Cable Forum - UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33708171)

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36046085)

I reiterate that that is an impossible question as no one outside the negotiating team has sufficient information to know what the UK's true red lines and objectives are.

My objectives, as you know are to put the economy first as a strong economy enables services like our armed forces and nursing homes to be properly funded and it's beneficial for people's health and in keeping crime rates low. This necessitates as close a deal with the EU as possible so we should elect for a deal like the EFTA countries have without the Schengen area. I'm happy to sacrifice notional elements of sovereignty to join NATO, to join the United Nations, to join EFTA and to join Five Eyes.

---------- Post added at 00:28 ---------- Previous post was at 00:27 ----------

:D:D:D

Of the three highlighted there is no notional sovereignty involved. We not only joined each one as a sovereign nation but helped set them up. Each of which we can if we wish (I wouldn't want to) withdraw from without penalty.

NATO is a common defence originally against Soviet Russia and also includes the US and Canada. It could do nothing about the Russian annexation of part of the Ukraine as they weren't a member state.

The UN, again we are a founding member and along with the others have the power of veto over whatever any other country would like to do along with China, France, Russia, and the United States. So anyhing that may impinge on our sovereignty could just be vetoed.

5 Eyes is is an intelligence alliance that has nothing to do with the rest of Europe it is made up of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States.

So no notional surrender or otherwise of sovereignty there. They are agreements that can be ended at any time with no penalty, not that I would wish it.

EFTA was started by the 7 nations that the EEC (then) did not accept into their agreement back in 1960 including the UK (gotta love Charles de Gaul), it now consists only of 4. However I digress.

1960 The European Free Trade Association (EFTA) is founded by Austria, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, to promote closer economic cooperation and free trade in Europe..

1961 Finland becomes an associate member of EFTA. The EFTA Consultative Committee is established (representatives of trade unions and employers' organisations).

1966 Full free trade in industrial products is achieved between the EFTA States.

1970 Iceland becomes a member of EFTA.

Then it starts going pear shaped

1972 Denmark and the United Kingdom leave EFTA to join the European Economic Community (EEC). The remaining EFTA States sign bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) with the EEC during the 1970s.

1977 The EFTA Parliamentary Committee is established. Tariffs on industrial goods in trade are eliminated between the EEC and the EFTA States.

1979 EFTA's first FTA is signed with Spain.

1984 (here we go) The Luxembourg Declaration on broader cooperation between the EEC and EFTA is signed.

1985 Portugal leaves EFTA to become a member of the EEC. (why?).

1986 Finland becomes a full member of EFTA.

1989 Negotiations start on a European Economic Space, later to become the European Economic Area (EEA). An agreement on free trade in fish between the EFTA States is signed. (oh look, FISH!)

1991 Liechtenstein becomes a member of EFTA. An FTA is signed with Turkey, EFTA's oldest agreement still in force. A further 12 FTAs are signed in the 1990s, of which three are still in force (Israel, Morocco and the Palestinian Authority). The others, all of which are with Central and Eastern European countries, lapse when those countries join the European Union (EU). (Oh bugger!)

1992 The Agreement on the European Economic Area is signed in Oporto, Portugal. Switzerland rejects participation in the EEA by referendum.

1994 The EEA Agreement enters into force between the EU and five EFTA States. An EEA Financial Mechanism for the reduction of economic and social disparities in the EEA is established for the period 1994 to 1998. (EFTA no longer an independant trading area).

1995 Austria, Finland and Sweden leave EFTA to join the EU. Liechtenstein becomes a full participant in the EEA Agreement together with Iceland and Norway. (EFTA's shrinking).

2001 The updated EFTA Convention is signed in Vaduz, Liechtenstein, entering into force a year later. (There's only a few countries left).

There's a few thing inbetween relating to the EEA but.

2010 Iceland begins accessions negotiations with the EU. The EEA EFTA Forum of Elected Representatives of Local and Regional Authorities is established.

And that is the effective end of EFTA as an independant trade alliance.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Post contents deleted by Seph.

---------- Post added at 09:18 ---------- Previous post was at 09:04 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36046085)

I reiterate that that is an impossible question as no one outside the negotiating team has sufficient information to know what the UK's true red lines and objectives are.

My objectives, as you know are to put the economy first as a strong economy enables services like our armed forces and nursing homes to be properly funded and it's beneficial for people's health and in keeping crime rates low. This necessitates as close a deal with the EU as possible so we should elect for a deal like the EFTA countries have without the Schengen area. I'm happy to sacrifice notional elements of sovereignty to join NATO, to join the United Nations, to join EFTA and to join Five Eyes.
:D:D:D

If you're happy to give up notional sovereignty as you've described (actually we've given up next to nothing in sovereignty terms by being members of those associations), you should be able to answer the simple question I've posed in relation to the EU. I'll put it another way.

Which of these concessions should we make to the EU in order to achieve the best possible economic outcome:

1. ECJ jurisdiction over the trade deal?
2. Level playing field that goes beyond Canada, Japan ?
3. Sovereignty over UK territorial waters including fishing rights?

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36046090)

Link provided (under ”Fair Use” policy)

https://www.efta.int/About-EFTA/EFTA-through-years-747

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36046080)

Truth hurts doesn't it?

No idea what you’re referring to.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36046099)

Post contents deleted by Seph.

---------- Post added at 09:18 ---------- Previous post was at 09:04 ----------

If you're happy to give up notional sovereignty as you've described (actually we've given up next to nothing in sovereignty terms by being members of those associations), you should be able to answer the simple question I've posed in relation to the EU. I'll put it another way.

Which of these concessions should we make to the EU in order to achieve the best possible economic outcome:

1. ECJ jurisdiction over the trade deal?
2. Level playing field that goes beyond Canada, Japan ?
3. Sovereignty over UK territorial waters including fishing rights?

I've explained how participation in Five Eyes (Huawei anyone?), NATO (British army reporting into US superiors and vice versa) impact on our sovereignty. Sovereignty is not a binary situation as has been demonstrated across the EU since the Covid outbreak but I appreciate that some have bought into this perception and uncloaking it is hard.

And no, agreeing to the entry rules are not concessions Seph, that's a highly defeatist way of framing the argument.

We should obviously try and negotiate these in our favour as much as possible. Of the above criteria, the one which I would aim to negotiate hardest on is No. 1. Only a socialist or a pessimist that thinks we can only survive as a low cost manufacturer (a la the recent sweatshop issues in Leicester) would have a genuine issue with No. 2 and we need to be careful with No. 3 as the fish we catch is largely sold to the EU, it's typically not species consumed in the UK.
I hope this helps.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36046106)

Quote:

Posted by Sephiroth:
Which of these concessions should we make to the EU in order to achieve the best possible economic outcome:

1. ECJ jurisdiction over the trade deal?
2. Level playing field that goes beyond Canada, Japan ?
3. Sovereignty over UK territorial waters including fishing rights?

On #1, you haven't said which way you'd swing when you would "negotiate hardest". My question stands (with modified tone): Would you "agree to" ECJ jurisdiction over the trade deal?

On#2 - "we need to be careful"? What's that about? Should we agree to the EU tying our hands more than they've done with Japan & Canada?

On#3 - So what? I understand that if we don't have a trade deal, the fish caught in our waters will finder their market harder to sell to. But on the other hand, the EU countries will want that fish. A trade deal would settle that without agreeing to the fishing rights status quo operating ibn perpetuity.

You seem to be careful to avoid answers that carry any emotion. Fine. But I still can't see on the three questions what you think we should agree to? The Forum is waiting with baited breath.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36046061)

I've answered that it's impossible to answer. And it's not up to Remainers to bail you out as their solutions will not be seen as independent.

Can I respectfully point out that the vast majority of Brexiteers do not want to give ground.

You, however, think that we should, so Seph's question to you is a reasonable one. What ground do you think we should give?

---------- Post added at 19:23 ---------- Previous post was at 19:22 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36046056)

Not really as he's the person to take up your buyer's remorse with. And that question on its own is impossible to answer. Leavers need to own a situation of their creation.

But pleading with a third country to try and prevent migrants coming to the UK whilst simultaneously trying to withdraw that country's fishing rights is not the brightest of ideas.

I'm so glad that you are not leading these negotiations!

:rolleyes:

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36046056)

OB has reminded me that the highlighted paragraph should draw comment from me.

The migrants trying to come to the UK are in breach of EU law which requires them to register for asylum in the first EU landing point.

The UK is not withdrawing France's fishing rights. The EU and UK have signed a WA and the UK is withdrawing from the EU. With that comes legal sovereignty over all our waters. If we traded fishing rights for no migrants, do you think that would work? No, of course not. So why bother.

I'm disappointed at the degeneration of your argument quality. Earlier you claimed that the Canada TA with the EU instituted a level playing field; on closer examination that was specifically for IPR.

The truth is simple: you were content to remain in the EU and the majority of voters disagreed with you and, as late as last December, still did. When you are asked for your preferred approach, at last you came up with an answer: the EFTA model.

Quote:

1Andrew1: ... as close a deal with the EU as possible so we should elect for a deal like the EFTA countries have without the Schengen area

Pip ripped that apart. Isn't that embarrassing? And at all costs you don't want to be accused of recommending that we give in to the EU on sovereignty (ECJ jurisdiction) - you prefer the weasel words "agree" because it is a negotiation.

I'm sorry that you're cornered here (you'll deny it) but there's no way out except rational and realistic argument.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36046120)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36046120)

The UK is not withdrawing France's fishing rights. The EU and UK have signed a WA and the UK is withdrawing from the EU. With that comes legal sovereignty over all our waters. If we traded fishing rights for no migrants, do you think that would work? No, of course not. So why bother.

The withdrawal agreement with the EU ends 31/12/2020. You only have to look at the advertising posters from 2016 to realise that immigration was a big issue. That includes support from France on immigration. We already know that Brexit will have negative economic impacts. However, if it increases immigration then it will appear to be an abject failure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36046120)

I'm disappointed at the degeneration of your argument quality. Earlier you claimed that the Canada TA with the EU instituted a level playing field; on closer examination that was specifically for IPR.

If by IPR you mean intellectual property rights, the link I supplied was indeed around a broader playing field.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36046120)

The truth is simple: you were content to remain in the EU and the majority of voters disagreed with you and, as late as last December, still did. When you are asked for your preferred approach, at last you came up with an answer: the EFTA model.

Pip ripped that apart. Isn't that embarrassing? And at all costs you don't want to be accused of recommending that we give in to the EU on sovereignty (ECJ jurisdiction) - you prefer the weasel words "agree" because it is a negotiation.

I'm sorry that you're cornered here (you'll deny it) but there's no way out except rational and realistic argument.

It appears everyone has been busy in my absence and I'm looking forward to reading it all. Thank you all for your contributions to the debate.

Ultimately, your arguments boil down to what I believe is a flawed definition of sovereignty. If you're a member of the United Nations then you're a sovereign nation.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36046122)

<SNIP>

Ultimately, your arguments boil down to what I believe is a flawed definition of sovereignty. If you're a member of the United Nations then you're a sovereign nation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_state

Quote:

A sovereign state, in international law, is a political entity that is represented by one centralized government that has sovereignty over a geographic area. International law defines sovereign states as having a permanent population, defined territory, one government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other sovereign states. It is also normally understood that a sovereign state is neither dependent on nor subjected to any other power or state.

Sorry - you are flawed again. Andrew, I beg you - think things through properly.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

And if you think in today’s global interconnected world, that any country is not dependent or influenced by any other country, I’ve got a bridge you might want to buy... :D

For example Priti Patel has just said we are dependent on the French to help us return migrants, as our "sovereignty" in this matter depends on their support...

Quote:

The Home Secretary has asked French authorities to intercept and return migrant boats found trying to cross the English Channel.

Sovereignty 2016 - We demand the right to control our borders!!

Sovereignty 2020: Why aren’t the bloody French controlling our borders?!

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36046124)

Not the same as having ECJ jurisdiction over part of our affairs.

And you know it.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36046124)

I’m pretty sure most people understand the difference between submission via treaty to supranational jurisdiction over our affairs, and quid-pro-quo negotiations between states of the sort that have been going on for centuries.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

The ECJ can only rule over areas where EU directives and regulations are in force so, if we want to have access to EU (and some non-EU) agencies, there is a case for 'sucking it up' and taking ECJ jurisdiction to get access.

My wish list would include;

EASA - aviation regulation including safety and the European Common Aviation Area
ECHA - chemical regulation and safety including REACH (huge impact to my business right now!)
EMA - European Medicines Agency
EUIPO - intellectual property
EFSA - food safety
EMSA - maritime safety
ECDC - disease control and epidemiology

Leaving these agencies due to ECJ jurisdiction in a quest for sovereignty seems to be the aim. It's each persons own value judgement to what cost is worth the degree of sovereignty we will gain.

Re: Brexit-Transitional Period Ends 31/12/20

Why, for the love of god, would we leave the EU and then still want to be subject to the rulings of the ECJ? We will not be a member of the EU anymore.

Does the ECJ run its sticky fingers over the dealings with Canada, Japan, Russia? . . . in fact any Country that is not part of the EU.

Are you trying to say that, whether we are in or out, any dealings we have with any EU Country have to be ratified and 'passed' by a court consisting of EU members, dealing with EU members, which presides over ensuring one EU member isn't being 'ripped off' by another EU member?

If that's the case, what is the equivalent UK court that ensures this Country isn't overwhelmed by cheap foreign imports that decimate our own manufacturing & industry . . . oh hang on, we're 40 years too late :mad: