politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A Customs Union deal needs to be on the table if No Deal is to
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A Customs Union deal needs to be on the table if No Deal is to be avoided
It’s lonely at the top. It’s probably lonelier if you cut yourself off and isolate yourself from your colleagues, even if they are after their own interests and your own job. This last week has proven just how politically lonely Theresa May is, yet still she carries on. There’s something admirable in that and perhaps it’s no small part of the explanation for the rise in rise in the level of sympathy the public feel for the PM, as noted in the previous thread, and also in her rising ‘Best PM’ lead (the two times YouGov have asked that this year, the leads – 18 and 16 per cent, respectively – have been the biggest since the 2017 election).
Comments
-
First on the Order Paper like Grieve's five-party army.0
-
Second. First was stolen!0
-
Yes, a deal needs to be softer to get through. Or at least close. But as you say it is more resignations, there's the EU to worry about, and so on and so forth. Time to prepare for no deal, or the remainers need to side with Labour.
My assumption you meant she should have a pass was based on you saying that one should be fastidious about flinging it 'earned or not', which I took to mean that you would wish to hesitate to fling it even when it was earned. If that was not your intent I apologise, but I could not see how else to take it. If someone is confident an attack is accurate I see no reason they should not fling it just because the target faces unearned attacks. Of course, that attacker might be wrong, and should be careful, we all should.Theuniondivvie said:
Who said she had a pass?kle4 said:
What a peculiar attitude. Essentially give someone a pass because they also face unearned crap? We should all welcome getting such crap on that basis, because then how dare people criticise us.Theuniondivvie said:
Personally if someone gets a ton of unearned racist & sexist shit, I'd be pretty fasdtidious about flinging more, earned or not.kle4 said:
Well, for one thing people haven't forgotten, for two its hardly the only time Abbot had such an incident, and she'll also a lot more aggressive and, quite reasonable and proudly, even more partisan than most MPs, so far less likely to get any charitable understanding when she would never, ever, in a million years, extend the same courtesy. It's quite possible that she takes a lot of unearned shit, which she does, while still earning plenty of shit.Theuniondivvie said:
It is very easy to criticise people without even getting close to racist and sexist about it. That's all people have to do. Not stop with the criticism because you don't want to be in the same company of racists and sexists.
That's as silly as people liking something purely on the basis it upsets those they dislike.
I applaud your confidence in your judgement of what's accurate. Perhaps some of us are a little more hesitant deciding what is and isn't earned shit, particularly when a lot of it is indubitably unearned.
0 -
I wonder how Grieve and co decided you needed at least 10 from the governing party. 5 would make it unacceptable but 10 is ok and 15 is unreasonable?0
-
From a not-exactly-well-off part of Newcastle.
https://twitter.com/catmckinnell/status/1086630455825362944?s=210 -
What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
There's no point, other than to make it easier to join again with the minimum of fuss.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
As long as the backstop is in place, there already is a de facto permanent customs deal.
Otherwise, how can trading arrangements between UK and country X diverge from those of Ireland and country X?0 -
We voted Conservative on a manifesto that said "No CU". Those cries of betrayal would be very loud - and entirely justified.
The only way May can avoid meltdown amongst the Conservative vote is to have a revised manifesto in a General Election, that proposes that CU - and see if people are prepared to change tack.
But adding CU is the worst of all worlds. If you think the current deal is Shit, then adding CU makes it Shit+. The Conservative vote would still meltdown.0 -
Actually you could argue that 45 years ago that's exactly what we did, and by a very much larger percentage margin that the Leave in 2016.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
Of course that means reneging on yet another manifesto commitment for those of us who don’t like being lied to be politicians.
If you are to be forever in a Customs Union you might as well stay in the EU. You can’t negotiate your own trade deal if you can’t set your own trading laws and your own customs tariffs. The common external tariff is not in our best interests. The highest tariffs are on food as a protectionists measure for French farmers. Offering a customs union is for those who think any deal is better than no deal.
Norway’s deal, which is similar, gives them exemption from the CAP and the CFP but nothing else. What’s the appeal of that ? Zero. We’d still be subject to the ECJ, have freedom of movement and simply be a rule taker with no say in the rules and we’d still end up paying for trade.
0 -
The Tory manifesto commitment on which they retained office in 2017 contained a commitment to leave the customs union.OldKingCole said:
Actually you could argue that 45 years ago that's exactly what we did, and by a very much larger percentage margin that the Leave in 2016.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
YawnAmpfieldAndy said:
The Tory manifesto commitment on which they retained office in 2017 contained a commitment to leave the customs union.OldKingCole said:
Actually you could argue that 45 years ago that's exactly what we did, and by a very much larger percentage margin that the Leave in 2016.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
Persuasive argument, I must say.Gallowgate said:
YawnAmpfieldAndy said:
The Tory manifesto commitment on which they retained office in 2017 contained a commitment to leave the customs union.OldKingCole said:
Actually you could argue that 45 years ago that's exactly what we did, and by a very much larger percentage margin that the Leave in 2016.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
You obviously find it acceptable to be lied to.Gallowgate said:
YawnAmpfieldAndy said:
The Tory manifesto commitment on which they retained office in 2017 contained a commitment to leave the customs union.OldKingCole said:
Actually you could argue that 45 years ago that's exactly what we did, and by a very much larger percentage margin that the Leave in 2016.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
I see no prospect of Theresa May making any concessions in the direction of a softer Brexit. The last thing that she wants is mass fury, rage and apoplexy in the Conservative Parliamentary Party. She has said many times that a no-deal Brexit is better than a bad deal. She sees her job as to deliver Brexit on 29th March 2019, no matter what the cost to the country is, because this is what people voted for on 23rd June 2016.
If there is a path to avoiding a no deal Brexit it runs through the Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn has been evasive as to what his solution/strategy is, but he has said many times that a no deal Brexit would be a national disaster. What would happen if the Parliamentary Conservative Party split over a no deal Brexit? Jeremy Corbyn might be able to win a vote of no confidence and become Prime Minister immediately, but what would he then do? Would he support a second referendum, an extension of Article 50, a permanent customs union or something else? This is difficult to know, but it could result in a no deal Brexit not taking place.0 -
Nevertheless that election didn't give her a majority, so even under the crooked rules of FPTnP she is obliged to compromise with others.MarqueeMark said:We voted Conservative on a manifesto that said "No CU". Those cries of betrayal would be very loud - and entirely justified.
The only way May can avoid meltdown amongst the Conservative vote is to have a revised manifesto in a General Election, that proposes that CU - and see if people are prepared to change tack.
But adding CU is the worst of all worlds. If you think the current deal is Shit, then adding CU makes it Shit+. The Conservative vote would still meltdown.0 -
She did - with the DUP.IanB2 said:
Nevertheless that election didn't give her a majority, so even under the crooked rules of FPTnP she is obliged to compromise with others.MarqueeMark said:We voted Conservative on a manifesto that said "No CU". Those cries of betrayal would be very loud - and entirely justified.
The only way May can avoid meltdown amongst the Conservative vote is to have a revised manifesto in a General Election, that proposes that CU - and see if people are prepared to change tack.
But adding CU is the worst of all worlds. If you think the current deal is Shit, then adding CU makes it Shit+. The Conservative vote would still meltdown.0 -
I doubt 90% of the population have the faintest idea what a customs union even is.
Anoraks will get into a stew over it but, when it comes to it, it won't shift votes.
And remember the vast majority were positively happy with our EEC membership - people are happy with free trade - what turned people against the EU was immigration and all the political stuff.0 -
FPT: in response to @YBarddCwSC who said this -
"If the EU dictate the Referendum question, then I think the Referendum will only have one answer."
They won't dictate it. They will simply refuse an extension for a referendum which does not give them something they won't get just by waiting until March 29th.
It's brutal power politics. We should not be surprised. It is exactly how Britain behaved when it had the upper hand. Now it doesn't. We don't like it. And instead of coming to terms with the new reality we're thrashing around moaning that the world isn't fair, isn't like it should be. What are we: four? Time for Britain to grow up.0 -
Asserting that the Tories retained office in 2017 is dubious, saying that they retained it on the basis of their manifesto is barking.AmpfieldAndy said:
The Tory manifesto commitment on which they retained office in 2017 contained a commitment to leave the customs union.OldKingCole said:
Actually you could argue that 45 years ago that's exactly what we did, and by a very much larger percentage margin that the Leave in 2016.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
This is nonsense. The DUP manifesto saysIanB2 said:
Nevertheless that election didn't give her a majority, so even under the crooked rules of FPTnP she is obliged to compromise with others.MarqueeMark said:We voted Conservative on a manifesto that said "No CU". Those cries of betrayal would be very loud - and entirely justified.
The only way May can avoid meltdown amongst the Conservative vote is to have a revised manifesto in a General Election, that proposes that CU - and see if people are prepared to change tack.
But adding CU is the worst of all worlds. If you think the current deal is Shit, then adding CU makes it Shit+. The Conservative vote would still meltdown.
“We support the current UK Government pledge to renegotiate
elements of our relationship with the European Union.”
So long as all MPs of both parties adhere to their manifesto commitments, there is a clear majority. This can be seen further by the customs union amendments that were defeated earlier in this very session.0 -
I'm afraid it's our misfortune that when we needed a subtle diplomat in No. 10, we have a pedantic puritan. We will suffer accordingly. We are, today, standing on the shoulders of midgets.0
-
They definitely retained office, and their manifesto, inasmuch as we can infer votes for a party as endorsements of any manifesto, was the most popular in the UK.Theuniondivvie said:
Asserting that the Tories retained office in 2017 is dubious, saying that they retained it on the basis of their manifesto is barking.AmpfieldAndy said:
The Tory manifesto commitment on which they retained office in 2017 contained a commitment to leave the customs union.OldKingCole said:
Actually you could argue that 45 years ago that's exactly what we did, and by a very much larger percentage margin that the Leave in 2016.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.
None of which changes that they did not win outright, and they cannot get anything through the Commons now, so unless they want to try the ridiculous idea of a GE, they have to depart from their manifesto, probably in some huge ways.0 -
Unfortunately the Commons is stuffed with anoraks. And not the pleasant, slightly odd anoraks. The weird kind.MikeL said:I doubt 90% of the population have the faintest idea what a customs union even is.
Anoraks will get into a stew over it but, when it comes to it, it won't shift votes.
And remember the vast majority were positively happy with our EEC membership - people are happy with free trade - what turned people against the EU was immigration and all the political stuff.0 -
"She sees her job as to deliver Brexit on 29th March 2019, no matter what the cost to the country is"fox327 said:I see no prospect of Theresa May making any concessions in the direction of a softer Brexit. The last thing that she wants is mass fury, rage and apoplexy in the Conservative Parliamentary Party. She has said many times that a no-deal Brexit is better than a bad deal. She sees her job as to deliver Brexit on 29th March 2019, no matter what the cost to the country is, because this is what people voted for on 23rd June 2016.
If there is a path to avoiding a no deal Brexit it runs through the Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn has been evasive as to what his solution/strategy is, but he has said many times that a no deal Brexit would be a national disaster. What would happen if the Parliamentary Conservative Party split over a no deal Brexit? Jeremy Corbyn might be able to win a vote of no confidence and become Prime Minister immediately, but what would he then do? Would he support a second referendum, an extension of Article 50, a permanent customs union or something else? This is difficult to know, but it could result in a no deal Brexit not taking place.
is why she is a danger to the country she is leading. No matter what the cost? Really: if the cost meant deaths, she'd still see it as her job? Really???0 -
Notionally they retained office. They do occupy Downing St and Whitehall. The fact that Grieve, Soubry, Greening etc were elected on a manifesto they had no intention of honouring says more about them as individuals really.Theuniondivvie said:
Asserting that the Tories retained office in 2017 is dubious, saying that they retained it on the basis of their manifesto is barking.AmpfieldAndy said:
The Tory manifesto commitment on which they retained office in 2017 contained a commitment to leave the customs union.OldKingCole said:
Actually you could argue that 45 years ago that's exactly what we did, and by a very much larger percentage margin that the Leave in 2016.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
And if they and the Tories can unite on a compromise they will win the day. If they cannot, then further compromise with Labour is needed to see something agreed.AmpfieldAndy said:
She did - with the DUP.IanB2 said:
Nevertheless that election didn't give her a majority, so even under the crooked rules of FPTnP she is obliged to compromise with others.MarqueeMark said:We voted Conservative on a manifesto that said "No CU". Those cries of betrayal would be very loud - and entirely justified.
The only way May can avoid meltdown amongst the Conservative vote is to have a revised manifesto in a General Election, that proposes that CU - and see if people are prepared to change tack.
But adding CU is the worst of all worlds. If you think the current deal is Shit, then adding CU makes it Shit+. The Conservative vote would still meltdown.0 -
Meaningless blah.Gallowgate said:From a not-exactly-well-off part of Newcastle.
https://twitter.com/catmckinnell/status/1086630455825362944?s=210 -
I of course agree 100% with Mr Herdson. He has put into eloquence what I've been wittering on about for yonks.0
-
Only if you rule out no deal. That’s not actually been done. Offering to compromise with Labour has risks for both parties as neither have any unity.kle4 said:
And if they and the Tories can unite on a compromise they will win the day. If they cannot, then further compromise with Labour is needed to see something agreed.AmpfieldAndy said:
She did - with the DUP.IanB2 said:
Nevertheless that election didn't give her a majority, so even under the crooked rules of FPTnP she is obliged to compromise with others.MarqueeMark said:We voted Conservative on a manifesto that said "No CU". Those cries of betrayal would be very loud - and entirely justified.
The only way May can avoid meltdown amongst the Conservative vote is to have a revised manifesto in a General Election, that proposes that CU - and see if people are prepared to change tack.
But adding CU is the worst of all worlds. If you think the current deal is Shit, then adding CU makes it Shit+. The Conservative vote would still meltdown.
Withdrawing the whip from those who ignore the manifesto upon which they were elected and holding a GE would make more sense if the Gov can’t deliver on its own manifesto for its flagship policy.0 -
1. 52-48 is pretty much a half-way house;Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.
2. It might be a viable deal - more so than anything else bar a last-minute and extremely grudging return to May's Chequers Plus one;
3. Even if it doesn't come off, it shows flexibility and not an ideological commitment to No Deal.
4. And also, if it doesn't come off, it makes the rest of the Commons complicit, not just the government.0 -
Has anyone done the numbers of whether the Boles or Grieve amendments will pass? (under various leadership whipping assumptions)0
-
You compromise with the DUP; they don't compromise with you!AmpfieldAndy said:
She did - with the DUP.IanB2 said:
Nevertheless that election didn't give her a majority, so even under the crooked rules of FPTnP she is obliged to compromise with others.MarqueeMark said:We voted Conservative on a manifesto that said "No CU". Those cries of betrayal would be very loud - and entirely justified.
The only way May can avoid meltdown amongst the Conservative vote is to have a revised manifesto in a General Election, that proposes that CU - and see if people are prepared to change tack.
But adding CU is the worst of all worlds. If you think the current deal is Shit, then adding CU makes it Shit+. The Conservative vote would still meltdown.0 -
To clarify, I think I mean "no matter what the economic cost (and cultural and reputational damage) to the country". Clearly, I am not suggesting that TM would support lives being directly lost for the sake of Brexit. Indirectly, it would be diffferent because if it led to substantial economic damage this would lead to cuts in public services which would have that effect.Cyclefree said:
"She sees her job as to deliver Brexit on 29th March 2019, no matter what the cost to the country is"fox327 said:I see no prospect of Theresa May making any concessions in the direction of a softer Brexit. The last thing that she wants is mass fury, rage and apoplexy in the Conservative Parliamentary Party. She has said many times that a no-deal Brexit is better than a bad deal. She sees her job as to deliver Brexit on 29th March 2019, no matter what the cost to the country is, because this is what people voted for on 23rd June 2016.
If there is a path to avoiding a no deal Brexit it runs through the Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn has been evasive as to what his solution/strategy is, but he has said many times that a no deal Brexit would be a national disaster. What would happen if the Parliamentary Conservative Party split over a no deal Brexit? Jeremy Corbyn might be able to win a vote of no confidence and become Prime Minister immediately, but what would he then do? Would he support a second referendum, an extension of Article 50, a permanent customs union or something else? This is difficult to know, but it could result in a no deal Brexit not taking place.
is why she is a danger to the country she is leading. No matter what the cost? Really: if the cost meant deaths, she'd still see it as her job? Really???
Theresa May is a very responsible person but to her Brexit is something that overrides all other priorities.0 -
This is absolutely right. The public will mostly put with CU membership, which excites no-one who can command TV time outside of moments when the EU is itself front-page news. By contrast, the SM, CAP and CFP can always form the basis of an easy news article from some fishing port or farm.MikeL said:I doubt 90% of the population have the faintest idea what a customs union even is.
Anoraks will get into a stew over it but, when it comes to it, it won't shift votes.
And remember the vast majority were positively happy with our EEC membership - people are happy with free trade - what turned people against the EU was immigration and all the political stuff.0 -
Working on the assumption that a softer Brexit is voted through it will be interesting to consider how it would impact future GE's.
Where will the electoral benefits be held in a parties manifesto approach?
1. Stand pat
2. Move back closer to the EU
3. Move further away
My feeling is Labour will go for 1.
LD's/SNP/Greens for 2.
Conservatives for 3.
Depending on how the arguments are framed there could be some rich seams of votes to be harvested.0 -
May’s deal is already based on a customs union. She’s just not being honest about it yet. It’s very similar to the December agreement in the way it allows people to believe something is alive that isn’t.0
-
This for me is of vital importance.david_herdson said:
4. And also, if it doesn't come off, it makes the rest of the Commons complicit, not just the government.
If this eventual outcome of this decision was consequence free our parliament would have already overturned the referendum result and told the country we were remaining.
But electorally (and I hope that is the extent of any backlash) there will be a price to pay for whoever is seen to have subverted the democratic will of 17m+ voters.
Remainers are frightened and want to back May in to a corner so she has to take the rap.
May, quite understandably, isn't keen on doing the remainers dirty work for them.
0 -
David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Agreement not the Future relationship with the EU.0
-
In the Telegraph this week they did a piece on the numbers and said that come out for a customs union then another 40 Tory MP's that backed Mays deal would vote against, with none going the other way. So that would be 156 Tory MP's against. If Cobyn agreed this it may well be headlines in the papers of "Labour Majority force Brexit."
This is the last thing that he wants.0 -
Well half the complaints have been around the future relationship.David_Evershed said:David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Arrangement not the Future relationship with the EU.
0 -
Absolutely right.No_Offence_Alan said:As long as the backstop is in place, there already is a de facto permanent customs deal.
Otherwise, how can trading arrangements between UK and country X diverge from those of Ireland and country X?
In fact if we ignore the party politics of all this - which I know we cannot - there is a deal to be struck.
Norway Plus.
This is more or less Labour's Brexit, the DUP would accept it, so would many pragmatic leavers and remainers, and it is also the Deal on the table - once we recognize that the Deal is essentially the Withdrawal Agreement, that it is purely this which we need to ratify in order to leave the EU with a transition period. The Political Declaration is not binding and in any case is not even close to being the finished article.
The Withdrawal Agreement is the only thing the EU care about at this point - Citizens rights, Money, Transition, Irish Backstop - and any 'soft' Brexit is compatible with it.
So, yes, Customs Union and Single Market. Norway Plus. If that cannot be done due to Lab and Con party political calculation, then I cannot see any resolution of Brexit with this parliament and we will have to have a general election.0 -
You can’t change the WA - the EU keep telling you that. The only choice is either no deal or no Brexit neither of which need it.David_Evershed said:David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Agreement not the Future relationship with the EU.
0 -
What would the half-way house be if Remain had won 52-48?david_herdson said:
1. 52-48 is pretty much a half-way house;Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.
2. It might be a viable deal - more so than anything else bar a last-minute and extremely grudging return to May's Chequers Plus one;
3. Even if it doesn't come off, it shows flexibility and not an ideological commitment to No Deal.
4. And also, if it doesn't come off, it makes the rest of the Commons complicit, not just the government.
A point yet to be raised is that Labour also stood in 2017 on a Brexit which included the ability to make our own trade deals - i.e. outside the CU. They've already reneged on that, and Theresa May is right not to do the same. Politicians casually reneging on manifesto promises is a huge part of why public disillusionment with them is so high.0 -
The government is losing control of events. It is looking increasingly likely that the next steps will be foisted on it by Parliament.0
-
Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.0
-
You can change the WA if the UK changes its position on one or more issues.AmpfieldAndy said:
You can’t change the WA - the EU keep telling you that. The only choice is either no deal or no Brexit neither of which need it.David_Evershed said:David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Agreement not the Future relationship with the EU.
0 -
I’ve not followed this story at all, but is there any reason to suppose that the tariffs wouldn’t continue to apply to the UK when it leaves?ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
0 -
No deal means no supply chains.ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
0 -
So, 8 of them eh ?Norm said:
Meaningless blah.Gallowgate said:From a not-exactly-well-off part of Newcastle.
https://twitter.com/catmckinnell/status/1086630455825362944?s=210 -
The Withdrawal Agreement dictates the softest of Brexits - because of the Backstop.David_Evershed said:David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Agreement not the Future relationship with the EU.
The Withdrawal Agreement is even IMO incompatible with the current Political Declaration - which tries to describe TM's desired destination of out of the SM, out of FOM, out of the CU.
This vision (absent tech border solutions) does not obviate the Backstop and thus can never be implemented.
Norway Plus, however, could be.0 -
The plus part of Norway plus is the Customs Union part which means in a way calling it Norway is a misnomer. It's EEA plus Customs Union, an unenvied status no other European nation has. However if it's a place where we can head for some breathing space pending resolution of our future status with the EU then as long as we can escape it down the line then why would people apart from the second referendum crew of hard line remainers object.0
-
Remember - Labour doesn’t have to actively support No Deal for No Deal to become reality. It can say it opposes No Deal, do nothing and watch No Deal happen. That’s the Morning Star strategy being followed by those who run the leader’s office: Milne, Murray, McCluskey and Murphy.0
-
In theory, but in practice it’s just cheap words. The EU aren’t going to change on the backstop and that’s what caused the WA to fail, and rightly so.Polruan said:
You can change the WA if the UK changes its position on one or more issues.AmpfieldAndy said:
You can’t change the WA - the EU keep telling you that. The only choice is either no deal or no Brexit neither of which need it.David_Evershed said:David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Agreement not the Future relationship with the EU.
0 -
Up to a point, and full Customs Union, or even full Single Market plus CU are possible with the WA, as part of the long term deal. It is relatively simple to change the aspiration in the non-binding political declaration.David_Evershed said:David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Agreement not the Future relationship with the EU.
Ultimately though the WA sets the tone for the next round of talks, the pressures to move softer will be even stronger, and equally compelling.0 -
Tariffs are much less of an issue than the damage No Deal does to supply chains.Polruan said:
I’ve not followed this story at all, but is there any reason to suppose that the tariffs wouldn’t continue to apply to the UK when it leaves?ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
0 -
Hopefully that will help, but I'm not very optimistic.AlastairMeeks said:The government is losing control of events. It is looking increasingly likely that the next steps will be foisted on it by Parliament.
0 -
Indeed, depending on local content rules as I understand them, those exports to the EU may well qualify for US tarrifs aimed at the EU even with No Deal.SouthamObserver said:
Tariffs are much less of an issue than the damage No Deal does to supply chains.Polruan said:
I’ve not followed this story at all, but is there any reason to suppose that the tariffs wouldn’t continue to apply to the UK when it leaves?ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
0 -
I think that’s right, which is why I can’t see how any reasonable person supports the deal. It effectively commits to something a bit like Norway+ until we either find a suitable unicorn or agree to an Irish Sea border. In the continuing absence of unicorns the EU can probably insist on the Irish Sea border. And unlike EU membership where we have the power to leave, we don’t have any right to exit the new arrangement.kinabalu said:
The Withdrawal Agreement dictates the softest of Brexits - because of the Backstop.David_Evershed said:David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Agreement not the Future relationship with the EU.
The Withdrawal Agreement is even IMO incompatible with the current Political Declaration - which tries to describe TM's desired destination of out of the SM, out of FOM, out of the CU.
This vision (absent tech border solutions) does not obviate the Backstop and thus can never be implemented.
Norway Plus, however, could be.
Concerns about the impact of a new referendum on our democracy and political climate aren’t unreasonable but the impact of the public gradually realising what they’ve been tied into under the deal would surely be worse.0 -
Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)0 -
"25 questions about (another) early general election – and the horror show it could be for the Conservatives"
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2019/01/25-questions-about-another-early-general-election.html0 -
I agree, and @foxy makes a good point about rules of origin too. But even in the mythical situation where we build an all-UK auto industry in the next few months, I assume that Trump would apply protectionist tariffs to that as well even if outside the EU.SouthamObserver said:
Tariffs are much less of an issue than the damage No Deal does to supply chains.Polruan said:
I’ve not followed this story at all, but is there any reason to suppose that the tariffs wouldn’t continue to apply to the UK when it leaves?ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
0 -
Or Irish reunification of course.Polruan said:
I think that’s right, which is why I can’t see how any reasonable person supports the deal. It effectively commits to something a bit like Norway+ until we either find a suitable unicorn or agree to an Irish Sea border. In the continuing absence of unicorns the EU can probably insist on the Irish Sea border. And unlike EU membership where we have the power to leave, we don’t have any right to exit the new arrangement.kinabalu said:
The Withdrawal Agreement dictates the softest of Brexits - because of the Backstop.David_Evershed said:David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Agreement not the Future relationship with the EU.
The Withdrawal Agreement is even IMO incompatible with the current Political Declaration - which tries to describe TM's desired destination of out of the SM, out of FOM, out of the CU.
This vision (absent tech border solutions) does not obviate the Backstop and thus can never be implemented.
Norway Plus, however, could be.
Concerns about the impact of a new referendum on our democracy and political climate aren’t unreasonable but the impact of the public gradually realising what they’ve been tied into under the deal would surely be worse.
And unless the DUP are nessecary in a coalition next Parliament, their veto on Irish Sea customs is irrelevant.0 -
It does not mean that at all. 21% of components come from outside the EU.SouthamObserver said:
No deal means no supply chains.ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
No deal means the supply chains from continental EU may need to be rejigged a bit, but nothing major.0 -
Yep - this is rules of origin. Where the car is assembled is not the issue. It’s where its parts were made that matters.Foxy said:
Indeed, depending on local content rules as I understand them, those exports to the EU may well qualify for US tarrifs aimed at the EU even with No Deal.SouthamObserver said:
Tariffs are much less of an issue than the damage No Deal does to supply chains.Polruan said:
I’ve not followed this story at all, but is there any reason to suppose that the tariffs wouldn’t continue to apply to the UK when it leaves?ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
0 -
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)0 -
That has to be true.AlastairMeeks said:The government is losing control of events. It is looking increasingly likely that the next steps will be foisted on it by Parliament.
Clearly there are not the numbers in the present parliament, by any logic to rule out No Deal.
Clearly there are not the numbers for any Custom's Union
Clearly there are not the numbers for a Loser's Referendum, unless the question is we are leaving but "Deal or No Deal" but we are leaving.
It is difficult to see now how a General Election can be avoided.
Any attempt to rule out No Deal and the government would not survive the day out.0 -
Hahahaha! Bless you Alastair - you believe what Theresa promises?!AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)0 -
I thought she hedged it so that she promised not to fight a 2022 election.AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)
Personally, I would have thought a GE much less likely to resolve the issue than a #peoplesvote, and the latter far less likely to break her party. She may even be able to get her Deal through that way.0 -
Well I am going to assume that when you say "exports to the EU" you mean USA.Foxy said:
Indeed, depending on local content rules as I understand them, those exports to the EU may well qualify for US tarrifs aimed at the EU even with No Deal.SouthamObserver said:
Tariffs are much less of an issue than the damage No Deal does to supply chains.Polruan said:
I’ve not followed this story at all, but is there any reason to suppose that the tariffs wouldn’t continue to apply to the UK when it leaves?ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
Rules of origin are only used in preferential FTA deals. The EU does not have one with the USA for cars. So RoO do not apply. US car tariffs are 2.5%.
So take JLR 180K sales into USA current Tariffs 2.5% new Trumpian tariffs 25%
JLR sales to EU27 126K current tariffs 0% new no deal tariffs 10%.
Which one would you prefer?
Make no mistake, If Trump puts tariffs of 25% on UK car exports, the redundancies are going to be large.0 -
If the uk softens lines that cause a hard border then some elements of the backstop become unnecessary or uncontroversial.AmpfieldAndy said:
In theory, but in practice it’s just cheap words. The EU aren’t going to change on the backstop and that’s what caused the WA to fail, and rightly so.Polruan said:
You can change the WA if the UK changes its position on one or more issues.AmpfieldAndy said:
You can’t change the WA - the EU keep telling you that. The only choice is either no deal or no Brexit neither of which need it.David_Evershed said:David Herdson misses the point that the problem is with the Withdrawal Agreement not the Future relationship with the EU.
0 -
Theresa May was against a 2017 election, until she called it.AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)0 -
No she went further than that:Foxy said:
I thought she hedged it so that she promised not to fight a 2022 election.AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)
Personally, I would have thought a GE much less likely to resolve the issue than a #peoplesvote, and the latter far less likely to break her party. She may even be able to get her Deal through that way.
https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1073225154967277568?s=210 -
Is his new nickname Keir "Gammon" Starmer?williamglenn said:0 -
Exactly given they lie through their teeth at every opportunity what the hell does it matter.Gallowgate said:
YawnAmpfieldAndy said:
The Tory manifesto commitment on which they retained office in 2017 contained a commitment to leave the customs union.OldKingCole said:
Actually you could argue that 45 years ago that's exactly what we did, and by a very much larger percentage margin that the Leave in 2016.Morris_Dancer said:What's the point?
We didn't vote to stay in the customs union, and might as well stay in properly rather than pretend to leave properly and end up with a daft halfway house.0 -
Rejigged!! :-Dralphmalph said:
It does not mean that at all. 21% of components come from outside the EU.SouthamObserver said:
No deal means no supply chains.ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
No deal means the supply chains from continental EU may need to be rejigged a bit, but nothing major.
0 -
Well no she didn't actually - not if there was a snap election.AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)
She would be allowed to be leader if the ticket was Leave on 29 March with no Customs Union. Otherwise, God knows Rory ???
However, on the other hand Theresa has a long history of doing the right thing, about 6 to 8 weeks too late. That would suggest a GE on May 2. As we know 28 February is the first possible date. Clearly there have been preparations, perhaps that explains the weird timing for the deferred Meaningful Vote.
I don't think there is advice coming out to selected candidates as yet but we do know candidate selection is all but complete, unlike 2017.
If she does have to go then she had better learn from herself and Heath, keep the campaign as short as possible.0 -
Why go to purgatory. Either piss or get off the pot.Norm said:The plus part of Norway plus is the Customs Union part which means in a way calling it Norway is a misnomer. It's EEA plus Customs Union, an unenvied status no other European nation has. However if it's a place where we can head for some breathing space pending resolution of our future status with the EU then as long as we can escape it down the line then why would people apart from the second referendum crew of hard line remainers object.
0 -
I suspect the end state for us if we exit via the Withdrawal Agreement (regardless of what the Political Declaration says) is permanent membership of the Single Market and the Customs Union. The Backstop drives us to that. That is, in reality, TM's deal, although she presents it as something else.Polruan said:I think that’s right, which is why I can’t see how any reasonable person supports the deal. It effectively commits to something a bit like Norway+ until we either find a suitable unicorn or agree to an Irish Sea border. In the continuing absence of unicorns the EU can probably insist on the Irish Sea border. And unlike EU membership where we have the power to leave, we don’t have any right to exit the new arrangement.
Concerns about the impact of a new referendum on our democracy and political climate aren’t unreasonable but the impact of the public gradually realising what they’ve been tied into under the deal would surely be worse.
So I perfectly understand the Brexiteer objection (this is not Brexit) and the Remainer objection (we may as well retain our full membership of the EU).
The deal is a stupid deal.
However, unlike you I prefer it to another referendum or to crashing out with no deal at all.
A straightforward revoke and remain, plus an apology to the British people for holding the 2106 referendum, is my ideal world outcome.0 -
Only if the RoO are written into a FTA.SouthamObserver said:
Yep - this is rules of origin. Where the car is assembled is not the issue. It’s where its parts were made that matters.Foxy said:
Indeed, depending on local content rules as I understand them, those exports to the EU may well qualify for US tarrifs aimed at the EU even with No Deal.SouthamObserver said:
Tariffs are much less of an issue than the damage No Deal does to supply chains.Polruan said:
I’ve not followed this story at all, but is there any reason to suppose that the tariffs wouldn’t continue to apply to the UK when it leaves?ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
0 -
All that says is what 'she would love to do' and what 'the party would prefer'. Easily got round by the argument that "we have to have a GE and there is not time to select a new leader".AlastairMeeks said:
No she went further than that:Foxy said:
I thought she hedged it so that she promised not to fight a 2022 election.AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)
Personally, I would have thought a GE much less likely to resolve the issue than a #peoplesvote, and the latter far less likely to break her party. She may even be able to get her Deal through that way.
https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1073225154967277568?s=210 -
If we get off the pot we'll soon find we don't have a pot to piss in!malcolmg said:
Why go to purgatory. Either piss or get off the pot.Norm said:The plus part of Norway plus is the Customs Union part which means in a way calling it Norway is a misnomer. It's EEA plus Customs Union, an unenvied status no other European nation has. However if it's a place where we can head for some breathing space pending resolution of our future status with the EU then as long as we can escape it down the line then why would people apart from the second referendum crew of hard line remainers object.
0 -
The top brass of the Car companies have been in front of the select committee. They have all been asked what happens if no customs union or no deal.SouthamObserver said:
Rejigged!! :-Dralphmalph said:
It does not mean that at all. 21% of components come from outside the EU.SouthamObserver said:
No deal means no supply chains.ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
No deal means the supply chains from continental EU may need to be rejigged a bit, but nothing major.
They have all answered basically the same - it will be a pain, but we can handle it.
The transcripts are on the parliament site, go read them make your own mind up, instead of listening to some journalist tweeting their interpretation with a slant.0 -
Can handle it eventually I think is more accurate.ralphmalph said:
The top brass of the Car companies have been in front of the select committee. They have all been asked what happens if no customs union or no deal.SouthamObserver said:
Rejigged!! :-Dralphmalph said:
It does not mean that at all. 21% of components come from outside the EU.SouthamObserver said:
No deal means no supply chains.ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
No deal means the supply chains from continental EU may need to be rejigged a bit, but nothing major.
They have all answered basically the same - it will be a pain, but we can handle it.
The transcripts are on the parliament site, go read them make your own mind up, instead of listening to some journalist tweeting their interpretation with a slant.0 -
Why on earth would a second referendum resolve the issue?Foxy said:
I thought she hedged it so that she promised not to fight a 2022 election.AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)
Personally, I would have thought a GE much less likely to resolve the issue than a #peoplesvote, and the latter far less likely to break her party. She may even be able to get her Deal through that way.
If the result of the first is not respected, why respect the result of the second?0 -
And what would be the Brexit position of the two main parties? I think it is going to be deal mark 2 (last minute flourish on backstop) scraping through or a referendum - but I'm not sure what the questions or voting algorithm will be!A_View_From_Cumbria5 said:
That has to be true.AlastairMeeks said:The government is losing control of events. It is looking increasingly likely that the next steps will be foisted on it by Parliament.
Clearly there are not the numbers in the present parliament, by any logic to rule out No Deal.
Clearly there are not the numbers for any Custom's Union
Clearly there are not the numbers for a Loser's Referendum, unless the question is we are leaving but "Deal or No Deal" but we are leaving.
It is difficult to see now how a General Election can be avoided.
Any attempt to rule out No Deal and the government would not survive the day out.0 -
There was talk earlier about betting on No Deal/early Brexit as an insurance policy against the financial consequences of the same.
Any thoughts on spread betting on the value of the pound as an alternative?0 -
As long as you are prepared to lose potentially a lot of money. Because the pound will move on other issues i.e Trump tarrifs on Cars, Putin invades somewhere, China invades Taiwan.Chris said:There was talk earlier about betting on No Deal/early Brexit as an insurance policy against the financial consequences of the same.
Any thoughts on spread betting on the value of the pound as an alternative?0 -
..and what happens if the purported GE provides a hung Parliament....0
-
I think the only people who might be choking when victory is in sight more than Leavers are Liverpool FC.0
-
I'm not an expert on customs duties and tariffs, but my understanding is that RoO are an inseparable element of assessing which country or countries any import comes from - so this is considered when deciding whether goods are within the scope of a particular FTA or on WTO terms, and relevant for considering MFN applicability etc. In this situation (and now further beyond my knowledge) isn't the risk that stuff shipped from the UK to the EU which has a heavy EU component and service element could be treated as EU-originated and therefore subject to the same tariffs regardless of the UK's status?ralphmalph said:
Well I am going to assume that when you say "exports to the EU" you mean USA.Foxy said:
Indeed, depending on local content rules as I understand them, those exports to the EU may well qualify for US tarrifs aimed at the EU even with No Deal.SouthamObserver said:
Tariffs are much less of an issue than the damage No Deal does to supply chains.Polruan said:
I’ve not followed this story at all, but is there any reason to suppose that the tariffs wouldn’t continue to apply to the UK when it leaves?ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
Rules of origin are only used in preferential FTA deals. The EU does not have one with the USA for cars. So RoO do not apply. US car tariffs are 2.5%.
So take JLR 180K sales into USA current Tariffs 2.5% new Trumpian tariffs 25%
JLR sales to EU27 126K current tariffs 0% new no deal tariffs 10%.
Which one would you prefer?
Make no mistake, If Trump puts tariffs of 25% on UK car exports, the redundancies are going to be large.0 -
I am getting a general election feeling, I must admit. The configuration of this parliament makes a brexit decision impossible, ergo a new parliament is required to decide on brexit. And the only way to get a new parliament is an election.A_View_From_Cumbria5 said:That has to be true.
Clearly there are not the numbers in the present parliament, by any logic to rule out No Deal.
Clearly there are not the numbers for any Custom's Union
Clearly there are not the numbers for a Loser's Referendum, unless the question is we are leaving but "Deal or No Deal" but we are leaving.
It is difficult to see now how a General Election can be avoided.
Any attempt to rule out No Deal and the government would not survive the day out.0 -
I don't think I said I preferred another referendum; I think it could be less toxic on a 1-2 year horizon than signing the WA would be. Revocation plus a commitment (Royal Commission, people's assembly, constitutional convention and so on) to look at how we could leave without chaos or the need for unicorns, followed by a referendum on the outcome of that process seems better than either right now.kinabalu said:
I suspect the end state for us if we exit via the Withdrawal Agreement (regardless of what the Political Declaration says) is permanent membership of the Single Market and the Customs Union. The Backstop drives us to that. That is, in reality, TM's deal, although she presents it as something else.Polruan said:I think that’s right, which is why I can’t see how any reasonable person supports the deal. It effectively commits to something a bit like Norway+ until we either find a suitable unicorn or agree to an Irish Sea border. In the continuing absence of unicorns the EU can probably insist on the Irish Sea border. And unlike EU membership where we have the power to leave, we don’t have any right to exit the new arrangement.
Concerns about the impact of a new referendum on our democracy and political climate aren’t unreasonable but the impact of the public gradually realising what they’ve been tied into under the deal would surely be worse.
So I perfectly understand the Brexiteer objection (this is not Brexit) and the Remainer objection (we may as well retain our full membership of the EU).
The deal is a stupid deal.
However, unlike you I prefer it to another referendum or to crashing out with no deal at all.
A straightforward revoke and remain, plus an apology to the British people for holding the 2106 referendum, is my ideal world outcome.0 -
Presumably this was around the time Theresa was offering her mysterious 'assurances'. In the case of No deal, I'd expect the car industry to be given massive government incentives not to pack up shop - the political optics of abandoned car plants would be just too destructive.ralphmalph said:
The top brass of the Car companies have been in front of the select committee. They have all been asked what happens if no customs union or no deal.SouthamObserver said:
Rejigged!! :-Dralphmalph said:
It does not mean that at all. 21% of components come from outside the EU.SouthamObserver said:
No deal means no supply chains.ralphmalph said:Also this is slightly off topic but the black swan event in the case of brexit is Trump and his tariffs on EU car imports. JLR, Mini and Honda all sell more cars to the USA from their UK factories than they do to the EU27. Trumps tariffs will be more of a significant hit than no deal brexit to them. It is rumoured that he is going to implement the tariffs, if he does no deal brexit will stop the impact on the UK manufacturers.
No deal means the supply chains from continental EU may need to be rejigged a bit, but nothing major.
They have all answered basically the same - it will be a pain, but we can handle it.
The transcripts are on the parliament site, go read them make your own mind up, instead of listening to some journalist tweeting their interpretation with a slant.0 -
The result of the first has had more than enough respect alreadykyf_100 said:
Why on earth would a second referendum resolve the issue?Foxy said:
I thought she hedged it so that she promised not to fight a 2022 election.AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)
Personally, I would have thought a GE much less likely to resolve the issue than a #peoplesvote, and the latter far less likely to break her party. She may even be able to get her Deal through that way.
If the result of the first is not respected, why respect the result of the second?0 -
Ratify the deal or revoke notification. It’s simple and can be acted upon straight away after a democratic decision without making it a thought crime to disagree with the result. The reason the 2016 referendum was so devisive is that it purported to represent the national will that we all must “respect”.kyf_100 said:
Why on earth would a second referendum resolve the issue?Foxy said:
I thought she hedged it so that she promised not to fight a 2022 election.AlastairMeeks said:
Theresa May has publicly promised that she won’t lead the Conservatives into the next election. If she agrees to an early election, it seems to me that she will be duty-bound to step down immediately.Benpointer said:Very good thread header once again David, thank-you!
I agree with lots of this except the last sentence - I don't think it's the only solution, nor the simplest. Others already covered at length include:
- Pushing her Deal, subject to confirmation in a Ref2.
- Agreeing to call a spring GE in return for Labour MV abstention.
- Calling a snap GE with her Deal as the flagship Tory policy (it won't be liked amongst Tories but who can stop her?)
Personally, I would have thought a GE much less likely to resolve the issue than a #peoplesvote, and the latter far less likely to break her party. She may even be able to get her Deal through that way.
If the result of the first is not respected, why respect the result of the second?0
