Brexit

But environment and employment?

 

So what you said previously must be incorrect?

The "level playing field" that is apparently necessary to trade can't include those aspects.

 

This bit about the level playing field.

Turkey (and Algeria, Morocco, Jordan, Mexico, etc);all have agreements in place but on standards of employment and environment don't seem to play by the same rules.

Therefore it can't be a necessity for every aspect of the playing field to be level for trade to occur.

However the main - and separate - point is that I believe the EU want to set all standards in the UK (which I think is wrong) rather than just the standards for things which are exported into the EU (Which is perfectly understandable and achieveable).

 

I didn't particularly mean every aspect had to be level, I was just picking up on the 2 aspects you said needed to be and gave examples which suggest it is completely optional rather than necessary.

As I said before, if the EU rules were that you have to have a completely level playing field to trade with the EU then that's fine and we should abide by that......but it isnt and we shouldn't claim that those are non-negotiable starting points for agreement.

But yes, I agree, they see us as competitors. That's good, it's how the negotiations should be. So why in that case are some people in the UK so keen on our rules being set by our competition?

The whole point is that we have the freedom to set our own standards (like Mexico, Morocco, Japan and Norway) but also trade with them as partners. Anything less than that doesn't work. The fact other countries get that show that it is possible but the EU - perhaps understandably - don't want to give us it, however, that is different from saying they CAN'T give us it.

 

@Offcomedun actually made that quote that it was a big concern to the EU that we would undercut them and offer the multi nationals better terms to come to the UK and set up manufacturing as Nissan did many years ago in Sunderland.

 

An interesting point. I know i'm of limited intelligence but how does being a member of the EU work in terms of trade deals? What is their role in the dealings and what exactly is it we are trading? If a company in the UK wants to sell to another company in another country, say Canada, what is it the EU do that the company can't do themselves? Genuine question as i'm trying to work out the pros and cons of leaving.

 

I don't think of it as what the EU do that the company can't do themselves personally. It's what the EU do that the UK or any other country can't or havent yet agreed.

So the EU have an overarching agreement with Canada - for example - and that sets the terms for any trading relationship between a buyer/seller in the UK and a corresponding seller/buyer in Canada in relation to how those goods can cross the border and what costs are involved in that. The fact the EU and Canada have that deal makes it simpler (Canada don't need 27 different deals with the EU countries) and standardises the terms, being outside of that agreement would give the UK - or anyone else more flexibility in the terms but obvioulsy diminishes the buying power behind them. I suppose that's the trade off.

So as I say I don't view it as a EU vs Company thing. It's an EU vs Country thing.

Probably the best example I can think of - and don't pull this apart because I'm trying to keep it simple - is the Amazon Ireland tax case. In this the Irish government wanted to give Amazon tax breaks so that they would set up their headquarters in Dublin which, whether you believe in tax breaks or not, I would consider to be a decision for the country. The EU commission stepped in and ordered Amazon to pay a different amount of tax and I believe also took the Irish government to the European Court of Justice for failure to collect this money. My personal opinion is that this should have been up to the Irish government to set their own taxes but it is apparently and EU issue.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement

Weren't some suggesting it would take several years to agree a trade deal with the likes of Japan, the US and other countries, I believe were in negotiations with both New Zealand and Austrailia, I wonder when the project fear brigade will stop making stuff up.

Maybe a trade deal is more important to the Japanise than the rewording of the withdrawal agreement.

 

An interesting piece here, this guy thinks the UK will prosper better outside the EU.

Director of the Bruges Group think tank, Robert Oulds argued the UK has a prosperous future ahead regardless of whether a Brexit trade deal is agreed.

During an interview with Express.co.uk, Mr Oulds warned the EU would be losing one of the most successful economies and would face serious financial difficulties.

He also noted the UK had the opportunity to trade outside the EU as often as it wanted post-Brexit.

Mr Oulds said: "The EU will not fare well without great Britain's money.

"The EU are in serious financial difficulties and are having to cut back there own programmes.

"Through Brexit, the EU is losing one of the most successful economies in the world.

"Yes we do have our difficulties at the moment but Britain is bouncing back as the lockdown eases."
Mr Oulds also noted that after cutting ties with the European Union, Britain has an opportunity to reassess who it wishes to trade with.

He said: "The European Union will also lose a great deal of trade.

"Britain buys so many products from the European Union, Britian is essentially exporting its jobs and capital to buy services and goods from the EU.

"We were essentially taking the wealth out of the UK, for products we need as that is how trade works, but it was working in the EU's favour.

Once the UK is fully outside the EU Britain can look to expand its trade into markets around the world."

Mr Oulds highlighted how confident he was that Britian would be able to grow post-EU to have great relations with countries across the world.

He added: "Outside of the European Union we are already looking at striking a new trade deal with Japan.

"Britain is looking beyond the EU to overseas which is where the UK's destiny will always lie.

"According to the international monetary fund, 90 percent of global growth will happen outside of the European Union.

"That is where Britain needs to be and wear Britain needs to be plugging into.

"Other countries would also have the benefit of having good trade agreements with the UK if the EU decides to be unreasonable with their unfair demands."

Is he wrong ?.

 

He is spot on and the EU know they will be seriously damaged by the UK leaving, The EU is a self protectionist shrinking trade power with the real growth and opportunity in the rest of the world which is where the UK will be,

 

we're actually completely free to have higher standards trev, our government is arguing for the freedom to have lower standards and why would anyone want lower standards in any area of life

 

If they were proposing to freeze standards as they are now you may have a point but standards are not the problem it is principle, The EU are insisting we follow all standards they set in the future, This will mean huge parts of our laws are set by the EU, No independent country could accept a position where part of its laws are set by another country with no say or choice but to accept them. They are in fact attempting to keep us in the EU as if we accept this for an agreement what else will they want in future to allow free trade

 

Exactly.

People are preoccupied with whether standards will be lower or higher but thats not the point. It's simply an ideological position on who should be allowed to set the standards.

 

not at all as they arent deliberately taking people to our shores are they?

no they aren't, we are completely free to have higher standards than what we have now

 

No, just turning a blind eye to what is actually happening, mybe they need to get better control of their borders, then again why should they give another country the problem of the economic migrants.