Brexit, for once some facts.

[Woosh]

Interesting reader's comments in the Independent this morning
"
Robert S
19 October - In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the EU? (Results from: 45 polls)

Wrong 45%

Right 42%

12 October - Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union, orleave the European Union? (Results from: 23 polls)

Toremain 49%

Toleave 45%

12 October - Do you think Britain will be economically better or worse off afterwe leave the EU? (Results from: 20 polls)

Worse off 44%

Better off 23%

11 October - Do you think Britain will have more or less influence in the world after we leave the EU? (Results from: 15 polls)

Less 41%

More 15%

22 September - If there was another referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU,how would you vote? (Results from: 15 polls)

To remain 45%

To leave 44%

24 July - If there was a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, how wouldyou vote? (Eurotrack)

To remain 46%

To leave 43%

whatukthinkseu opinion-polls uk-poll-results"

They should only ask the conservative membership.
The opinion of rest of the country doesn't count for much at the moment.
As long as the electorate is still roughly divided in the middle, the hard brexiters can spoil any trade deal by sinking their own government.

 

[oldtom]

Add on a big China style tariff into the EU from the UK which would be inevitable and Brompton could be hit very badly indeed.

That's the trouble with being a one-trick pony. All Brompton's energies are aimed at a niche market and their lack of diversification may well be their undoing in a changing market.

Perhaps they should try their hand at vacuum cleaners or fans or hand dryers - just one or two good, stylistic ideas, have them made in Indonesia or somewhere - it could be a winner!

Tom

 

[oldgroaner]

Those stats coincide closely with my own research. I conducted a spot poll in my front room this morning and there was unanimous support to remain in the EU.

You just can't argue with a majority like that!

Tom

Nothing like an unbiassed opinion as they say!

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

Well what a shock.

The Government has responded to the petition I signed – “The Government must publish its own Brexit Impact/Risk Assessments”.

I've highlighted the bit in bold. Just think about it. If the impact studies showed Brexit would be a positive, it would strengthen our position... clearly. So what do they show that is going to undermine our position??

Government responded:

As Parliament agreed, we will not publish anything that would undermine our ability to negotiate the best deal for Britain.

The Department for Exiting the European Union, working with officials across Government, is undertaking a wide range of analysis covering the entirety of the UK economy in order to support negotiations. We are looking at over 50 sectors as well as areas of cross-cutting regulations.

Stakeholder engagement is a central element of our plan to build a national consensus around our negotiating position. DExEU Ministers are working closely with colleagues across Government to ensure that we are speaking to a wide range of sectors.

The Government is committed to negotiating a deep and special partnership with the European Union and is conducting a wide-ranging programme of analysis. It would not be appropriate, however, to publish details that could undermine the UK's negotiating position with the EU, and Parliament has voted not to publish such details.

Parliament will have a say on the final deal we achieve with the European Union as we will put that deal to a vote in both Houses before it comes into force. We will, of course, continue to support Parliament in its scrutiny role throughout the negotiating stage. It is not standard practice to provide an ongoing commentary on internal analytical work that is being carried out within government. On 7 December 2016 the House of Commons voted in favour of an amended Opposition motion which stated that there should be no disclosure of material that could reasonably be judged to damage the UK in any negotiations to withdraw from the European Union after Article 50 has been triggered.

Department for Exiting the European Union

 

[oldtom]

The longer these non-negotiable British demands talks in Brussels go on, the clearer it becomes that the UK side was never prepared for the contest.

May & Co have done little more than display the very kind of arrogance that caused General De Gaulle to repeatedly recommend a veto of the UK's entry into the then common market. Even now, such is the level of unpreparedness, that the UK wishes and expects to be granted more time than we are entitled to under the A50 provisions, in order to smoothly transition towards the land of milk and honey or wherever the clueless cabal of May appointees thinks we are headed.

'The Guardian' gives some insight into the EU position, described by Michel Barnier, and it serves to illustrate how difficult our economic situation and trading ability will be outside of the EU. Pro-'Brexit' pundits in this thread have described, at one time or another, various models that the UK might adopt post-secession - we have heard about Norway, about Switzerland, about Canada but I fail to see how any of those compare favourably with the deal we have right here, right now.

uk-likely-to-end-up-with-canadian-style-deal-warns-michel-barnier

Tom

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

The way I read it is that WTO rules apply unless you have completed a trade deal with a country,then you can select tariffs that suit both countries in the deal,not sure if it has to be the same in both directions.
Will look a bit further.
Dave

Yes, but if WTO rules apply when there is a lack of trade deal, they have to apply both ways... otherwise there would by definition be a deal wouldn't there?

So if the WTO rate is 25%, I'm hearing it might be 14%, but lets wait for HMRC or Bicycle Association clarification.

There are some pretty major implications that I've got bouncing round my head that I need to work out.

 

[oldtom]

As Parliament agreed, we will not publish anything that would undermine our ability to negotiate the best deal for Britain.

The Department for Exiting the European Union, working with officials across Government, is undertaking a wide range of analysis covering the entirety of the UK economy in order to support negotiations. We are looking at over 50 sectors as well as areas of cross-cutting regulations.

Stakeholder engagement is a central element of our plan to build a national consensus around our negotiating position. DExEU Ministers are working closely with colleagues across Government to ensure that we are speaking to a wide range of sectors.

The Government is committed to negotiating a deep and special partnership with the European Union and is conducting a wide-ranging programme of analysis. It would not be appropriate, however, to publish details that could undermine the UK's negotiating position with the EU, and Parliament has voted not to publish such details.

Parliament will have a say on the final deal we achieve with the European Union as we will put that deal to a vote in both Houses before it comes into force. We will, of course, continue to support Parliament in its scrutiny role throughout the negotiating stage. It is not standard practice to provide an ongoing commentary on internal analytical work that is being carried out within government. On 7 December 2016 the House of Commons voted in favour of an amended Opposition motion which stated that there should be no disclosure of material that could reasonably be judged to damage the UK in any negotiations to withdraw from the European Union after Article 50 has been triggered.

Department for Exiting the European Union

So, true to form, when asked a simple question, the government resorts to gobbledygook in an effort to fool the public. This classic reversal of fact, or as some might put it, a lie, demonstrates clearly the use of verisimilitude:

The Government is committed to negotiating a deep and special partnership with the European Union

We already have exactly that - the government is intent on destroying that and simply having every benefit we enjoy as a member of the EU but without paying subscriptions!

This shower masquerading as a government couldn't run a bath, let alone the country.

Tom

 

[KTM Bike Industries UK]

Colin,KTM...this is the best info I have found.
The U.K.,post Brexit,can choose what tariffs it wants to apply on imports.
However,we don't have a free hand,whatever tariffs we choose,we would have to apply the same rates to all WTO members,except where it has a trade agreement or helping developing countries.
There are bound ranges within WTO which as a member we have to keep within.
The average applied tariff on bicycles (8714) are as follows...
EU....15%
China.....25%
India.....45%
USA.....8%
Taiwan....11%
Some big numbers there,no way would the Chinese want the UK to put 25% tariff on China to UK bikes.
Hope that helps but it doesn't really answer your question,I think it's really Mays decision.
KudosDave

Thanks for that Dave.... here is some additional information, I've found on my search for clarity. So we might not even get WTO Terms... its all very muddy.

"Please allow me to summarise: Because we are members of the EU, we are also members of the WTO If we leave the EU we can still be members of the WTO, providing we don’t change any trading arrangement already in place with any other country in the world. ?"

Also...

This from an interview with Pascal Lamy:

The UK will have to renegotiate the deals which they already have with 60-80 countries which are better than the WTO regime – these are the bi-lateral deals the EU has with these countries. This, of course, will take time. And it’s not certain that the UK will get the same deal that the EU has with these countries. If I’m Japan, my bi-lateral agreement with the EU is for trade with a 500million consumer market. If I negotiate with the UK, a 65million consumer market, I’m not going to pay the same price. So the capacity to negotiate as a single country, the deal will be not as good as the EU deal.

Pascal Lamy is the former Director General of the WTO.

Experts – who needs ‘em..?

 

[oldgroaner]

Well what a shock.

The Government has responded to the petition I signed – “The Government must publish its own Brexit Impact/Risk Assessments”.

I've highlighted the bit in bold. Just think about it. If the impact studies showed Brexit would be a positive, it would strengthen our position... clearly. So what do they show that is going to undermine our position??

Government responded:

As Parliament agreed, we will not publish anything that would undermine our ability to negotiate the best deal for Britain.

The Department for Exiting the European Union, working with officials across Government, is undertaking a wide range of analysis covering the entirety of the UK economy in order to support negotiations. We are looking at over 50 sectors as well as areas of cross-cutting regulations.

Stakeholder engagement is a central element of our plan to build a national consensus around our negotiating position. DExEU Ministers are working closely with colleagues across Government to ensure that we are speaking to a wide range of sectors.

The Government is committed to negotiating a deep and special partnership with the European Union and is conducting a wide-ranging programme of analysis. It would not be appropriate, however, to publish details that could undermine the UK's negotiating position with the EU, and Parliament has voted not to publish such details.

Parliament will have a say on the final deal we achieve with the European Union as we will put that deal to a vote in both Houses before it comes into force. We will, of course, continue to support Parliament in its scrutiny role throughout the negotiating stage. It is not standard practice to provide an ongoing commentary on internal analytical work that is being carried out within government. On 7 December 2016 the House of Commons voted in favour of an amended Opposition motion which stated that there should be no disclosure of material that could reasonably be judged to damage the UK in any negotiations to withdraw from the European Union after Article 50 has been triggered.

Department for Exiting the European Union

Ho ho Ho!
"As Parliament agreed, we will not publish anything that would undermine our ability to negotiate the best deal for Britain."

Is it worth pointing out to these Blithering Idiots that they just did that very thing?
Thank you for Confirming the negative nature of the reports you are trying so desperately to cover up!

Truly it is hard to soar like an Eagle while you work among Turkeys!

 

[mountainsport]

Thus speaks a bachelor? Or a divorced person...

Ah! Thus speaks a wise person.

MS.

 

[mountainsport]

.....priest?

Tom

.....Priestess?

MS.

 

[oldtom]

We have all heard the phrase, often attributed to the 1st Lord Acton in the 19th century, 'Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely'.

This action by a tory MP, reported by 'The Guardian', is shocking and redolent of both Nazism and Communism, not to mention many other states whose people are governed by a dictator or a military junta.

Free of any European regulation within the jurisdiction of the ECJ and with the soon to follow abolition of human rights legislation, this gives some insight into what life would be like under tory rule.

Still think that 'Brexit' is simply about sovereignty or economics? Those who support 'Brexit' want that absolute power. Be warned!

This is a brief passage from a long-winded explanation of the meaning:

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely
There are many examples, throughout history, of leaders who have been corrupted with power. For example, people like Hitler and Napoleon have all committed shameful actions in the hopes of gaining absolute power. Authority, or simply the desire of control, can cause people to act in incomprehensible ways.

Here is 'The Guardian' article:

universities-mccarthyism-mp-demands-list-brexit-chris-heaton-harris

Tom

 

[mountainsport]

Ho ho Ho!
"As Parliament agreed, we will not publish anything that would undermine our ability to negotiate the best deal for Britain."

Is it worth pointing out to these Blithering Idiots that they just did that very thing?
Thank you for Confirming the negative nature of the reports you are trying so desperately to cover up!

Truly it is hard to soar like an Eagle while you work among Turkeys!

And its not even the 25th of December yet.

MS.

 

[oldtom]

What's the difference between lying, cheating, self-serving tory scum and the large civilised remainder of decent human beings in the UK?

This helps to illustrate that difference:

tory-voters-take-note-sean-hughes-has-bequeathed-one-of-his-houses-to-a-homelessness-charity

Tom

 

[oldtom]

What does hypocrisy look like? I think it looks very much like these examples:






Tom

 

[Woosh]

The view of a reluctant remainer:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-23/the-harder-brexit-gets-the-more-necessary-it-seems

For many British commentators, in fact, the coming disruption means this was never a matter of weighing long-term pros and cons of EU membership: There was no real choice, in their view, except to remain. But that draws attention to another problem. The irrevocability of EU membership was not previously advertised. Until recently, Article 50 in the European treaties was supposed to affirm that participation in the project was voluntary, contingent and subject to popular consent. Now it's portrayed by Remainers as a kind of suicide clause.

Remember that the European Union is a work in progress. "Ever closer union" remains a guiding principle, and, with the creation of the euro, deeper integration has become a practical necessity as well. It's happening -- haltingly, messily, and leading in the end who knows where. But if quitting the EU now is hard, how much harder will it be in ten years, or 20? And by then, what kind of union will the EU be?

Thus, on the one hand, the costs of Brexit in 2019 will be high; on the other, it might be now or never.

 

[oldtom]

Should we pay any attention to the projections made by the LSE?

Vince Cable, the man for all seasons, (I think he's a laughable demorat at the moment), has picked up on an LSE report to spread alarm and despondency, particularly in Scotland:

15614550.Scotland_set_for____devastating______30bn_Brexit_bombshell_if_UK_leaves_EU_without_deal

Tom

 

[flecc]

Thus, on the one hand, the costs of Brexit in 2019 will be high; on the other, it might be now or never.

Never sounds good.
.

 

[Woosh]

Never sounds good.
.

Even Ken Clarke thinks that brexit is unavoidable.
Just pay and keep our fingers crossed.

 

[oldtom]

We have all heard the phrase, often attributed to the 1st Lord Acton in the 19th century, 'Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely'.

This action by a tory MP, reported by 'The Guardian', is shocking and redolent of both Nazism and Communism, not to mention many other states whose people are governed by a dictator or a military junta.

Free of any European regulation within the jurisdiction of the ECJ and with the soon to follow abolition of human rights legislation, this gives some insight into what life would be like under tory rule.

Still think that 'Brexit' is simply about sovereignty or economics? Those who support 'Brexit' want that absolute power. Be warned!

This is a brief passage from a long-winded explanation of the meaning:



Here is 'The Guardian' article:

universities-mccarthyism-mp-demands-list-brexit-chris-heaton-harris

Tom

I found a reply to this MP's question in the form of a tweet from academia:


I like that!

Tom