Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%

  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%
  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
Goldhawk-Road said:
The Times - end of March

The deal struck by Kemi Badenoch in the early hours of Friday, opening the way for Britain to join the CPTPP, a huge Indo-Pacific trade bloc, is a significant achievement for the government and welcome boost to the country’s post-Brexit fortunes. It means that Britain will become the first country from outside the region to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership since it was established in 2018 to increase trade links between its 11 members. Once Britain joins, the CPTPP will be home to 500 million people and be worth 15 per cent of global GDP, which is more than the 27 members of the European Union. Those figures are sure to rise given that other countries are queueing up to join.

True, the immediate economic benefits are likely to be limited. That’s partly because Britain’s trade with the bloc is relatively limited. Exports to CPTPP countries in 2021-22 were worth about £60 billion. That compares with exports of £161 billion to America and £330 billion to the EU. It’s also because the CPTPP is not a single market like the EU but a free trade area, whose primary focus is on lowering tariffs. Since Britain already has free trade agreements with all but two of the members, Malaysia and Brunei, there are few additional gains from new tariff deals on accession. A government analysis suggests the economic boost could be as little as 0.08 per cent of GDP.

Nonetheless, Ms Badenoch is right to insist that the way to view this deal is akin to investing in a start-up. CPTPP rules of origin, which require all goods produced in member countries to be treated as domestic for the purposes of trade within the bloc, will make it easier for British firms to participate in regional manufacturing supply chains. And while the CPTPP does little to improve market access in services, which account for 43 per cent of Britain’s exports, it does remove the requirement for British firms to open offices in member countries before they can start to trade, thereby removing cost and bureaucracy.

The real advantage of membership comes from the influence it gives Britain over how the block might develop in the future. At a time when the global rules-based trading system is fragmenting and a growing number of countries are reverting to outright protectionism, including America itself, as it did under Donald Trump and now under Joe Biden, Britain has secured a seat at the table among what are forecast to be some of the world’s fastest growing economies over the coming decades. That will give Britain a powerful platform both to push for further liberalisation of the trade among members of the bloc but also to champion efforts to reform the rules-based trading system in ways that ensure its important benefits to global prosperity are not lost.

Indeed, CPTPP membership brings broader diplomatic benefits too. Britain will have a veto over future entrants. Already some are calling for the government to rule out allowing China to join. More broadly, it will give Britain a stronger voice in the region, in line with the tilt to the Indo-Pacific announced in the Integrated Review. Of course, that is not and cannot be a substitute for a close partnership with Britain’s allies and neighbours in the EU. Instead, strong global relations reinforce each other. Following the King’s highly successful tour of Germany this week, this deal is another sign that Britain, after the turmoil of recent years, is recovering its poise.
Click to expand...
Just for transparency, this is the Times editorial leader from 31 March. It’s opinion, not reportage, as might be evident by the lack of facts and excess of opinion. The fact that its opinion is clear in the Times, less so in your post.

The editor of the Times is Tony Gallagher, a self confessed Brexiter and Johnson fan. When editor of the Sun in 2016 he claimed that the Queen supported Brexit and refused to qualify or provide evidence for that claim. So his opinion, which he is entitled to and which by virtue of his position is entitled to share, might not be exactly balanced.

The posts which highlight the potential tiny impact of this trade treaty are based on the Government’s own published assessment.

As all treaties involve an element of sharing sovereignty and acting in accordance with the wishes of other countries I wonder if those who are exercised by such matters think this is a good deal.
 
sb_73 said:
Just for transparency, this is the Times editorial leader from 31 March. It’s opinion, not reportage, as might be evident by the lack of facts and excess of opinion. The fact that its opinion is clear in the Times, less so in your post.

The editor of the Times is Tony Gallagher, a self confessed Brexiter and Johnson fan. When editor of the Sun in 2016 he claimed that the Queen supported Brexit and refused to qualify or provide evidence for that claim. So his opinion, which he is entitled to and which by virtue of his position is entitled to share, might not be exactly balanced.

The posts which highlight the potential tiny impact of this trade treaty are based on the Government’s own published assessment.

As all treaties involve an element of sharing sovereignty and acting in accordance with the wishes of other countries I wonder if those who are exercised by such matters think this is a good deal.
Click to expand...

Any sovereignty shared is minuscule compared with that demanded by EU membership.
 
sb_73 said:
Let’s say no. Is sovereignty as a principle important to you, or was your problem simply the way the EU works (some of which I probably share)?
Click to expand...

Genuinely didn’t give a flying **** about sovereignty and flag shagging stuff. However , when the EU as a whole decided things that went against the principles I believed in, like the free flow of low cost labour as a commodity, then of course I was against it
The EU in principle would have been a great idea as a trading block, however it is being used as a way for a few old timers to get very rich from the taxes of working class people of the whole of Europe…People like the Kinnocks, Blair and Farage have made a tidy sum out of it….and will continue to do so.
That, in my opinion, is very wrong. Happy for you to disagree though
 
Last edited:
Staines R's said:
Genuinely didn’t give a flying **** about sovereignty and flag shagging stuff. However , when the EU as a whole decided things that went against the principles I believed in, like the free flow of low cost labour as a commodity, then of course I was against it
The EU in principle would have been a great idea as a trading block, however it is being used as a way for a few old timers to get very rich from the taxes if working class people of the whole of Europe…Peiple like the Kinnocks, Blair and Farage have made a tidy sum out of it….and will continue to do so.
That, in my opinion, is very wrong. Happy for you to disagree though
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree in terms of the bureaucracy of the EU stinking. I used to think the concept is ok, if we can’t have something radically better, but it’s all irrelevant now, we’ve gone and we aren’t going back, even if the majority of the country want us to.

I’m just interested in what individuals’ red lines are. If yours are about paying bureaucrats’ pensions, why not so upset at having to pay for the senior British civil servants and your bosses in the ambulance service and so on? It’s not a wind up question, as you should know from me.
 
Staines R's said:
Genuinely didn’t give a flying **** about sovereignty and flag shagging stuff. However , when the EU as a whole decided things that went against the principles I believed in, like the free flow of low cost labour as a commodity, then of course I was against it
The EU in principle would have been a great idea as a trading block, however it is being used as a way for a few old timers to get very rich from the taxes of working class people of the whole of Europe…People like the Kinnocks, Blair and Farage have made a tidy sum out of it….and will continue to do so.
That, in my opinion, is very wrong. Happy for you to disagree though
Click to expand...
Wow
A trading block
What a fantastic idea
Why didn't we go down that route
 
  • Like
Reactions: rangercol and Staines R's
sb_73 said:
I don’t disagree in terms of the bureaucracy of the EU stinking. I used to think the concept is ok, if we can’t have something radically better, but it’s all irrelevant now, we’ve gone and we aren’t going back, even if the majority of the country want us to.

I’m just interested in what individuals’ red lines are. If yours are about paying bureaucrats’ pensions, why not so upset at having to pay for the senior British civil servants and your bosses in the ambulance service and so on? It’s not a wind up question, as you should know from me.
Click to expand...

I do think the pay and pension pots of the upper management in the NHS and such is appalling….while all the time those at the bottom are paid pittance. Sadly, in my opinion, whichever government is in power, that will not be changed as it’s never gonna change. They are all as bad as each other.
Unfortunately this isn’t being discussed in the main, as those in the liberal left seem infatuated by Brexit. Hopefully in the future that will change….however I can’t see it happening in my lifetime
 
Spent so much of my 18/19/20/21 in the trocadero...arcades, bars.
Shoot up there on the motorbike.
Great fun
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back