UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

So we will be "aligned with EU rules" (your words), but not their regulations?

Thanks for clearing that up...

No, but we will have to meet the specifications for the goods that are exported to the EU. The same as we have to do for our trade with other countries.

What I actually said was that we are already aligned with EU rules. That means we are already compliant with specification requirements on our exports to the EU.

But our Government has stated frequently they don’t intend to continue to be aligned with EU rule, so currently being aligned is irrelevant, and we could be non-compliant in the future.

It’s not irrelevant at all.

Trade deals are frequently characterised by mutual recognition of standards, not compliance. A mutual recognition deal that starts from a point of near perfect alignment ought to be far easier to work out than one that begins from a place of great divergence.

There are EU rules written right through our statute book. Even a deliberate effort to diverge from them would take years to produce significant widespread differences.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chris

It’s not irrelevant at all.

Trade deals are frequently characterised by mutual recognition of standards, not compliance. A mutual recognition deal that starts from a point of near perfect alignment ought to be far easier to work out than one that begins from a place of great divergence.

There are EU rules written right through our statute book. Even a deliberate effort to diverge from them would take years to produce significant widespread differences.

Eloquently put, Chris.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Chris

It’s not irrelevant at all.

Trade deals are frequently characterised by mutual recognition of standards, not compliance. A mutual recognition deal that starts from a point of near perfect alignment ought to be far easier to work out than one that begins from a place of great divergence.

There are EU rules written right through our statute book. Even a deliberate effort to diverge from them would take years to produce significant widespread differences.

+1

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Eloquently put, Chris.

So if it'd take years to make any meaningful changes, what's the rush to not extend 12 months?

Originally Posted by Chris

It’s not irrelevant at all.

Trade deals are frequently characterised by mutual recognition of standards, not compliance. A mutual recognition deal that starts from a point of near perfect alignment ought to be far easier to work out than one that begins from a place of great divergence.

There are EU rules written right through our statute book. Even a deliberate effort to diverge from them would take years to produce significant widespread differences.

So doesn’t that mean the PM, Foreign Secretary, and (then) Home Secretary were "not being congruent with actuality" when they said

Boris Johnson will issue a direct warning on Monday that the UK will refuse close alignment of rules

Britain will "not be aligning with EU rules" in any post-Brexit trade deal, the foreign secretary has said.

Britain will have no alignment with EU rules post-Brexit, the U.K. chancellor said, urging companies to “adjust” to the new reality.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

So if it'd take years to make any meaningful changes, what's the rush to not extend 12 months?

Because it will drag on and on. The EU would see to it. Only Remainers want that.

---------- Post added at 21:05 ---------- Previous post was at 21:03 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

So doesn’t that mean the PM, Foreign Secretary, and (then) Home Secretary were "not being congruent with actuality" when they said

You know full well what the Guvmin meant. We are no longer going to be rule takers. Out statute is what it is and can be amended if Parliament so decides.

Originally Posted by Hugh

So doesn’t that mean the PM, Foreign Secretary, and (then) Home Secretary were "not being congruent with actuality" when they said

Not in the slightest (as I suspect you already know).

The PM and others are talking about trajectory - future intent, not the present state of the statute book, which is self evidently fully aligned with the EU because it has been developed in line with the EU for more than 40 years.

This present government is open to regulatory change to the benefit of British businesses and consumers. There is, however, simply no way their pronouncements can possibly be construed as meaning that all those regulations will change on day one after the transition ends.

Originally Posted by Chris

Not in the slightest (as I suspect you already know).

The PM and others are talking about trajectory - future intent, not the present state of the statute book, which is self evidently fully aligned with the EU because it has been developed in line with the EU for more than 40 years.

This present government is open to regulatory change to the benefit of British businesses and consumers. There is, however, simply no way their pronouncements can possibly be construed as meaning that all those regulations will change on day one after the transition ends.

Agreed - however, that is one of the reasons why the treaty negotiations might take longer; what time period is our Government intending, and gaining agreement about this.

The point is - it's not that simple...

---------- Post added at 12:46 ---------- Previous post was at 12:44 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Because it will drag on and on. The EU would see to it. Only Remainers want that.

---------- Post added at 21:05 ---------- Previous post was at 21:03 ----------


You know full well what the Guvmin meant. We are no longer going to be rule takers. Out statute is what it is and can be amended if Parliament so decides.

That's a very simplistic attitude, and not attached to reality - we have to adhere to other countries product specifications (not just the EU's).

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Brexit has happened.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Pleae don't be obtuse. The hand "Brexit" in this thread covers the future relationship with the EU.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Brexit happened, if there is a delay to future trading relationship, I will wait. Isn’t that what you do if there is a delay?

Unusually, Pierre and I find ourselves in agreement on this point.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

So if it'd take years to make any meaningful changes, what's the rush to not extend 12 months?

Because it would allow the EU to continue to impose their rules on us.

Anyway, there is the initial video meeting today of the EU-UK joint committee on the Implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement today, by teleconference, with Michael Gove and EC Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič (and support staff), and here is the provisional agenda.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Because it would allow the EU to continue to impose their rules on us.

Rules we have no plans to diverge from for years apparently.

[OLD BOY]

I'm not sure if some of you are being deliberately obtuse. My point was about the specifications for goods. From next year we want to be able to determine the specifications for goods coming into this country and those we export out. We don't want to be hidebound by EU rules that are there as protectionist measures by the EU..

Of course, when it comes to trade WITH the EU, they will want goods coming in to meet certain standards. Well, we already meet those standards, which is why it will not take so long for us to get a trade agreement, assuming the EU are not still in punishment mode.

If we were still subject to EU rules next year, we would not have a free hand on these matters in negotiating with other countries. It will be our decision, not theirs, if we want to import chlorinated chicken from the States (which I would remind everyone is safer than EU salmonella-covered chicken).

---------- Post added at 15:35 ---------- Previous post was at 15:33 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

Rules we have no plans to diverge from for years apparently.

That was not my point. However, it would be nice to be able to do so if we chose.