Brexit Discussion Thread.

[Jon the Hat]

Some of you are very confused.  You don't have to be in the single market to have access to the single market.  You can have access to the single market with tariffs, or indeed without if you agree a free trade deal with the EU after leaving which is perfectly possible.  We could also agree to a new customs union with the EU, like Turkey has, to reduce admin burden on movements within European supply chains for example.

Meanwhile the fact that people like to take the government to court doesnt mean they are right, and even if they are right, MPs will absolutely vote to trigger article 50, and indeed to leave the EEA if needed.  The fact is that if legal opinion decides we don't automatically leave the EEA (highly unlikely to be upheld in European Parliament I think) that probably puts in a stronger negotiating position if anything.

 

[Alf Bentley]

2 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Some of you are very confused.  You don't have to be in the single market to have access to the single market.  You can have access to the single market with tariffs, or indeed without if you agree a free trade deal with the EU after leaving which is perfectly possible.  We could also agree to a new customs union with the EU, like Turkey has, to reduce admin burden on movements within European supply chains for example.

Meanwhile the fact that people like to take the government to court doesnt mean they are right, and even if they are right, MPs will absolutely vote to trigger article 50, and indeed to leave the EEA if needed.  The fact is that if legal opinion decides we don't automatically leave the EEA (highly unlikely to be upheld in European Parliament I think) that probably puts in a stronger negotiating position if anything.

 

 

Your first point about access to the single market is spot on - which is why it's utterly meaningless for politicians to talk about negotiating "access to the single market", as many of them do. Almost any country can have "access to the single market". China has access to the single market. The question is what are the terms for access to the single market? 

 

Re. Turkey and the Customs Union: This could certainly have advantages, depending on the precise content. But my understanding is that the Govt has almost ruled it out? In particular, this is because membership of such a customs union would prevent us from doing our own trade deals with third countries such as USA, China or Japan...and such independent trade deals supposedly underpin the Govt's whole approach to life post-Brexit. It's also worth noting that the Turkey-EU customs deal largely relates to industrial exports, not services. That suits the Turks who mainly export industrial products - but the UK mainly exports services, doesn't it?

 

Maybe we'd be able to negotiate some different and beneficial customs union with the EU. But then you have to ask, what would be in it for the EU, as a whole? They wouldn't sign up to anything that was not beneficial to them - or to anything that undermined the EU as a whole. For that matter, the 27 individual EU member countries wouldn't sign up to anything that was harmful to their national interests.....could be very hard to negotiate a UK-EU customs union that was beneficial to us.

 

[Webbo]

4 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Your first point about access to the single market is spot on - which is why it's utterly meaningless for politicians to talk about negotiating "access to the single market", as many of them do. Almost any country can have "access to the single market". China has access to the single market. The question is what are the terms for access to the single market? 

 

Re. Turkey and the Customs Union: This could certainly have advantages, depending on the precise content. But my understanding is that the Govt has almost ruled it out? In particular, this is because membership of such a customs union would prevent us from doing our own trade deals with third countries such as USA, China or Japan...and such independent trade deals supposedly underpin the Govt's whole approach to life post-Brexit. It's also worth noting that the Turkey-EU customs deal largely relates to industrial exports, not services. That suits the Turks who mainly export industrial products - but the UK mainly exports services, doesn't it?

 

Maybe we'd be able to negotiate some different and beneficial customs union with the EU. But then you have to ask, what would be in it for the EU, as a whole? They wouldn't sign up to anything that was not beneficial to them - or to anything that undermined the EU as a whole. For that matter, the 27 individual EU member countries wouldn't sign up to anything that was harmful to their national interests.....could be very hard to negotiate a UK-EU customs union that was beneficial to us.

 

They'd be able to trade with their biggest export partner hassle free.

[Alf Bentley]

11 minutes ago, Webbo said:

They'd be able to trade with their biggest export partner hassle free.

 

Here's an apparently independent discussion of this: https://fullfact.org/europe/where-does-eu-export/

 

It says that 16% of EU exports of goods go to the UK (15% to the USA). It partly backs up your claim as the UK is just about the EU's largest export market of goods....if you ignore Germany, which would be higher.

But that ignores trade in services, a key money-spinner for the UK. What deal would we get on that? It doesn't matter to the Turks, but it does to us.

It also describes the current situation....EU exports to the UK could decline if trading terms under a customs union weren't as good as under the single market. I'd assume that EU exports to the UK will shrink a little next year, anyway, due to the exchange rate.

 

There's also the little matter that, while we take 16% of EU exports of goods, the EU takes about 45% of UK exports....so who's in the stronger bargaining position there?

 

I'm not suggesting that we have no bargaining chips to play. We do. It's just that our opponents have a lot more. And that's ignoring the political motivation for the EU to avoid doing any deal perceived as beneficial to the UK.

They know that such a deal would only encourage Eurosceptics and nationalists in their own countries. The very survival of the EU might depend on them NOT negotiating a Brexit deal beneficial to the UK.

 

And wouldn't Brexiteers be pissed off at anything like the Turkish deal? No independent trade deals with US, China etc? Acceptance of the legal dominance of the European Court of Justice? 

[Webbo]

8 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Here's an apparently independent discussion of this: https://fullfact.org/europe/where-does-eu-export/

 

It says that 16% of EU exports of goods go to the UK (15% to the USA). It partly backs up your claim as the UK is just about the EU's largest export market of goods....if you ignore Germany, which would be higher.

But that ignores trade in services, a key money-spinner for the UK. What deal would we get on that? It doesn't matter to the Turks, but it does to us.

It also describes the current situation....EU exports to the UK could decline if trading terms under a customs union weren't as good as under the single market. I'd assume that EU exports to the UK will shrink a little next year, anyway, due to the exchange rate.

 

There's also the little matter that, while we take 16% of EU exports of goods, the EU takes about 45% of UK exports....so who's in the stronger bargaining position there?

 

I'm not suggesting that we have no bargaining chips to play. We do. It's just that our opponents have a lot more. And that's ignoring the political motivation for the EU to avoid doing any deal perceived as beneficial to the UK.

They know that such a deal would only encourage Eurosceptics and nationalists in their own countries. The very survival of the EU might depend on them NOT negotiating a Brexit deal beneficial to the UK.

 

And wouldn't Brexiteers be pissed off at anything like the Turkish deal? No independent trade deals with US, China etc? Acceptance of the legal dominance of the European Court of Justice? 

I was reading an article today that said that the EU needs access to London to sell it's debts, I'm not an expert on financial trading so I don't know if that's true but it's a good reason to not to make it too complicated .

 

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/11/britain-holds-the-aces-in-brexit-talks/   It's the Spectator so I'm not claiming it's unbiased, make your own mind up.

 

There'd be no point accepting a Turkish style deal but we're far more important than Turkey, we'll get a better deal than them.

[Alf Bentley]

30 minutes ago, Webbo said:

 

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/11/britain-holds-the-aces-in-brexit-talks/   It's the Spectator so I'm not claiming it's unbiased, make your own mind up.

 

 

Not a bad article. It certainly makes some sound points about the vulnerabilities of the EU - and about the strong political position that May is currently in.

But the very vulnerabilities of the EU could make it more inclined to adopt a hard line out of self-defence - or could make it harder for the EU to reach a position agreed by all 27 nations, leaving the two-year time-bomb ticking....

 

May's strong political position could quickly become diluted, too, if the economy takes a downturn in 2017 and Brexit negotiations start looking tricky. Labour and UKIP are both in the doldrums, but that only really matters if she opts for an early general election, which she's ruled out so far. Without an early election, she has a tiny majority and already has rebels in her own ranks....imagine if inflation surges, unemployment starts to rise, the EU is taking a hard line in negotiations...her strong position could quickly evaporate.  

[Bettsj2]

Yeah to be honest it's all starting to be a bit of a ballache so may as well stay in.

[Innovindil]

9 hours ago, Bettsj2 said:

Yeah to be honest it's all starting to be a bit of a ballache so may as well stay in.

Nothing worth doing ever came easy. 

[Strokes]

10 hours ago, Bettsj2 said:

Yeah to be honest it's all starting to be a bit of a ballache so may as well stay in.

Its almost as hard as trying to get out of a gym contract.

[Jon the Hat]

I dont think we will have a final trade deal with the EU when we leave.  More likely we have 2-3 years of further negotiations before we get tariff free access.  It wont impact exports too much as the lower £ helps, and we wont impose tariffs on imports, which would be completely within our control, and limit price increases.  EU rules would only apply to the approximately 10% of our total economic activity which is export to the EU, leaving us plenty of room to increase exports to the rest of the world free of the admin burden.  

[davieG]

Eddie Izzard and Wetherspoons among Brexit vote spenders

2 hours ago

 

From the sectionUK Politics

Share

Image copyrightPA

Image captionThe comedian and activist was a prominent figure at remain rallies during the campaign

Comedian Eddie Izzard spent £36,229 on his campaign to keep the UK in the EU, official details of spending in this summer's referendum show.

The Labour activist was among Remain supporters who spent less than £250,000 during the campaign, according to the Electoral Commission.

Unite union spent £140,173 while the National Farmers Union spent £73,565.

Leave backers included Sun publisher News Group Newspapers with £96,898 and pub chain JD Wetherspoon £94,586.

Tim Martin, the boss of Wetherspoon, was one of the most outspoken supporters of Brexit in the business community. His pubs launched an advertising campaign attacking the European Commission and other organisations such as the IMF on their beer mats.

Figures published on Tuesday largely cover registered individuals and campaign groups who spent between £10,000 and £250,000 during the referendum campaign.

Image copyrightREUTERS

Image captionWetherspoons founder Tim Martin made the case for a Leave vote

Details of expenditure by the official two lead campaigns - Vote Leave and Britain Stronger in Europe - and the majority of campaigners which reported spending of more than £250,000 will be released next year.

Mr Izzard, a longstanding Labour supporter who has said he would like to run for London Mayor one day, was a prominent figure during the campaign and its aftermath - addressing a number of pro-Remain rallies.

It is not clear whether he funded his campaign himself or whether he relied on donations from others. In total, Remain supporters reporting expenditure under the £250,000 threshold spent £2,917m, compared with the £1,901m spent by those supporting Leave.

Leading Remain supporters included telecoms firm Lebara, which spent £220,573, business lobby group London First which spent £101,655 and the City of London Corporation, £48,612. Others to support a Remain vote included the CWU trade union with £86,543, German photographer Wolfgang Tillmans spent £33,758 and Universities UK, which lobbies on behalf of leading universities, £69,365.

On the Leave side, prominent backers included the Grassroots Out movement, spending £219,215, the Freedom Association, £90,341 and Veterans for Britain spending £146,945.

The largest single reported spend on either side in this category was the £676,016 attributed to Darren Grimes, who submitted his invoices early - the larger spending amounts do not have to be registered until just before Christmas.

In August, it was reported that Vote Leave gave £625,000 to the fashion design student in the days before the EU referendum to persuade young voters to opt for Brexit. Mr Grimes is now head of digital for the Brexit Central website.

The Conservative Party remained neutral in the referendum but the figures show the Conservative Group for Europe spent less than £10,000. The Labour Movement for Europe spent £11,309 while the Green Party spent £48,815 on a remain vote.

The Electoral Commission said the figures were a vital part of ensuring "transparency and accountability both in how campaigners obtained funds as well as how they spent them".

[GazzinderFox]

16 minutes ago, davieG said:

Mr Izzard, a longstanding Labour supporter who has said he would like to run for London Mayor one day, was a prominent figure during the campaign and its aftermath - addressing a number of pro-Remain rallies.

It is not clear whether he funded his campaign himself or whether he relied on donations from others.

Probably not the best money he ever spent. Next time he might want to give twice that amount to the other side and keep his mug off the telly, it might help his cause more!

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

2 hours ago, GazzinderFox said:

Probably not the best money he ever spent. Next time he might want to give twice that amount to the other side and keep his mug off the telly, it might help his cause more!

Eddy Izzard is just total wally. and is just deadwood.

[davieG]

Brexit: UK ready to 'buy in' trade experts

2 hours ago

 

From the sectionUK Politics

Share

Image captionOfficials said their department had grown in size in recent months

The UK is retraining civil servants as post-Brexit trade negotiators but is also set to "buy in" expertise from outside, a top official has told MPs.

The UK's capacity to negotiate trade deals with other countries after Brexit has been queried, with up to 100 staff needed alone for a single agreement.

Oliver Griffiths said negotiators were not "mythical creatures" and current staff had many of the skills required.

But he said the civil service would need to recruit "across the piece".

Whitehall is expected to have to recruit thousands - as many as 30,000 according to a recent internal Deloitte's assessment - of civil servants to deal with the challenge of extricating the UK from the EU after June's referendum vote.

There are particular concerns about a shortage of trade negotiators, given that many of the UK's most experienced professionals in this field are currently working for the EU - which arranges trade deals for all member states including the UK - and are not guaranteed to return.

'Experienced core'

Giving evidence to MPs on the international trade select committee, senior officials said they were "ramping up" their operations in light of the Brexit vote - with the new international trade department led by Liam Fox now employing 2,700 staff.

Mr Griffiths, the department's director of trade policy capability, said the UK had 45 trade policy experts at the time of the referendum vote and this number was now "100 up on that".

Image copyrightPA

Image captionThe UK cannot negotiate any third party trade deals until it leaves the EU

"We start from a core that was strong on trade policy... albeit that being a support position for the European Commission," he said.

Although there was more to trade policy than negotiating bilateral agreements, Mr Norton acknowledged that reaching deals with countries outside the EU after Brexit would draw heavily on the department's resources in the coming years.

"A free trade agreement is typically 20 to 30 chapters, covering a particular area like agriculture or services," he explained. "You would tend to have an individual that is leading at that chapter level - a specialist that understands that policy area very well.

"You will then have a level of deputies that will provide the co-ordination and oversight of the text that is being produced and then you will have a chief negotiator that sits at the top. It is a pyramid structure and you can imagine a free trade agreement team being 50 to 100 people."

'Mythical creature'

As it looked to supplement its already "experienced" team, Mr Griffiths said the civil service's "strong preference" was to recruit internally - meaning training existing civil servants rather than recruiting negotiators from other countries.

But he added: "We have an important decision to make which is effectively do we buy or build. The focus of our recruitment to date has almost exclusively been from Whitehall. But what that puts is a huge weight in terms of up-skilling and training.

"We have a trade faculty that has been set up by the Foreign Office that is going to be playing a huge role."

Asked by SNP MP Angus MacNeil, who chairs the committee, whether the UK was simply replacing an experienced Brussels-based bureaucracy with a less experienced London-based one, Mr Griffiths said there was a danger trade negotiators were being seen as "mythical creatures".

To be a negotiator, he said, people had to understand the policy areas at stake and to have the experience and skills to "carry out a negotiation in a very complex multi-stakeholder environment".

"We have done a lot of the latter in the civil service in the past but I think it would be a mistake to just look at the civil service," he added.

"As we move into that open and detailed negotiation phase, we will certainly be looking to have posts that are open to the best and brightest in both the public and private sectors."

[Jon the Hat]

We will certainly need a few trade negotiators.  I believe there might be some sort of talent pool in Brussels whose TTIP just fell off the table?

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

We will certainly need a few trade negotiators.  I believe there might be some sort of talent pool in Brussels whose TTIP just fell off the table?

Would they take our money or just dismiss it as the classical thirty pieces of silver?

 

Actually, don't answer that.

[leicsmac]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-37777729

 

Another key STEM project that might get mothballed on account of Brexit?

 

There's been a lot of talk about projects like this being somehow protected financially when the time comes, but some more solid reassurances might not go amiss, given the importance of such work.

 

You know, because the UK really thinks scientific research is "important" and all that.

[Alf Bentley]

Looks like Boris has been going off message again or getting confused between truth and fiction.

 

Let's hope somebody knows what they're doing. The nature of those handwritten notes that the press managed to photograph suggests not - debate on here is at a higher level.

 

http://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-supports-freedom-of-movement-in-brexit-10678355

"Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has privately told at least four EU ambassadors that he supports freedom of movement - despite the Government's hard stance on Brexit.

The high-ranking diplomats were speaking under the Chatham House rule, which allows their comments to be reported, but not directly attributed".

[Innovindil]

41 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

Looks like Boris has been going off message again or getting confused between truth and fiction.

 

Let's hope somebody knows what they're doing. The nature of those handwritten notes that the press managed to photograph suggests not - debate on here is at a higher level.

 

http://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-supports-freedom-of-movement-in-brexit-10678355

"Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has privately told at least four EU ambassadors that he supports freedom of movement - despite the Government's hard stance on Brexit.

The high-ranking diplomats were speaking under the Chatham House rule, which allows their comments to be reported, but not directly attributed".

In response to the accusations, a spokesman for the Foreign Secretary said: "Boris said what he has said many times before - he is pro-immigration but wants to take back control to limit numbers.

"He did not say he supported freedom of movement and challenges anyone to show proof that he ever said that."

 

On to the next non-story. Many, if not most,  support immigration with limits. 

[Alf Bentley]

17 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

In response to the accusations, a spokesman for the Foreign Secretary said: "Boris said what he has said many times before - he is pro-immigration but wants to take back control to limit numbers.

"He did not say he supported freedom of movement and challenges anyone to show proof that he ever said that."

 

On to the next non-story. Many, if not most,  support immigration with limits. 

 

I haven't got the time to get involved in yet another debate about immigration - and support immigration with limits myself.

 

I'm sure there's no proof of what Boris said (ambassadors are unlikely to make secret recordings of discussions with the Foreign Secretary, I presume).

 

In the absence of proof either way, we can decide who we believe. We can choose to believe the 4 ambassadors.

Or we can choose to believe Boris, the bloke who was sacked as a journalist for lying, who was sacked as a minister for lying, who prepared Leave and Remain speeches, who promised that we'd be negotiating new trade deals as soon as we voted Leave, who promised an extra £350m per week for the NHS, who scared us with the prospect of Turkey joining the EU....and who was recently ridiculed for publicly offering to help Turkey to join the EU. 

[Innovindil]

18 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I haven't got the time to get involved in yet another debate about immigration - and support immigration with limits myself.

 

I'm sure there's no proof of what Boris said (ambassadors are unlikely to make secret recordings of discussions with the Foreign Secretary, I presume).

 

In the absence of proof either way, we can decide who we believe. We can choose to believe the 4 ambassadors.

Or we can choose to believe Boris, the bloke who was sacked as a journalist for lying, who was sacked as a minister for lying, who prepared Leave and Remain speeches, who promised that we'd be negotiating new trade deals as soon as we voted Leave, who promised an extra £350m per week for the NHS, who scared us with the prospect of Turkey joining the EU....and who was recently ridiculed for publicly offering to help Turkey to join the EU. 

And you are welcome to that belief, and I'm inclined to agree with it, but it's hypocritical to accuse someone of "getting confused between truth and fiction" yet buying what was said by ambassadors who have their own agenda hook line and sinker. Better to stick to facts about Boris imo.  (of which there are many negatives as you pointed out)

[SMX11]

There is a difference between freedom of movement of workers and freedom of citizenship. However Boris is clearly a reluctant leaver (for personal gain which backfired).

[davieG]

Net migration has stayed near record levels, standing at 335,000 in the year to June, the Office for National Statistics has said.

There was also a record number of EU citizens coming to live in Britain with the figure standing at 284,000.

Net migration - immigration minus emigration - was the second-highest number on record.

Immigration minister Robert Goodwill said the government was "committed to getting net migration down".

The ONS says the net migration figure is similar to the previous year, although it was up slightly on the 12 months ending in March, when it stood at 326,000.

Immigration to the UK has also risen to a record level with 650,000 migrants in the year to June.

Net migration from the EU was the highest figure on record with the number standing at 189,000.

'An abject failure'

Mr Goodwill said the British people had sent out a "clear message" they want more control on immigration and the government was committed to getting numbers down to "the tens of thousands".

He added: "That is why reducing the number of migrants coming to the UK will be a key priority of our negotiations to leave the EU."

[Alf Bentley]

56 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

And you are welcome to that belief, and I'm inclined to agree with it, but it's hypocritical to accuse someone of "getting confused between truth and fiction" yet buying what was said by ambassadors who have their own agenda hook line and sinker. Better to stick to facts about Boris imo.  (of which there are many negatives as you pointed out)

 

Fair comment insofar as there's no proof either way. There often isn't. We'd be unable to form many opinions if we needed conclusive proof every time.

 

Boris has a long and proven track record of lying, so I'm disinclined to believe him above 4 unidentified ambassadors. I might be wrong. This might be an occasion on which he's telling the truth - and they could have their own agenda, as you say.

That's why I said "looks like" Boris had been confusing truth and fiction. I didn't "buy what the ambassadors said hook line and sinker", though. I'm just more inclined to believe them. Rather than referring to "truth and fiction", though, it would have been better if I'd referred to Boris confusing the importance of his ego with the importance of government policy. I can just imagine him talking to the ambassadors along these lines: "Of course, intelligent, free-thinking people like you and I know that border control is utter piffle but what can you do? The plebs want to keep Johnny Foreigner out, so poor old Boris has to oppose free movement, dash it!" 

[davieG]

David Davis: UK may pay for access to EU single market

41 minutes ago

 

From the sectionUK Politics

Share

The UK would consider making payments to the EU after it leaves the bloc to secure the best possible access to the EU single market, Brexit Secretary David Davis has said.

Mr Davis told MPs the "major criterion" was getting the best access for goods and services to the European market.

"And if that is included... then of course we would consider it."

He said reports Boris Johnson backed freedom of movement were "at odds" with what he knew of Mr Johnson's views.

According to Sky News the foreign secretary privately told four EU ambassadors he backed free movement.

Brexit: All you need to know

What are the UK's Brexit options?

But Mr Davis said: "What I've seen.. strikes me completely at odds with what I know about my right honourable friend's approach to this matter.

"He believes very clearly - and he made this very clear in the Leave campaign because he was a much more major part of it than I was. - that some immigration is useful. We all agree on that.

"That's not the same as thinking free movement of people as it now stands is a good idea. It's a problem."

During his regular session facing MPs in the Commons, Mr Davis was asked a number of questions about the shape of the future Brexit deal, including one from Labour MP Wayne David, who said: "Will the government consider making any contribution in any shape or form for access to the single market?"

Mr Davis replied: "The major criterion here is that we get the best possible access for goods and services to the European market - and if that is included in what you are talking about, then of course we will consider it."

Hilary Benn, the Labour chairman of the Commons Brexit Committee, urged the government to publish details of its negotiating plans, claiming MPs were "fed up" at the lack of detail.

Mr Davis argued that "the probable success of the negotiations depend very greatly on us being able to manage the information and keep what needs to be secret until the last minute secret".

He also confirmed that Article 50, which sparks the formal legal process for leaving the EU, will be triggered by 31 March, 2017.