Brexit negotiations

[Scott-Copywriter]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47218687

It would not surprise me, in the slightest, if Olly Robbins said this.

It's the outcome that makes the most sense right now. While May could gamble on leaving the vote until the last minute to force MPs to accept the deal (good old parliamentary sovereignty), it would be a huge gamble from someone who probably wants to avoid no deal just as much as the rest of them. Time will tell if it's a risk she's prepared to take, but I'm doubtful.

In other, somewhat related news, the government has admitted that we've run out of time to procure additional shipping and ferry capacity before the 29th of March (after the firm without any ships had its contract ripped up):

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...seaborne-freight-chris-grayling-a8777766.html

I maintain that no deal will not be allowed to happen. It'll be anything except that. And unless May rolls the dice on the withdrawal deal vote to circumvent the will of the Commons, an extension is looking the most likely route now.

 

[Mr D]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/feb/13/brexit-uk-trade-deals-eu

Things are going well. We have trade deals with 7 countries. Faroe Islands, Zimbabwe, Seychelles, Mauritius, Chile, Madagascar and Switzerland.

Seems so worth exchanging the EU market for.

Faroe islands? Not a big market then. Population of a small town - 48,000 people or so at last census presumably not all ordering from amazon?
Mauritius has a big import of UK goods? Madagascar similar?
Zimbabwe been importing much British goods recently?

 

[Mr D]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47218687


I maintain that no deal will not be allowed to happen. It'll be anything except that. And unless May rolls the dice on the withdrawal deal vote to circumvent the will of the Commons, an extension is looking the most likely route now.

Great. Will all 28 agree to an extension if its just kicking the can down the road? Or would it have a greater chance of the other 27 agreeing if there is more involved than 'we have wasted almost 3 years give us another year to not agree stuff again'?

Delaying a no deal Brexit by a year will extend the uncertainty for business. There is a case to be made for certainty before investing.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Great. Will all 28 agree to an extension if its just kicking the can down the road?

Probably, because it's unlikely to involve kicking the can down the road.

If no deal is so unacceptable that we must extend Article 50 (which will, let's say, annoy some folk), then it would indicate, after a Commons vote, that the deal is no more and that nothing is going to change enough to get it through.

May can try once, and try again with the supposed leverage of a looming no deal outcome, but if they're still miles apart after that, I suspect she'll call it quits on the idea.

In truth, it might not be that difficult to convince her to do that. But for political pantomime reasons, she wants to be seen to have exhausted every possible option so she can't be blamed.

Once that happens, the Commons as a whole will likely take charge, leading to an evaporation of May's red lines that will encourage the EU to approve an extension to see what can be done.

The EU does want a deal of some kind, whether that's May's deal or a closer relationship such as a permanent customs union. They just won't undermine the single market or customs union for it, which we're currently asking them to do.

 

[Mr D]

Probably, because it's unlikely to involve kicking the can down the road.

If no deal is so unacceptable that we must extend Article 50 (which will, let's say, annoy some folk), then it would indicate, after a Commons vote, that the deal is no more and that nothing is going to change enough to get it through.

May can try once, and try again with the supposed leverage of a looming no deal outcome, but if they're still miles apart after that, I suspect she'll call it quits on the idea.

In truth, it might not be that difficult to convince her to do that. But for political pantomime reasons, she wants to be seen to have exhausted every possible option so she can't be blamed.

Once that happens, the Commons as a whole will likely take charge, leading to an evaporation of May's red lines that will encourage the EU to approve an extension to see what can be done.

The EU does want a deal of some kind, whether that's May's deal or a closer relationship such as a permanent customs union. They just won't undermine the single market or customs union for it, which we're currently asking them to do.

If we don't get some sort of deal within the extension, agreed by both sides and passed through parliaments - then all we are doing is kicking the can down the road to have the exact same problems in a year.

If commons as a whole takes charge (over 300 MPs agreeing on a vision of Brexit that has the backstop in it?) then may still end up with no deal.
The other side has to agree to things too. Its not just our parliament deciding anything and they appear to be coming up with stuff the EU has said they won't change.
If commons vote by a majority to not have the backstop in any agreement then what will be the result from Eire or Brussels? No?

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

If we don't get some sort of deal within the extension, agreed by both sides and passed through parliaments - then all we are doing is kicking the can down the road to have the exact same problems in a year.

I'm just going to copy and paste my post again:

Probably, because it's unlikely to involve kicking the can down the road.

If no deal is so unacceptable that we must extend Article 50 (which will, let's say, annoy some folk), then it would indicate, after a Commons vote, that the deal is no more and that nothing is going to change enough to get it through.

May can try once, and try again with the supposed leverage of a looming no deal outcome, but if they're still miles apart after that, I suspect she'll call it quits on the idea.

In truth, it might not be that difficult to convince her to do that. But for political pantomime reasons, she wants to be seen to have exhausted every possible option so she can't be blamed.

Once that happens, the Commons as a whole will likely take charge, leading to an evaporation of May's red lines that will encourage the EU to approve an extension to see what can be done.

The EU does want a deal of some kind, whether that's May's deal or a closer relationship such as a permanent customs union. They just won't undermine the single market or customs union for it, which we're currently asking them to do.

PS: To add a little more context, the only thing preventing a deal of some kind currently are May's red lines. If we accepted the situation we have in Ireland, and cut straight to the chase on a solution for that which would also be good for the economy and the country, we'd have signed it off months ago.

 

[Mr D]

I'm just going to copy and paste my post again:



PS: To add a little more context, the only thing preventing a deal of some kind currently are May's red lines. If we accepted the situation we have in Ireland, and cut straight to the chase on a solution for that which would also be good for the economy and the country, we'd have signed it off months ago.

But without a deal being made in the extended time its ONLY kicking the can down the road. Think of us in 12 months having had extension watching MPs dither in parliament once again with no deal.
What is the point then in delaying matters? 12 months further uncertainty? 12 months where companies are reluctant to invest here? 12 months more for other countries to continue to attract business investment into a more secure deal?

The bit of the current deal we know a bunch of MPs have trouble with is the backstop - how likely do you think the EU is going to time limit, give us sole decision making on its end or cancel that idea?
Now suppose a revised plan is put together by negotiators over next 9 months then put for vote again with the NI border and backstop unchanged from last deal offered - will it be likely to go through with minor changes to other aspects?

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

The bit of the current deal we know a bunch of MPs have trouble with is the backstop - how likely do you think the EU is going to time limit, give us sole decision making on its end or cancel that idea?

The point is that after May's deal is out of the picture, we are likely to explore closer ties such as a permanent customs union.

And contrary to the opinion of some, it's plausible that most MPs would support this. Yes, it may not give us a say, but practically it solves the Irish border problem, eliminates large parts of the chaos of no deal, continues to facilitate single market trade (to a degree), removes business uncertainty, and keeps all the EU-brokered FTAs in place with more to come. Overall, it would be good for the country.

And bonus points if they can somehow arrange a customs union where we have a say in future trade agreements. I think this is unlikely, but possible in some fashion.

Crucially, this is likely to have bipartisan support. It could pass even if the majority of Tories reject it.

Failing that, we may go further down the rabbit hole to a second referendum of some kind. Many MPs privately wouldn't mind this, and the EU wouldn't either if it made it possible we'd stay.

So all in all, when it comes to the EU deciding whether to grant us an extension, it would be worth rolling the dice, particularly if the only alternative really is a no deal Brexit that the EU would much prefer doesn't happen.

 

[Newchodge]

The point is that after May's deal is out of the picture, we are likely to explore closer ties such as a permanent customs union.

And contrary to the opinion of some, it's plausible that most MPs would support this. Yes, it may not give us a say, but practically it solves the Irish border problem, eliminates large parts of the chaos of no deal, continues to facilitate single market trade (to a degree), removes business uncertainty, and keeps all the EU-brokered FTAs in place with more to come. Overall, it would be good for the country.

And bonus points if they can somehow arrange a customs union where we have a say in future trade agreements. I think this is unlikely, but possible in some fashion.

Crucially, this is likely to have bipartisan support. It could pass even if the majority of Tories reject it.

Failing that, we may go further down the rabbit hole to a second referendum of some kind. Many MPs privately wouldn't mind this, and the EU wouldn't either if it made it possible we'd stay.

May can't get her deal agreed. No one wants a no deal exit. ANY deal will leave us in a worse position than continued membership. Logical outcome - don't extend Article 50, revoke it.

Then spend the next 5 years with cross party input into what an accetable EU exit may be, develop a plan and invoke Article 50 again. Or not.

So all in all, when it comes to the EU deciding whether to grant us an extension, it would be worth rolling the dice, particularly if the only alternative really is a no deal Brexit that the EU would much prefer doesn't happen.

 

[Mr D]

The point is that after May's deal is out of the picture, we are likely to explore closer ties such as a permanent customs union.

And contrary to the opinion of some, it's plausible that most MPs would support this. Yes, it may not give us a say, but practically it solves the Irish border problem, eliminates large parts of the chaos of no deal, continues to facilitate single market trade (to a degree), removes business uncertainty, and keeps all the EU-brokered FTAs in place with more to come. Overall, it would be good for the country.

And bonus points if they can somehow arrange a customs union where we have a say in future trade agreements. I think this is unlikely, but possible in some fashion.

Crucially, this is likely to have bipartisan support. It could pass even if the majority of Tories reject it.

Failing that, we may go further down the rabbit hole to a second referendum of some kind. Many MPs privately wouldn't mind this, and the EU wouldn't either if it made it possible we'd stay.

So all in all, when it comes to the EU deciding whether to grant us an extension, it would be worth rolling the dice, particularly if the only alternative really is a no deal Brexit that the EU would much prefer doesn't happen.

Customs union with no say? Not so sure there can be support in this parliament for that. Has some support but judging by the voting so far doesn't have enough.
Customs union with a say - in other words cancel Brexit. I'd go for that, let adults later on work things out before a future referendum.

Something that majority of Tory MPs reject would have to have considerable support from elsewhere. Corbyn does not control his MPs any more than May does hers.
SNP (the third party in UK politics) have better control but which way they go is open as to which is better for Scottish politics (which isn't quite the same as better for Scotland though they do a good spin).

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...rtners-ask-uk-to-lower-human-rights-standards

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...essions-from-britain-in-trade-talks-eu-brexit

Ta-da!

I said it would happen, and it is.

The most-favoured nation clauses commonly found in a lot of trade deals are also likely to scupper any attempts to come out of this with better deals than we had under the EU. The EU market is far larger and more lucrative than ours, so their bargaining position means they'll be able to secure relatively advantageous terms. And with the MFN clause, countries won't be able to do anything better for us (even if they wanted to, which they don't, as they have us bent over a barrel anyway).

This is a completely pointless exercise. We're intent on going down the most destructive path available just to come out of it in a worse position than before, even after every conceivable trade deal has been signed.

 

[simon field]

Well, it's not all doom & gloom though is it?

If Cyndy's idea up there ^^^ comes to fruition, we'll have ANOTHER FIVE YEARS OF THIS to look forward to!

The thread might even make it to 1,000 pages, that's even better than 'Knowing the Mind of God'

 

[MBE2017]

According to latest press stories Macron now is supposedly to offer a legally binding backstop temporary offer to time limit the deal to help May push through a Brexit deal.

All games being played, badly by the UK Gov and the EU.

 

[Newchodge]

According to latest press stories Macron now is supposedly to offer a legally binding backstop temporary offer to time limit the deal to help May push through a Brexit deal.

All games being played, badly by the UK Gov and the EU.

Believe it if it happens. I doubt Ireland would accept it anyway and Macron does not have the power to offer anything. He can suggest, but he cannot offer on behalf of the EU.

 

[Mr D]

According to latest press stories Macron now is supposedly to offer a legally binding backstop temporary offer to time limit the deal to help May push through a Brexit deal.

All games being played, badly by the UK Gov and the EU.

So a time limit - then what?
Its kicking the can down the road - put something in place that ends and the same situation not resolved in 2 years comes back into play.
Unless wanting to impose a very expensive and unwanted hard border and this is a method of buying time to build infrastructure?

 

[Newchodge]

Bye bye Honda

And before any Brexit supporter says it, it is of course, as eny fule kno, nothing to do with Nrexit.

 

[The Byre]

Its kicking the can down the road

You'll have to stockpile the cans first, before you can kick them!

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Bye bye Honda

And before any Brexit supporter says it, it is of course, as eny fule kno, nothing to do with Nrexit.

The lengths people will go to claim this has nothing to do with Brexit should be interesting.

Are there other forces at play when it comes to our recent losses? Probably. But instead of doing what we can to mitigate more challenging market conditions, we're going in the opposite direction by throwing away one of the most lucrative reasons for companies to operate here by far.

I wonder what's up next in our dose of project reality.

 

[KM-Tiger]

The lengths people will go to claim this has nothing to do with Brexit should be interesting.

As far as I can see, no reason has been given as yet.

But as it's Honda's only plant in the EU, I wouldn't be surprised if they announced a move to a different country. But they are not, at least not yet, announcing that. I wonder if, like NIssan, they will move production back to Japan?

Further announcement tomorrow it seems.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Here are another couple of logs to add to the fire:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...talks-high-handed-letter-liam-fox-jeremy-hunt

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...illiamson-china-warship-threat-philip-hammond

This is what happens when you have such levels of desperation from this position of weakness. We now need to be extremely careful over everything we do and say to avoid disrupting the trade talks we so badly need compared to the other party.

I'm proud of this country, and it's very disheartening to see us put in this position.

 

[thetiger2015]

We now need to be extremely careful over everything we do and say to avoid disrupting the trade talks we so badly need compared to the other party.

They won't be careful. They'll stuff it up, like they have done for decades. The incompetence is staggering but not surprising.

Brexiteers turn these situations round by saying 'they need us more than we need them'...I don't think that's true at all. In fact, it's already started, with people saying that Honda are consolidating their business in Japan and it has nothing to do with Brexit, they were going to do it anyway. They neglect the fact the UK gave them assurances that we would be in the EU and be a useful partner for trade between the USA and EU. Now, we're not useful at all to the Japanese. We've screwed them over and they're going to give us a good kicking.

Ireland are already positioning themselves to replace anything the UK can do, they will be the hub between the USA and EU mainland. We are going to be completely circumvented, as our government are next to useless.

 

[KM-Tiger]

with people saying that Honda are consolidating their business in Japan and it has nothing to do with Brexit, they were going to do it anyway.

There will be a number of factors in play. Brexit will be one of them, but not top of the list.

The EU/Japan FTA means that the imperative to manufacture in the EU has gone.

Trump's threat of tariffs on EU imported cars could well happen.

Both of those make a retreat to Japan a sensible business decision.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Both of those make a retreat to Japan a sensible business decision.

But it will never make Brexit a sensible business decision.

 

[KM-Tiger]

But it will never make Brexit a sensible business decision.

Perhaps not, but it's not a business decision.

What is right for the people is unlikely to also be convenient for business.

 

[simon field]

In fact, it's already started, with people saying that Honda are consolidating their business in Japan and it has nothing to do with Brexit

What, you mean people like actual Honda, the company in question? Why would they tell a fib?

 

[Clinton]

Way back at the start of this Brexit discussion I mentioned that London is so big and so important in the world of finance that the EU has no choice but to live with it and with a lot of services and facilities continuing with London ...or they'll very severely damage their economies and cause a collapse of the common currency project.

One topic that came up was clearing. At the time the EU was making big threats to move Euro clearing out of London. I said that it's not practical for the EU to do so and that they were just sabre rattling, that they can make all the noise they want, but if they move Euro clearing to Frankfurt or some other village it'll be them that suffers the most.

Today: European regulator recognises London clearing houses

Ha ha.

 

[Clinton]

Bye bye Honda

And hello to all the others: Inward investment brings 1,500 new jobs a week to the UK

For the poor at maths, that's 78,000 a year to Honda's 3,500.

Inward investment in 2017, the year after the Referendum, was 6% more than 2016 and that's with investors fully aware that we're leaving the EU (and completely unsure about what deal we'd have). We were #1 for FDI among all EU countries. Strange that. Why are investors from around the world betting on the UK in such big numbers (despite the uncertainty around a Brexit deal)?

And why do Remainers have to be such miserable gits grasping at every bad news straw?

 

[Clinton]

Before the Referendum George Osborne said that a vote to leave would cause a loss of 500,000 jobs. Not after we left, simply voting to leave would cause 500,000 job losses.

Today's news:
UK employment reaches record high
The jobless rate is the lowest since 1975
Weekly average earnings went up by 3.4%
Unemployment for women has dropped below 4% for the first time ever.

Immediately after the Referendum when the sky didn't fall on our heads, many Remainers kept saying that it was too soon. "Wait a few months," they said, "it will fall on our heads". So we waited two years. The economy is fine, employment is doing great, FDI is booming. The sky is still where it always used to be.

"Hmm. OK, wait till we actually leave," they're saying now. After March 29th, they are going to return to, "Wait a few months".

They keep waiting and waiting for the bad news and it doesn't come. There's occasionally something like the Honda closure and they leap onto it with great delight but, let's face it, they've just been badly wrong!

They display, like all radicals, a desperate lack of metacognitive sensitivity.

 

[Newchodge]

UK employment reaches record high

Did you know that, to count as an employed person and not be on the jobless list, a person has to work at least 1 hour per fortnight. People who are doing domestic duties, ie stay at home parents or those who are not looking for work are also included as employed. This lying government will do anything to make it appear as if they are doing a good job.

 

[Clinton]

You have a point about the redefinition of employment. There is also a lot of zero hour work around and a lot more employment insecurity. So the picture may be a tad worse than it at first appears.

But care to address the 500K job losses claim? And the huge foreign investment flowing into the UK creating tens of thousands of jobs per year? Or is this lying government fiddling the FDI numbers?

 

[KM-Tiger]

There is also a lot of zero hour work around

The ONS figures are showing a reduction in zero hours employment.

 

[thetiger2015]

You have a point about the redefinition of employment. There is also a lot of zero hour work around and a lot more employment insecurity. So the picture may be a tad worse than it at first appears.

But care to address the 500K job losses claim? And the huge foreign investment flowing into the UK creating tens of thousands of jobs per year? Or is this lying government fiddling the FDI numbers?

The number of people in employment in the UK is measured by the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and consists of people aged 16 and over who did one hour or more of paid work per week (as an employee or self-employed), those who had a job that they were temporarily away from, those on government-supported training and employment programmes, and those working in family businesses who benefit from the profits of those businesses but who do not receive a formal wage or salary. (ONS Link)

500k job losses? It's probably not that bad but according to Retail Gazette, they anticipate around 164k job losses just in retail with nearly 20k store closures contributing to these losses. (Another Link)

Some of these are natural losses, retail is being battered by our own government but uncertainty must surely be affecting investment?? Negative news may be biased but it still makes people think about their £50 million investment in to UK manufacturing/retail.

 

[simon field]

Having voted Remain and observed & listened to all the clap-trap from all over the place I would definitely now vote Leave, given another chance.

Stuff it to ‘em!

 

[Clinton]

Some of these are natural losses, retail is being battered by our own government but uncertainty must surely be affecting investment??

We've been having record levels of investment (see my previous posts). Are you saying we'd have had much more if there wasn't all this negative news?

Having voted Remain and observed & listened to all the clap-trap from all over the place I would definitely now vote Leave, given another chance

I voted Remain as well. And would certainly vote Leave now.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

But care to address the 500K job losses claim?

How about you address the 70 million Turks flooding the UK?

 

[Deleted member 59730]

For the poor at maths, that's 78,000 a year to Honda's 3,500.

Inward investment in 2017, the year after the Referendum, was 6% more than 2016 and that's with investors fully aware that we're leaving the EU (and completely unsure about what deal we'd have). We were #1 for FDI among all EU countries. Strange that. Why are investors from around the world betting on the UK in such big numbers (despite the uncertainty around a Brexit deal)?

And for 2018 it was flat. At 76,000 it was less than the number of jobs lost by a big margin. The trend is towards lower paid jobs or lower hour jobs.

 

[The Byre]

You have a point about the redefinition of employment. There is also a lot of zero hour work around and a lot more employment insecurity. So the picture may be a tad worse than it at first appears.
But care to address the 500K job losses claim? And the huge foreign investment flowing into the UK creating tens of thousands of jobs per year? Or is this lying government fiddling the FDI numbers?

Falling productivity.

After the 2007-8 crisis, UK companies met growth in demand by hiring more workers. The UK had a job-rich but investment-weak mild recovery.

From a study by McKinsey -
"Breaking down investment into components, we find that investment as a share of gross value added fell in equipment and structures while investment increased in intangibles such as software and R&D. Equipment investment is one of the key drivers of the overall low levels of investment in the United Kingdom compared with other countries, both pre- and post-crisis. This is particularly relevant because of equipment’s role in automation. Indeed, weak equipment investment played a key role in declining productivity growth in manufacturing. We find that the manufacturing sector accounted for about half of the decline in equipment investment between the pre- and post-crisis periods."

This has of course, Sweet-FA to do with Brexit, other than that many companies are moving activities out of the UK and the main beneficiary is Ireland's tiny economy, where GDP-per-capita has shot through the roof (over $70k compared to the UK's $44k, Germany $52k).

So all you guys can continue to argue in circles - the real effects of Brexit will be felt in 10-20 years time and beyond.

OK - carry on!

 

[Mr D]

Did you know that, to count as an employed person and not be on the jobless list, a person has to work at least 1 hour per fortnight. People who are doing domestic duties, ie stay at home parents or those who are not looking for work are also included as employed. This lying government will do anything to make it appear as if they are doing a good job.

You may recall a Mr Brown back in 2005 set forth plans to make ONS be independent of government.
Are you suggesting that despite being independent of any one government and having its own guidelines to follow that this - or any other government in the past dozen years or so - has decided to fake its figures?
If so, which ones?


https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentan.../methodologies/aguidetolabourmarketstatistics


Employment

The number of people in employment in the UK is measured by the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and consists of people aged 16 and over who did one hour or more of paid work per week (as an employee or self-employed), those who had a job that they were temporarily away from, those on government-supported training and employment programmes, and those working in family businesses who benefit from the profits of those businesses but who do not receive a formal wage or salary. Employment levels and rates are published each month in the labour market statistical bulletin.

Employment is a different, but similar, concept to jobs. Employment is a measure of people, and a person with more than one job would therefore be counted once in the employment estimates.

 

[simon field]

One of the funniest and most entertaining things about all this is seeing the losers getting all bent out of shape over nothing!

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

"Hmm. OK, wait till we actually leave," they're saying now. After March 29th, they are going to return to, "Wait a few months".

Let's not be pedantic.

Many remainers, including myself, have always strongly disagreed with the idea of such a sudden doomsday scenario. Regardless of belief, it simply doesn't make any sense. No business is going to be on such a precipice where the disruptions caused by Brexit will result in redundancies in the space of a few days.

Osborne and others made silly claims. They rolled the dice on a political strategy that failed. But it doesn't mean that very different arguments should be grouped in with the ridiculous ones.

The fact remains that we haven't left yet. And by haven't left, I mean we have yet to experience the majority of tangible ramifications that will be caused by Brexit: the tariffs, quotas, customs disruptions, carnets, regulatory hurdles and so on. Not just with EU trade, but with 60+ other countries in which we utilise EU-brokered FTAs.

So far, none of that has changed whatsoever. The only changes have been uncertainty and sentiment, but even they have been mitigated by a belief, at least up until recently, that something will be agreed in the final hour.

And if some don't believe that these ramifications will cause major problems, why bother having a single market or other trade blocs? Why bother signing free trade agreements? The argument can only be that this will have a big impact on our economy, or that trade blocs and FTAs are vanity projects with no discernable gain.

To be frank I find the idea of claiming that "project fear" has been disproven in its entirety at this point a bit absurd. It's like a supplier telling a business customer that prices will double in one month's time, and then the next day claiming "see, you're still trading well, these price hikes won't impact you" when the price hikes are still a month away.