A daily newspaper shouldn't have to take this action:
david-davis-brexit-european-union-studies-economic-effects-treasury-a8000326.html
Tom
david-davis-brexit-european-union-studies-economic-effects-treasury-a8000326.html
Tom
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
It shouldn't - or at least not without asking the EU for their assessment of the impact of BREXIT at the same time.
Not polluted by right wing propaganda, you mean, and not likely to bet other people's futures on a bet on a rank outsider like Brexit.
No I mean, truth only comes out of the mouth of babies, or words to that effect.
Well they could do that but it would be pointless as they could much more easily just go to the European union website and download the studies.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ireland/en/news-press/european-parliament-research-on-brexit
Thank you, it'll make a good read, I'm sure.
Bit of a revelation (to me) and on first glance a few more on here should take the time to read. It seems to paint a fair picture without any of the dramatics. Much of the UK information comes directly from HM Treasury so one must assume that is as good / fair as it gets? Obviously it's the interpretation that matters to some and I can see why HMG wouldn't want to prejudice their / our negotiation position anymore than the EU. There doesn't appear to be any detailed impact assessments in the EU document either, the whole thing is by its very nature, fluid.
Last edited:
on this site, there is a model that has not been talked much about
https://www.ceps.eu/system/files/SR147 ME Which model for Brexit.pdf
The new Association Agreement model with neighbouring countries
The new Association Agreements that came into force in 2016 with Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova have several interesting features for the UK, which have been curiously ignored so far in London.
These concern their comprehensive structure and high degree of inclusion in the single market for three of the four freedoms (free movement of goods, service and capital, but not people). The reason for the exclusion is not explained in the Agreements, but is surely because the EU was worried about the prospect of large flows of migrants, a point that coincides with a prime UK interest for itself. This is a departure from the doctrine that all four freedoms always come together in an indivisible package, a doctrine that applies to the EU itself and the EEA, but not necessarily now between the EU and other close neighbours. Going further afield, the EU’s free trade agreements with the rest of the world invariably exclude the free movement of people.
These Agreements set out in legally precise terms the entire agenda for defining the relationship with the EU, sector by sector, for almost all EU competences.
This structure is more or less used in many of the EU’s association or partnership agreements with third countries.
If the UK chose to go for a deep and comprehensive future relationship, the EU would probably want to work along the lines of the same structure.
Thanks for this as well.
Need to spend a lot more time, but, it does look as if this report bears many similarities with the EU commissioned one albeit perhaps easier to read, I'm hoping so!
In a world of giants thare are only two safe courses for a country like the UK:
1) Become part of a giant like a future USE.
2) Be independently too small and insignificant to bother with.
The course we are on to try to be independently small but punch beyond our weight is very dangerous.
.
With friends like those who needs... 
I thought Trump had disbanded NATO?
I thought Trump had disbanded NATO?He's seen the light, born again Christian. I think there was some thought that the Germans weren't paying their fair share - all resolved, for the moment. An EU Army might well influence what happens in the future.With friends like those who needs...
Agree with AK, I don't see them as reliable friends. In truth they are one and the same thing, only one of those dogs wags the tail.
.
very possibly. I much prefer the UK not punching anyone in the first place.
You might not believe me, but they are reliable friends. Only the politicians get in way at times. I suspect we will continue to need one another (all three of us) for a long time yet. Four even, could never forget Canada.
Where the USA is concerned, are you sure there is an r in that last word?
.
Sticking with sayings, I think that horse has bolted with our determination to have Trident. Our status as a threat is very much part of the danger I was implying.
.