Looks like its all going wrong for Merkel http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-appears-shaky-coalition-talks-miss-deadline/ https://www.express.co.uk/news/worl...s-EU-agenda-Brussels-Merkel-Jamaica-coalition
I don’t really see this as being a good thing for us. Just bumps Brexit further down the list of priorities.
Watford you need to see the bigger picture mate. I remember hearing that the EU 27 were strong, now the biggest player is in bad shape. So bad that Macron is very concerned. As for Brexit we were being told that all our infighting was bad for us so I guess now it won't be as bad as before. She has caused her own problems and it will be her downfall (pardon the pun)
Yes, the bigger picture to me is that I don't see the link between her government not being at its strongest and us benefitting.
Agree. Sure, there's some schadenfreude after Europe laughing at Theresa May's poor election result, but the UK needs certainty in leadership in Germany. Important talks in the UK cabinet today on whether, and if so, how much, to increase the divorce payment. Personally, I'd be unhappy to see a doubling of the current £20bn offer to the EU, unless we can be sure we get something for it in terms of trade going forward.
Surprisingly anything but cheap as reported by Mrs. Danish from her annual Christmas shopping trip. Top of the range was on a exact par with CPH. Mid range often more expensive. The only shop that offered the real cost savings was of course Primani, we don't have in Scandinavia for obvious reasons. What was cheaper was dining out, otherwise Mrs. "Mulberry" Danish was not impressed. Reported that Mayfair at night felt like Moscow.
If we want a deal we need someone with authority to make it with. Doesn’t have to be Merkel, but it does have to be someone. A fragmented EU 27 can’t make a deal either, we need them to be united. Of course if we don’t want a deal we can sit at the back and snigger.
The EU are holding out for £60 billion, and won't mention trade talks until we commit to it. Why? Could it be that the EU intends to offer us really poor trade terms - after all, it wants us to be worse off than when we were in the club - with huge amounts of binding terms and red tape that will be a condition of doing business with the block of 27. The biggest bargaining chip we have on trade talks, is that the EU is desperate to fill a massive hole in their budget and needs our money. Do we give that away? Or should we be more trusting, agree to a huge divorce bill on the assumption the EU will be generous on the new trade deal i.e. the approach that Corbyn's Labour is taking?
I heard just now that the EU will offer an off the shelf trade deal, either like Norway (which we won’t take as it means we stay in the Single Market) or Canada. No special sector by sector deals (specifically not for finance). Because our economies are already aligned it should at least take less time to sort out than the Canada one did. The only question is what is it worth - which I suppose is a calculation taking into account what we lose from leaving the single market versus what we will lose by going to WTO terms, plus added costs on new customs arrangements etc offset by all the splendid new trade deals we will make with third parties. The one thing we can be sure of it that trade with the EU will be more difficult post Brexit, even if we get the ‘best possible’ deal.
...and, I guess, when calculating what we lose by going to WTO, net that figure off by taking into account the £60 billion we gain by not paying monies which we are not legally obliged to pay. The EU say they are preparing for a no-deal solution. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Junckers et al meet to decide how they get around the black hole in their budget. Germany and France won't want to pay - if Merkel goes, Germany may even become more Eurosceptic
We are in the Single Market now Jock. So it would be exactly the same. Yep, that would have to be taken into account. We would be explicitly buying a trade deal if we pay more than the balance sheet says we should. I heard that the no deal planning was being done by a totally different group to Barniers and was in the event of a collapse of the Tory government. Which, if the cabinet don’t get properly behind whatever they agreed today, could be quite imminent. Presumably because another election and a new government would run out of time, equaling no deal. Though why they couldn’t just put the deadline back a bit is beyond me. Looks like Merkel will go for another election, gambling that the wandering voters will be terrified of life without Mutti and come running back. Could bite her in the arse that strategy, though the instant in fighting in the AFD once they had a good election may count against them too.
Radio 4, The Times, my mate (English) who is a deputy trade commissioner for the EU, the one who was offered a £50k pay cut to work for Liam Fox. None of which will be sufficiently convincing for you, simply because I posted it.
