[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

I actually found the questions pretty poor. This was (supposed to be) a TSC interview on financial stability that verged on panto-esque (at times) questioning. Its started poorly and I thought Carney did well to maintain dignity and composure when he must be thinking, "why is this bloke being a bit of a tit? why am I wasting important time here?"

It must be incredibly difficult ensuring that your comments are tight and that they cannot be misconstrued.

With the other EU countries refusing to engage in public until Article 50 is triggered there is no other option.

Indeed mefty, this is the crux for me.

You really do need the factor in the reality that Europe is standing at the edge of an economic casum staring into the abyss.

Perhaps, but the nature of our relationship has no/little bearing on this. Either way, we will be affected by the EU's fortunes - and NO we do not have a financial obligation to the EZ. Ironically, Brexshit is harmful to the EU hence we have a self-fulfilling downward spiral - a classic lose:lose.

You saw Carney's remarks that Brexit wasn't our biggest risk and Hammond's (?) remark that we do not want to see the EU collapse.

Yes, and I understood the nuance. Before the vote, Brexshit was considered the biggest risk to financial stability. Hence the BoE made contingency plans (liquidity support etc) which as Carney neatly responsed, "allowed them to make the weather." The nuance now, is that Brexshit still has an on-going effect on four factors that are a risk to financial stability but that these are not exclusively driven by Brexshit itself. Obviously the fourth, rising inflation/inflationary expectations, is directly linked to the folly of Brexshit.

that verged on panto-esque (at times) questioning

well rees-mogg was on the panel, never misses an opportunity to showboat

no it was Tyrie

The result will inform their future conduct as it will make the circumstances of when prerogative powers be used clearer.

aaaand yet several prominent Torys jumped on teh Daily Mail bandwagon, frothing with outrage that Brexit was being questioned

They should listen very carefully to the introductory comments from the judge - he was v clear. The ruling is about the process, not the result. They just froth for frothing's sake.

7. So we need to enter a period of negotiation with the EU (the other EEA members, the RoW, the WTO etc) in order to achieve a workable compromise solution. You cannot keep straddling the chasm, even in a pair of supportive leather trousers

All true, but, I repeat… WE DO NOT HAVE THE STAFF IN PLACE TO CARRY OUT THESE NEGOTIATIONS.

8. Once we have an agreement on this, the real hard work begins ie, filling in all the detail

So, you think we can have some broad brush deal, and fill in the details afterwards?

Other than agreeing to keep current arrangements (for longer than 2 years) this makes no sense.

9. There is no benefit to be gained from delaying this process.

Yes there is, we need to buy some time, for bleeding obvious reasons.

May made a political calculation, that she could get away with 9 months without looking to be delaying, but, behind the scenes, everyone knows that longer is needed really.

Yes, we will have a transition period. That is becoming obvious, although you could just about do EEA in two years.

We dont need to buy time. We need to engage.

We have the staff, but we lack the experience. Why? Because this hasnt been done before. It unchartered territory (Greenland aside). This is a cliched excuse. As mefty highlighted, we cant engage until we trigger A50. Until we engage, we cant determine the resources we need etc.

The ball has to be put in motion, unless one is a leaver that is desperate to ignore he result of course. Then you can play all kinds of silly games.

* Brexshiteers will continue to play down/ignore the existence of this inherent trade off. This may be deliberate or simply due to their lack of understanding. Either way, they are wrong.

On reflection THM, Kelvin, I think we can wait. After all the Brexies (Jamba for example) keep explaining to us that things are getting better not worse since the debacle of the referendum - so uncertainty is clearly good.
Now I may not agree with them, but I'm certainly in no rush to jettison one of the things that has led to the lifestyle we enjoy. Even those in poverty (and I have sympathy with them and feel it is a pressing issue for the country) would look relatively better off than those in poverty in the pre-EU (and predecessor organisation) decades.
And remember one of the reasons we pay EU club subs in is because of our relative wealth. The problem is one of wealth distribution with the UK and leaving the EU won't change that - well not for the better.

EEA?

Whatever we end up with, it will be worse than the deal we achieved last Feb. That's the sad bit.

Once can knock Dave all you like, but the reality of that wont change.

We don't have the staff in place to negotiate one trade deal in a 24month window, never mind 20+

Anyway, THM, looks like we agree about a transitional arrangement, realistically it is that or WTO and build up from scratch. That is the battle going on behind the scenes… which they don't want to be happening in public, hence wanting to trigger A50 without that clear and obvious debate happening first in HoC & HoL. As soon as you choose one option, you lose support.

IMO WTO is even worse in terms of negotiations!

The battle is going in behind the scenes but it is a false battle since what we want is only 1/27 of the equation. We know what we want (cake and eat it) is out-of-rach so we need to start to negotiate to determine want is likely/achievable.. We recruit the staff in this phase 1 for phases 2-17659

The recruiting is going on (phase1 if you like) but it isn't going well.
It doesn't help that we have given our trading partners a very good reason to hold on to the best people.
It also doesn't help that the government won't tell key staff exactly what the aims are, so they are trying to recruit with a blank job description.

The recruiting is going on (phase1 if you like) but it isn't going well.
It doesn't help that we have given our trading partners a very good reason to hold on to the best people.
It also doesn't help that the government won't tell key staff exactly what the aims are, so they are trying to recruit with a blank job description.

Im guessing we can only recruit loyal brexiters with 3 generations of british ancestors too? (im kind of joking but knowing how bonkers some of the top brexies are....)

TMH my view is that the eurozone / EU was [b]always[/b] the biggest risk to the UK economy and the sooner we can ween ourselves off it as a trading partner the better. We keep hearing about access to a market of 500m people but Germany and the UK are responsible for the vast majority of EU job creation and economic strength. IMO tariff free access to most of the rest is a total red herring. It is they who benefit the most and we pay them for the privilige.

From what I have heard the various Brexit teams in the civil service have been overwhelmed with volunteers / applicants of people who want to be involved in this historic once in a lifetime event.

IMO the vast majority of the trade "negotiations" are going to be very simple, ie just replicate with the UK what they have with the EU. We add far more to the EU than they add to us, with us leaving the economic vakue of the EU as a trading partner is much reduced.

[i]The recruiting is going on (phase1 if you like) but it isn't going well.[/I]

Probably a combination of fixed-term offers (only going to take 2 years 🙂 ), crap package for perms and the April 2017 rules of only paying Contractors net of tax/NI?

From what I have heard the various Brexit teams in the civil service have been overwhelmed with volunteers / applicants of people who want to be involved in this historic once in a lifetime event.

one can only imagine.......

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Jamba, Jamba, Jamba…

The EU doesn't stop us trading with the rest of the world. It doesn't stop Germany.
Making trading with the EU harder for businesses doesn't make it easier for us to trade with the rest of the world.
If by "weening off" you mean decrease our total exports so that the balance between EU and rest of world exports is moved away from EU, what does that gain us?
I'd rather we grew our exports with the rest of the world while maintaining current or slightly increasing trade with EU.
We can do that best inside the EU, or EEA, or similar.

As for recruitment, I'm talking about skilled experienced people in actual posts, as reported to me by someone in one those departments, not some hearsay about dreamers requesting posts beyond them.

IMO the vast majority of the trade "negotiations" are going to be very simple, ie just replicate with the UK what they have with the EU.

A good thing to aim for. Short and medium term, this can be achieved by a transitional deal. Anything else will be far from simple, and I suspect you are totally aware of that.

IMO the vast majority of the trade "negotiations" are going to be very simple, ie just replicate with the UK what they have with the EU.

Isn't this impossible? How can we negotiate "existing" terms with Canada who have a trade deal with the EU for instance, when we are no longer in the EU and they won't allow us to trade inside the single market?

We can't - its a myth that you can copy and paste/that it is simple. It isnt.

Ditto membership of EEA would have to be agreed by other EEA members. Its not automatic.

IMO the vast majority of the trade "negotiations" are going to be very simple, ie just replicate with the UK what they have with the EU.

The only simple thing appears to be you, if you think this is at all straightforward or 'simple'. Its taken 40 years to get all the deals in place and hundreds of expert negotiators and we have 2 years and about 20.

IMO the vast majority of the trade "negotiations" are going to be very simple

And your expertise in international trade is what?

igm - Member

Jamba - you're still giving a biased view of that story. I was well aware there was an Oxford Poly quote in the story, and even us non-Russell Group types can spot the difference.

Frankly talking down another university's contribution because they're in the 5 out of 6 non-Russell Group universities is ridiculous- there's a tendency to roll out a Russell Group institution every time people want to hear from a university but it's like only speaking to Eton when you ask about schools.

The finest Uni in the Uk isnt even in the Russell Group either 😉

Mexico said they were going to increase trade with EU.
At this rate we'll end up with only a Russian controlled, bankrupt USA to trade with.
If I were a conspiracy theorists...

Does anyone else think that Jambo might have grabbed the 'stupidest post of the year award' in the 2nd week of January with this Gem:

Jambo - IMO the vast majority of the trade "negotiations" are going to be very simple

At this rate we'll end up with only a Russian controlled, bankrupt USA to trade with.

I can picture the supermarket now.... you can choose tesco or Trump branded products only

teamhurtmore - Member

The finest Uni in the Uk isnt even in the Russell Group either

Maastricht?

Maastricht in the UK???

I now you are joking NW anyway, as no one forgets your country's oldest and the UK's second oldest (and finest) Uni

(at least until AS opens his mouth and then we all cringe)

What button did I press mentioning Russell Group unis?

It's a joke at home because my degrees are from two respected in their fields but non-Russell unis, while my wife has two Russell Group degrees.

igm is bemused.

IGM - its the 15-16:00 energy low and we are easily distracted

I'm 50:50 FWIW

teamhurtmore - Member

Maastricht in the UK???

It's the fastest growing university for UK students, and easier to get to for most folks than Aberdeen. Same as Schiphol is our hub airport 😉

Mini THM1 did look at it too! [Maastricht not Aberdeen!]

Dont mention distances though - mini THM2 has major clobber for next semester, so I may be driving North in a few days time. Will have to avoid duckie's border guards, but some golf might be in order!! Bloody long drive though, but had a nightmare with unibaggage.com before

Bob in for a pint if you're through York on the way.

Would be nice, but I use the west coast route sorry.

Good trivial pursuit question - which is further west, Edinburgh or Carlisle? I am amazed at how many people use the east coast route which is much, much longer

(waves at Cody!! 😉 )

Now I'm scared..... 🙂

Even from York A64, A1, A66, M6/74, A702 is shorter than A64 then A1 all the way.

How did this get on a Brexit thread?

Be very scared 😉

It's c) BTW 😉

Just joking tbc!!!

@molgrips quite a bit as a matter of fact. 11 years working for one of the worlds largest trade finance banks (behind only Citibank and HSBC) and 3 years directly on global trade related transactions, then the last 4 years investing in them. Did my first global trade finance transaction with Glencore in the late 1990's (first ever such deal)

TMH don't want the EEA either. Outside the lot.

@kelvin the EU isn't worth paying for and has curtailed our traditional Commonwealth relationships and severely restricted us in our ability to forge new alliances.

@Northwind, frankly there is a pecking order. It is what it is. BBC clearly used the headline to mislead including a photo of the Radcliff Camera (the event was being held at Oxford Uni - the real one), a significant chunk of the readership would not understand that Oxford Brookes isn't Oxford Uni itself or an Oxford Uni College

Jamabs - c'mon, you know that stuff about the commonwealth is not true, just check waht happened with our trade deals with the commonwealth immediately when we joined. Negotiating as part of the EU has facilitated and accelerated our abilty to establish free trade deals. One reason why we have trade deals with close to 90% of our trading partners, guess what happens to these deals now?

From the LSE

Contrary to the myth that the UK ‘betrayed’ the Commonwealth by joining the EU in 1973, the majority of Commonwealth countries – those located in Africa, the Caribbean and Pacific – were in fact incorporated into the EU’s system of trade preferences at this time.  Under the 1975 Lomé Convention, this arrangement provided the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries with unilateral preferential access to the EU market, a series of lucrative commodity protocols for bananas, beef, rum and sugar and development finance through the European Development Fund. [b] The EU’s special relationship with the ACP countries served to preserve and extend the UK’s links with this group of former colonies at a time when the Commonwealth was otherwise fractious and divided.[/b]

@kelvin the EU isn't worth paying for and has curtailed our traditional Commonwealth relationships and severely restricted us in our ability to forge new alliances.

Bullshit. Utter Bullshit.

Look at EU India trade talks, it is a series of UK governments, obsessed about immigration and protectionism for finance services, that has always been the stumbling block. The UK has curtailed relationships with Commonwealth countries as regards trade. In particular, in the HO, and now as PM, May is the biggest block to any trade deal with India in particular, due to her two big red lines… one is because looking to keep out immigrants is her political ticket into power, and to stay there… the other is because she will protect The City industries at all cost, it is where her family and friends make their livings.

I am done with the bias towards Europe, time for a more level playing field.

We absolutely can have a trade deal without significantly increased immigration from India. As I have noted before we've had a close relationship with India for 100 years leading to approx 1m Indians resident in the UK Poland got there in 10. Yes of course India asked for more visas, why wouldn't they ?

Protectionist tariffs on lamb killed our long term trade relationship with NZ. I have far more trust in NZ animal husbandry than hugely discredited Eastern Europeans wrt pork, poultry and of course horse burgers.

we've had a close relationship with India for 100 years leading

That was called an empire and they're generally frowned upon.