UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Goods will be cheaper for our consumers under our own UK tariff deal.

https://www.lbcnews.co.uk/uk-news/go...global-tariff/

Only those from outside the EU. Else what would German car manufacturers have to worry about?

At a 10% tariff on that schedule I don't see Mercedes or BMW worrying too much in the absence of any meaningful competition on these shores. As stated previously less than the impact of the collapse of the pound on the import price.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Goods will be cheaper for our consumers under our own UK tariff deal.

https://www.lbcnews.co.uk/uk-news/go...global-tariff/

£30 billion worth of imports out of £718 billion = 4%.

[Sephiroth]

Am I mistaken? I sense that those in this thread who previously supported remaining in the EU (most of them on economic grounds), have not really engaged on the sovereignty aspects of the UK Guvmin's position.

That position is illogical. It cannot be right that as a sovereign country we should be subject to the laws of another legal entity - and in in shambles mode at that.

Why do these people in this thread rest part of their case on "the EU is only protecting its own position" without acknowledging that it is right for the UK to do the same?

Why do these people in this thread not criticise the EU for its bullying stance (".. we are bigger than the UK")?

The nation has voted for Brexit under our voting rules and that should be respected.

"We can’t get what we want" ≠ "bullying"

Both sides have points they see as "red lines" - you seem to see the U.K. not shifting on points as "sovereignty", the EU not shifting as "bullying".

It is right for both sides to protect their positions, without assigning any emotive phrases.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Hugh

"We can’t get what we want" ≠ "bullying"

I should be resting my case on that ridiculous reply but, of course, can't lest others believe you.

You completely ignore the sense of what I'm saying which is the EU's bullying stance is "You must do what we want".

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Am I mistaken? I sense that those in this thread who previously supported remaining in the EU (most of them on economic grounds), have not really engaged on the sovereignty aspects of the UK Guvmin's position.

That position is illogical. It cannot be right that as a sovereign country we should be subject to the laws of another legal entity - and in in shambles mode at that.

Why do these people in this thread rest part of their case on "the EU is only protecting its own position" without acknowledging that it is right for the UK to do the same?

Why do these people in this thread not criticise the EU for its bullying stance (".. we are bigger than the UK")?

The nation has voted for Brexit under our voting rules and that should be respected.

I'll play but this run the danger of going over a well worn path...

Here's my view. Not wanting an argument, just answering your questions;

The European Union is a legal entity that we were part of. We had influence, we had MEPs, we had a seat on the European Council. Now if we vote for MEPs and a government/Prime Minister who are, at best, ambivalent to the functioning of the EU, that's on us as the voters, not on the EU.

The EU was not and is not some monolithic 'other' that ran our country without us having any say. It is a union of nations coming to agreement over issues that had impact to the union as a whole. Nations do not trust one another. This is why legally binding treaties between nations and blocs are in place. The depth of relations and interactions between nations require stronger and deeper treaties.

There is a strange dichotomy in many in the UKs view of current relations between the UK and the EU. There is both British exceptionalism (they need us more than we need them) and paranoia (we're being bullied)

In any negotiation, you need to understand the person you negotiate with's position and get a handle on what they can flex on and what are red lines. You will of course have your own red lines and flex points. The EU tends to be quite open in publishing their position (this is part of how the EU works) while the UK government tends to keep its'cards closer to its chest. Whether the UKs policy of not being so open is a paternalistic approach (trust us public, we know best) or hiding things from the ERG types is not clear.

Do I respect the result of the referendum? Yes. Have I changed my mind about how I would vote if I could go back in time? No, Brexit is a silly idea. If we have to leave the EU, then I would like to it be as soft a landing as possible. Instead, we seem to be going headlong into the most nuclear of options of WTO only while antagonising our neighbours along the way.

That's my 2cents, sorry 2p :-)

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I should be resting my case on that ridiculous reply but, of course, can't lest others believe you.

You completely ignore the sense of what I'm saying which is the EU's bullying stance is "You must do what we want".

But isn’t that also what the U.K. are saying?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I should be resting my case on that ridiculous reply but, of course, can't lest others believe you.

You completely ignore the sense of what I'm saying which is the EU's bullying stance is "You must do what we want".

Both parties have set out their red lines as they're entitled to. To permit only one side to do this is illogical. So Hugh is correct.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Both parties have set out their red lines as they're entitled to. To permit only one side to do this is illogical. So Hugh is correct.

Yes - quite so.

But my comments relate to the people in this thread, of Remain persuasion, who cannot bring themselves to respect criticism that the EU wants to keep a degree of sovereignty over the UK. Their red lines are to keep us bound by their laws. That can't be right and why don't you lot acknowledge & accept this?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Am I mistaken? I sense that those in this thread who previously supported remaining in the EU (most of them on economic grounds), have not really engaged on the sovereignty aspects of the UK Guvmin's position.

That position is illogical. It cannot be right that as a sovereign country we should be subject to the laws of another legal entity - and in in shambles mode at that.

Why do these people in this thread rest part of their case on "the EU is only protecting its own position" without acknowledging that it is right for the UK to do the same?

Why do these people in this thread not criticise the EU for its bullying stance (".. we are bigger than the UK")?

The nation has voted for Brexit under our voting rules and that should be respected.

If I go along to my bank and ask them for loan of a quarter of a million pounds at a 0.1% interest rate and HSBC bank laugh me out of town do I get to write to trading standards and call them bullies?

No. They’re bigger than me and frankly it’s not worth their while engaging with me on such a preposterous basis. I’m not the biggest fan of uncontrolled and unregulated capitalism (as everyone on the forum knows) but I fail to see why some cry “foul” at capitalism in action.

We did vote for Brexit as is our sovereign right to do so. But nobody owes us a single dime as a result. We chose to carve out our own path. If that’s too challenging then that’s an entirely expected outcome of entering negotiations with an observably unrealistic set of objectives.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Yes - quite so.

But my comments relate to the people in this thread, of Remain persuasion, who cannot bring themselves to respect criticism that the EU wants to keep a degree of sovereignty over the UK. Their red lines are to keep us bound by their laws. That can't be right and why don't you lot acknowledge & accept this?

My perception is that you're seeing the situation through one filter; that of sovereignty; whereas the central issue is the single market.
Allowing neighbouring countries unfettered access to the single market at no cost and with potential cost advantages through weaker employment rights and environmental standards is not in the EU's interests.
It's so important that such enforcement can't be left to chance and needs to be legally enforceable. So any impact on sovereignty is a side-product, not the key intention.
The differentiation of neighbouring countries is important due to the gravity of trade. The Adam Smith Institute has a good explainer of it here.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

If I go along to my bank and ask them for loan of a quarter of a million pounds at a 0.1% interest rate and HSBC bank laugh me out of town do I get to write to trading standards and call them bullies?

No. They’re bigger than me and frankly it’s not worth their while engaging with me on such a preposterous basis. I’m not the biggest fan of uncontrolled and unregulated capitalism (as everyone on the forum knows) but I fail to see why some cry “foul” at capitalism in action.

We did vote for Brexit as is our sovereign right to do so. But nobody owes us a single dime as a result. We chose to carve out our own path. If that’s too challenging then that’s an entirely expected outcome of entering negotiations with an observably unrealistic set of objectives.

You see (or rather everyone else should be able to see) that what you've said exactly makes my point.

You cannot reasonably apply the bank analogy to fundamental issues of national sovereignty. You must know that, jfman but you don't want to run with my logic.

You write of an "unrealistic set of objectives". To recap, those (UK) objectives are to negotiate the trade agreement separately from other matters such as fishing rights. Overarching those objectives is defence of the notion that we must preserve our sovereignty.

If the only thing we can achieve is to protect our sovereignty, then there will be no trade deal.

The matter of bullying arises when the EU (Barnier) tells us directly that the EU is bigger than we are - by corollary the EU's terms or nothing.

A Brit should consider that unreasonable even if that Brit also says, like you, what else would you expect from them.




---------- Post added at 22:47 ---------- Previous post was at 22:42 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

My perception is that you're seeing the situation through one filter; that of sovereignty; whereas the central issue is the single market.
Allowing neighbouring countries unfettered access to the single market at no cost and with potential cost advantages through weaker employment rights and environmental standards is not in the EU's interests.
It's so important that such enforcement can't be left to chance and needs to be legally enforceable. So any impact on sovereignty is a side-product, not the key intention.
The differentiation of neighbouring countries is important due to the gravity of trade. The Adam Smith Institute has a good explainer of it here.

Then let me correct your view of my perspective.

It seems to me that Remain supporting people see this through the lens of regret that economic matters trump sovereignty.

I'm sure there is economic downside to leaving the EU. The British public who voted for it know that. To them, sovereignty is the key point and a trust that the UK will build on its skills and abilities to rise above any economic downturn.

Your second paragraph defends the EU's position.

No Brit should be doing this.

[jfman]

Sovereignty doesn’t truly exist under capitalism.

He who pays the piper calls the tune.

Fishing rights has a monetary or strategic value just like US Air Force bases in the UK. Literally everything is a commodity.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Sovereignty doesn’t truly exist under capitalism.

He who pays the piper calls the tune.

Fishing rights has a monetary or strategic value just like US Air Force bases in the UK. Literally everything is a commodity.

What can I say (rhetorical)?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

What can I say (rhetorical)?

“You’re right, jfman, thanks for converting me.”