Luckily, it wasn't my home, I was living in the UK for work so I was able to return to my own country. I'd have been looking at a much better situation career-wise if Brexit had never happened, that's for sure - it set me way back.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Luckily, it wasn't my home, I was living in the UK for work so I was able to return to my own country. I'd have been looking at a much better situation career-wise if Brexit had never happened, that's for sure - it set me way back.
It represents what the English thought, the same English people who now don't give a feck what Scots and NI people think or want, as you eloquently put it yourself.
That's such brilliant summary of some people's line of thought
The cheek of that wanker is incredible. He's the equivalent of a tourist in Thailand behaving like a twat with the reasoning that he's somehow financing this country and they need the likes of him.
"They have more to lose" because some areas will face a potential loss of British tourists. Hilarious negotiation position.
And he was our chief Brexit negotiator.
Is it any wonder why things have gone so badly...
The problem is that there isn't a lot of sexy things to highlight other than simplicity for EU citizens and companies. The benefits of the EU is that it makes very disruptive and costly things disappear but you can't really sell that to people that have never experienced international trade, supply chain management and regular cross border checks. Logically they/we don't care much about it because when the goods are on shop shelves we don't think about how it got there, how many people checked them, the amount of administration required or the time that it took.
Its certainly creaking at its foundations, and the EU will be worse off without the UK, especially if its a no deal departure! However most people I know who voted leave did so for a variety of different reasons, very few of these were related to economics. If I had to give an overall terminology I would say most leavers I know voted to press a re-set button, but some also believed they were pressing a fast forward button, in either case it seemed to involve 'time travel'... unfortunately the UK Politicians don't know how to operate the Tardis
Aha. Cool. Gotcha. Australia has plenty of problems of its own (when I was there Pauline Hanson got elected) but their healthcare system is so impressive. A good deal for doctors and patients, without costing the earth. I dunno why more European countries don't adopt similar models.
This gave me a decent chuckle!
I would strongly recommend reading this policy briefing released yesterday from the Ifo Institue (leading German economic think tank).
http://www.econpol.eu/sites/default/files/2019-01/EconPol_Policy_Brief_12_Brexit.pdf
To me, their proposed solution is a very fair compromise, even if seemingly completely politically unviable on both sides right now.
This is also their take on how a ‘no deal’ Brexit would play out at the Northern Irish border:
Interesting they think UK will just avoid having to implement a hard border in this emergency situation by reducing its WTO MFN tariffs to zero. What’s your take @JPRouve ? I think you have good insight on this stuff.
http://www.econpol.eu/sites/default/files/2019-01/EconPol_Policy_Brief_12_Brexit.pdf
To me, their proposed solution is a very fair compromise, even if seemingly completely politically unviable on both sides right now.
This is also their take on how a ‘no deal’ Brexit would play out at the Northern Irish border:
Interesting they think UK will just avoid having to implement a hard border in this emergency situation by reducing its WTO MFN tariffs to zero. What’s your take @JPRouve ? I think you have good insight on this stuff.
Could someone quickly explain why in the event of a no deal brexit the £39bn that is talked about is not payable?
Surely the fact that they have arrived at that figure demonstrates that the UK is indebted to the EU for it, but how come they wouldnt seem to be indebted to them for it in a no deal brexit scenario?
Surely the fact that they have arrived at that figure demonstrates that the UK is indebted to the EU for it, but how come they wouldnt seem to be indebted to them for it in a no deal brexit scenario?
It is still payable you just see Tories shift their language around on the matter, one week they'll say we need to pay our debts then when they want to look tough they'll use it as leverage. Just conning the public.
In the same way they'll talk about getting control of our borders and then saying we don't need one in NI. How long before the public work that one out
There is no doubt the UK owes this money for obligations it agreed to while a member of the EU, the question is whether it is legally enforceable in the absence of a ratified Withdrawal Agreement, and if so what legal body would have jurisdiction to enforce payment? There are competing views from international legal experts and no real consensus opinion.
The reality, in my opinion, is that even if the UK could not be legally forced to hand over the money following a ‘no deal’ Brexit, if it ever wants a trade deal with the EU, which Britain surely needs for its long-term economic viability, the EU’s precondition to opening negotiations would be ‘give us our fecking money first’.
How is it different from a debt you have to pay? If you close your credit card you still have to pay what you owe. At nation state level trust is everything. A country must honor it's agreements or it becomes undesirable for any kind of cooperation.
The using the 39 billion as a bargaining chip thing has to be one of the silliest things brought up during hte whole issue. Which is saying something considering how many stupid/false things have been said.
Thanks, thats interesting. Can you summarise their proposed solution?
I wonder how many of the 40 eu trade pacts Liam Fox has managed to replicate so far with just 56 days to go? 20? 30?
Well, I wouldn’t compare international treaty obligations to a credit card as I think it confuses things more than helps.
In the event that the UK witheld the divorce payment, it would likely argue that it is not a one way street and it is owed its share of European assets. The EU commited to obligations to the UK as well, which would be witheld. The UK would say it is not getting its share of capital back from the European Investment Bank etc
Unlikely this argument would hold any weight, but that’s probably what we’d try.
- The backstop provision in the withdrawal agreement is dropped.
- The United Kingdom permanently delegates all trade policy matters in goods to a newly created European Customs Association (ECA) in which the EU is also a member. Neither the EU nor the UK pursues independent trade policies, and the ECA represents them the World Trade Organization (WTO) in the same way as the EU has done until now for all 28 EU members.
- The UK has voting rights in the ECA, as do all other member states. Together with the other members of the ECA, it mandates the EU Commission to negotiate trade agreements with third parties.
- Decisions are taken with a double majority as defined in the Lisbon Treaty, and the European Court of Justice (in an extended form including all participating countries) continues to supervise all law- and policy-making in the field of trade.
- The ECA covers all ‘classical‘ areas of trade policy, such as tariffs, quotas, rules of origin, trade defense, etc. On these issues, the EU has exclusive competence.
- Areas in which the EU has no exclusive competence and in which countries have veto rights (trade in services, intellectual property, direct foreign investment, audiovisual and cultural services, and social, educational and health services), should not fall under the ECA. During a transition period, the pertinent provisions in the EU treaties continue to apply. For the future, arrangements in these areas are made by means of one or several supplementary bilateral agreements.
- In existing trade agreements with third parties, provisions pertaining to ‘classical‘ areas or areas covered by bilateral agreements continue to apply to the UK, as well as those currently or in future negotiated
Basically, the EU compromises on free movement of labour (they make arguments as to why the supposed indivisibility of the four freedoms should be reviewed in their policy paper), and the UK compromises on an autonomous trade policy and full regulatory control.
At this stage it’s completly unrealistic, in my opinion, that either side would be willing to give up these red lines. However, the paper makes a well reasoned detailed argument for why they should, and I think it’s interesting that a very prominent European economic think tank is publicly arguing this.
If the UK decides not to pay the £39bn it will affect gilt prices surely? The cost of borrowing is low because the UK is seen as a reliable and trustworthy partner that will pay its debts, if that ceases to be the case the cost of borrowing will rise accordingly.
By rights the Tory party should be finished once all this has played out. But somehow I dont expect it to happen.
By rights the Tory party should be finished once all this has played out. But somehow I dont expect it to happen.
So, what are you saying Col?
I'm wrong for posting news about a dangerous movement infiltrating British politics because the Queen might have different views?
If she's got it all under control then I'll just move along!
There's definitely a Lannister joke in there somewhere.
Something something UK fecks its sister.
Presumably there would be a legal battle / negotiations about the £39bn, not sure how jurisdiction would work exactly, probably need an expert in international law to figure it out.
I doubt it would effect the gilt market, no one is worried about nominal repayment of gilts as the government / BOE have full control of the pound.
So, by reducing its tarrifs to zero and systematically requiring zero qualitative checks outside of an FTA and CU, the UK would put themselves in a situation where they won't have FTAs and where everyone else will have the right to maintain their trade barriers. That's a pretty bad situation from an economic and consumer safety standpoint.
For the EU it would be different while ROI would be in a difficult situation, the rest of the EU is protected by the fact that Ireland is an island and custom checks can be done anywhere. Goods unfit for the EU market do not become fit because they entered it, they have to be cleared by customs which could be done in any custom office between ROI and the rest of the EU. Also customs debt wouldn't be extinguished, failure to comply with customs legislation would still lead to penalties for the importers or goods carriers. So I don't think that there would be issues with other WTO members.
I'm pretty sure that there would some issues to fix with ROI and a financial support would be needed but that part is a little bit complex for me.
It is precisely what the UK would argue, if there was a 'no deal' Brexit... the loss of the £39B is the most tangible part of the expected damage the EU would suffer from of going over the cliff edge, with us!
Thanks for the response.
To pick up on this paragraph, I think there would potentially be issues with other WTO members if Ireland (i.e. the EU) did not impose actual customs checks on goods entering its customs area from the UK, even if tariffs were still legally due.
To me, this would be the same situation we discussed earlier whereby the UK would run into WTO disputes if it allowed goods from the EU freely into NI, even if tariffs were still legally due.
Under WTO MFN rules, if the EU allows UK imports in unchecked (let’s assume these goods remain in Ireland for ease), it would be obliged to allow in goods unchecked from all other WTO members. This would also theoretically apply to all EU entry points, not just the NI border. Similarly, the UK couldn’t argue under WTO rules that its border in NI should be subject to special treatment without being applicable to other entry points.
Last edited:
This will just impede any future negotiations. Hardly useful unless you plan total isolation and no trade whatsoever.
Yes they are professional liars and con-men but they have all have two significant points of weakness.
Firstly if you don't tell lies you can't be found out and they do continously which is a vital weakness , secondly none of them are very bright and can be outwitted.
They have got away with so much with the British media because either the media have deliberately not asked the right questions and persisted with the line of questioning or that the journalists themselves are ignorant of what the truth is.
It's a question of asking the right things in the right circumstances.
This is a very interesting issue.
I have read information saying that we DO and conversely WE DO NOT actually have to pay.
My understanding is that the figure represents money that we had committed to pay as part of our membership had we remained in the EU for a number of years hence.
However, the actual figure is part of the Withdrawal Bill which assumed that we would leave as part of that agreement.
I have also read that the £39bn is not legally binding should we leave with no deal. So there is some debate.
The key point though is that we need to continue to trade with both the EU as well as to negotiate new trade deals with the rest of the world and refusing to honour our commitment to the EU would send an extremely bad signal to future trade partners that the UK cannot be trusted.
So unless we really want to literally cut off our nose to spite our face, it appears that we have to or need to pay up.
It would only be an issue if the goods go through customs or free zones and are systematically unchecked. The potential fudge is to simply inform importers about free zones locations for customs clearance purposes, if they go to them everything is good, if they don't they will have issues later whether it is in Irish ports/airports or other member states. Also Irish authorities can do random checks on roads which if I'm not mistaken is already the case.
PS: Unless I'm missing a regulation, the only location requirement for free zones is that they are in the Union custom territory.
@Paul the Wolf what do you think about this topic?
Interesting. So why can’t the UK do the same thing regarding the NI border, maintaining tariffs without physical infrastructure at the NI border, without running into WTO issues?
I haven't read all of what you've been discussing so sorry if there are points you covered ,but if there are goods circulating in the EU or in Ireland (as part of the EU) which have not have their duties paid or the VAT paid or documentation that the goods comply EU standards and have passed the necessary phytosanitary or veterinary checks with all relevant certifcates, people are going to be in serious trouble. They cannot be in free circulation within the country.
As in all EU countries customs checks can take place within the countries . Where I live there are regular customs checks about 30km north on the motorway which is a specifically built customs post but is hidden from the road and regularly they send all commercial vehicles in and check every single one.
They also do regular checks 20km south in a service area.
There is a myth that once goods have got into the EU are they can freely travel around without checks.
All goods in circulation would have to comply completely whether all have been actually physically checked is another matter but if there are goods that don't comply , big problems and seizures for those responsible.
Have come across problems with UK customs where they didn't charge the correct tariffs , didn't send the VAT owed to the EU that they should have and allowed the importation of goods into the UK that did not comply with EU regulations.
UK customs couldn't cope properly back then , god knows how they would cope having to check everything and the documentation is even more constraining than the goods themselves.
An example of one of the many documents required for the movement of goods in the EU.
I could be wrong but pretending and providing a way to control could be enough for both sides. One of the thing that I have in mind is that french Guyana's border with Brazil isn't totally controlled due to the nature of the terrain. So while they do check and the military patrols the Amazon, goods can easily go through without ever seeing a custom officer.
But to be honest, it's not a solution and you are right to say that ultimately it's an issue for everyone.
@Paul the Wolf, that's what I said earlier and why I pointed to the fact that other member states are protected by the fact that Ireland is an island, they can do all the checks necessary wherever they want. While stamps are supposed to be provided at entry points, other custom offices can do it later.
Did you read the whole article? I like Gary's articles and that's a good article, but the overall conclusion you could draw is that voting for Brexit because of sovereignty is stupid since you cannot really have the sort of sovereinty they imagined in the modern world.
Sorry, what I meant is that if the goods are circulating in Ireland they should already have all the stamps and documentation and all duties, VAT paid by the importers, ie have to be fully compliant even if they haven't been physically checked but could still be re-checked/checked after they have entered the territory.
Brits love a bit of bureaucracy
An example of one of the many documents required for the movement of goods in the EU.
That sounds right to me.
If there is a ‘no deal’ exit, I think we’ll end up in a standoff with each side wanting the other to be the first to make any move that looks like a physical border or customs checks. It will be a political blame game, while we all suffer.
I do too mate, and I did. Also I had more difficulties on some than others. And you didn't asked in your question to remainers if they can or not to work anywhere. Also some of them they have families in UK. You just said in another words " if you don't like Brexit leave". Pretty rich from someone that doesn't like the EU and loves Brexit but lives in the EU but doesn't fly over UK to enjoy the greatness of Brexit
But I guess I am the only one that sees the analogy, apparently