Brexit: Now What? Part III

[jimbob]

Yes but it seems unclear whether we can just continue or not according to the WTO itself see this article https://www.theguardian.com/busines...rexit-trade-talks-start-scratch-eu-referendum and even if we can developing the schedules is actually the work of step 2 with all the bilateral talks and step 3 is the writing and submission of them and step 4 is the members approval of them. So if the WTO accepts that we are a member, we still have to put schedules in place to cover all existing trade deals that we are involved in at present, by virtue of being an EU member. This is not just with the 27 but with every country that we have an existing deal with as an EU member. This is not the work of 2 years but of many years and of many trade negotiators just to be where we are now.

I'd gusee that North Korea would let us trade with them eith minimal red tape.

 

[MCel58]

I'd gusee that North Korea would let us trade with them eith minimal red tape.

Yes we can trade with Non WTO members but that could cause even bigger problems at the WTO. I am sure the Republic of Korea (South Korea) which is a member and others in the region might have more than a few objections.

 

[Amazer]

I'd gusee that North Korea would let us trade with them eith minimal red tape.

Just imagine the opportunities! They're having shortages with everything imaginable after all.

 

[The Don]

I seem to recall assertions before the the vote that we'd still have access to the single market...

Oh, we will have access to it. The access may not be tariff-free and may leave UK companies at a significant disadvantage to their EU competitors but we will have access

 

[McHrozni]

I know it's repetitive, but:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/13/monday-briefing-trigger-warning-scenes-of-brexit-ahead

After the chief Brussels negotiator for Brexit gave Britons fresh hope of keeping their EU citizenship rights, other countries such as Bulgaria and Lithuania are warning that any such deal will have to cut both ways. Whenever it happens we’re gonna need a bigger bureaucracy – there are predictions a much-enlarged civil service will be required to deal with the challenge of Brexit, and other Whitehall projects will have to be put on hold.

Another one for 350 million a week to cover.

McHrozni

 

[Aepervius]

I know it's repetitive, but:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/13/monday-briefing-trigger-warning-scenes-of-brexit-ahead

After the chief Brussels negotiator for Brexit gave Britons fresh hope of keeping their EU citizenship rights, other countries such as Bulgaria and Lithuania are warning that any such deal will have to cut both ways. Whenever it happens we’re gonna need a bigger bureaucracy – there are predictions a much-enlarged civil service will be required to deal with the challenge of Brexit, and other Whitehall projects will have to be put on hold.

Another one for 350 million a week to cover.

McHrozni

To be fair I think it was already listed in the long list The Don (I think?) made on what should be covered by those 350M a week.

 

[ceptimus]

I seem to recall assertions before the the vote that we'd still have access to the single market...

Yes. The entire world has access so why would we be any different?

 

[abaddon]

The UK was a member by virtue of being a member of EU. Once it leaves... That leaves the membership open. Or so I gathered from other posters.

Their abandoned 1973 membership would apply, but that's way out of date.

 

[Garrison]

Yes. The entire world has access so why would we be any different?

Pathetically disingenuous, you know full well they meant on the favourable terms we enjoy now. Of course semantics are all you have when May and co. have reneged on every promise made by leave during the campaign.

Of course Ceptimus' position isn't quite as pathetic as the politicians who faced with the prospect of a hard brexit aren't even willing to make a stand to ensure they have a say on whatever appalling deal May limps home from Brussels with.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

you know full well they meant on the favourable terms we enjoy now.

Actually I disagree. I think they knew full well what they meant when they said it and it is exactly as ceptimus says. However they wanted to give the impression of meaning what you think they meant. It was a calculated deception from the start and for this very reason. So they could dishonestly claim to still have said it all along in the event of being in the situation we are now in.

 

[jimbob]

This is a pro Brexit blog;

http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86406#comment-3202058673

I was asked to write a couple of paragraphs on our prospects for Brexit - plus and minus ... optimistic and pessimistic. This is my offering:

Causes for optimism: none – given the complexity of Brexit and the suicidally short timescale, the default outcome was always going to be a plane crash, unless heroic measures were taken to prevent it and the Brexit team hit the ground running. The measures haven't been taken and, far from hitting the ground running, the team is demonstrating the tactical skill of a demented slug, with the same sense of direction and speed.

Reasons for pessimism: as above. In the absence of any ideas of its own, the politico-media nexus has relied on a London-based "think-tank" movement that has lost the "think" and is in the process of tanking, only then to be misdirected by a self-referential academia that is so imbued with its own brilliance that it has lost the plot. Between them all, they haven't a clue how to manage Brexit which means, when "Team Brexit" finally goes to Brussels, it will experience the negotiating equivalent of the first day of the Somme, leaving them to stagger out wondering what hit them.
Apart from that, I think it will go swimmingly.

Dr Richard North

Political analyst, researcher and anti-EU campaigner. 35794 Upvotes
Bradford, West Yorkshire
http://eureferendum.com
Joined Feb 8, 2011

 

[Garrison]

Actually I disagree. I think they knew full well what they meant when they said it and it is exactly as ceptimus says. However they wanted to give the impression of meaning what you think they meant. It was a calculated deception from the start and for this very reason. So they could dishonestly claim to still have said it all along in the event of being in the situation we are now in.

Actually I was referring to Ceptimus deliberately misunderstanding Jimbob's post.

 

[dudalb]

Yay, Maple Syrup and Boomerangs for everybody.

That who Canada is right next door to seems to be ignored by the Commonwealth advocates.
But I keep on reading the country that will make out like a thief from Britix is Ireland.

 

[dudalb]

Apparently Labour has a "radical vision" for Brexit

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39243734



Presumably radical in its impotence......


edited to add...

OFFS, they're talking about seizing the means of production



What a recipe for disaster.

Has been tried. Has never worked.

 

[jimbob]

Has been tried. Has never worked.

Details, you've got to realise that Corbyn is more the big picture* sort of person.

About the only thing he's actually good at is making Theresa May look competent.




*Drawn in crayons by a 5-year old

 

[ceptimus]

Actually I was referring to Ceptimus deliberately misunderstanding Jimbob's post.

I didn't misunderstand. I'm trying to get people like him to say what they mean. If they want us to be members of the EU single market - with everything that entails - then they shouldn't use the sloppy wording, 'access to the single market.'

"Access to the single market" is pretty meaningless, given that every country has exactly that.

 

[Aber]

Yes but it seems unclear whether we can just continue or not according to the WTO itself see this article https://www.theguardian.com/busines...rexit-trade-talks-start-scratch-eu-referendum and even if we can developing the schedules is actually the work of step 2 with all the bilateral talks and step 3 is the writing and submission of them and step 4 is the members approval of them. So if the WTO accepts that we are a member, we still have to put schedules in place to cover all existing trade deals that we are involved in at present, by virtue of being an EU member. This is not just with the 27 but with every country that we have an existing deal with as an EU member. This is not the work of 2 years but of many years and of many trade negotiators just to be where we are now.

Default approach is get the Tippex out and change the country names at the top of the schedules.

 

[Aber]

Their abandoned 1973 membership would apply, but that's way out of date.

GTO did not exist in 1973; the organisation was then GATT, which the UK joined in 1948.

 

[Garrison]

I didn't misunderstand. I'm trying to get people like him to say what they mean. If they want us to be members of the EU single market - with everything that entails - then they shouldn't use the sloppy wording, 'access to the single market.'

"Access to the single market" is pretty meaningless, given that every country has exactly that.

So you admit this was just a rather pathetic bit of pedantry on your part, understandable I suppose when you've been played for a fool by the leave campaign that you want to duck the substantive issues. I mean what exactly is it Brexit is supposed to deliver since May and Davis now admit it won't mean any more money for public services, we won't get the same favourable trading terms, and it won't stop EU immigration?

 

[jimbob]

So you admit this was just a rather pathetic bit of pedantry on your part, understandable I suppose when you've been played for a fool by the leave campaign that you want to duck the substantive issues. I mean what exactly is it Brexit is supposed to deliver since May and Davis now admit it won't mean any more money for public services, we won't get the same favourable trading terms, and it won't stop EU immigration?

It was more than that:

“Our trade will almost certainly continue with the EU on similar to current circumstances…The reality is that the hard-headed, pragmatic businessmen on the continent will do everything to ensure that trade with Britain continues uninterrupted.” David Davis, speech, 26 May 2016