UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

Originally Posted by Pierre

I just love that the EU are losing their Sh|t over this, reading the articles on the news apps tonight is brilliant.

It’s like an exHusband/wife trying to tell you what to do.

I think getting excited over the performative noises the respective parties make outside of internal negotiations is like getting excited over the banter boxers make before a fight.

I suspect, like the boxers themselves, those involved are on more amicable terms than the audience might suspect or want to believe.

The public framing of this as a big fight might help Boris Johnson sell any concessions to people if it appears he 'stuck it' to the EU whereas the EU might find any concessions easier to sell if they are seen to stick to their guns.

A good public fight isn't always bad for those involved. If it's anything like political punditry it's quite profitable.

The U.K. side has just deliberately made it harder to reach a deal with the EU. If there was any lingering doubt in Brussels over whether we were serious, or likely to blink and cave in like Teresa May, well then hopefully they now have clarity. If the EU wants a deal it is going to have to stop mucking about with preconditions that treat us like a client state.

I love how our Attorney General, cites in her Statement back to the EU that it was Gina Miller’s Supreme Court case that highlights that our parliament is sovereign and by saying this, that Miller herself has unwittingly become the Queen of Brexit. Cheers Gina.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by Mick

I love how our Attorney General, cites in her Statement back to the EU that it was Gina Miller’s Supreme Court case that highlights that our parliament is sovereign and by saying this, that Miller herself has unwittingly become the Queen of Brexit. Cheers Gina.

Yes, the AGs statement indeed says that Parliament is sovereign and can therefore unilaterally negate any treaty it has signed through domestic legislation.

How this sits with Article 27 of the Vienna Convention;

A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.

I am not sure (note that this convention might not apply with supranational organisations, this is not clear) I guess we can legislate to ignore that too.

[1andrew1]

Amusing as this all is, a key objective of the Brexit referendum in 2016 was to unite the Conservative Party. The key beneficiaries at the moment paradoxically seem to be Sir Keir and Nicola Sturgeon.

Judging by today's headlines, it's only worsening the Conservative Party's splits eg

Sky News: For heaven's sake, try and find some other way! Tory MPs urge PM not to override Brexit agreement

Daily Telegraph: Brexit battle lines have been redrawn - it's 2019 all over again

The Times: Dozens of Tory MPs prepare new Brexit revolt. Growing anger at bid to breach international law

BREAKING: UK has signed its first major trade deal as an independent trading nation, worth £30 Billion with Japan.

Originally Posted by Mick

BREAKING: UK has signed its first major trade deal as an independent trading nation, worth £30 Billion with Japan.

Butbutbut we don’t have the expertise, nobody wants a deal with little us, it’ll take years to make any deals

[Sephiroth]

I sympathise with what the Guvmin seeks to achieve - which is to prevent the EU's reach into the UK post transition.

I can also see that the rush to "get Brexit done" may have led to some carelessness over the implications of some terms of the WA, or (less likely) at "worst" a cynical assessment that if there is no trade deal, we could reverse some of the WA terms.

But rather than spook the trade talks as they have now done, they could have waited for the outcome of the trade talks and then, if the EU intruded into our affairs and free trade between GB and NI, simply to put up the hand and say "Non" and fight the battle then.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

BREAKING: UK has signed its first major trade deal as an independent trading nation, worth £30 Billion with Japan.

Hopefully BoJo has read it this time and won't decide to try and amend it nine months later.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Mick

BREAKING: UK has signed its first major trade deal as an independent trading nation, worth £30 Billion with Japan.

Originally Posted by Chris

Butbutbut we don’t have the expertise, nobody wants a deal with little us, it’ll take years to make any deals

As the FT points out, it's basically maintaining the existing trade we can do via the EU-Japan FTA.

https://www.ft.com/content/1cb01980-...a-528c5b3b1807

Devil will be in the details though as to how it's different, as it will be an indication of what benefits (or downsides) we get by negotiating our own deals as an independent trading nation.

[Carth]

Brexit talks will resume despite UK rejecting EU ultimatum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54112973

a few quotes:

The EU has threatened the UK government with legal action if it does not ditch its controversial Internal Market Bill by the end of the month

The new law would give UK ministers powers to modify or "disapply" rules relating to the movement of goods that will come into force from 1 January, if the UK and EU are unable to strike a trade deal.

The publication of the bill prompted emergency talks on Thursday, in which the EU said the planned changes must be scrapped or risk jeopardising the UK-EU trade talks.

Meanwhile, trade talk negotiators on both sides have acknowledged they are still clashing on "significant" issues.

Now I'm not the brainiest chap here (although I can read without moving my lips), but it looks to me like a gentle nudge suggesting if no deal is what we end up with, changes to existing 'agreements' will be made to reflect this.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

As the FT points out, it's basically maintaining the existing trade we can do via the EU-Japan FTA.

https://www.ft.com/content/1cb01980-...a-528c5b3b1807
Devil will be in the details though as to how it's different, as it will be an indication of what benefits (or downsides) we get by negotiating our own deals as an independent trading nation.

Key area to watch is: Will the UK have a tariff-free export quota for agricultural produce as it does at the moment via the EU agreement?

Originally Posted by BenMcr

As the FT points out, it's basically maintaining the existing trade we can do via the EU-Japan FTA.

https://www.ft.com/content/1cb01980-...a-528c5b3b1807

Devil will be in the details though as to how it's different, as it will be an indication of what benefits (or downsides) we get by negotiating our own deals as an independent trading nation.

Anything close to the existing EU trade deal puts the kibosh on claims that the U.K. is less attractive as a sovereign trade partner than the EU as a bloc.

I have no doubt that in the long run, deals we do with other sovereign states and trading blocs will vary, offering greater benefits in some areas and compromises in others. This will demonstrate the flexibility we now have to negotiate deals that best fit our economy, although I have no doubt that remainers will gleefully pounce upon any compromise as evidence of our reduced negotiating heft.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Chris

Anything close to the existing EU trade deal puts the kibosh on claims that the U.K. is less attractive as a sovereign trade partner than the EU as a bloc.

I have no doubt that in the long run, deals we do with other sovereign states and trading blocs will vary, offering greater benefits in some areas and compromises in others. This will demonstrate the flexibility we now have to negotiate deals that best fit our economy, although I have no doubt that remainers will gleefully pounce upon any compromise as evidence of our reduced negotiating heft.

I'm not sure we can read much into one potential trade deal whose precise details have yet to surface, but it won't stop anyone doing precisely this.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by pip08456

It has nothing to do with food standards per se. The EU says it has no safety concerns over chlorinated chicken.

It's everything to do with food standards. The issue isn't that the yanks chlorinate their chicken, the issue is that they do this because the rest of their standards are so abysmally low. EU (and current UK) food regulations require a high degree of standard throughout the life of the animal. US standards are much lower, so in order to minimise the risk of disease entering the food supply, they wash the chicken in a chlorine bath. You don't need to do that if you keep your chickens healthy.

Originally Posted by Pierre

I just love that the EU are losing their Sh|t over this, reading the articles on the news apps tonight is brilliant.

It’s like an exHusband/wife trying to tell you what to do.

I'm seeing other countries, former tory MPs, current tory MPs, the house of lords and, of course, the "opposition" complaining about this, not just the EU.

Also, don't try to bypass the swear filter or Admin Mick will send you a nasty warning. I got one for using *'s instead of words and that was reason enough, so I can only assume everyone on this board is treated to the same high standard.