I'm going to miss that brakeman, though.
/*snip*/ (I only ask because there have been several comments about self-serving leadership.)
Why is the EU so anxious to get us to invoke article 50? Personally I agree - the sooner the better. But it seems odd to me that the EU don't want to string this one out for as long as possible though. It's a lot of lucre to be giving up.A guess: Getting rid of the UK means getting rid of the brakeman who slows down the ever-increasing-union train.
As for the UK's pecuniary contributions to the EU coffers - what is the net contribution actually? How much will the EU system actually lose when the money flow from the EU coffers to the UK also stops?
I'm going to miss that brakeman, though.
Somewhere in the region of £100 to £150 million short fall per week for the EU for the UK potentially the same amount will remain as to whether the same research will be funded to the same amount or research will be pointed in other directions remains to be seen. I expect that people drawing hockey stick graphs of the relationship between weather patterns and and the increase in LBGT clubs will get less funding though.
In addition if there's no agreement then it's WTO rules.
I wonder if the EU Canada agreement includes free movement of people.
Also, let's no forget Russia. The EU would not like the UK to lift sanctions against Russia, which could be a useful bargaining chip in our negotiations with the EU.
In addition if there's no agreement then it's WTO rules.
I wonder if the EU Canada agreement includes free movement of people.Lol. I can't see that happening. The EU just wants to link free trade with free movement for the UK and any other European state who is thinking about leaving.
The UK government should stop dithering. Activate article 50. Concentrate on negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world, with the the EU being at the bottom of the list. Then when we finally leave, we'll be in a stronger position to negotiate a better deal.
Also, let's no forget Russia. The EU would not like the UK to lift sanctions against Russia, which could be a useful bargaining chip in our negotiations with the EU.
In addition if there's no agreement then it's WTO rules.
I wonder if the EU Canada agreement includes free movement of people.Lol. I can't see that happening. The EU just wants to link free trade with free movement for the UK and any other European state who is thinking about leaving.
The UK government should stop dithering. Activate article 50. Concentrate on negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world, with the the EU being at the bottom of the list. Then when we finally leave, we'll be in a stronger position to negotiate a better deal.
Also, let's no forget Russia. The EU would not like the UK to lift sanctions against Russia, which could be a useful bargaining chip in our negotiations with the EU.
You've got that the wrong way round:
The U.K. is the EU’s most vocal critic of Russia’s 2014 annexation of the Crimean Peninsula and was instrumental in the decision to levy sanctions against the country’s financials, energy and defense sectors two years ago.
Several EU countries, including Austria and Hungary, have expressed interest in lifting, or at least softening, sanctions, as they can no longer afford to miss out on trade with Russia. Countries that have faced difficulty offsetting lost trade opportunities are Finland, Poland and the Baltic states—Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania. The French parliament recently adopted a resolution to urge Brussels to drop all sanctions. Italy’s Upper House of Parliament, meanwhile, approved a resolution opposing any automatic renewal of sanctions.
Britain’s exclusion from any future policy decision-making, then, could help Moscow’s chances to renegotiate terms.
In addition if there's no agreement then it's WTO rules.
I wonder if the EU Canada agreement includes free movement of people.Lol. I can't see that happening. The EU just wants to link free trade with free movement for the UK and any other European state who is thinking about leaving.
The UK government should stop dithering. Activate article 50. Concentrate on negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world, with the the EU being at the bottom of the list. Then when we finally leave, we'll be in a stronger position to negotiate a better deal.
Also, let's no forget Russia. The EU would not like the UK to lift sanctions against Russia, which could be a useful bargaining chip in our negotiations with the EU.
There is urgency in negotiating a new trade deal with Europe as the breath of regulations to cover is immense, to such an extend that two years may not be enough time to process everything. The two year deadline will likely be pushed back. The EU is also the UK biggest market (50%). There is no point in snubbing your best trade partner.
Before the UK joined, EU we did a lot of trade with Australia, Canada, Singapore, India etc. which was suppressed when we joined and getting this back should be the number 1 priority.
Some claim that it could take a long time to establish trade agreements with other countries, based on how long it's taken for the EU to negotiate with non-European states but the UK has the advantage that such arrangements don't need to be agreed by all EU states.
In addition if there's no agreement then it's WTO rules.
I wonder if the EU Canada agreement includes free movement of people.Lol. I can't see that happening. The EU just wants to link free trade with free movement for the UK and any other European state who is thinking about leaving.
The EU just wants to link free trade with free movement for the UK
QuoteThe EU just wants to link free trade with free movement for the UK
There is plenty of evidence to show that EU is wrong on that. Free movement makes sense when you have a (relatively) homogeneous culture / political system. To me, the push for free movement today is more ideology / political than anything else.
In addition if there's no agreement then it's WTO rules.
I wonder if the EU Canada agreement includes free movement of people.Lol. I can't see that happening. The EU just wants to link free trade with free movement for the UK and any other European state who is thinking about leaving.
A common misunderstanding in the UK. Like "Cameron should have negotiated harder on immigration". The point is, like it or not (and you obviously don't), free movement is a fundamental part of the nature of the EU. It is not just a business arrangement, it is an attempt to bring the people of Europe together, and to equalise opportunities. So refusing to sacrifice freedom of movement is not a choice, it is an existential necessity for the EU.
In addition if there's no agreement then it's WTO rules.
I wonder if the EU Canada agreement includes free movement of people.Lol. I can't see that happening. The EU just wants to link free trade with free movement for the UK and any other European state who is thinking about leaving.
A common misunderstanding in the UK. Like "Cameron should have negotiated harder on immigration". The point is, like it or not (and you obviously don't), free movement is a fundamental part of the nature of the EU. It is not just a business arrangement, it is an attempt to bring the people of Europe together, and to equalise opportunities. So refusing to sacrifice freedom of movement is not a choice, it is an existential necessity for the EU.Well you obviously don't know me. Although I can see the disadvantages of free movement, I ultimately see it as a good thing and personally would like it to continue, even when we leave the EU. However it's clear that one of the main reasons why people voted to leave (I voted to remain) was over concerns over immigration, so our leaders need to negotiate with the EU on free movement.
I have not seen the details of any trade deals with the US and Canada but I highly doubt free movement will be one of the conditions and if it is, then it would explain why they'll ultimately fail. Can you seriously see the US and Canadian governments agreeing to free movement and open boarders with all of the EU member states?
If the EU can establish trade agreements with other states which do not involve free movement, then why can't the EU do the same with the UK? The only reason I can see is because the UK is in Europe and will be a former EU state which will make it politically unpopular with other EU countries but so will not establishing any kind of trade deal.
In addition if there's no agreement then it's WTO rules.
I wonder if the EU Canada agreement includes free movement of people.Lol. I can't see that happening. The EU just wants to link free trade with free movement for the UK and any other European state who is thinking about leaving.
The UK government should stop dithering. Activate article 50. Concentrate on negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world, with the the EU being at the bottom of the list. Then when we finally leave, we'll be in a stronger position to negotiate a better deal.
Also, let's no forget Russia. The EU would not like the UK to lift sanctions against Russia, which could be a useful bargaining chip in our negotiations with the EU.
There is urgency in negotiating a new trade deal with Europe as the breath of regulations to cover is immense, to such an extend that two years may not be enough time to process everything. The two year deadline will likely be pushed back. The EU is also the UK biggest market (50%). There is no point in snubbing your best trade partner.
Why is the EU so anxious to get us to invoke article 50? Personally I agree - the sooner the better. But it seems odd to me that the EU don't want to string this one out for as long as possible though. It's a lot of lucre to be giving up.
You think the UK is a big contributor? Well lets see the figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union EU-28 contributions (2014)
UK contributed 14072 million and got 6984 million back so net 7088 million with a population of 63,2 million people that is 112€ a person you contributed.
Germany 29413 million and got 11485 million back so net 17928 million with a population of 81,8 million people that is 219€ a person Germany contributed, almost double.
And even Holland contributed 8373 million and got 2014 million back so net 6359 million with a population of 17 million people that is 374€ a person we contributed, more than triple.
So in that aspect we pay per person three time more than the oh so mighty british umpire. Go brew some decent beer and you might have a good export product
The economics part of the fallout is interesting but not nearly as interesting as the geopolitical part of it.
An EU without the UK is considerably weakened militarily. Merkel had suggested an EU self-sufficient defense by 2025 - 2030. I think that's mostly impossible now.
That means NATO will continue to exist as the defense umbrella for Europe into the foreseeable future.
So a brexit is bad for Russia - quite counter-intuitive.
How a President Trump or a President Clinton handles that would be quite interesting.
the rest of the EU has a net drop of 7088 million on the balance sheet.
That's not a drop in the ocean.