The UKs economic issue a lot of people on here seem to be in denial of.
I know perfectly well what it is.
It is just getting a bit tiresome having posters say things like "We will just say we want the same EU trade and they will say yes"
- Status
I know perfectly well what it is.
It is just getting a bit tiresome having posters say things like "We will just say we want the same EU trade and they will say yes"
I'm certain they won't say that, and I have expressed that view here several times.
I have been saying the exact opposite of that, at present all of our trade is done as part of EU trade deals both trade inside and outside of the EU. We will have to renegotiate everything and I am sure that the deal that any country makes with a market of 500 million people will not be the one they make with a country of 65 million. Also while all that is being worked out you won't get any price for NZ lamb in the UK as the New Zealnd trade deal is an EU deal not a UK deal, so it will be renegotiated and will take time.
Also companies still have to work out our new costs of production and service delivery and their new price structures given that a large amount of our supply chains are outside of the U.K and we will have to import while the £ is falling and when trade is uncertain.
This is not denying that we will have Brexit. I think everyone is just trying to estimate how and when we will actually achieve it. I suspect in the end no-one will be pleased with the results.
Last edited:
The only realistic and clear things the two sides said:
Leave: while we remain in the EU we cannot effectively control immigration because we've signed up to free movement of people from within the EU.
Remain: if we leave, it will cause an economic shock and a great deal of work negotiating new trade agreements: the country will be poorer as a result for the foreseeable future.
Put those two things together and you get the 'choice' I described.
Leave: while we remain in the EU we cannot effectively control immigration because we've signed up to free movement of people from within the EU.
Remain: if we leave, it will cause an economic shock and a great deal of work negotiating new trade agreements: the country will be poorer as a result for the foreseeable future.
Put those two things together and you get the 'choice' I described.
But Leave weren't offering an option of sacrificing prosperity in order to keep Johnny Foreigner out. They weren't being "realistic" about that. They were telling lies, or spouting ignorant or irresponsible rubbish.
Primus
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2007
- Messages
- 1,191
This trade deal with NZ that the EU is doing. Does NZ have to accept free movement of all EU nationals across it's borders as one of the conditions? If not is it a considerably worse deal than other EU countries get with regards to trade and if it is then why are NZ going ahead with it?
No but according to the NZ authorities they are going ahead with it because
"The EU is New Zealand’s third-largest trading partner, with two-way trade valued at $19.6 billion in goods and services in the year to June 2015. This comprises over $8 billion in exports ($4.9 billion goods, $3.1 billion services), and $11.5 billion in imports ($8.5 billion goods, $2.9 billion services).
The EU is our second-largest source of foreign direct investment in New Zealand (NZ$10.9 billion) and third-largest destination for New Zealand direct investment abroad (NZ$2.89 billion). Nearly 40% of all New Zealand international research collaboration is with EU partners. New Zealand is now one of only six WTO members without an EU FTA in place or under negotiation. This puts New Zealand at a competitive disadvantage in the EU market. Similarly, the EU is the only one of New Zealand’s top ten trading partners without an FTA in progress." More can be found out here https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/agreements-under-negotiation/eu-fta/
They will probably not have to accept free movement as such but it will probably have to accept something like the Canadians are doing to get their free trade agreement. The EU/NZ FTA is expected in 2017 but CETA is being seen as a bit of a template.
However, this is not access to the common market as an EU member this is just a trade agreement and potentially all 27 national parliaments will have to vote to accept it.
Some of the conditions of CETA are;
Allowing EU businesses to enter Canadian procurement for Public contracts
Temporary movement of key company personnel and service-providers between the EU and Canada. This is particularly important for firms with overseas operations
Allow EU investors to enter the Canadian market
Mutual recognition of qualifications
Acceptance of more regulation
Protection of EU based Intellectual property
If you want to read more on this find it here http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ceta/
"The EU is New Zealand’s third-largest trading partner, with two-way trade valued at $19.6 billion in goods and services in the year to June 2015. This comprises over $8 billion in exports ($4.9 billion goods, $3.1 billion services), and $11.5 billion in imports ($8.5 billion goods, $2.9 billion services).
The EU is our second-largest source of foreign direct investment in New Zealand (NZ$10.9 billion) and third-largest destination for New Zealand direct investment abroad (NZ$2.89 billion). Nearly 40% of all New Zealand international research collaboration is with EU partners. New Zealand is now one of only six WTO members without an EU FTA in place or under negotiation. This puts New Zealand at a competitive disadvantage in the EU market. Similarly, the EU is the only one of New Zealand’s top ten trading partners without an FTA in progress." More can be found out here https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/agreements-under-negotiation/eu-fta/
They will probably not have to accept free movement as such but it will probably have to accept something like the Canadians are doing to get their free trade agreement. The EU/NZ FTA is expected in 2017 but CETA is being seen as a bit of a template.
However, this is not access to the common market as an EU member this is just a trade agreement and potentially all 27 national parliaments will have to vote to accept it.
Some of the conditions of CETA are;
Allowing EU businesses to enter Canadian procurement for Public contracts
Temporary movement of key company personnel and service-providers between the EU and Canada. This is particularly important for firms with overseas operations
Allow EU investors to enter the Canadian market
Mutual recognition of qualifications
Acceptance of more regulation
Protection of EU based Intellectual property
If you want to read more on this find it here http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ceta/
Last edited:
Well, Remain were also making **** up. Remember the £4,300 per household figure? Not £4,200 or £4,400 - their predictions were *that* accurate.
Like I said, I tried to listen to both sides arguments with a rational ear, and after filtering away all the crap, the choice was continue with uncontrolled levels of immigration or accept some level of financial hardship.
I think the Remain side tacitly accepted this, because whenever the subject of immigration came up all they could do was to try to change the subject back to the economy.
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
And of course the Leave side took the same approach to economics, which they couldn't win on. The Remain side couldn't win on immigration. Received wisdom is that you play to your strengths and avoid your weaknesses.
Of course you still need capable players, and the Remain camp was very short of those.
Again, that may be the real situation. Keep out Johnny Foreigner and have financial hardship. Yes indeed, that's the choice.
But that's not what was on offer from the likes of Farage and BoJo, was it? Have I not cited some of the Brexit propaganda? If these absurdities had not been believed, Brexit would not have won. The Leave voters were either intentionally deceived, or they were bamboozled by irresponsible or ignorant politicians.
gypsyjackson
Master Poster
I would be interested to know what percentage of that EU trade is with the UK. I suspect a pretty high percentage. Would try to look it up, but about to do a photoshoot.
Francesca R
Girl
And that there would be an emergency "punishment" budget that hiked tax and cut spending.
They also had the disadvantage of having to always say when pressed "We know the EU is not perfect, it's just less bad than the alternative".
Francesca R
Girl
Trade agreements rarely include opening borders to free migration that is an EU single market thing and is the anomaly not the rule.
Lothian
should be banned
My boss told me that he would be cutting my hours. I said if he did that I wouldn't have enough money so I would need another job or would need to cut costs. Anyway my hours were cut, I haven't got another job but I have decided to carry on spending what I did before. Now my overdraft in increasing at a higher rate than it was and the bank had upped it's lending rates.
Is my mistake identifying the need to revisit my finances or is the error not doing so?
We call this dim here
Francesca R
Girl
One day in the future I think that the NHS budget will eventually be £350 million per week bigger than it is today. The UK will probably still be outside the EU when that happens.
Perhaps you and others were confused about the time horizon presuming that it was in some sense linked to the point in time at which a bus was painted.
Lothian
should be banned
If the tube replacement bus service tries to follow the exact same route as the underground line it could, given enough time and demolition get there, but it would cause far less damage to take a different route.
Or in simple terms, there should be an emergency budget. Not as a punishment but simply to find an easier route to where we want to be.
Francesca R
Girl
In many parts of the country you can load up the Uber app and it essentially tells you "Um yeah, don't start from here"
I remember asking Google maps for public transport options from Solenzara to Cucuruzzu just for fun when I was in Corsica the other month. I think it said something like within two million years somebody will probably deliver the lemon soaked paper napkins and then we will see about setting off.
Or in simple terms you don't and never did tighten policy after the onset of recession. Unless you're being forced to bow down before the IMF and even they are not so nasty about that any more. It might be a women in charge thing I suppose.
I remember asking Google maps for public transport options from Solenzara to Cucuruzzu just for fun when I was in Corsica the other month. I think it said something like within two million years somebody will probably deliver the lemon soaked paper napkins and then we will see about setting off.
Or in simple terms you don't and never did tighten policy after the onset of recession. Unless you're being forced to bow down before the IMF and even they are not so nasty about that any more. It might be a women in charge thing I suppose.
But will immigration be lower even though the spend in the NHS is higher and may be at some future date £350 million per week bigger.
At what point does anyone come clean about the need for immigration in a country where we have more elderly than children and where our median age is now 40 and rising.
We have approx 26 million people in the UK under the age of 35 and approx 37 million over that age including approx 15 million over the age of 60. Of the 26 million people in the UK under 35 approximately 4 million are immigrants and of those over 35 approximately 2 million.
Last edited:
Francesca R
Girl
I certainly hope not.
Obviously not yet as most remain campaigners also stayed "dirty" on immigration (said it was too high).
Immigration alone can not offset greying of course. Immigrants get old too. To stop the dependency ratio from rising just using immigration would require huge and ever increasing immigrant flows. (I think immigration has many other advantages though)
- Status