Off Topic UK / EU Future

[Leo]

EU intransigence will ensure a no deal is the most likely option now. They fear an independent powerhouse on their doorstep, free of much red tape and restrictive practices. There is so much scepticism now in the EU for its superstate project that damaging the UK is the priority.
The Brexiteers will live to fight another day, they will ensure the referendum result is respected.

The EU may finally decide to deal and see they have moved the UK quite a way. The idea of them fearing an independent powerhouse on their doorstep though made me chuckle. Few people in the EU seem bothered by the superstate idea - long time away if ever - and I think the UK appears about 5 or 6 on most EU countries agendas - shock horror SH - I am not sure we are so important to them as some of us imagine.

 

[colognehornet]

All sides before the referendum made it perfectly clear that leaving the EU meant leaving the single market and the customs union. That is what was voted on and the electorate chose leave on those terms. The PM has consistently reiterated these facts and now has to carry out what was promised. Any backsliding will install anger and disappointment in the majority of those vast numbers who bothered to vote. The EU is unlikely to accept this offer, any further backsliding will result in ridicule for the PM and the UK in general. The UK was unable to assert adequate authority because of the stitch up between Germany and it's lackey France.

What evidence do you have for a 'stitch up' between Germany and France SH. ? Are the Germans and the French such lovers of each other that it was not possible for the UK. to be at head height with them ? If Germany has assumed any position of strength within the EU. at all then one of the main reasons has been the perpetual inability of the British and French governments to work together. You, at least, are apparently incapable of mentioning France without applying a negative adjective to them.

 

[Leo]

All sides before the referendum made it perfectly clear that leaving the EU meant leaving the single market and the customs union. That is what was voted on and the electorate chose leave on those terms. The PM has consistently reiterated these facts and now has to carry out what was promised. Any backsliding will install anger and disappointment in the majority of those vast numbers who bothered to vote. The EU is unlikely to accept this offer, any further backsliding will result in ridicule for the PM and the UK in general. The UK was unable to assert adequate authority because of the stitch up between Germany and it's lackey France.

Just about nothing to do with the referendum was made clear. Not when brexiters were offered such different deals as total walk away and "Norway plus"
I am going to love it if we do a Norway deal - to watch brexiters become bre-moaners will be excellent.

 

[superhorns]

Just about nothing to do with the referendum was made clear. Not when brexiters were offered such different deals as total walk away and "Norway plus"
I am going to love it if we do a Norway deal - to watch brexiters become bre-moaners will be excellent.

Everybody from Cameron, Osborne Farage, vote leave and vote remain, whatever it was called, made it abundantly clear a vote for leaving meant leaving the single market and the customs union. Is amnesia setting in?

 

[superhorns]

The US Ambassador Woody Johnson has reaffirmed Trump wants to do a quick 'zero tariff' deal with the UK. This is while the US is actively working on imposing further tariffs on EU products, mainly targeting German cars. The timing will probably coincide around the date the UK leaves the EU. Trump has astounded many by actually carrying out most of his promises.

 

[colognehornet]

The US Ambassador Woody Johnson has reaffirmed Trump wants to do a quick 'zero tariff' deal with the UK. This is while the US is actively working on imposing further tariffs on EU products, mainly targeting German cars. The timing will probably coincide around the date the UK leaves the EU. Trump has astounded many by actually carrying out most of his promises.

Do you want a 'zero tariff' deal with a country which has a massive trade imbalance and is desparate to offload goods which do not satisfy EU. health and safety standards ?

 

[oldfrenchhorn]

Independent powerhouse. Britain's factories showed the steepest fall in productivity for more than five years in April and there was a sudden widening of the trade deficit by £2 billion in manufactured goods.
Any deal with the US will be heavily biased in their favour due to them knowing that we are desperate to accept anything going. Agricultural products are always tied to deals that the US does. Their standards are not acceptable to many in the UK.

 

[superhorns]

Do you want a 'zero tariff' deal with a country which has a massive trade imbalance and is desparate to offload goods which do not satisfy EU. health and safety standards ?

The UK currently has a positive trade imbalance with the US. I'm perfectly happy to trade with the US in future on UK health and safety standards.

Trump is doing the correct thing for his country by drawing attention to the US's wholly unbalanced trade deficits with the EU and China. If the present tariff arrangements are unfair to the US then they must be amended, having a short term trade punch up is the only way to affect any change. If the UK has a zero tariff arrangement with the US that would benefit both countries.

 

[Leo]

Everybody from Cameron, Osborne Farage, vote leave and vote remain, whatever it was called, made it abundantly clear a vote for leaving meant leaving the single market and the customs union. Is amnesia setting in?

Not at all thanks. If you remember Cameron was responsible for your so called project fear so how come you are relying on what he said as your truth. Farage said that if he lost 52-48 he would not accept the referendum verdict so he is unreliable too. There were lots of suggestions as to what brexit might deliver - do you remember the Norway model being a prominent example - I do and there are lots of papers you can go back to if your memory is failing you that confirm it.
The vote was pure and simple - leave the EU - is Norway in the EU - no. QED.

 

[Deleted.......]

All sides before the referendum made it perfectly clear that leaving the EU meant leaving the single market and the customs union. That is what was voted on and the electorate chose leave on those terms. The PM has consistently reiterated these facts and now has to carry out what was promised. Any backsliding will install anger and disappointment in the majority of those vast numbers who bothered to vote. The EU is unlikely to accept this offer, any further backsliding will result in ridicule for the PM and the UK in general. The UK was unable to assert adequate authority because of the stitch up between Germany and it's lackey France.

Do you honestly think that 17 million actually knew exactly what leaving the single market and customs union meant? I know for a fact they didn't - nor did all the sweet sixteen either to be fair.
I've done EU related work for 30 years and I have been a bit shocked by some things that well be affected by as a result of leaving. I suspect that goes for many other voters too.

 

[superhorns]

Not at all thanks. If you remember Cameron was responsible for your so called project fear so how come you are relying on what he said as your truth. Farage said that if he lost 52-48 he would not accept the referendum verdict so he is unreliable too. There were lots of suggestions as to what brexit might deliver - do you remember the Norway model being a prominent example - I do and there are lots of papers you can go back to if your memory is failing you that confirm it.
The vote was pure and simple - leave the EU - is Norway in the EU - no. QED.

I completely disagree the 'Norway model' was a general prominent example, it may have been something you concentrated on.

Cameron was partly responsible for project fear, particularly as we have just found out he requested Obama quote the ill fated and silly 'back of the queue' statement. Obama's involvement gave the leave side a massive boost. Cameron, along with many others, did however made it abundantly clear the consequences of leaving the EU, no single market no customs union.

 

[superhorns]

Do you honestly think that 17 million actually knew exactly what leaving the single market and customs union meant? I know for a fact they didn't - nor did all the sweet sixteen either to be fair.
I've done EU related work for 30 years and I have been a bit shocked by some things that well be affected by as a result of leaving. I suspect that goes for many other voters too.

I expect very few know the exact consequences of leaving, they did however deduce it meant ending free movement, sovereignty and the ability to do free trade deals with non EU countries.

 

[Deleted.......]

Independent powerhouse. Britain's factories showed the steepest fall in productivity for more than five years in April and there was a sudden widening of the trade deficit by £2 billion in manufactured goods.
Any deal with the US will be heavily biased in their favour due to them knowing that we are desperate to accept anything going. Agricultural products are always tied to deals that the US does. Their standards are not acceptable to many in the UK.

The problem with an agrifood deal with the US is that it would need to be very restrictive so as not to jeopardise our trade in that sphere with the EU. They don't import products of animal origin from anyone who imports live animals or meat from US - and we support that more than many.

I doubt most would accept beef from cattle reared on steroids and various other hormones or chlorinated chicken. Sure that chicken is safe to eat - but the quality is impaired because it probably had bird flu or another notifiable disease. US welfare standards are way behind ours.

All of this isn't to say we won't get a deal. We will and it will be a good one because both sides are super keen and we tend to include items that are not produced by both countries. Eg - we export more minced beef to them than anyone else.

 

[Markthehorn]

Little video set up by the Government for their vision of Brexit..

You must log in or register to see media

Don't think it has gone down too well going by the comments below!​

 

[superhorns]

The problem with an agrifood deal with the US is that it would need to be very restrictive so as not to jeopardise our trade in that sphere with the EU. They don't import products of animal origin from anyone who imports live animals or meat from US - and we support that more than many.

I doubt most would accept beef from cattle reared on steroids and various other hormones or chlorinated chicken. Sure that chicken is safe to eat - but the quality is impaired because it probably had bird flu or another notifiable disease. US welfare standards are way behind ours.

All of this isn't to say we won't get a deal. We will and it will be a good one because both sides are super keen and we tend to include items that are not produced by both countries. Eg - we export more minced beef to them than anyone else.

Balanced post.

I thought most of the UK chickens already contain harmful bacteria only killed through a sufficient level of cooking.?

 

[Deleted.......]

Balanced post.

I thought most of the UK chickens already contain harmful bacteria only killed through a sufficient level of cooking.?

Thanks - see what's possible wen I put my mind to it
You are right about bacteria - mainly salmonella and campylobactor. You have to vaccinate to get rid of it and if you do you cannot trade. So Sweden does and therefore won't import from anyone in the EU and cannot export. But that's her choice.

I'm a big fan of the EU welfare and biosecurity standards because they safeguard countries like Ireland whose economies are massively dependent on farming. If they got Foot and Mouth Disease on the scale we did in 2001 they would have been crippled. Oh and a lot of UK retailers actually have higher standards than the EU!

Sorry for the rambling and long post. I could talk about this stuff all day

 

[Leo]

I completely disagree the 'Norway model' was a general prominent example, it may have been something you concentrated on.

Cameron was partly responsible for project fear, particularly as we have just found out he requested Obama quote the ill fated and silly 'back of the queue' statement. Obama's involvement gave the leave side a massive boost. Cameron, along with many others, did however made it abundantly clear the consequences of leaving the EU, no single market no customs union.

Ha ha. Good one. No I did not concentrate on it as if you remember I voted remain. I did not believe anything the brexit side said - not that we could have a Norway deal nor that the NHS would get £350m per week. I was surprised that 17.4 m people could be hoodwinked by lies and false promises. Nobody voted for no deal, a Norway deal, a Switzerland deal; a good deal; a bad deal or anything else because the referendum was simply about whether we leave the EU. We have - what deal we do is whatever the government can manage. Norway are not in the EU so if we copy them - great. Best result short of staying in the EU.

 

[colognehornet]

I expect very few know the exact consequences of leaving, they did however deduce it meant ending free movement, sovereignty and the ability to do free trade deals with non EU countries.

Can I focus on the first of those SH ? How do you visualize ending free movement of people. Britain already inspects documents on entry, and can refuse entry to anyone who is on the wanted list, or who has certain classes of conviction behind them. How do you see it developing over and above this ? Do you see the introduction of visas for all visitors from the EU ? If this is the case then tourism will be hit badly, and this not just from the EU. because currently a visitor from the USA or Japan can come into the UK. on a general EU. visa. Or do you see registration of when a person comes into the country as the solution ie. they can stay for eg. 3 months ? If this is the case then the number of a million illegal immigrants, which Britain already has, could only grow. Or do you see the controls coming later ie. when applying for jobs or benefits ? I have heard a great deal about ending free movement, but it all seems a bit wooly - I want to know in concrete terms what you mean by it. One thing is certain - you cannot differentiate between EU. citizens according to their nationality. Any attempt to treat Rumanians or Bulgarians differently to eg. Germans, Dutch or whatever will lead to a collective EU. reaction.

 

[superhorns]

Ha ha. Good one. No I did not concentrate on it as if you remember I voted remain. I did not believe anything the brexit side said - not that we could have a Norway deal nor that the NHS would get £350m per week. I was surprised that 17.4 m people could be hoodwinked by lies and false promises. Nobody voted for no deal, a Norway deal, a Switzerland deal; a good deal; a bad deal or anything else because the referendum was simply about whether we leave the EU. We have - what deal we do is whatever the government can manage. Norway are not in the EU so if we copy them - great. Best result short of staying in the EU.

Hopefully you also discounted the lies and false predictions of the 'remain' side. The electorate voted to leave on the best terms the government of the day could negotiate. If the EU's intransigence makes that impossible then the public would not want the UK to agree a bad deal. As I always thought it now transpires that the only way to achieve a decent deal is to plan for a no deal.

The Boris bus did not promise £350m for the NHS. It claimed we were liable for that amount to send to Brussels and when that ceased there could be more cash for the NHS. It did not specifically state £350m.

 

[Leo]

Hopefully you also discounted the lies and false predictions of the 'remain' side. The electorate voted to leave on the best terms the government of the day could negotiate. If the EU's intransigence makes that impossible then the public would not want the UK to agree a bad deal. As I always thought it now transpires that the only way to achieve a decent deal is to plan for a no deal.

The Boris bus did not promise £350m for the NHS. It claimed we were liable for that amount to send to Brussels and when that ceased there could be more cash for the NHS. It did not specifically state £350m.

ha ha - again. Yes I took economic the predictions with as much of a pinch of salt as I took the £350m for the NHS on the side of the Boris bus. Both sides were very naughty weren't they? So it is a good thing we were asked one simple question. Do we leave the EU? I missed the bit on the ballot asking people about the terms of exit. Could you point them out for me as my ballot paper just had the one simple question.
Anybody who thought the EU would give the UK a good deal is also likely to believe that had it been Frexit we would have given them a good deal. Never going to happen. So 17m people voted out - on any (probably bad) terms.
You might think a good deal is no deal. Some might think a good deal is a Norway deal.. Perhaps now that we are free of the EU we can have a referendum on the deal. Do you support that?