Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
Andrew, Just so you know, IDS is of no importance to me.
On the specific point about 'level playing field', which is the term you used to rebut my argument, I'm not wrong. The term 'level playing field' as applied to CETA doesn't have the same meaning as what the EU wishes to apply to the UK. I quote the EU synopsis in full. Bold text is as per original. Coloured text is my highlight.
APPLICATION IN CETA https://ec.europa.eu/commission/pres...en/MEMO_16_445
[/SIZE]
By significant contrast: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/51180282
You will see that the EU is demanding considerably more from the UK by way of 'level playing field' provisions than they have agreed with Canada. Their reasoning is that we are on their doorstep - so we can't have a Canada style agreement, which is what the UK Guvmin wants.
In other words, the EU wants our cake to eat.
|
The EU set out at the start of the negotiations what was required of the UK if it wanted a certain level of access so it's four years too late for people to start whingeing that these do not match the dreams they were sold by Vote Leave and Leave EU. We all need to move on and accept the new reality.
The deal with Canada is more than just intellectual property rights, as my extract demonstrates and I think you accept this now so our views are now not so far apart. It also shows that you and I agree that the UK would need to build on the enhanced playing field with firmer support due to the UK's EU proximity and size. That's all part of the gravity of trade which I have tried to explain to people but never seems to sink in before they start talking up Mexico, India etc.