DS Forums

 
 

Guardian: EU agrees to push UK into Hard Brexit


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 29-12-2016, 22:18
John146
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 8,253
I'm sorry I can't find links from the early 80s to back up my general knowledge for your education. You may think you know of a better reason the Japanese sited factories in the UK but I suspect you'll be very disappointed if we leave the single market.

The Japanese can export cars to the rest of the world just as well from Japan as they can from an outside the single market UK.


I'm still waiting for an example of EU export tariffs. Your bluster doesn't replace that.
Perhaps he was referring to exports outside the EU.

Customs requirements, duties and VAT you must pay to export goods to a 'third country' outside the*EU
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exportin...outside-the-eu
John146 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 29-12-2016, 22:22
The infidel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,036
But that's not because of the EU, neither will anything much change when we leave. All other European fishing fleets have declined too.
I think things will have to change though. The European people have had enough. For a start I would like to know how they are going to replace the £350 million a week taken from Britain.
The infidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 23:28
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,469
Perhaps he was referring to exports outside the EU.

Customs requirements, duties and VAT you must pay to export goods to a 'third country' outside the*EU
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exportin...outside-the-eu
They are import tariffs set by the non EU country, nothing to do with any EU export tariffs,
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 23:29
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,469
I think things will have to change though. The European people have had enough. For a start I would like to know how they are going to replace the £350 million a week taken from Britain.
They're not. The 350m never existed. You've been right royally conned.

And fish won't magically appear, you can't vote for that no matter how much you might think you have.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 23:39
alan29
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,480
They're not. The 350m never existed. You've been right royally conned.

And fish won't magically appear, you can't vote for that no matter how much you might think you have.
Don't mention the fish in Grimsby.
alan29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 23:42
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,469
Don't mention the fish in Grimsby.
Don't need to, you can still smell 'em.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-12-2016, 00:09
The infidel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,036
They're not. The 350m never existed. You've been right royally conned.

And fish won't magically appear, you can't vote for that no matter how much you might think you have.
Yes the £350m is misleading. Its more like £700m if you add in the cost of pointless 'directives', paying for the education and health care of EU migrants (including sending child tax credits to children who have never set foot in the UK) and paying benefits to British workers displaced in the workplace.
The infidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-12-2016, 00:57
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,469
Yes the £350m is misleading. Its more like £700m if you add in the cost of pointless 'directives', paying for the education and health care of EU migrants (including sending child tax credits to children who have never set foot in the UK) and paying benefits to British workers displaced in the workplace.
Ah, another one who wants to save money by removing regulations protecting workers and consumers. I don't.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-12-2016, 08:01
alan29
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,480
Ah, another one who wants to save money by removing regulations protecting workers and consumers. I don't.
A Brexit that works for the banks and bosses, you mean?
Not with the Tories in charge, surely.
alan29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:38
Steve_Holmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,638
I'm sorry I can't find links from the early 80s to back up my general knowledge ...............
Of course you can't - your general knowledge is clearly far too insufficient to assist anybody.....I'll bet you still have your conical cap with a big D on it.
However, as daunting a task as it is, I will still continue to overcome your patently inept education - despite the apparent lack of gratitude on your part - for instance - you now know what a Customs Union is!!!
You may think you know of a better reason the Japanese sited factories in the UK but I suspect you'll be very disappointed if we leave the single market.
Perhaps you could point out where I claimed that? The point being made was that it WASN'T the ONLY reason!!......and our high global exports, to over 100 countries springs to mind.

The Japanese can export cars to the rest of the world just as well from Japan as they can from an outside the single market UK.
As I have already informed you......they do just that - but they also like to manufacture nearer their specific markets - and they also encounter export difficulty when exporting direct from Japan because of the very high valued Yen.....and of course they cannot manufacture ALL their products in Japan can they?..... don't you listen????


I'm still waiting for an example of EU export tariffs. Your bluster doesn't replace that.
Ah diddumss - still pretending that my erroneous reference to 'export' instead of 'import' tariffs was not a genuine error.....albeit, because of your confessed ignorance of what a Customs Union is, maybe that isn't so surprising.You should be quite a happy chappy if there is any truth in the saying that 'ignorance is bliss'!!
After all - I would expect that even YOU realise that a Customs Union imposes ALL import tariffs to be applied on products imported into the Customs Union.
Steve_Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:09
Steve_Holmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,638
But that's not because of the EU, neither will anything much change when we leave. All other European fishing fleets have declined too.
Of course they have! - but it was the UK that had the prime fishing territories , PRIOR to joining the EU.......even you should realise that, and acknowledge it.
The loss of our fishing territories was one of the most damaging implications of Britain joining the EU.

And, just as with most policies emanating from the unelected elite in Brussels, the CFP has been an absolute disaster - and especially so for the UK.
Steve_Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:13
Steve_Holmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,638
Ah, another one who wants to save money by removing regulations protecting workers and consumers. I don't.
Perhaps you could, for a change, provide the link to support your unfounded claim!
Steve_Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:44
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,469
Perhaps you could point out where I claimed that? The point being made was that it WASN'T the ONLY reason!!......and our high global exports, to over 100 countries springs to mind.
I can only repeat, they can do that just as well, if not better, from Japan.
As I have already informed you......they do just that - but they also like to manufacture nearer their specific markets - and they also encounter export difficulty when exporting direct from Japan because of the very high valued Yen.....and of course they cannot manufacture ALL their products in Japan can they?..... don't you listen????
Yes, they could. They very successfully did so until they built factories here to get round European tariffs and quotas.
Ah diddumss - still pretending that my erroneous reference to 'export' instead of 'import' tariffs was not a genuine error.....albeit, because of your confessed ignorance of what a Customs Union is, maybe that isn't so surprising.You should be quite a happy chappy if there is any truth in the saying that 'ignorance is bliss'!!
After all - I would expect that even YOU realise that a Customs Union imposes ALL import tariffs to be applied on products imported into the Customs Union.
Well, this is the first time you've admitted that was an error, despite repeating it frequently as I questioned it. So we're back to you asking:
Common sense tells you that we would be able to sell MORE of everything we sell to the much.much larger market with reduced tariffs - so maybe YOU should perhaps indicate what UK products or services exports would be hampered by lower tariffs???
And I said:
Steel. Our steel industry is already suffering because the UK govt blocked higher steel tariffs.
But then you replied
[/i][/b]The issue we were discussing was UK EXPORTS, which you appear to believe will not be assisted by reduced tariffs.
So if you meant import tariffs and not export tariffs i'm not sure what point you were trying to make.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:56
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,469
Of course they have! - but it was the UK that had the prime fishing territories , PRIOR to joining the EU.......even you should realise that, and acknowledge it.
The loss of our fishing territories was one of the most damaging implications of Britain joining the EU.

And, just as with most policies emanating from the unelected elite in Brussels, the CFP has been an absolute disaster - and especially so for the UK.
You can be fabulously self centred. The UK has about 13% of EU waters:

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-pinching-our-fish/

They're so good we used to fish around Iceland until we got kicked out.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 04:43
Miasima Goria
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wammy's House
Posts: 4,781
I spotted this over at the Groaniad as a BTL comment, for me it is a fairly concise summary of why there will be a hard Brexit;

Has it occurred to you that Nativist might just be a rather dismissive way of describing "Being aware of what is actually possible." There seems to be an unbridgable gap between what Pro-Brexit people seem to think is possible from these talks, and what everyone else in europe thinks about this.

Here in Ireland we are staring in horror at what is going on, and how little the british EU debate seems to be connected to reality. We get a real close up of this when your govt talks about what is going to happen with the border and Northern Ireland. It is fair to say that James Brokenshire has literally no concept of how the EU works, and how brexit is going to affect the relationship between Ireland and England.

But when you have disgraced liam fox talking about bilateral trade deal discussions that would be illegal, or Boris johnson talking utter garbage about prosecco and cognac, or David Davies highlighting that the peter principle has its limitations.

Changing your negotiators, or having a great big plan won't make the slightest difference. The EU is going to ask does the UK want to end any one of the four freedoms, or leave the ECJ , and if the answer to any part of that is yes, then the UK will be outside the Single market. The hardest of hard brexits. If the EU negotiators offer anything other than that, or budge from that, one of the 33 member parliaments will shoot it down, even if the European parliament doesn't.

If you don't accept free movement, then you won't get anything, because giving you anything would start to mean the end of free movement, and the end of the EU. So even Ireland would vote against a deal like this.

It will take the guts of 10 years to negotiate a trade treaty with the EU, and the thing to remember is that the day you leave the single market, not only will you be unable to export any services to the EU, but the trade deals under which you export services anywhere will also expire. That's an awful lot of people that will lose their jobs.

This isn't project fear, this isn't negativity. It's just that the EU has a completely fixed position because of its treaties, and it will be held to these treaties by all of the groups that can veto it. changing the eu diplomat isn't going to change anything.
Miasima Goria is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 07:37
Resonance
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,204
I spotted this over at the Groaniad as a BTL comment, for me it is a fairly concise summary of why there will be a hard Brexit;

Has it occurred to you that Nativist might just be a rather dismissive way of describing "Being aware of what is actually possible." There seems to be an unbridgable gap between what Pro-Brexit people seem to think is possible from these talks, and what everyone else in europe thinks about this.

Here in Ireland we are staring in horror at what is going on, and how little the british EU debate seems to be connected to reality. We get a real close up of this when your govt talks about what is going to happen with the border and Northern Ireland. It is fair to say that James Brokenshire has literally no concept of how the EU works, and how brexit is going to affect the relationship between Ireland and England.

But when you have disgraced liam fox talking about bilateral trade deal discussions that would be illegal, or Boris johnson talking utter garbage about prosecco and cognac, or David Davies highlighting that the peter principle has its limitations.

Changing your negotiators, or having a great big plan won't make the slightest difference. The EU is going to ask does the UK want to end any one of the four freedoms, or leave the ECJ , and if the answer to any part of that is yes, then the UK will be outside the Single market. The hardest of hard brexits. If the EU negotiators offer anything other than that, or budge from that, one of the 33 member parliaments will shoot it down, even if the European parliament doesn't.

If you don't accept free movement, then you won't get anything, because giving you anything would start to mean the end of free movement, and the end of the EU. So even Ireland would vote against a deal like this.

It will take the guts of 10 years to negotiate a trade treaty with the EU, and the thing to remember is that the day you leave the single market, not only will you be unable to export any services to the EU, but the trade deals under which you export services anywhere will also expire. That's an awful lot of people that will lose their jobs.

This isn't project fear, this isn't negativity. It's just that the EU has a completely fixed position because of its treaties, and it will be held to these treaties by all of the groups that can veto it. changing the eu diplomat isn't going to change anything.
This is clearly nonsense.
Resonance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 08:47
Miasima Goria
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wammy's House
Posts: 4,781
This is clearly nonsense.
Is it?
Miasima Goria is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 09:50
Miasima Goria
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wammy's House
Posts: 4,781
Seems the view from Ireland is that hard Brexit is the most likely outcome, and whilst pushing for the CTA to remain in place, it will adhere to the EU27 negotiating position.

Border posts will be going up soon then.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/polit...area-1.2924859

The sudden resignation of Britain’s most senior diplomat in Brussels has raised fears among politicians and officials in Dublin that a hard Brexit is increasingly likely.
Sir Ivan Rogers, Britain’s ambassador to the EU, resigned yesterday amid divisions with Downing Street over Britain’s approach to forthcoming negotiations on the UK’s departure from the EU.


The Irish delegation asked the commission negotiators “to reassure other member states that Ireland is not ‘pre-negotiating’ nor is it enjoying any special relationship. Ireland is part of EU 27 and will negotiate as EU 27”, the report said.
Miasima Goria is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 10:23
Radiomike
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,408
The main reason for there potentially being a "hard" Brexit (a singularly divisive term) is that, by any reasonable interpretation, a "soft" Brexit as currently imagined would, in effect, amount to no Brexit at all.

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/col...EU-exit-at-all

Any outcome which maintains unrestricted free movement from within the EU, restricts or prevents the ability of the UK to negotiate its own trade deals independent of the EU, retains the supremacy of the ECJ, allows the EU to continue to set the rules across the board, or results in significant continued contributions to EU budgets, would go directly against any reasonable interpretation of the democratic decision of the British people when they voted to leave the EU in terms of what they were voting for. The current versions of "soft" Brexit as advocated tend to imply or directly result in all of those things being inevitable consequences. They neither respect "the will of the people" or the outcome of the Referendum vote despite their proponents claims to that effect.

Add to that "soft" Brexit as currently envisaged would be a disaster for the Government in political terms - political suicide in fact. As such it is simply not a viable option for them. Their ideal would probably fall somewhere between the "hard" and the "soft" positions. The "Canada" arrangement is probably closest to what they might like out of the "bespoke" options doing the rounds. The problem is that so long as the debate remains so binary in nature (hardest outcome v softest outcome) the actual outcome is much more likely to be one of those extremes.
Radiomike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 15:32
Steve_Holmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,638
I can only repeat, they can do that just as well, if not better, from Japan.
Which is all you can do - regurgitate rubbish - but as I pointed out - they already do....but they cannot match the capacity of all their overseas operations......as well as being near their markets of expected sales......and don't forget their very highly valued currency. They at least can see the sense in having overseas manufacturing facilities.....even if you can't!

Yes, they could. They very successfully did so until they built factories here to get round European tariffs and quotas.
Erm - they have quite a few operations in the EU - but they also seem to like the UK's non- EU export market too. But in any event, it would be absolutely stupid, and totally undemocratic to allow UK 'policies' to be unduly influenced by foreign owned manufacturers established in the UK......especially as facilities have been moved to non - EU countries despite our EU membership. Businesses will ALWAYS do what they consider to be in their best interests - and rightly so - and the UK , should also act democratically - which, wrt the EU, has been made very clear.


Well, this is the first time you've admitted that was an error, despite repeating it frequently as I questioned it. So we're back to you asking:
At least , unlike yourself, I admit to being human, and therefore prone to making mistakes from time to time

And I said:

But then you replied

So if you meant import tariffs and not export tariffs i'm not sure what point you were trying to make.
Clear enough to most people I would have thought.....whilst members of the EU, not only do we have no ability to apply import tariffs that would be in our own specific interests - but we are unable to make mutually beneficial trade agreements with non-EU countries, ( where MOST of our trade is conducted).....but of course, post Brexit, (if it ever takes place), will see that flaw rectified!
Steve_Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 15:42
Steve_Holmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,638
You can be fabulously self centred. The UK has about 13% of EU waters:

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-pinching-our-fish/

They're so good we used to fish around Iceland until we got kicked out.
Perhaps you should take it up with an alternative source -
which quotes - After its introduction in 1970, the CFP has been synonymous with the huge decline of our fish stocks, deterioration of the environment, wasteful discarding of fish, and the destruction of Britain’s fishing industry and communities.

Geographically well placed, British and Irish waters actually account for 60 percent of the EU’s waters. To add salt to the wound, it is an embarrassing reminder the CFP did not exist until Britain joined the EU.

Which ever way you look at it - that 13% looks ridiculously low - but was undoubtedly woefully inaccurate when Heath gave them away!!
Steve_Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 15:45
Cheetah666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,549
Perhaps you should take it up with an alternative source -
which quotes - After its introduction in 1970, the CFP has been synonymous with the huge decline of our fish stocks, deterioration of the environment, wasteful discarding of fish, and the destruction of Britain’s fishing industry and communities.

Geographically well placed, British and Irish waters actually account for 60 percent of the EU’s waters. To add salt to the wound, it is an embarrassing reminder the CFP did not exist until Britain joined the EU.

Which ever way you look at it - that 13% looks ridiculously low - but was undoubtedly woefully inaccurate when Heath gave them away!!
Can you link to this alternative source?
Cheetah666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 16:40
Eurostar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,589
Can you link to this alternative source?
This would appear to be it :

http://www.thecommentator.com/articl...shing_industry
Eurostar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 16:46
andykn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,469
Someone's queried it there and the author's not been able to substantiate it.
andykn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2017, 16:47
Cheetah666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,549
Cheetah666 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:25.