain etc. Essentially money going out of the UK economy. Also there's a good chance that they come back to the UK for NHS care. Or they use their EHIC for treatment over there, which is then reimbursed by the NHS (if I understand that arrangement correctly).

 

So it would be interesting to see what the actual financial balance of returning expats would be.

 

All healthcare for British ex-pats is paid for by the UK Government through a global reimbursement. For example, here in France I have a Carte Vitale which entitles me to (roughly) 65% cover for all medical costs, and 100% costs for chronic or emergency treatment (for example, I am diabetic, so I get 100% cover). These costs go into a 'pot' with those of all other qualifying UK residents, which is set-off against NHS costs incurred by French UK residents, and the UK Government reimburses the balance to the French Government. At the moment

 

To that extent, there would be little difference to the UK. However, my point is that French healthcare is well resourced and well staffed. If loads of elderly Brits come back, and lots of youngish EU HNS employees go in the opposite direction, the additional burden on the (already understaffed and under-resourced) NHS will be crippling, irrespective of the money involved.

 

Still, as Ms Leadsom said today, we need to banish the pessimists, so I won't be allowed back anyway.

[LanguedocFox]

I haven't got much time today, but here's a Wiki list of Germany's trading partners by volume (2013), which gives a rough idea:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_Germany

 

So, in 2013 we were Germany's 3rd biggest destination for exports, behind France and USA, just ahead of Netherlands and China. But, if you look at the figures, Germany's exports were reasonably well spread, so not massively vulnerable to any single trading partner (inc. UK).

 

I've no doubt Germany - and the EU generally - will want to do a deal. I'm just challenging the idea of some Brexiters that we're in a strong negotiating position. Yes, Germany might be one of the nations that is prepared to be more flexible. But we won't be negotiating with Germany. We'll be negotiating with the EU, after all 27 nations have agreed a joint negotiating stance (without us in the room)....and that's before you consider the political dimension. The EU faces an upsurge of Euroscepticism and doesn't want to encourage this by handing out generous deals to countries that leave....particularly not when Hollande & Merkel both face elections next year, and are hard-pressed by Eurosceptic/nationalist parties in their own countries.

 

I did read somewhere else that, in the EU, we actually only have a trade deficit with Germany and the Netherlands. We have a surplus with every other EU member. According to Brexiter logic, then, France, Italy, Ireland and the rest are in a strong negotiating position compared to us and we'll be obliged to offer them all a generous deal to protect our exports. I disagree.

 

Take Ireland as an example: I don't think the Irish are in a strong position because we send them more exports than they send us (Brexiter logic). I think they're in a vulnerable position because a much larger percentage of Irish trade is with the UK, compared to the percentage of UK trade that is with Ireland. Likewise, our trade deficit with the EU is less significant than the comparative importance of that trade to the UK and the EU. Taking exports alone, as Brexiters like to focus on German car exports: 16% of EU exports go to the UK; 45% of UK exports go to the EU, All will want a deal, but that's not a strong negotiating position, particularly with a 2-year clock running once Article 50 is triggered.

 

Good points Alf, especially this one.

 

The UK is in a very weak negotiating position given our vulnerability to fluctuations in the international financial markets: we need the open market, and to get that we will have to agree to the Four Freedoms - including free movement of people.

 

Apparently France has overtaken the UK as the world's fifth largest economy, simply on the basis of the fall in the value of UK stock markets and of the pound in the past two weeks. This is big news here, and Hollande is going to use his position as someone at the heart of Europe to drive a hard bargain with the UK. Although he is unlikely to come out and say it directly, the ideal for France is for the UK to leave the EU without free-market access, because he would then be able to attract UK financial businesses to Paris. He could use this as a way of stuffing Le Pen and the Fronte Nationale.

 

Oddly enough, I think the UK would be in a stronger position if the future Prime Minister (please not Leadsom) says she is not going to activate Article 50 - yet - but is going to take the Referendum result as a mandate to persuade the rest of the EU leaders to cut bureaucracy, reduce costs, slim down the European Commission, and introducing a new régime of accountability. It would be difficult for Merkel or Hollande to argue against that, and it would be supported by most other countries. It would take guts, of course, which is a quality lacking in our politicians at the moment, but it would make the UK much stronger.

[Webbo]

Good points Alf, especially this one.

 

The UK is in a very weak negotiating position given our vulnerability to fluctuations in the international financial markets: we need the open market, and to get that we will have to agree to the Four Freedoms - including free movement of people.

 

Apparently France has overtaken the UK as the world's fifth largest economy, simply on the basis of the fall in the value of UK stock markets and of the pound in the past two weeks. This is big news here, and Hollande is going to use his position as someone at the heart of Europe to drive a hard bargain with the UK. Although he is unlikely to come out and say it directly, the ideal for France is for the UK to leave the EU without free-market access, because he would then be able to attract UK financial businesses to Paris. He could use this as a way of stuffing Le Pen and the Fronte Nationale.

 

Oddly enough, I think the UK would be in a stronger position if the future Prime Minister (please not Leadsom) says she is not going to activate Article 50 - yet - but is going to take the Referendum result as a mandate to persuade the rest of the EU leaders to cut bureaucracy, reduce costs, slim down the European Commission, and introducing a new régime of accountability. It would be difficult for Merkel or Hollande to argue against that, and it would be supported by most other countries. It would take guts, of course, which is a quality lacking in our politicians at the moment, but it would make the UK much stronger.

If I seriously believed that was going to happen I'd be happy to see another referendum. The EU is unreformable though.

[LanguedocFox]

If I seriously believed that was going to happen I'd be happy to see another referendum. The EU is unreformable though.

 

On what basis do you think the EU is unreformable? In the 1970s, people said the UK unions were unreformable, but Thatcher proved them wrong.  As I say, reform will take guts, and we've seen with Cameron and Johnson that guts are in short supply.

 

And the concept of using the Referendum as a mandate for the UK to demand reform means there is no need for another one. Remember that this Referundum result was not binding - it was advisory.

[Webbo]

On what basis do you think the EU is unreformable? In the 1970s, people said the UK unions were unreformable, but Thatcher proved them wrong.  As I say, reform will take guts, and we've seen with Cameron and Johnson that guts are in short supply.

 

And the concept of using the Referendum as a mandate for the UK to demand reform means there is no need for another one. Remember that this Referundum result was not binding - it was advisory.

Too many of the people who run the EU  don't want reform. They're he'll bent on a United States of Europe. Even if that wasn't the case the countries in it are too diverse to agree on anything so either nothing gets done or countries have policies that don't suit them imposed upon them.

 

As for the referendum, if you ignore the democratic vote of the majority there's going to be trouble.

[Strokes]

One major issue stems from the fact that the vast majority (upwards of 90%) of the two million or so Brits who live in the EU are older people - ie, over the age of 60 - while about 10% of the employees of the NHS are EU immigrants.

 

Now, not all ex-pat Brits will want to come back to the UK, but the majority will - as I know from personal experience. And maybe not all of the EU immigrants working for the NHS will want to go back to their home countries. But it's likely that a majority will do so.

 

Given that older people tend to suffer from more illnesses than younger people, this will impose an additional burden on an already understaffed and under-funded NHS. How fortunate that we will have the additional £350 million a week to help deal with this issue.

This article suggest that figure is much lower http://www.expatforum.com/general-considerations/british-born-expats-are-more-likely-to-be-retired-survey-finds.html

I'm not sure of its accuracy, can you tell where you got upwards of 90% from?

[Alf Bentley]

This article suggest that figure is much lower http://www.expatforum.com/general-considerations/british-born-expats-are-more-likely-to-be-retired-survey-finds.html

I'm not sure of its accuracy, can you tell where you got upwards of 90% from?

 

 

I don't have such figures to hand or the time to look for them. However.....

 

It occurred to me that this figure will vary greatly from country to country. In Spain & Portugal, it will be very high (mainly retired Brits on the Costas, Algarve etc.), France will probably be a mixed picture (a lot of retirees on the Côte d'Azur & Dordogne, but many of working age in Paris etc.). In Germany & Netherlands, although there will be a much lower number of Brits, they will predominantly be people there for work and their families, I reckon.

 

This will affect the negotiations - initially, probably, the negotiations among the EU27 before they bring a joint negotiating stance to the table with us. Brits abroad won't be a burden on health services in most EU countries, but this will be a big issue for Spain & Portugal, and maybe a small issue for France & Italy. On the other hand, it won't be an issue for Germany/NL and countries like Poland & Romania will probably be very keen on a reciprocal agreement so as to avoid losing migrant revenues and suddenly having a lot of their nationals returning home from the UK, when there might not be jobs - or decent jobs - for many of them.

 

Whether those divergences are resolved during negotiations among the EU27 or through their Brexit negotiations with us, I'm not sure.

[The Guvnor]

On what basis do you think the EU is unreformable? In the 1970s, people said the UK unions were unreformable, but Thatcher proved them wrong.  As I say, reform will take guts, and we've seen with Cameron and Johnson that guts are in short supply.

 

And the concept of using the Referendum as a mandate for the UK to demand reform means there is no need for another one. Remember that this Referundum result was not binding - it was advisory.

 

Having witnessed the miners strike in 1984 I don't think reform is the right choice of words, she battered them literally with the police and army, and lets face it that was the death (regarding clout) of nearly all unions in this country, I say nearly all maybe the RMT can be considered an exception as they can bring the capital to a standstill, 45K + for a train driver not too bad a wage.

[Thracian]

No mention of the ridiculous guidance they got from the Marxist Scargill.

 

Politicising the workplace is like infecting it with a voluntary cancer.

 

Everyone loses. The politically motivated class war which some trades unions sought to foster - and the unreliability of British workers encouraged by those communistic union agitators  - saw so much manufacturing lost including the closure of shipbuilding yards, coal mines, vehicle manufacturers and so on. Well done to one and all.

 

Marxism is a grossly flawed concept anyway so why anyone bothers trying to foist it on people I don't know.

 

What's needed in the workplace is a benevolent partnership.

 

It's not hard. One guy I know makes it work admirably with decent pay, profit sharing schemes, flexible hours and a genuine commitment to ongoing re-education and advancement.

 

Apart from exceptional circumstances, he doesn't allow overtime because he believes that time belongs to the family.

 

It's just about the same kind of attitude and commitment that's fostered Leicester City's success and that's down to leadership, recruitment and the establishment of an unbending team ethic involving all involved. 

 

 

 

 

 

 . 

[yorkie1999]

Having witnessed the miners strike in 1984 I don't think reform is the right choice of words, she battered them literally with the police and army, and lets face it that was the death (regarding clout) of nearly all unions in this country, I say nearly all maybe the RMT can be considered an exception as they can bring the capital to a standstill, 45K + for a train driver not too bad a wage.

And then paid them all off with huge tax payer funded redundancy packages.

[Captain...]

Good points Alf, especially this one.

 

The UK is in a very weak negotiating position given our vulnerability to fluctuations in the international financial markets: we need the open market, and to get that we will have to agree to the Four Freedoms - including free movement of people.

 

We are in a weaker position as a single nation, than as a massive conglomerate of nations, but leaving the EU gives us flexibility and choice, we will just have to wait and see if that is just the choice in how we get fvcked over by other nations who will already have trade deals with the EU and will be able to continue to deal with our European competitors on favourable terms while we hurry to get deals done. The fact that we haven't negotiated a trade deal for years and are having to draft in foreign negotiators to negotiate with the EU doesn't fill me with confidence that we will be able to quickly negotiate beneficial trade deals with the EU and every other nation on the planet.

 

Apparently France has overtaken the UK as the world's fifth largest economy, simply on the basis of the fall in the value of UK stock markets and of the pound in the past two weeks. This is big news here, and Hollande is going to use his position as someone at the heart of Europe to drive a hard bargain with the UK. Although he is unlikely to come out and say it directly, the ideal for France is for the UK to leave the EU without free-market access, because he would then be able to attract UK financial businesses to Paris. He could use this as a way of stuffing Le Pen and the Fronte Nationale.

 

Oddly enough, I think the UK would be in a stronger position if the future Prime Minister (please not Leadsom) says she is not going to activate Article 50 - yet - but is going to take the Referendum result as a mandate to persuade the rest of the EU leaders to cut bureaucracy, reduce costs, slim down the European Commission, and introducing a new régime of accountability. It would be difficult for Merkel or Hollande to argue against that, and it would be supported by most other countries. It would take guts, of course, which is a quality lacking in our politicians at the moment, but it would make the UK much stronger.

 

It would be interesting to see if that happened.

 

This was what frustrated me so much about the pathetic reforms Cameron tried to negotiate, small minded small term concessions to try and appease the masses who rightly disregarded them as bollocks, they were hardly mentioned in the remain campaigning.

 

It should have been going to the EU looking at reforms to the EU as a whole and not just getting "special benefits" for Britain. One would be a restructuring of the European Parliament to at least give people the chance to vote for the EP party/voting block they want, and not be forced to only vote for a UK party none of which are members of the biggest voting block in the EP. Making our votes largely irrelevant. Another would have been to negotiate freedom of movement terms for the whole EU and not just some benefit related bollocks specific to the UK and a some new eastern European EU members. For example basing the benefits model on the Healthcare model, any benefits taken by EU residents in the UK is claimed back from that person's country of birth and offset against benefits claimed by UK citizens in said country (and possibly income tax taken from migrants a portion of which goes into the EU pot).

 

Larger reforms to make the EU better for everyone rather than trying to make Britain "special"

[Webbo]

We are in a weaker position as a single nation, than as a massive conglomerate of nations, but leaving the EU gives us flexibility and choice, we will just have to wait and see if that is just the choice in how we get fvcked over by other nations who will already have trade deals with the EU and will be able to continue to deal with our European competitors on favourable terms while we hurry to get deals done. The fact that we haven't negotiated a trade deal for years and are having to draft in foreign negotiators to negotiate with the EU doesn't fill me with confidence that we will be able to quickly negotiate beneficial trade deals with the EU and every other nation on the planet.

 

 

It would be interesting to see if that happened.

 

This was what frustrated me so much about the pathetic reforms Cameron tried to negotiate, small minded small term concessions to try and appease the masses who rightly disregarded them as bollocks, they were hardly mentioned in the remain campaigning.

 

It should have been going to the EU looking at reforms to the EU as a whole and not just getting "special benefits" for Britain. One would be a restructuring of the European Parliament to at least give people the chance to vote for the EP party/voting block they want, and not be forced to only vote for a UK party none of which are members of the biggest voting block in the EP. Making our votes largely irrelevant. Another would have been to negotiate freedom of movement terms for the whole EU and not just some benefit related bollocks specific to the UK and a some new eastern European EU members. For example basing the benefits model on the Healthcare model, any benefits taken by EU residents in the UK is claimed back from that person's country of birth and offset against benefits claimed by UK citizens in said country (and possibly income tax taken from migrants a portion of which goes into the EU pot).

 

Larger reforms to make the EU better for everyone rather than trying to make Britain "special"

Did any other country ask for reform? Wasn't it the govts of the other EU 27 countries who told us we couldn't get what we wanted?

Let's not pretend the rest of the EU were unaware we wanted reform until recently, no encouragement was forthcoming.

[Captain...]

Did any other country ask for reform? Wasn't it the govts of the other EU 27 countries who told us we couldn't get what we wanted?

Let's not pretend the rest of the EU were unaware we wanted reform until recently, no encouragement was forthcoming.

 

What we wanted was mainly special reforms for the UK the reforms on Competitiveness were the most well received as they were about the EU as a whole and Cameron, according to the BBC, got more than he was asking for. All the other reforms he got less than originally wanted as they were all specific to giving Britain an advantage.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105

 

Competitiveness:

What Cameron wanted: A target for the reduction of the "burden" of excessive regulation and extending the single market.

What the draft deal said: "The EU must increase efforts towards enhancing competitiveness, along the lines set out in the Declaration of the European Council on competitiveness. To this end the relevant EU institutions and the member states will make all efforts to strengthen the internal market….this means lowering administrative burdens."

What the final deal said: Similar language but a promise to establish "where feasible burden reduction targets in key sectors, with commitments by EU institutions and Member States.

Assessment: This was the least controversial of the government's demands - and Mr Cameron got more than he was offered in the draft document, with the target to cut red tape. Such promises have been made before, however, without being matched by reality.

 

The EU can be reformed, but not by 1 country wanting to distance itself from the principles of the EU.

[Guest MattP]

Did any other country ask for reform? Wasn't it the govts of the other EU 27 countries who told us we couldn't get what we wanted?

Let's not pretend the rest of the EU were unaware we wanted reform until recently, no encouragement was forthcoming.

 

It's frankly bizarre anyone can still bang the "reform" drum.

 

We tried to get reform, even with close polling and a threat to leave we couldn't get anything close to meaningful reform, the idea we would have tried to work towards it after giving the EU a big thumps up doesn't even pass the straight face test, let alone any serious political point.

 

The people preaching this are the ones who were clinging onto deckchairs on the Titanic.