Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.


Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
1
HOLA442
1 minute ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

What powers do the US have to interfere with Canada or Australia's immigration policy? Their domestic legal system?

Any country in a trade deal has to abide by mutually agreed rules pertaining to that trade. That is all.

And I'm afraid I simply don't believe that having identical rules & standards to start with doesn't make future agreements a whole lot easier. Unless one side wishes to be obstructive of course ...

 

Non tariff barriers are perhaps the main obstacles to trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2
HOLA443
22 minutes ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

What powers do the US have to interfere with Canada or Australia's immigration policy? Their domestic legal system?

Any country in a trade deal has to abide by mutually agreed rules pertaining to that trade. That is all.

And I'm afraid I simply don't believe that having identical rules & standards to start with doesn't make future agreements a whole lot easier. Unless one side wishes to be obstructive of course ...

 

That's fine is we are aiming to implement a BRINO, we can stay harmonised for ever and the deal will be quick and easy.  However, if the aim is to diverge then it gets very complicated.

We cannot expect to retain access to the SM and have the ability to diverge in areas where we think we can gain an advantage and stay as we are in areas where we think that gives us an advantage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3
HOLA444
31 minutes ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

What powers do the US have to interfere with Canada or Australia's immigration policy? Their domestic legal system?

Any country in a trade deal has to abide by mutually agreed rules pertaining to that trade. That is all.

And I'm afraid I simply don't believe that having identical rules & standards to start with doesn't make future agreements a whole lot easier. Unless one side wishes to be obstructive of course …

 

None over immigration but lots in their domestic legal system (and this for an agreement that according to several reviews has provided zero benefit to Australia). 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia–United_States_Free_Trade_Agreement#Australian_attitudes_to_the_FTA

http://www.anu.edu.au/news/all-news/how-the-us-trade-deal-undermined-australias-pbs

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445
2 hours ago, dances with sheeple said:

It is not about a plan, it is about being able to negotiate and being able to project the size/importance of the UK market for the EU into the negotiations, this will have to happen now after a "Hard" Brexit with more competent people at the table than May and her remainer chums. The EU deliberately refused to negotiate trade deals etc. at the start and instead just wanted to discuss how much we owed them, hoping to bully us into a soft Brexit like May`s deal later on as they have done with other countries/agreements. Unfortunately for the EU it has backfired and they are now showing their fear in public.

Now it's not about a plan.....?....my sides are splitting. Wtf....you guys can't even agree what needs to be done....piss-up in a brewery comes to mind.....

We'll be negotiating from a position of strength when we hard brexit. :lol:?? 

The phrase 'can we have some more .......please!' .......comes to mind. Sad. You'll be eaten alive....

Edited by IMHAL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5
HOLA446
12 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

None over immigration but lots in their domestic legal system (and this for an agreement that according to several reviews has provided zero benefit to Australia). 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia–United_States_Free_Trade_Agreement#Australian_attitudes_to_the_FTA

http://www.anu.edu.au/news/all-news/how-the-us-trade-deal-undermined-australias-pbs

 

And of course let's not forget the beauty of the US-AUS investor state dispute system ..... whereupon an American tobacco company successfully sued the  AUS  taxpayer via their government.

Lovely! AUS tax dollars going to an American multinational. Can't wait for that here  :wacko:...../s

Oh! Wait! the NHS is already being sued in secret ISDS courts ...but I can't mention that because it's 'secret'. Allegedly.

#GiveAwayControl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6
HOLA447
18 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

None over immigration but lots in their domestic legal system (and this for an agreement that according to several reviews has provided zero benefit to Australia). 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia–United_States_Free_Trade_Agreement#Australian_attitudes_to_the_FTA

http://www.anu.edu.au/news/all-news/how-the-us-trade-deal-undermined-australias-pbs

 

I can't see where the Australian trade deal has led to US interference in Australian law in the same way the ECJ does in UK law.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448
5 hours ago, kzb said:

You've just gone round in circles. 

The negotiations have been controlled by (Tory) remainers.  Do you disagree with this one simple fact?

Your Brexiteers shuffled off the deck of the Titanic....... maybe they know something you don't.? Just poor old maybot left with the poison chalice.

2 and 1/2 years it's been ...... the UK deserves a plan....some certainty...if you havn't got a plan then get the fck out and leave the British people to get on with their lives. Enough is enough. People are sick of it. If we get a hard brexit then people will be sick of it and angry.

Tusk is right....Brexiteers without a plan do deserve a special place in hell.

Edited by IMHAL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8
HOLA449
2 hours ago, dances with sheeple said:

It is not about a plan, it is about being able to negotiate and being able to project the size/importance of the UK market for the EU into the negotiations, this will have to happen now after a "Hard" Brexit with more competent people at the table than May and her remainer chums. The EU deliberately refused to negotiate trade deals etc. at the start and instead just wanted to discuss how much we owed them, hoping to bully us into a soft Brexit like May`s deal later on as they have done with other countries/agreements. Unfortunately for the EU it has backfired and they are now showing their fear in public.

It is true that pre-referendum talk was about "Germany will still sell us cars" and "Belgium their chocolate" - the essential idea that the EU would forgo itself for the expediency of business with the UK. As an idea this has failed and it has failed because Europe needs to protect its multi-trillion a year business. You can say that the idea is not a plan but making the idea into reality would of required a plan. Its a shame that the leave population focused on the "idea" rather than actualisable possibilities that could emerge out of the abstraction.

Edited by smash
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9
HOLA4410
24 minutes ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

I can't see where the Australian trade deal has led to US interference in Australian law in the same way the ECJ does in UK law.

 

You are half right. It interferes in different, much less democratic and much more secret ways. 

One of the things that always amuses me about Leavers dislike of the ECJ, is that they usually don't realise that all meaningful trade deals involve submitting to some supranational court. The don't realise that because unlike the ECJ they tend to operate in secret.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10
HOLA4411
20 minutes ago, smash said:

It is true that pre-referendum talk was about "Germany will still sell us cars" and "Belgium their chocolate" - the essential idea that the EU would forgo itself for the expediency of business with the UK. As an idea this has failed and it has failed because Europe needs to protect its multi-trillion a year business. You can say that the idea is not a plan but making the idea into reality would of required a plan. Its a shame that the leave population focused on the "idea" rather than actualisable possibilities that could emerge out of the abstraction.

Good observation. When the abstract meets reality .....reality always wins. The EU made it clear right from get go...you're in or you're out......we called their bluff...and  we lost...

Edited by IMHAL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11
HOLA4412
On ‎05‎/‎02‎/‎2019 at 18:08, Sheeple Splinter said:

Maybe, but CoVI does have contacts within the EU.

IIRC, the EU tightened the screws on the A.50 framework after Macron beat Le Pen.

 

On ‎05‎/‎02‎/‎2019 at 18:18, Dorkins said:

A50 is in the Lisbon Treaty so could only be changed through a new treaty. There hasn't been a new treaty since Lisbon in 2009.

:blink:

I was referring to this:

Quote

European Council (Art. 50) (29 April 2017) - Draft guidelines following the United Kingdom's notification under Article 50 TEU ...

… These guidelines define the framework for negotiations under Article 50 TEU and set out the overall positions and principles that the Union will pursue throughout the negotiation. The European Council will remain permanently seized of the matter, and will update these guidelines in the course of the negotiations as necessary...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12
HOLA4413
On ‎05‎/‎02‎/‎2019 at 20:04, Confusion of VIs said:

1. Like all trade deals it takes account of the needs/interests of literally tens of thousands of stakeholders on both sides. As the EU has what is generally regarded as the worlds best trade negotiation team, it is a fair bet that any concessions were given were balanced by gains in other areas.

2. Of course the terms of a trade deal that does not include the UK will be different to one that did.  Why would you expect the future of the mainly UK based assembly plants to be a major concern of the remaining EU states.  Almost certainly the Japanese negotiators would have seen that this represented an opportunity to gain direct access to the EU market at far lower cost, in terms of balancing concessions, than if the UK was party to the negotiations.  It also has the added advantage of reducing the cost to Japanese companies if they have to write off their investment in the UK as a result of tariff/non tariff barriers being erected after we leave.  

:blink:      I think that trophy goes to China and let's see how Japan's manufacturing strategy evolves in the EU.

Anyway, returning to Nissan and the X-Trail decision; were you hoping that Nissan would select another EU country instead of the UK?

As an aside, in which country is this Nissan X-Trail made?

image.png.b4ffcb1b1f5b3a5a4f9d9e8be5cf50c3.png

 

2. Indeed, with or without the UK, Japan can now export cars, and much more, without having manufacturing plants in the EU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13
HOLA4414
7 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

You need to move on from thinking that the world revolves around the UK. it doesn't.

Apart from reporting the ongoing fiasco of the negotiations, Brexit hardly ever makes the news in France or Germany.

New FTA's agreed between us deciding to leave and actually leaving will replace the loss of the UK market more than twice over.

I don’t have delusions of grandeur and of empires lost, but I do think we are big enough to manage on our own.

7 hours ago, ****-eyed octopus said:

What powers do the US have to interfere with Canada or Australia's immigration policy? Their domestic legal system?

Any country in a trade deal has to abide by mutually agreed rules pertaining to that trade. That is all.

And I'm afraid I simply don't believe that having identical rules & standards to start with doesn't make future agreements a whole lot easier. Unless one side wishes to be obstructive of course ...

 

Your comments are smoking hot tonight. Another cracker!

7 hours ago, rollover said:

 

Labour offer is almost as good as remaining. That's what I call have a cake and eat it Brexit deal.

Checkmate for ERG and no deal Brexit.

 

In the abscence of any talent or ability to achieve any outcome other than default, I think you are right.

7 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

That's fine is we are aiming to implement a BRINO, we can stay harmonised for ever and the deal will be quick and easy.  However, if the aim is to diverge then it gets very complicated.

We cannot expect to retain access to the SM and have the ability to diverge in areas where we think we can gain an advantage and stay as we are in areas where we think that gives us an advantage. 

The whole world has ‘access’.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14
HOLA4415
7 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

You are half right. It interferes in different, much less democratic and much more secret ways. 

One of the things that always amuses me about Leavers dislike of the ECJ, is that they usually don't realise that all meaningful trade deals involve submitting to some supranational court. The don't realise that because unlike the ECJ they tend to operate in secret.  

Errr, I think you're mistaken. Leavers don't realise that because they haven't bothered to check because THEY DON'T ACTUALLY CARE. They care about ending freedom of movement. The rest of it is just a smokescreen they've thrown up in order to make their argument look a littleness narrow minded.

Once we're out and freedom of movement has ended I guarantee that almost the entirety of the leave voting group will go back to how it was pre referendum of not giving a shit about trade deals and independent court systems.

Edited by dugsbody
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15
HOLA4416
16
HOLA4417
17
HOLA4418
39 minutes ago, GrizzlyDave said:

Work urgently with me on Brexit – Britain’s May appeals to EU euractiv

And then: "The sky is falling!", "The sky is falling!"

Quote

Chicken Licken, is a European folk tale with a moral in the form of a cumulative tale about a chicken who believes the world is coming to an end. The phrase "The sky is falling!"

 

Edited by rollover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18
HOLA4419
19
HOLA4420
20
HOLA4421
21
HOLA4422
11 minutes ago, hotblack42 said:

Tusk is angry.
People get angry when they are frightened.

Image result for images mr burns excellent

Exasperated rather than angry...It was a great idea to call A50 without a plan or Dominic Cummings deliberately deciding against promoting any plan whatsoever, or the ERG shouting from the sidelines without any workable idea..

Edited by Dave Beans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22
HOLA4423
23
HOLA4424
24
HOLA4425
3 minutes ago, hotblack42 said:

Tusk is angry.
People get angry when they are frightened.

Image result for images mr burns excellent

 .... he's pissed off for sure that a nation as great as ours would willfully engage in self harm. Remember...he is talking about Brexit without a credible plan..... that is inexcusable and those who support it are no friends of this nation. Mogg, BJ and the rest of the putin sponsored ERG vipers...... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information