Cont: Brexit: Now What? 9 Below Zero

Status
Not open for further replies.
ceptimus said:
You should check your bias. Someone being critical of something you think is a good thing doesn't mean that they don't understand it.
Click to expand...
Except your critism is that the EU did not allow a state of affairs that is currently either technologically impossible or would put a tremendous admin burden on countries and business.
A customs union needs consistent deals with 3rd states for frictionless internal trade. Your criticism that the EU doesn't allow member states to negotiate their own deals demonstrates this clearly.
 
ceptimus said:
USA, Canada, India, China, Australia, Mexico, Japan, New Zealand, and many other countries all choose not to be members of customs unions. Now the UK is doing the same.
Click to expand...
Amusing.

USA - Negotiations commenced April 2019.
Canada - Agreement reached after 10 years of negotiations.
India - Negotiations ongoing since 2007.
China - Negotiations ongoing since 2013.
Australia/New Zealand - Negotiations ongoing since 2018.
Mexico - Negotiations ongoing since 2016.
Japan - EPA in force since Feb, 2019.

But somehow, you think the UK will get it all done in under 11 months despite having no negotiators nor anything to negotiate with.
 
Darat said:
No. The alternative is to sit down, understand what both you and the "other side" want, understand what is most important for each side, understand where each side can compromise if necessary, and then work with the other side to come up with an agreement that both of you are satisfied can live with. Now in trade talks it is slightly different in that you start with an agreed deal and are then trying to improve on that deal for both sides.
Click to expand...

Satisfaction might be too high a goal.
 
Mojo said:
Yeah, that’s why we’ve made so much progress with it in the last three and a half years. The 11 month deadline will be a piece of cake.
Click to expand...

From afar that deadline looks as firm as mush. Isn't the most likely future to be one of endless sliding deadlines, that it will become one of just muddle along while we work something out.
 
Ziggurat said:
CE certification is mostly done by the manufacturer, not by any recognized body. The only thing that changes in those cases is the manufacturer will have to transfer the Technical File for the product to somebody within the EU, but there is no additional certification needed. During the transition period, UK certifying bodies will still be valid, we shall see what happens after that. I doubt prior certifications will expire, since I see no provision in the rules for certification expiring if the certifying body simply goes out of business.
Click to expand...

Captain_Swoop said:
Britain will "not be aligning with EU rules" in any post-Brexit trade deal, the foreign secretary has said.

Dominic Raab argued agreeing to stick strongly with EU regulations would "defeat the point of Brexit".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51345776
Click to expand...
If I were in the EU and read that the UK will "not be aligning with EU rules" then re-certification would become a necessity.
 
SezMe said:
If I were in the EU and read that the UK will "not be aligning with EU rules" then re-certification would become a necessity.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense. If the product hasn’t changed, why recertify? CE products from non EU states only have to certify once, why would the UK be different? And new or altered products need to be certified regardless as well. All that the non-alignment means is that NEW products for the UK market would be able to use different standards, that makes no difference to existing products.
 
Ziggurat said:
That makes no sense. If the product hasn’t changed, why recertify? CE products from non EU states only have to certify once, why would the UK be different? And new or altered products need to be certified regardless as well. All that the non-alignment means is that NEW products for the UK market would be able to use different standards, that makes no difference to existing products.
Click to expand...


How will they know whether or not the products have changed?
 
Ziggurat said:
That makes no sense. If the product hasn’t changed, why recertify? CE products from non EU states only have to certify once, why would the UK be different? And new or altered products need to be certified regardless as well. All that the non-alignment means is that NEW products for the UK market would be able to use different standards, that makes no difference to existing products.
Click to expand...

If the UK say's they aren't going to follow the rules why wouldn't you want to make sure they haven't changed anything?
 
Boris Johnson says there is "no need" for the UK to follow Brussels' rules.

The prime minister will use a speech in London later to call for a Canada-style free trade agreement - and threaten to walk away if one cannot be struck.

"There is no need for a free trade agreement to involve accepting EU rules," he will say.
Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51351914
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Boris Johnson says there is "no need" for the UK to follow Brussels' rules.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51351914
Click to expand...

In one sense he's absolutely correct - there's no absolute need for the UK to follow EU rules in order to secure some kind of free trade deal.

Presumably this would mean that the UK would negotiate a bespoke deal from scratch because no "off the peg" deal would come close to meeting our requirements. As has been pointed out repeatedly, negotiating trade deals takes years, sometimes decades. A UK bespoke deal is likely to take considerably longer than the 10-and-a-lot months that the UK has left until the end of the transition period.

As I've been saying for nearly 3 years, there are only two outcomes I could see, "no Brexit" and "no deal". Now there is only one, "no deal", which IMO is what the architects of Brexit had in mind all along :(. WTO terms suit them well enough and they stand to gain from the turmoil.
 
The Don said:
In one sense he's absolutely correct - there's no absolute need for the UK to follow EU rules in order to secure some kind of free trade deal.

Presumably this would mean that the UK would negotiate a bespoke deal from scratch because no "off the peg" deal would come close to meeting our requirements. As has been pointed out repeatedly, negotiating trade deals takes years, sometimes decades. A UK bespoke deal is likely to take considerably longer than the 10-and-a-lot months that the UK has left until the end of the transition period.

As I've been saying for nearly 3 years, there are only two outcomes I could see, "no Brexit" and "no deal". Now there is only one, "no deal", which IMO is what the architects of Brexit had in mind all along :(. WTO terms suit them well enough and they stand to gain from the turmoil.
Click to expand...
And just in case the useful idiots, who voted them into power, cons on to the fact that trading WTO terms isn't exactly some shining beacon of prosperity, the cabinet has apparently decided to rephrase it as "Australian-style deal".

At least Barnier is fairly straight-to-the-point about what this means:
Barnier says exporters must prepare now for border checks
Barnier says there will be no mutual recognition of rules.

That means there will be no passporting in the banking sector.

Goods entering the EU will be subject to regulatory checks, he says.

He says these are the automatic and mechanical consequences of the UK’s choices.

Business must adapt now to these conditions, he says.
Click to expand...
 
What reasons, other than 'because we say so', does the EU give for wanting an alignment treaty for the UK to have a Canada-style deal, when the actual deal with Canada is subject to no such treaty?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom