Options

What if we left the single market and some WTO members veto the UK from that as well?

Net NutNet Nut Posts: 10,286
Forum Member
✭✭
Could we be stopped by them indefinitely?

Could something like that happen?

Comments

  • Options
    i4ui4u Posts: 55,016
    Forum Member
    According to evidence given a select committee it only needs one country to say 'NON', if it's likely is another matter.

    One of the major concerns of other countries is said to be agriculture and would British farmers be prepared to face more competition without subsidies.
  • Options
    andyknandykn Posts: 66,849
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Net Nut wrote: »
    Could we be stopped by them indefinitely?

    Could something like that happen?

    No, because we are already WTO members.
  • Options
    DaveBeansDaveBeans Posts: 764
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    andykn wrote: »
    No, because we are already WTO members.

    Indeed..we just have an empty seat, as the EU represents us for the time being...
  • Options
    PencilPencil Posts: 5,700
    Forum Member
    The WTO is just a friendly organisation with no agenda, not a superstate wannabe blackmailing countries into accepting political union in exchange for free trade.
  • Options
    i4ui4u Posts: 55,016
    Forum Member
    Dr Richard North
    ..if the UK left the EU and did not negotiate a regional free trade agreement with the EU, it would acquire by virtue of its membership of the WTO the status of Most Favoured Nation (MFN) with the EU. In accordance with the rules of the WTO trading system, and especially the rules of equal treatment, the EU would then be obliged to impose the same tariffs under the same conditions as all the other countries that enjoyed MFN status.

    That would include tariffs on a wide range of industrial goods. Britain would not even qualify for reduced tariffs under the Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP).

    Currently, in trading with the rest of the world, Britain as an EU Member State benefits from tariff concessions negotiated by the EU. The differential rates it enjoys discriminate against parties which do not have trade agreements with the EU, but this is permitted under the rules concerning regional trade agreements.

    On leaving the EU, Britain would lose the protection of these rules, and be faced with MFN tariffs. The EU would have no choice in this. It must obey WTO rules.

    Perversely, if Britain sought to retaliate, the WTO's rules on equal treatment, and thus the prohibition of discrimination, would kick in. Tariffs imposed by the UK on goods from EU member states would have to be applied to similar goods from all other countries with which it did not have formal trade agreements.

    A duty on cars from the EU, for instance, would have to be matched by the same levy on cars from all other trading partners, including Japan and Korea.
  • Options
    Aye UpAye Up Posts: 7,053
    Forum Member
    i4u wrote: »

    WTO rules are sidestepped in that respect if there is a FTA in place.
  • Options
    i4ui4u Posts: 55,016
    Forum Member
    Pencil wrote: »
    The WTO is just a friendly organisation with no agenda, not a superstate wannabe blackmailing countries into accepting political union in exchange for free trade.

    Someone thinks differenty...
    Formally speaking, the WTO makes decisions through consensus and a one-country, one-vote system. Yet actual decision-making is done with a great deal of informality, and largely behind closed doors between only about 25–30 Members. The ‘consensus’ arrived at is then imposed on the rest of the Members as a take-it-or-leave-it package...
  • Options
    i4ui4u Posts: 55,016
    Forum Member
    Aye Up wrote: »
    WTO rules are sidestepped in that respect if there is a FTA in place.

    And if there isn't a FTA in place?
    This option eschews negotiations with the EU. Instead, it relies exclusively on the GATT/WTO framework to facilitate trade. It suggests that there should be no specific agreements with the EU and that trade relations should be regulated solely by reference to the diverse agreements made under the aegis of the WTO.

    This option has considerable support within the wider Eurosceptic community, where it is an article of faith that the EU would be willing to trade under these terms, and that it would be advantageous to the UK.

    Dr Richard North uses a report to state...
    ...the EU buys half of the UK's exports while the UK only accounts for around ten percent of EU exports. Additionally, half of the EU's trade surplus with the UK is accounted for by just two member states: Germany and the Netherlands. Most EU member states do not run substantial trade surpluses with the UK, and some run deficits with it. Those in deficit might seek to block UK imports.
  • Options
    DaveBeansDaveBeans Posts: 764
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    He also has email correspondence with John Mills, head of labour leave. In no undercertain terms, RN lay out the facts on what would happen if we went to WTO, but Mills responds as if he's sticking his fingers in his ears....Perhaps its ideological with people like him...

    http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86194

    Monograph 2 is a worthwhile read too..

    http://eureferendum.com/documents/BrexitMonograph002.pdf
Sign In or Register to comment.