Off Topic UK / EU Future

[Leo]

One word, Power. I have known politicians who are quite happy to serve as MPs in Westminster and do not have the desire to achieve the highest posts. Others seem to have the belief that they were put on this earth to be world leaders. It never seems to cross their minds how unsuitable they are to do just that.

Well it has to be power and ambition as there is no other good reason - but how can she have thought the job was achieveable and that it would not break her? I guess politicians like her have great self belief.
"Others" are wrong - I will be the one and only world leader - I am biding my time - just waiting for my immortality pill to kick in.

 

[Leo]

It was clear from day 1 after the referendum that the EU were only interested in giving the UK a bloody nose for having the audacity to reject their project. No British government of any persuasion could have negotiated a sensible deal with the EU. It will not be until there is a real prospect of us leaving without a deal and the prospect of no further funds from the UK, will the minds of leaders of EU member states be concentrated on the negative consequences to themselves. The 'unity' of the EU will soon disappear so that pragmatic meaningful discussions can begin on the future relationship.
If May thinks there is another way she is wasting time and deluding herself along with the nation.

I agree that the EU were never going to give the UK a decent deal. Think how Brits would have felt and reacted if it were Frexit - shadenfeude in spades.
That is why brexit was always a bad idea. There was never a prospect of a "good deal" so it was either no deal or Norway deal. Both abysmal. Given that why would anyone who did not want "no deal" vote brexit?

 

[Leo]

I am still waiting - on this and other forums as well as in personal conversations for anyone - anyone - to explain to me what reasonable deal could have been acceptable to both the UK and EU. Not what are the advantages and disadvantages, sovereignty, migration, contributions, ECJ etc - but what deal could have been agreed by both parties? Only deafening silence.

 

[Tobes]

It was clear from day 1 after the referendum that the EU were only interested in giving the UK a bloody nose for having the audacity to reject their project. No British government of any persuasion could have negotiated a sensible deal with the EU. It will not be until there is a real prospect of us leaving without a deal and the prospect of no further funds from the UK, will the minds of leaders of EU member states be concentrated on the negative consequences to themselves. The 'unity' of the EU will soon disappear so that pragmatic meaningful discussions can begin on the future relationship.

If May thinks there is another way she is wasting time and deluding herself along with the nation.

It was clear before a vote was cast that the EU was going protect its own members ahead of the nation who unilaterally decided to leave. It was also clear that they were never going to agree to a deal that saw us retain most of the benefits of membership having left the trading bloc.

But no, that was ‘project fear’, ‘they need us more than we need them’ and ‘German cars though’ was the mantra, the trade deficit was held up as being proof that they’d give us a ‘great deal’, whilst ignoring the simple fact that as individual nations their exposure was small compared to our near 50% of exports.

Now the reality is finally dawning on those who kidded themselves on, the mantra has changed to ‘they’re bullying us’ and ‘the EU will collapse anyway’.

It’s like watching a slow motion car crash, that was completely predictable and was predicted by many over 2 years ago.

 

[superhorns]

I am still waiting - on this and other forums as well as in personal conversations for anyone - anyone - to explain to me what reasonable deal could have been acceptable to both the UK and EU. Not what are the advantages and disadvantages, sovereignty, migration, contributions, ECJ etc - but what deal could have been agreed by both parties? Only deafening silence.

If the EU side is hamstrung by its intransigence then an initial no deal is the best prospect for the UK. I'm sure time and pressure from individual member states would no doubt increase the likelihood of finding agreement on many subjects for mutual benefit. Calls for flexibility on the EU's sacrosanct free movement is already underway from the French and others. The yearning for the EU to self harm is staggering.

 

[superhorns]

There does seem to be a consensus that it is the EU side at fault for the two sides not reaching a sensible agreement. Intransigence, justified or not.

 

[Hornet-Fez]

We reap what we sow.

 

[oldfrenchhorn]

I am still waiting - on this and other forums as well as in personal conversations for anyone - anyone - to explain to me what reasonable deal could have been acceptable to both the UK and EU. Not what are the advantages and disadvantages, sovereignty, migration, contributions, ECJ etc - but what deal could have been agreed by both parties? Only deafening silence.

You have deafening silence because there never was a deal different to what we had available. Many countries this side of the Channel already thought that you had too much, going back to the Thatcher rebate. To have the advantages we had, and believe that we could extract more was total madness. Is there a deal available now? Yes, a simple free trade deal as the Canada option, and let us see how long that will take to sort out.

 

[Tobes]

I am still waiting - on this and other forums as well as in personal conversations for anyone - anyone - to explain to me what reasonable deal could have been acceptable to both the UK and EU. Not what are the advantages and disadvantages, sovereignty, migration, contributions, ECJ etc - but what deal could have been agreed by both parties? Only deafening silence.

Easy, we could have taken the Norway model.

Only May chose to put her own interpretation onto the in /out vote result, and decided she knew the motives of the populous for voting as they did. She then took those assumptions and foolishly set out her ‘red lines’, which ruled out retaining Single market and customs union access as well as removing free movement. If she’d have not painted herself into a corner so early on, then she’d have many more options still on the table now.

 

[Leo]

If the EU side is hamstrung by its intransigence then an initial no deal is the best prospect for the UK. I'm sure time and pressure from individual member states would no doubt increase the likelihood of finding agreement on many subjects for mutual benefit. Calls for flexibility on the EU's sacrosanct free movement is already underway from the French and others. The yearning for the EU to self harm is staggering.

Yes - well some of us think no deal is not good.

There does seem to be a consensus that it is the EU side at fault for the two sides not reaching a sensible agreement. Intransigence, justified or not.

I would love to see where you have seen that consensus.

 

[Leo]

You have deafening silence because there never was a deal different to what we had available. Many countries this side of the Channel already thought that you had too much, going back to the Thatcher rebate. To have the advantages we had, and believe that we could extract more was total madness. Is there a deal available now? Yes, a simple free trade deal as the Canada option, and let us see how long that will take to sort out.

... and were they not correct The UK had a superb deal within the EU.
Is the Canada deal a deal - or just an ordinary trade arrangement which we will eventually negotiate if we leave with no "deal"?

 

[Leo]

Easy, we could have taken the Norway model.

Only May chose to put her own interpretation onto the in /out vote result, and decided she knew the motives of the populous for voting as they did. She then took those assumptions and foolishly set out her ‘red lines’, which ruled out retaining Single market and customs union access as well as removing free movement. If she’d have not painted herself into a corner so early on, then she’d have many more options still on the table now.

Do you think that is "easy"?
I can see two problems.
Many brexiters do not consider the Norway model is really leaving the EU - we would still be subject to the 4 pillars.
Many remainers consider that the Norway deal is worse in all respects than being in the EU as we have all the disadvantages, possibly would pay more and would no longer have a say in future matters.
So who does the Norway model appeal to?

 

[Tobes]

Do you think that is "easy"?
I can see two problems.
Many brexiters do not consider the Norway model is really leaving the EU - we would still be subject to the 4 pillars.
Many remainers consider that the Norway deal is worse in all respects than being in the EU as we have all the disadvantages, possibly would pay more and would no longer have a say in future matters.
So who does the Norway model appeal to?

We’d pay far less than we do now, we’d regain the bollocks notion of Sovereignty that the Brexiteers have claimed is their prime driver. We’d be able to strike our own trade deals which is their other main Unicorn. The compromise would be around free movement, but we could actually try the idea of enforcing the current rules, like Belgium do, and thus eradicating the possibility of anyone coming here and not providing for themselves.

 

[oldfrenchhorn]

The current negotiations are not really about trade, but to sort out the way in which we leave. However it does say that a future relationship should be taken into account. Therefore a deal about how we leave, which parts such as Euratom, Open Skies, etc we can pay to still belong to will have to be sorted unless we wish to see everything grind to a halt. So some sort of deal on the actual leaving has to be found. There cannot be any trade talks until after we leave, so a Norway type deal could come under the existing talks, but a Canada deal is only a free trade deal, and would not start to evolve until after we left.

 

[Leo]

We’d pay far less than we do now, we’d regain the bollocks notion of Sovereignty that the Brexiteers have claimed is their prime driver. We’d be able to strike our own trade deals which is their other main Unicorn. The compromise would be around free movement, but we could actually try the idea of enforcing the current rules, like Belgium do, and thus eradicating the possibility of anyone coming here and not providing for themselves.

I'm not sure we would pay much less. It was a long time ago I saw some figures but it seemed to show Sweden were paying almost the equivalent per head that we do - we have rebates now that won't "transfer over" I suspect.
Now - could we strike our own trade deals? I thought not as we would be tied to the customs union and single market without technically being in them.

 

[Leo]

The current negotiations are not really about trade, but to sort out the way in which we leave. However it does say that a future relationship should be taken into account. Therefore a deal about how we leave, which parts such as Euratom, Open Skies, etc we can pay to still belong to will have to be sorted unless we wish to see everything grind to a halt. So some sort of deal on the actual leaving has to be found. There cannot be any trade talks until after we leave, so a Norway type deal could come under the existing talks, but a Canada deal is only a free trade deal, and would not start to evolve until after we left.

Yes - that is how I understood it too.

 

[Tobes]

I'm not sure we would pay much less. It was a long time ago I saw some figures but it seemed to show Sweden were paying almost the equivalent per head that we do - we have rebates now that won't "transfer over" I suspect.
Now - could we strike our own trade deals? I thought not as we would be tied to the customs union and single market without technically being in them.

Norway pay about 35% less than we do as a full member. Norway aren’t in the customs union, so yes is the answer.

 

[Leo]

Norway pay about 35% less than we do as a full member. Norway aren’t in the customs union, so yes is the answer.

Just to make sure I am not confused - they pay 65% of what we do (35% less) - is that right? If so - we as a bigger country might be expected to pay more? Even so 35% of our net £8b is only £3b. NOt great for giving up rights to vote etc.
Norway is in the EEA - which is somehow linked to the CU and SM - I am pretty sure they are not allowed independent trade deals as it would interfere with EU free trade. Not 100% sure on that though. If you are right why are brexiters so fearful of it?

 

[Tobes]

Just to make sure I am not confused - they pay 65% of what we do (35% less) - is that right? If so - we as a bigger country might be expected to pay more? Even so 35% of our net £8b is only £3b. NOt great for giving up rights to vote etc.
Norway is in the EEA - which is somehow linked to the CU and SM - I am pretty sure they are not allowed independent trade deals as it would interfere with EU free trade. Not 100% sure on that though. If you are right why are brexiters so fearful of it?

Per head they pay about 35% less mate.

They’re in the Single market but not the customs union, so they can make their own trade deals.

They get to vote on certain areas btw, despite not being a full member.

As for the Brexiteers, their ‘red line’ of free movement would be the issue for them. It’s one that infuriates me due to the complete misrepresentation of what the rules actually mean we can do as a country, compared to how we’ve chosen to apply them, and there’s a stark difference.

 

[Leo]

Per head they pay about 35% less mate.

They’re in the Single market but not the customs union, so they can make their own trade deals.

They get to vote on certain areas btw, despite not being a full member.

As for the Brexiteers, their ‘red line’ of free movement would be the issue for them. It’s one that infuriates me due to the complete misrepresentation of what the rules actually mean we can do as a country, compared to how we’ve chosen to apply them, and there’s a stark difference.

Thanks for all that. The Norway deal is not as bad as I had feared. How does not being in the customs union affect the Irish border though?