Off Topic UK / EU Future

The UK could trade from the date of Brexit on WTO uncertified schedules for several years if need be until they achieve certification. This process is quite normal, the EU having done it for many years. It will not create any 'cliff edges' for the UK or its traders.

 

I don't think so SH. You have not considered on what grounds countries are objecting to the schedules that currently exist and why they cannot be rolled over. Having already said they will not trade with the UK on the current rules outside the agreed ones, why should they suddenly change their minds to trade the same thing, but under an unspecified rule? It makes no sense, and they know full well that the UK will be in a desperate situation that they will be able to exploit.

 

You fail to understand. Read my post above.

 

Maybe this will help you.

Objections to the UK's WTO Schedule: What do they mean? — Trade ...https://www.explaintrade.com/.../why-there-are-objections-to-the-uks-wto-schedule-an...

 

Why are countries such as Australia and New Zealand saying that they will not agree to the rolling over of the existing schedules? If you understood that you might see why they will not agree to your unspecified schedules. You can say we will trade on those terms, but no one has to suddenly change to accommodate you The USA have also said that they will oppose them for different reasons. Your it will all be so simple just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.

 

You need to read more than Guardian headlines to understand rules affecting Brexit.

 

Read it again, all these countries can do is stop the UK having certification for a while, trading will continue under WTO rules.

 

The EU has been trading on uncertified schedules for years. It was only last year they reached agreement to cover the 28 members.

 

I have seen it before. It doesn't deal with how countries that would rather deal with the large EU market than the small UK one, will sort out the division on the existing quotas. You only need one objection as correctly stated, but this is no longer in that situation. Two dozen have already objected. With Trump trying to put the boot in, the chances of a deal move nearer to the dustbin than ever before. The EU sorted out the schedules last year I believe, and that has made them stronger, while the UK wants to move backwards.

 

You fail to understand it is quite normal to trade under uncertified schedules. The experts have said it is a storm in a tea cup (The Guardian report). You are welcome to disagree with trade experts to further your project fear nonsense but you will only convince those already on your desperate 'remain' bandwagon. I was hoping you could stick to the facts for a change.

 

I am afraid that you do not wish to see the practicalities of your position. I could give you far more details, but as other have pointed out trying to convince someone who has been brainwashed by a cult is a waste of time.

 

Your attempt at exaggerating any problems regarding the UK trading on WTO rules is either born out of ignorance of the rules or something worse. Even the expert quoted by the Guardian called it 'a storm in a teacup'. You will need to fabricate another project fear non story today, this one failed miserably.

 

This statement is not correct.

The Commons chief clark, Sir David Natzler has confirmed that the vote MPs will take on what should happen in the event of a 'no deal' has no statutory significance. Officials confirmed that, from a legal perspective, parliament has little scope to stop Britain leaving the EU next March regardless of whether May's planned deal is approved or not.

Confirmation of the legal position will undoubtedly strengthen the UK government's position in parliament for its final proposed deal as the only possible alternative is leaving on a no deal basis.

 

It looks like the Tory party will do its usual suicide pact with itself... it either has to support May or implode.... all else will be a disaster for itself as the party of Government.....

An interesting parallel process with the changes in the Labour party...

Of course.... if we had PR


..............................
...

 

They have the numbers to force a second referendum whether you like it or not SH. Any attempt to nullify the sovereignty of Parliament in this way would be an insult to our democracy, and more fitting to some fascist republic. You do not have the numbers for the hard Brexit of your dreams, you can try to squirm out of that however you like, it will not work.

 

This is wishful thinking. The Commons Chief Clerk is aware of the law, you clearly are not.

 

I am sorry SH. but it is you that are guilty of wishfull thinking. In the absence of numbers in Parliament (or in the country) you are hoping for a no deal Brexit ie. we simply run out of time. This is obvious - however, as you know, Parliament can always seek to amend motions, and this right cannot be ignored. There is a precedent for Parliamentarians to impose a referendum as a condition for passing a government bill - the 1979 devolution referendums came about in this way. And British law is 100% about precedence.

 

There is a chance of adding an amendment to the Brexit bill for a second referendum but there is not the numbers for this in parliament. When this fails the only choices are accept May's option or leave without a deal.

 

There could be the numbers for this if Corbyn agrees, and he has not ruled this out. There are many options if Parliament votes down her deal, and this is one of them - the other is to send her back to renogotiate until she gets a deal which Labour supports. Legally there is no barrier to a second referendum if the numbers are there - or are you suggesting that you know more about the law than 200+ members of Parliament ?

 

They cannot send her back to renegotiate, if the amendment fails any other vote has no statutory significance, this means the government can ignore any result. You need to listen to the expert, The Commons Chief clark.