Off Topic Impact of Brexit on Football

RER bor, why exclude us from that meeting, don't we have a say in the EU ? Just because we have given notice to leave doesn't exclude us from hearing what they propose in the future. While we are members we should be accorded the same rights as other members.

 

RER bor, why exclude us from that meeting, don't we have a say in the EU ? Just because we have given notice to leave doesn't exclude us from hearing what they propose in the future. While we are members we should be accorded the same rights as other members.

 

America will do what suits them best, that's what Obama was saying. It won't be in their best interests to give Britain preferential treatment. Obama was looking out for the USAs interests when he commented, as trade agreements between the USA and the EU+UK would be concluded quicker if we remain.

On trade deals, the estimate from China is that it will take 500 British negotiators 10 years to get something to a point of being signed. We do not have 500 negotiators, I suspect even with New Zealand's help.

So using staff we don't have, in negotiations we haven't started, it's ten years before we might have an agreement with China. A deal with the USA might take a similar length of time, as would a new deal with the EU or India. Negotiations with Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, South Africa, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina, etc would hardly be a walk in the park either. In the EU we either have agreements or are negotiating with all those countries, and many more. 99 by my count of the countries listed on the Wikipedia page.

Is a century really that far off as an estimate? That's one year per country negotiating linearly, and that's utter fantasy. That's why I said simultaneously. So now we need even more staff we don't have in order to negotiate deals more quickly. I don't think we could even train or recruit enough staff to be in a position to negotiate multiple deals with major world economies, before we leave the EU and lose all those deals.

 

You say :Estimated 500 negotiators and ten years just to deal with China. Bloody hell, Cameron and about six ministers in 2013 got a trade deal with China in a matter of days. Looks like we should give Cameron a government post to look after our trade deals. I give credit where it is due and Cameron certainly looked after our interests then.

I've already said our leaving will help the Yanks in their negotiations with the EU and said how. You make the assertion that our remaining will help the Yanks, now give your reasons for the statement.

 

Cameron agreed business deals, not trade agreements. It's one thing speaking to China and coming back from the table with a £6bn investment in a UK nuclear power station (amongst others totalling around £40bn during the Chinese Premier's state visit), it's quite different to negotiate unilateral agreements on business regulations, protectionism, IP law (I suspect that'd be a fun one with China), labour rights, tariffs, regulatory standards...the list goes on. Agreeing a £45m deal for the import of pig semen is comparatively simple, and no doubt many of those deals were in place long before Cameron rubber-stamped them.

TTIP is probably a few years from concluding negotiations. Pre Brexit that covers the UK too. If we leave then UK-USA negotiations start afresh. It'll be much longer for the USA to conclude separate deals. Britain leaving the EU may weaken the EUs negotiating position slightly, and perhaps speed up negotiations as there's one less country demanding special treatment. A UK-USA deal would then be negotiated with the UK on a much weaker footing.

 

So you are saying we did business with China, them funding a nuclear power station etc and we "traded" nothing back. The Chinese never struck me as being stupid, I think they are more astute than that. What they got back I don't know because nothing has been mentioned but I certainly don't think the Chinese are that benevolent. Business to me is trade, negotiations are the finer point of business trading.

Importing pig semen, I thought our pigs were quite capable of reproducing without the assistance of Chinese pigs. !!!

Cannot see much to deter us on negotiating these subjects, business regulations, protectionism, IP law (I suspect that'd be a fun one with China), labour rights, tariffs, regulatory standards; as we already do a lot of business with China, shouldn't present a problem as most of our goods are already made in China.

Britain leaving the EU may weaken the EUs negotiating position slightly, only slightly. .Well at least you agree with me on that point although in my opinion there is no slightly about it. If we leave . . . not when we leave, interesting, you seem to have a doubt about the referendum decision. The Government and Corbyn as leader of the Opposition have already stated they accept the people's decision.

UK-US trade deals will become conducted under a new President and that is for the future.

 

I think the pig semen was just for Cameron's drinks cupboard..........

 

Hi Weighty bor, I think it was for pig iron but just guessing.

If it was semen beggars belief what we want with that. I know that we are experimenting with pig bodily parts, but ....semen.

 

I think it was a "pig in a poke!"

 

Hi Dave, I think DH and I differ on the meaning of business and trade. For instance I go into a shop look around and see an object I want marked at £150. I tell the assistant I will trade these coins valued at that amount, the assistant takes the money, does the paperwork and gives me a receipt. The goods are now mine. I have done business with the shop. Or you could say I have traded with the shop. the result is the same I am now the proud possessor of a fridge. Simple Basic English.

 

Cameron went to China to attract investment in British projects and products. China is cash rich in spite of investing heavily in the US and other countries and investing in nuclear power projects here gives them a prospect of long-term profit on the deal for cash up front. It is more like one of us investing in an ISA to gain future profit. It's not a buying-selling type transaction.

 

China invest in a nuclear power station and takes back money for its investment. Products, I presume you mean we sell goods to them and they pay for same. Very enlightening but what is your point.

China investing and getting interest on that investment is financial trading and products is basic trading. Investing in an ISA and getting back interest on the investment is financial trading. My bank takes my ISA money, gives me a financial return. If it didn't I wouldn't trade with them.

 

There is a difference between agreeing a trade/deal and providing a framework for all future trades/deals. Cameron's successes with China consisted of the former, the common market and these "trade agreements" between countries that are negotiated over several years are a completely different beast.

Simple basic English does have the odd word that has different definitions, and context is important. It doesn't change the fact that these "framework agreements" (to avoid confusion) take multiple years and many people to negotiate, neither of which we have if we don't want to reduce our ability to trade or make deals on favourable terms.

In terms of if/when we leave, I still don't see any MP prepared to pull the plug and activate article 50. As far as I'm aware none of the Tory candidates have said they'd trigger it immediately upon being chosen as party leader/Prime minister. The Tories and UKIP were the only parties with significant pro-exit factions, nobody else wants to.

It's catch-22 for whoever does it. Pulling us out of the EU into a Norway like deal gives up a lot of benefits, and still leaves us with freedom of movement, which appears to be the cause of a great deal of the unhappiness with the EU. That will leave many people from remain and exit positions unhappy, and I suspect render the PM responsible unelectable.

Alternatively pull us out completely, and there will be huge upheaval before the next general election, the scale of the problems will be brought into sharp relief, and once again the PM will be unelectable.

The government may pay lip-service to the idea of accepting the people's decision, but not one of them want to try to deliver it.

 

Let's deal with the easy one, the last paragraph. No-one in the Government wants to go for Leave. There are two ministers standing for PM that were for Leave,

Paragraph three, I see you have now corrected yourself, if/when not just the simple if. The Tories and UKIP only parties to want Leave, yes but the referendum was decided by the people, not parties, a lot of Labour supporters went against the Party advice and voted Leave.

After elimination of current candidates the Tory Party members will make their democratic choice from the remaining two candidates and that person will be the leader of the Tory Party. As that party held the majority at the last election, that person will present themself to the Queen to inform her he is the Prime Minister of her government.

Now the 60 dollar question. It takes a motion in Parliament to repeal the Act that took us into Europe. MPs will have to decide whether to abide by the people's decision or oppose that decision. The Tories only have a 16 majority and their party is split on the motion. SNP and LibDems are against Leave. If the Government is defeated on this issue which was in their mandate then a General Election seems the likely outcome. How many current MPs will retain their seats.

I wouldn't worry too much about what terms we get from the EU at the moment. First things first, getting the Tories to get their fingers out and electing their leader.

What form our discussions with the EU take will then take our time discussing.

 

Gove has said he wouldn't activate Article 50 until he/we were good and ready. Utterly logical or an attempt to weasel out of ever doing it, that's probably down to your opinion of the man. Leadsom as the other pro-leave candidate hasn't as far as I can see hasn't made such a statement, but is currently considered an outside bet by the bookies.

I don't see I've corrected myself at all, simply pointed out that it's career suicide for whoever does it. Ergo I don't think anybody will.

To article 50 itself, I'm not sure whether that's a decision the PM takes themselves, taking their mandate from the people, or puts it to parliament where I agree it wouldn't get passed. However, the fixed terms parliament act makes an early general election difficult. It requires either:

-A vote of no confidence in the government
-A two thirds majority vote in favour of an early general election.

I don't see either as likely, Labour and the Tories are in disarray, they'll want a strong position before trying to force a general election. I suspect many parties will be happy to let the Tories handle the mess of Brexit too, it'll only harm them in the eventual election.

So I don't see Article 50 being activated before 2020, and instead I expect the government to make changes that appease Leave voters without taking us out of the EU. Then we'll see at the General Election what happens, but any less than a win for UKIP or a pro-leave Tory leader will surely be seen as a vote to remain.

 

First let's look at the situation from a different angle, the EU. They have already expressed that the UK is out of the EU but cannot do anything until the button is pressed. They say there Is no turning back so that puts the matter firmly back in our politicians hands.

It comes back to Parliament, do the MPs vote to repeal the Act joining us to Europe or not.

Just been reading Gove, Fox and Leadsom comments regarding their taking the leadership and all three express the same sentiment. No single market contact and no freedom of access to EU citizens. May on the other hand seems in favour of retaining some membership but partially curbing emigrants.
No comment from Crabbe.

Now up to Parliament. The MPs are going to have to earn that increase they voted themselves.

 

May's approach is more flexible but would she get support from the EU on some restrictions on EU citizens coming here ? That I doubt.

 

I'm just going to leave this here. I doubt some are brave enough to watch it.

http://eaworldview.com/2016/07/brit...xit-one-of-the-most-dishonest-campaigns-ever/

 

Can't wait for our new PM of this government accountable to 60m, democratically elected by 150,000