Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
O, sweet irony.
Flightpath and cobblers.
Perhaps you could also answer the question of how we square a free trade deal with without freedom of labour. Couldn't possibly be that you don't have an answer could it ? (Bit like IDS)?
I'm getting a bit bored of the oft repeated Remain statistic the 50% of our exports go to EU and only 10(or whatever)% of EU exports come here.
Here's a different stat for you: Germany exports to us over 230% of what we export to them. That means their trade surplus with us is over 130% of our exports to them; will Germany be prepared to lose that because we've left the EU?
We could always try banning BMW's Mercedes or VW's if the British are going to be happy with that
I think you're (easily) confused and showing it in spades here.
David Smiths column in the ST today which can be read on his blog has some interesting stats on UK growth both before and after the UK joined the EEC. Basically our relative growth was much better after we joined even if our absolute growth wasn't.
It's worth a look but for me the important message is that in or out of the EU membership of the single market is key to our current and future prosperity.
One other startling fact. Apparently our exports of services doubled between 2006 and 2014. Doubled. Our economy is changing faster than we realise.
Don't forget that in the 1970s we were a basketcase, so I can see that the uplift from EU membership helped a lot. It's less critical now that the EU is declining and other markets are more substantial.
But, yes, membership of a free trading partnership with EU would be beneficial to the economy. The question is what is the cost of that membership (in all terms, not just financial)
The paradox is that we joined the EEC to take advantage of higher growth rates, just at the point that EEC nations stopped growing faster than us.
Is being in the EU hindering German exports to the world? It has car factories in America and China. German pharmaceuticals is the 4th largest in the world. With a market share of over 11 percent, Germany was the world’s largest exporter of chemical products in 2013. The country exported chemical products with a total value of €166 billion. Over 90 percent of Germany’s more than 2,000 chemical companies are small and medium-sized enterprises. They are competitive and employ nearly half a million workers. It invested €10.5 billion in the year 2013' Poor hamstrung Germany hobbled to the EU.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
It's loopy. Proportionately the EU makes up a far greater portion of British exports than the UK makes up of EU exports. Britain is in no position to be imposing preconditions.
Yet another lunatic Europhile who thinks the EU will cut their own throats to spite the UK. If you think they are that malicious and vindictive why do you want to stay with them? It is utter stupidity.
Read what I wrote.
I do not suggest that the EU wouldn't agree to a free trade deal. I do suggest that it won't agree to the moonbeams, unicorn and pixie dust type of deal that too many Leavers advocate.
The trade deficit with the EU is nearly entirely made up of German, Spanish and Dutch components as I recall. The other 25 EU nations may not be that bothered, and may well prioritise free movement over free trade.
Oh shush. It's not as though such an agreement would need all EU countries to agree to it, is it?
Good job a recession in Germany wouldn't affect the rest of the EU economies then.
You might want to investigate the ratification glitches for the EU deal with Canada.
I can see 'ratification glitches' becoming a real meme with the average voter.
Follow thy leader
"If I cant get the deal, I rule nothing out..."
Widely acknowledged crap deal
"If we leave there will be migrant camps in Kent, North Korea will attack, 3 million jobs are at risk, and we will probably get bombed my muslims like Paris... than God for the 4 year ban on migrant benefits"
Which is actually not even that is it? Sliding scale to full benefits?
If it is Osborne, he might not get many votes in 2020.
Corbyn will get even less.
9 mill vs 7.5 mill coming up.
Not sure about Osbo, but convinced no more than 6.5m would wake up on polling day and think 'well, I know he is fond of dubious organisations, can't do up his tie, wants to think about giving away British territories, talks about joining up with other hard left European parties, refuses to sing the national anthem, is more concerned about launching nuclear subs without missiles and is basically the political branch of the STWC, but I'll vote for him today'.
This may be my Sion Simon moment, of course.....
Pol Pot & Hitler's love child would get 6.5 million with a red rosette.
We'll see the hard minima for Labour's vote anyhow.
Not necessarily. SLAB thought they always had a large vote in Scotland. Things are changing.
Hmm there is no serious left wing party in England though, so it is Labour by default for alot of people.
There are alternative parties for the working class vote in England.
EFTA has a free trade deal with Canada. If we joined EFTA we could piggy back theirs.
There are many 'off the shelf' options readily available.
Twenty four of the twenty seven EU nations run a trade surplus with us, and the EU's 'privileged partnership' with Turkey shows that an arms-length arrangement is something they are very happy to consider.
The idea that free movement is some act of God is comedic.
A gigantic leap in the dark for the EU to lose one of it's biggest members and trading destinations.
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
The "leadership" of LEAVE are a mess.
They might start by having a decent heavyweight to front the campaign not disparate Marmite figures who can barely agree on which group should lead let alone the message they should put forward.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
O, sweet irony. Flightpath and cobblers.
Perhaps you could also answer the question of how we square a free trade deal with without freedom of labour. Couldn't possibly be that you don't have an answer could it ? (Bit like IDS)?
Do China/USA/Canada/etc have a free trade deal with the EC that allows free movement of labour?
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
Will it involve the unfettered right to come to the UK to look for work?
A so called free trade deal with the EU for any remaining non EU country in Europe will involve free movement of labour. As it stands right now any new non EU European country attempting a deal with the EU would have to sign up to Schengen.
You've not event attempted to answer the question.
Free movement of labour (in the sense of people) can comprise 3 elements:
(I) The right to move to accept a confirmed job offer (ie no work permits) (Ii) The right to move to a country to look for work + the right of preference in job seeking vs any individual who is not a citizen of the trading bloc (Iii) The right to move to a country and claim benefits
At the moment we have all 3. I'd be fine with (1) and - although 3 is irritating - it is 2 that causes the most damage to those Brits with less differentiated skillsets.
Where do you think the EU would draw the line in a trade deal - at what point would they walk away?
(flightpath reply) Of course I answered your first question. You had to rephrase it into triple the words to ask it properly. The EU would want us to obey the current free movement rules in order to access the free market and to work to the current EU EU free market regs and rules. I do not see why (ii) should be any more wrong than the other two. I think the free movement rules should be tighter myself but I am not going to the barricades about it since being in the EEA would make no difference anyway. As part of a trade block I see no reason why workers in that block should not be given preference over people not in that block.
Being part of a so called free trade deal with the EU would involve the single market and the free movement of labour. Anyone pretending otherwise is stupid or is lying. Anyone who wants out of the EU free market is putting a gun to the heads of British workers and suggesting a game of one sided russian roulette.
EFTA has a free trade deal with Canada. If we joined EFTA we could piggy back theirs.
There are many 'off the shelf' options readily available.
Twenty four of the twenty seven EU nations run a trade surplus with us, and the EU's 'privileged partnership' with Turkey shows that an arms-length arrangement is something they are very happy to consider.
The idea that free movement is some act of God is comedic.
A gigantic leap in the dark for the EU to lose one of it's biggest members and trading destinations.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
O, sweet irony.
Flightpath and cobblers.
Perhaps you could also answer the question of how we square a free trade deal with without freedom of labour. Couldn't possibly be that you don't have an answer could it ? (Bit like IDS)?
If I manufacture an item in London and stick it on FedEx/UPS to deliver to Berlin (customs free) we have free trade - but absolutely zero requirement to trade in labour.
David Smiths column in the ST today which can be read on his blog has some interesting stats on UK growth both before and after the UK joined the EEC. Basically our relative growth was much better after we joined even if our absolute growth wasn't.
It's worth a look but for me the important message is that in or out of the EU membership of the single market is key to our current and future prosperity.
One other startling fact. Apparently our exports of services doubled between 2006 and 2014. Doubled. Our economy is changing faster than we realise.
Don't forget that in the 1970s we were a basketcase, so I can see that the uplift from EU membership helped a lot. It's less critical now that the EU is declining and other markets are more substantial.
But, yes, membership of a free trading partnership with EU would be beneficial to the economy. The question is what is the cost of that membership (in all terms, not just financial)
The paradox is that we joined the EEC to take advantage of higher growth rates, just at the point that EEC nations stopped growing faster than us.
Is being in the EU hindering German exports to the world? It has car factories in America and China. German pharmaceuticals is the 4th largest in the world. With a market share of over 11 percent, Germany was the world’s largest exporter of chemical products in 2013. The country exported chemical products with a total value of €166 billion. Over 90 percent of Germany’s more than 2,000 chemical companies are small and medium-sized enterprises. They are competitive and employ nearly half a million workers. It invested €10.5 billion in the year 2013' Poor hamstrung Germany hobbled to the EU.
Your point being?
Germany is not hamstrung by being in the EU. Its exports on the world stage seem more than adequate.
David Smiths column in the ST today which can be read on his blog has some interesting stats on UK growth both before and after the UK joined the EEC. Basically our relative growth was much better after we joined even if our absolute growth wasn't.
It's worth a look but for me the important message is that in or out of the EU membership of the single market is key to our current and future prosperity.
One other startling fact. Apparently our exports of services doubled between 2006 and 2014. Doubled. Our economy is changing faster than we realise.
Maybe. But how much is also down to our finally getting to grips with structural issues in our economy? Our failing state industries being privatised, the growth of the City and the freeing up of our entrepreneurial spirit started in the late seventies - which was to do with domestic policy, not that of the EEC.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
O, sweet irony.
Flightpath and cobblers.
Perhaps you could also answer the question of how we square a free trade deal with without freedom of labour. Couldn't possibly be that you don't have an answer could it ? (Bit like IDS)?
Correct. Chestut is just another who has gone bonkers.
Mr. Flightpath, the new deal is worse than the status quo ante.
More importantly, that's not the reason. UKIP were riding high and the Conservative leadership was pressured into making concessions to try and head that threat off.
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
I think the interview on Marr with Ian Duncan Smith demonstrates the major problem leave have because his interview will now be the benchmark for leave's case and it is not credible. I would have thought that leave should have agreed a single verifiable position by now and surely Ian Duncan Smith's cannot be that position. Leave need to get their act together
I did not see it. What was not credible? Any position based arounda bilateral trade agreement?
He said that leave would agree a trade agreement that precluded free movement of labour without any evidence
So his failure was not to point to EU-Canada deal or EU-Korea deal.
The EU Canada deal does increase include provisions for increased freedom of movement, but clearly not to EEA levels.
So we can expect Toronto to be chock full of romanian beggars any day now?
The irritating thing about free movement is that EU citizens fly in on budget airlines to thieve and beg for a few days and then fly home after making a good tax free profit.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
O, sweet irony.
Flightpath and cobblers.
Perhaps you could also answer the question of how we square a free trade deal with without freedom of labour. Couldn't possibly be that you don't have an answer could it ? (Bit like IDS)?
If I manufacture an item in London and stick it on FedEx/UPS to deliver to Berlin (customs free) we have free trade - but absolutely zero requirement to trade in labour.
Ian Duncan Smith says on Marr that once we are out the EU will agree a trade deal allowing us to ristrict free movement of labour but cannot show any evidence of this. This is wing and a prayer stuff
It looks like a sound argument on the balance of probabilities.
There is an EU trade surplus of £61bn sitting in Leave's pocket.
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
Will it involve the unfettered right to come to the UK to look for work?
A so called free trade deal with the EU for any remaining non EU country in Europe will involve free movement of labour. As it stands right now any new non EU European country attempting a deal with the EU would have to sign up to Schengen.
You've not event attempted to answer the question.
Free movement of labour (in the sense of people) can comprise 3 elements:
(I) The right to move to accept a confirmed job offer (ie no work permits) (Ii) The right to move to a country to look for work + the right of preference in job seeking vs any individual who is not a citizen of the trading bloc (Iii) The right to move to a country and claim benefits
At the moment we have all 3. I'd be fine with (1) and - although 3 is irritating - it is 2 that causes the most damage to those Brits with less differentiated skillsets.
Where do you think the EU would draw the line in a trade deal - at what point would they walk away?
(flightpath reply) Of course I answered your first question. You had to rephrase it into triple the words to ask it properly. The EU would want us to obey the current free movement rules in order to access the free market and to work to the current EU EU free market regs and rules. I do not see why (ii) should be any more wrong than the other two. I think the free movement rules should be tighter myself but I am not going to the barricades about it since being in the EEA would make no difference anyway. As part of a trade block I see no reason why workers in that block should not be given preference over people not in that block.
Being part of a so called free trade deal with the EU would involve the single market and the free movement of labour. Anyone pretending otherwise is stupid or is lying. Anyone who wants out of the EU free market is putting a gun to the heads of British workers and suggesting a game of one sided russian roulette.
Bullsh1t ! Free movement is our inalienable right. The founding fathers of our Union ensured that.
IDS has moved me towards Remain after that performance.
Leave needs to use more Gove and less IDS in the future.
The "leadership" of LEAVE are a mess.
They might start by having a decent heavyweight to front the campaign not disparate Marmite figures who can barely agree on which group should lead let alone the message they should put forward.
I think two of them could have been candidates: May and Hammond. Both worked out in the end that it was better to stay with REMAIN.
I am not sure after 23rd June, how people like IDS or Villiers can stay in their jobs. In any event, the opposition need to ask the six MInisters: "Minister: do you agree with the government policy on the EU ? "
David Smiths column in the ST today which can be read on his blog has some interesting stats on UK growth both before and after the UK joined the EEC. Basically our relative growth was much better after we joined even if our absolute growth wasn't.
It's worth a look but for me the important message is that in or out of the EU membership of the single market is key to our current and future prosperity.
One other startling fact. Apparently our exports of services doubled between 2006 and 2014. Doubled. Our economy is changing faster than we realise.
Alanbrooke and Surbiton keep underlining our week manufacturing performance; beginning to sound like the rebalancing. It seems like service providers are too busy reaping the dividends to post on pb....
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
You have the choice between a leap on the dark - or more accurately a stroll on the shadows of certainty - and the absolute garauntee of closer union and more EU control. That is the choice you are making
You seem to tacitly accept that leave is a leap in the dark. As far as remain is concerned the EU is in meltdown and it is facing many challenges. That is why my decision will be neutral until much nearer the time
I did say it was a stroll in the shadows rather than a leap in the dark. Anyone who claims to be able to predict any future with real certainty is fooling themselves.
I am stunned how bad Ian Duncan Smith was on Marr. I have said that I will vote leave if leave can provide a convincing argument that we will have a trade deal without free movement and all he could say to Marr was that will happen with absolutely no evidence. This is ' a leap in the dark' stuff
You have the choice between a leap on the dark - or more accurately a stroll on the shadows of certainty - and the absolute garauntee of closer union and more EU control. That is the choice you are making
You seem to tacitly accept that leave is a leap in the dark. As far as remain is concerned the EU is in meltdown and it is facing many challenges. That is why my decision will be neutral until much nearer the time
I did say it was a stroll in the shadows rather than a leap in the dark. Anyone who claims to be able to predict any future with real certainty is fooling themselves.
Yes but leave have a higher bar as status quo will be the default safe option
Do not talk cobblers. A free trade deal will involve free movement of labour, unless you want to tow the UK to just offshore Connecticut.
O, sweet irony.
Flightpath and cobblers.
Perhaps you could also answer the question of how we square a free trade deal with without freedom of labour. Couldn't possibly be that you don't have an answer could it ? (Bit like IDS)?
If I manufacture an item in London and stick it on FedEx/UPS to deliver to Berlin (customs free) we have free trade - but absolutely zero requirement to trade in labour.
Hope that helps.
Why should they accept that ?
Because, in allowing the reciprocal arrangement, they - the Germans - make £30bn a year in profit.
You have to admire the Irish for having adopted this system nearly 100 years ago. Well, maybe admire isn't the right word. It's supposed to be fair but Labour could end up with half the number of seats their share of the vote would entitle them to under a strictly proportional electoral system. www.0cral.com | green2all.net
Comments
Perhaps you could also answer the question of how we square a free trade deal with without freedom of labour. Couldn't possibly be that you don't have an answer could it ? (Bit like IDS)?
How could IDS possibly make "a two footed lunge at David Cameron's knee" when he has one foot in his mouth ....
Referee !!
"If I cant get the deal, I rule nothing out..."
Widely acknowledged crap deal
"If we leave there will be migrant camps in Kent, North Korea will attack, 3 million jobs are at risk, and we will probably get bombed my muslims like Paris... than God for the 4 year ban on migrant benefits"
Which is actually not even that is it? Sliding scale to full benefits?
Twenty four of the twenty seven EU nations run a trade surplus with us, and the EU's 'privileged partnership' with Turkey shows that an arms-length arrangement is something they are very happy to consider.
The idea that free movement is some act of God is comedic.
A gigantic leap in the dark for the EU to lose one of it's biggest members and trading destinations.
They might start by having a decent heavyweight to front the campaign not disparate Marmite figures who can barely agree on which group should lead let alone the message they should put forward.
Free movement of labour (in the sense of people) can comprise 3 elements:
(I) The right to move to accept a confirmed job offer (ie no work permits)
(Ii) The right to move to a country to look for work + the right of preference in job seeking vs any individual who is not a citizen of the trading bloc
(Iii) The right to move to a country and claim benefits
At the moment we have all 3. I'd be fine with (1) and - although 3 is irritating - it is 2 that causes the most damage to those Brits with less differentiated skillsets.
Where do you think the EU would draw the line in a trade deal - at what point would they walk away?
(flightpath reply)
Of course I answered your first question. You had to rephrase it into triple the words to ask it properly.
The EU would want us to obey the current free movement rules in order to access the free market and to work to the current EU EU free market regs and rules.
I do not see why (ii) should be any more wrong than the other two. I think the free movement rules should be tighter myself but I am not going to the barricades about it since being in the EEA would make no difference anyway. As part of a trade block I see no reason why workers in that block should not be given preference over people not in that block.
Being part of a so called free trade deal with the EU would involve the single market and the free movement of labour. Anyone pretending otherwise is stupid or is lying.
Anyone who wants out of the EU free market is putting a gun to the heads of British workers and suggesting a game of one sided russian roulette.
Hope that helps.
Chestut is just another who has gone bonkers.
Of course I answered your first question. You had to rephrase it into triple the words to ask it properly.
The EU would want us to obey the current free movement rules in order to access the free market and to work to the current EU EU free market regs and rules.
I do not see why (ii) should be any more wrong than the other two. I think the free movement rules should be tighter myself but I am not going to the barricades about it since being in the EEA would make no difference anyway. As part of a trade block I see no reason why workers in that block should not be given preference over people not in that block.
Being part of a so called free trade deal with the EU would involve the single market and the free movement of labour. Anyone pretending otherwise is stupid or is lying.
Anyone who wants out of the EU free market is putting a gun to the heads of British workers and suggesting a game of one sided russian roulette.
Bullsh1t ! Free movement is our inalienable right. The founding fathers of our Union ensured that.
I am not sure after 23rd June, how people like IDS or Villiers can stay in their jobs. In any event, the opposition need to ask the six MInisters: "Minister: do you agree with the government policy on the EU ? "
www.0cral.com | green2all.net