Brexit - The negotiations.

Status
Not open for further replies.
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Gove talking tough tells us that if there isn't agreement on some basics (who decides the basics btw) by June then we are going to walk away.

That would mean businesses being told they had six months to prepare for disruption at the borders, with customs checks, tariffs and quotas all likely to be imposed as Britain began trading with the EU under World Trade Organisation rules. (Daily Telegraph - now)

But let's be positive - we are going for an Australia type agreement and - even though Australia doesn't actually yet have a trade agreement in place with the EU - we only need basics agreed by June.

https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/negotiations/aeufta/Pages/default.aspx

What Australia will get we clearly don't yet know, and as we don't know what Australia will get I am not too sure how we can agree the basics of an 'Australia-style' deal in 6 months - never a full deal within a year...never mind...Gove did a speech that will have pleased many - onwards and upwards to WTO rule-taking and beyond :)
Click to expand...

I thought an Australia style deal is basically no deal, but just branded as a deal to fool those who do not want to ask any difficult questions?
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Gove talking tough tells us that if there isn't agreement on some basics (who decides the basics btw) by June then we are going to walk away.

That would mean businesses being told they had six months to prepare for disruption at the borders, with customs checks, tariffs and quotas all likely to be imposed as Britain began trading with the EU under World Trade Organisation rules. (Daily Telegraph - now)

But let's be positive - we are going for an Australia type agreement and - even though Australia doesn't actually yet have a trade agreement in place with the EU - we only need basics agreed by June.

https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/negotiations/aeufta/Pages/default.aspx

What Australia will get we clearly don't yet know, and as we don't know what Australia will get I am not too sure how we can agree the basics of an 'Australia-style' deal in 6 months - never a full deal within a year...never mind...Gove did a speech that will have pleased many - onwards and upwards to WTO rule-taking and beyond :)
Click to expand...
Have you read the UK's draft document on the future relationship. I cant see where it is suggesting and Australian type agreement, it states throughout of a similar agreement to that already agreed with Canada and Japan.
 
Yes - I'm confused - are we going for a Canada-style deal and if we can't get the basics of that sorted by June then we'll go for an Australia-style deal - even though one doesn't exist - or just go straight for WTO rule taking as the Telegraph seems to think...

I think this is as earlier this month Johnson said that if we couldn't get a Canada-style deal then we could have a deal simply based upon the Withdrawal Agreement - and that would be Australia-style.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...n-style-brexit-deal-mean-for-the-uk-kxd2j9dqw

That that Australia-style deal is currently No Deal - I am thinking Johnson didn't mean that, but meant a deal that would look like what Australia is in negotiations with the EU over. But that would surely require negotiating with the EU?
 
Last edited:
drdel said:
Good speech (IMO) by Gove in HoC this morning: going to generate some heat with Barnier over next few weeks...

https://assets.publishing.service.g...68874/The_Future_Relationship_with_the_EU.pdf
Click to expand...

A very interesting read, and thanks for posting up. Someone's done a huge body of work. One or two areas of potential conflict, e.g. there is no mention of the ECJ being the overarching body which the EU has continually stipulated.

Very fair and equitable in most areas, especially as it references pre-existing agreements with other countries to model the agreement on. Makes it very clear where the UK stands on subsidies and fair competition. What it doesn't mention in that respect is the potential to use tax breaks as (hidden) subsidies.

Unlike May's abortion, which the EU were ecstatic over, I think it a very decent framework.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Yes - I'm confused - are we going for a Canada-style deal and if we can't get the basics of that sorted by June then we'll go for an Australia-style deal - even though one doesn't exist - or just go straight for WTO rule taking as the Telegraph seems to think...

I think this is as earlier this month Johnson said that if we couldn't get a Canada-style deal then we could have a deal simply based upon the Withdrawal Agreement - and that would be Australia-style.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...n-style-brexit-deal-mean-for-the-uk-kxd2j9dqw

That that Australia-style deal is currently No Deal - I am thinking Johnson didn't mean that, but meant a deal that would look like what Australia is in negotiations with the EU over. But that would surely require negotiating with the EU?
Click to expand...

I think you should take the time to read the Government's current publication - (its only 30 pages and quite a clear read) - it would be better than relying on media tit-bits. IMO opinion it is a pretty sensible document.

Here's is the 46page EU documents - bit of a harder read !
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/42736/st05870-ad01re03-en20.pdf
 
Last edited:
Hobbit said:
A very interesting read, and thanks for posting up. Someone's done a huge body of work. One or two areas of potential conflict, e.g. there is no mention of the ECJ being the overarching body which the EU has continually stipulated.

Very fair and equitable in most areas, especially as it references pre-existing agreements with other countries to model the agreement on. Makes it very clear where the UK stands on subsidies and fair competition. What it doesn't mention in that respect is the potential to use tax breaks as (hidden) subsidies.

Unlike May's abortion, which the EU were ecstatic over, I think it a very decent framework.
Click to expand...

I think its not mentioned the ECJ as the implications are it has no functional role between UK -EU
 
Hobbit said:
One or two areas of potential conflict, e.g. there is no mention of the ECJ being the overarching body which the EU has continually stipulated.

.
Click to expand...

Lord forgive me for stepping back into this wasps nest, but.....

Has it? From what I've read, all the EU has asked for is that the ECJ should be used to determine only what the EU side is stipulating? The UK would need a similar body to clarify its position. If I've read (and understood) it correctly, then this seems a fairly logical position really.
 
bluewolf said:
Lord forgive me for stepping back into this wasps nest, but.....

Has it? From what I've read, all the EU has asked for is that the ECJ should be used to determine only what the EU side is stipulating? The UK would need a similar body to clarify its position. If I've read (and understood) it correctly, then this seems a fairly logical position really.
Click to expand...

The piece I read said that both parties would form a mediating committee but if no agreement could be reached the ECJ would have the 'casting vote.'

To be honest, it was 'reported,' unlike the formal doc just issued by the UK govt. I've not bothered reading the EU's doc yet.
 
Surely it cannot be such that the ECJ or UK supreme Court have the overriding decision in a dispute as they cannot be independent.
 
SocketRocket said:
Surely it cannot be such that the ECJ or UK supreme Court have the overriding decision in a dispute as they cannot be independent.
Click to expand...
I would agree. There would have to be an independent body set up to rule on such things. As I believe every other trade agreement has. Which is why I "think" that this is a case of poor reporting from certain vested interests, rather than an accurate representation of the facts. However, I'm more than willing to stand corrected if someone can highlight the actual statement (y)
 
Johnson says in an interview that there will be no negotiation from the government's position as set out in the Future Relationship Document. We'll see. Looking for EU to move.

Also listened to where in his speech Gove mentioned Australia as a fall back to a Canada-style deal.
 
Last edited:
Hobbit said:
I'd put money on their being lots of negotiations. Its just posturing from Johnson, akin to Barnier's posturing a week ago.
Click to expand...

There's quite a bit of common ground the main difference is the EU seem to mention the "Union's interest" whereas the UK using'mutual'. Obviously the EU insisting on combining Fishing to trade, Ireland/NI and the Financial services bit are more challenging. Strategically I would have thought it a fairly straightforward negotiation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top