The EU deal

[dandydan]

I see that Sterling is buzzing today

Has He been at the laughing gas again?

 

[Professor Toffee]

Has He been at the laughing gas again?

Snorting a bit of Boris more like

 

[SNova]

To be clear I have not decided my opinion yet - say we come out;

I think some people are under the impression that we will be free of Euro trade regulations. But consider this;

If we want to trade with Eurozone companies/nations, we will still have to abide by EC rules because the organisation we will be trading with has to abide by EC rules. If we refuse to play by their rules, they will not trade with us.

So although we'd be out of Europe, we'd still have to deal with a lot of their 'red tape'.

To sell to markets you have to use their regulations. We do this when we sell to America, however, we do not suggest becoming the 51st state of America in the process. The red tape currently effects the whole of the UK, not just the parts that trade with the EU.

 

[peteblue]

IMO, some benefits are, in no particular order;

Cross continent protection of workers rights, with recourse to a supreme court if flouted.
EU wide tackling of climate change. (Not that arsed about that me, but thats another thread)
Access to the single market. Nissan, for just one, chose to set up in Sunderland because of that.
(Probably) a better negotiating position re trade deals. Your point on us being the 5 th largest, I do have consideration for mind.
Free movement. Yeah, not perfect, but London is what, the 7th largest "French" city, and the growth of the part of London in terms of the skills and stuff they have bought over are great. Dead easy to move to Spain as well!
Reasonably peaceful these last few decades.

Cons? Again, no particular order.
The Euro.
The political elite and sheer waste of cash.
Free movement. Like I said, it does have drawbacks.
Meddling in pretty unimportant stuff.
Red tape.
It is a gravy train, no doubt. (Google MEPs pensions ffs!)
Costs a few bob.

So on balance, for me, the pros are tangible and worthwhile, mainly. But the cons are more irritating than plain bad.

Well, workers rights can be protected by UK Laws and both Labour and Conservative governments
Climate change, even though Germany has got rid of all it's nuclear power station and converted to coal
Single Market, excellent, that's what we all voted for
Free movement of people. No one envisaged the incorporation of the whole of Eastern Europe or Turkey. Nor Germany announcing that anyone can come and eventually be given an EU passport.
London can bring in skills whether in the EU or not
Peace has been maintained by NATO not the EU,

In addition to your cons, we cannot negotiate trade deals independently
New Laws are being foisted on us daily
The ECHR
Pushing our historic allies, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc to the back of the queue
Lack of Democracy
Lack of Business flexibility
Large sums of money being paid to be a member
No natural allies, so always outvoted
Lowering of UK wages for the lowest paid

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

Well, workers rights can be protected by UK Laws and both Labour and Conservative governments

Erm....

 

[roydo]

Well, workers rights can be protected by UK Laws and both Labour and Conservative governments
Climate change, even though Germany has got rid of all it's nuclear power station and converted to coal
Single Market, excellent, that's what we all voted for
Free movement of people. No one envisaged the incorporation of the whole of Eastern Europe or Turkey. Nor Germany announcing that anyone can come and eventually be given an EU passport.
London can bring in skills whether in the EU or not
Peace has been maintained by NATO not the EU,

In addition to your cons, we cannot negotiate trade deals independently
New Laws are being foisted on us daily
The ECHR
Pushing our historic allies, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc to the back of the queue
Lack of Democracy
Lack of Business flexibility
Large sums of money being paid to be a member
No natural allies, so always outvoted
Lowering of UK wages for the lowest paid

At least I tried to be balanced, which is what you asked for.

If you see no benefits, at all, then fine.

 

[daylightrobber]

Well, workers rights can be protected by UK Laws and both Labour and Conservative governments
Climate change, even though Germany has got rid of all it's nuclear power station and converted to coal
Single Market, excellent, that's what we all voted for
Free movement of people. No one envisaged the incorporation of the whole of Eastern Europe or Turkey. Nor Germany announcing that anyone can come and eventually be given an EU passport.
London can bring in skills whether in the EU or not
Peace has been maintained by NATO not the EU,

In addition to your cons, we cannot negotiate trade deals independently
New Laws are being foisted on us daily
The ECHR
Pushing our historic allies, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc to the back of the queue
Lack of Democracy
Lack of Business flexibility
Large sums of money being paid to be a member
No natural allies, so always outvoted
Lowering of UK wages for the lowest paid

What has the EU ever done for us hey......

57% of our trade;
structural funding to areas hit by industrial decline;
clean beaches and rivers;
cleaner air;
lead free petrol;
restrictions on landfill dumping;
a recycling culture;
cheaper mobile charges;
cheaper air travel;
improved consumer protection and food labelling;
A ban on growth hormones and other harmful food additives;
better product safety;
single market competition bringing quality improvements and better industrial performance;
break up of monopolies;
Europe-wide patent and copyright protection;
no paperwork or customs for exports throughout the single market;
price transparency and removal of commission on currency exchanges across the eurozone;
freedom to travel, live and work across Europe;
funded opportunities for young people to undertake study or work placements abroad;
access to European health services;
labour protection and enhanced social welfare;
smoke-free workplaces;
equal pay legislation;
holiday entitlement;
the right not to work more than a 48-hour week without overtime;
strongest wildlife protection in the world;
improved animal welfare in food production;
EU-funded research and industrial collaboration;
EU representation in international forums;
bloc EEA negotiation at the WTO;
EU diplomatic efforts to uphold the nuclear non-proliferation treaty;
European arrest warrant;
cross border policing to combat human trafficking, arms and drug smuggling; counter terrorism intelligence;
European civil and military co-operation in post-conflict zones in Europe and Africa;
support for democracy and human rights across Europe and beyond;
investment across Europe contributing to better living standards and educational, social and cultural capital.
All of this is nothing compared with its greatest achievements: the EU has for 60 years been the foundation of peace between European neighbours after centuries of bloodshed.
It furthermore assisted the extraordinary political, social and economic transformation of 13 former dictatorships, now EU members, since 1980.
Now the union faces major challenges brought on by neoliberal economic globalisation, and worsened by its own systemic weaknesses. It is taking measures to overcome these. We in the UK should reflect on whether our net contribution of £7bn out of total government expenditure of £695bn is good value. We must play a full part in enabling the union to be a force for good in a multi-polar global future.

Simon Sweeney,

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...paign-as-US-rules-out-UK-only-trade-deal.html

Major blow for Brexit campaign as US rules out UK-only trade deal
US Trade Representative says America has no interest in a trade deal with Britain alone, urging it to remain in the EU
By Matthew Holehouse, in Brussels
9:40AM GMT 29 Oct 2015

The United States has ruled out a separate trade deal with UK if it leaves the European Union, in a major blow to Brexit campaigners.
President Obama’s most senior trade official said that America is “not in the market” for a free trade deal with Britain alone, and warned British firms could face crippling Chinese-style tariffs outside the EU.
The comments come as David Cameron pushes the EU to complete a major transatlantic free trade deal that could slash the cost of American food, clothing and computers for British consumers, as well as making it easier for British firms to export.
Downing Street says the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership could be worth £10 billion a year to the British economy, or £400 per family, and will revive the entire European economy.
The intervention – a hint that the White House is alarmed at the tightness of the polls – was cheered by pro-EU campaigners. The ‘Out’ campaign has always claimed that Britain would quickly win new deals around the world.
Mr Froman said: "I think it's absolutely clear that Britain has a greater voice at the trade table being part of the EU, being part of a larger economic entity.”
"We're not particularly in the market for FTAs [free trade agreements] with individual countries. We're building platforms that other countries can join over time."
"We have no FTA with the UK so they would be subject to the same tariffs – and other trade-related measures - as China, or Brazil or India.”
Hours later, however, John Key, the New Zealand Prime Minister, said that Britain could probably retain any deals his country secured with the EU following a Brexit.
Mr Key, who was in Brussels to launch talks for a free trade deal with the EU, said after a British exit, “we would want to preserve both our existing position with Great Britain and continue to grow that relationship.
“We would need to find a way through that,” he said. “The reality is there are a number of mechanisms where that would be possible.”
Sir Nigel Sheinwald, the former British Ambassador to both the United States and the EU, said: “Michael Froman's comments present those wanting to leave the EU with an inconvenient truth: that a major trade and investment partner, the US, sees no influential role for the UK in international trade negotiations if we go it alone.
“Outside the EU we would stand in line behind the big trading blocs. The US Trade Representative has done us a service by telling it like it is.”
The US bought more than £35 billion in goods from British firms last year. The EU falls under the United States’ "most-favoured-nation tariff" group, with an average rate of less than three per cent of a product’s value.
By contrast, China-made products such as car tyres and solar panels face tariffs more than 80 per cent of the products’ value in order to protect American manufacturing jobs.
Hardest hit would be the flourishing British car industry, with the US its second-largest export market after the EU.
If Britain left the EU and was not in TTIP, manufacturers such as Jaguar Land Rover would be hit by a 2.5 per cent tariff and at a disadvantage to German and Italian-made competitors.
Downing Street has warned that Britain would lose access to 52 separate EU trade deals after a Brexit, with no guarantee of replacing them.
Robert Oxley, of the Vote Leave campaign, said: “If we leave the EU there would be no change to our trade with America, but we would take back control over trade policy and would be able talk to Washington directly, instead of hoping that the EU will do it for us.”
William Dartmouth, the Ukip trade spokesman, said: "The US is nothing if not pragmatic, and when situations change, so do their positions."
The Prime Minister has used a visit to Iceland, a member of the EEA free trade zone but which is not in the EU, to warn that Britain would lose access to more than 50 trade agreements between Brussels and the rest of the world if it quit, with no guarantee they would be restored.
China last week called for Britain to stay in the EU. Beijing has been worried about the implications of free trade-supporting Britain leaving the EU, and of any weakening of a grouping which it views as a vital counter balance to the United States, diplomats say.
Peter Mandelson, the former British EU Commissioner, last week warned that India and China would be in no rush to sign deals with an independent Britain, as they have “bigger fish to fry”.
“How would we start negotiating with China, India and other countries, which are way bigger than ours, with whom there would be a very severe negotiating imbalance? We would essentially be supplicants. We would be begging to go nearer the top of the queue.”

 

[dandydan]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...paign-as-US-rules-out-UK-only-trade-deal.html

Major blow for Brexit campaign as US rules out UK-only trade deal
US Trade Representative says America has no interest in a trade deal with Britain alone, urging it to remain in the EU
By Matthew Holehouse, in Brussels
9:40AM GMT 29 Oct 2015

The United States has ruled out a separate trade deal with UK if it leaves the European Union, in a major blow to Brexit campaigners.
President Obama’s most senior trade official said that America is “not in the market” for a free trade deal with Britain alone, and warned British firms could face crippling Chinese-style tariffs outside the EU.
The comments come as David Cameron pushes the EU to complete a major transatlantic free trade deal that could slash the cost of American food, clothing and computers for British consumers, as well as making it easier for British firms to export.
Downing Street says the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership could be worth £10 billion a year to the British economy, or £400 per family, and will revive the entire European economy.
The intervention – a hint that the White House is alarmed at the tightness of the polls – was cheered by pro-EU campaigners. The ‘Out’ campaign has always claimed that Britain would quickly win new deals around the world.
Mr Froman said: "I think it's absolutely clear that Britain has a greater voice at the trade table being part of the EU, being part of a larger economic entity.”
"We're not particularly in the market for FTAs [free trade agreements] with individual countries. We're building platforms that other countries can join over time."
"We have no FTA with the UK so they would be subject to the same tariffs – and other trade-related measures - as China, or Brazil or India.”
Hours later, however, John Key, the New Zealand Prime Minister, said that Britain could probably retain any deals his country secured with the EU following a Brexit.
Mr Key, who was in Brussels to launch talks for a free trade deal with the EU, said after a British exit, “we would want to preserve both our existing position with Great Britain and continue to grow that relationship.
“We would need to find a way through that,” he said. “The reality is there are a number of mechanisms where that would be possible.”
Sir Nigel Sheinwald, the former British Ambassador to both the United States and the EU, said: “Michael Froman's comments present those wanting to leave the EU with an inconvenient truth: that a major trade and investment partner, the US, sees no influential role for the UK in international trade negotiations if we go it alone.
“Outside the EU we would stand in line behind the big trading blocs. The US Trade Representative has done us a service by telling it like it is.”
The US bought more than £35 billion in goods from British firms last year. The EU falls under the United States’ "most-favoured-nation tariff" group, with an average rate of less than three per cent of a product’s value.
By contrast, China-made products such as car tyres and solar panels face tariffs more than 80 per cent of the products’ value in order to protect American manufacturing jobs.
Hardest hit would be the flourishing British car industry, with the US its second-largest export market after the EU.
If Britain left the EU and was not in TTIP, manufacturers such as Jaguar Land Rover would be hit by a 2.5 per cent tariff and at a disadvantage to German and Italian-made competitors.
Downing Street has warned that Britain would lose access to 52 separate EU trade deals after a Brexit, with no guarantee of replacing them.
Robert Oxley, of the Vote Leave campaign, said: “If we leave the EU there would be no change to our trade with America, but we would take back control over trade policy and would be able talk to Washington directly, instead of hoping that the EU will do it for us.”
William Dartmouth, the Ukip trade spokesman, said: "The US is nothing if not pragmatic, and when situations change, so do their positions."
The Prime Minister has used a visit to Iceland, a member of the EEA free trade zone but which is not in the EU, to warn that Britain would lose access to more than 50 trade agreements between Brussels and the rest of the world if it quit, with no guarantee they would be restored.
China last week called for Britain to stay in the EU. Beijing has been worried about the implications of free trade-supporting Britain leaving the EU, and of any weakening of a grouping which it views as a vital counter balance to the United States, diplomats say.
Peter Mandelson, the former British EU Commissioner, last week warned that India and China would be in no rush to sign deals with an independent Britain, as they have “bigger fish to fry”.
“How would we start negotiating with China, India and other countries, which are way bigger than ours, with whom there would be a very severe negotiating imbalance? We would essentially be supplicants. We would be begging to go nearer the top of the queue.”

Nothing to do with the TTIP deal the USA and EU are preparing?

 

[ToffeeTim]

Probably going to vote out in this if I vote at all. Don't like idea of laws being made on the continent but know far too little to be fully able to decide what way to go because politicians on both sides are just using cliche rubbish with no explanations behind any of their points.

 

[markmarkmark]

Fair enough. Why do you think those things would not be forthcoming with us out of the Eu and saving Billions every year and not going cap in hand to Brussels to get some of our own money back ?.......

Yes, this is why I'm not 100% convinced that an 'in' vote would be in the best interests of the country!

 

[markmarkmark]

Probably going to vote out in this if I vote at all. Don't like idea of laws being made on the continent but know far too little to be fully able to decide what way to go because politicians on both sides are just using cliche rubbish with no explanations behind any of their points.

Fair enough point but it's worth noting that the reason we have workers rights (such as workable hours, better maternity pay) is because of the EU and the laws spread across it

 

[Eggs]

...it is ironic that the two EU referendums book end my working life. In 1975 I voted to go in and my current thinking is that I will vote to stay but I'm not 100% convinced in my own mind. Virtually every politician I dislike wants out which is also encouraging me to stay. I'm not a Cameron fan but I thought he spoke well in the Commons today. I think the next few months will see more than a fracture in the Tory camp.

 

[daylightrobber]

Probably going to vote out in this if I vote at all. Don't like idea of laws being made on the continent but know far too little to be fully able to decide what way to go because politicians on both sides are just using cliche rubbish with no explanations behind any of their points.

Is it the idea, or the laws themselves? How has this so far negatively affected you?

 

[dandydan]

More on TTIP
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/feb/22/ttip-deal-real-serious-risk-nhs-leading-qc

The controversial transatlantic trade deal set to be agreed this year would mean that privatisation of elements of the NHS could be made irreversible for future governments wanting to restore services to public hands, according to a new legal analysis.

The legal advice was prepared by one of the UK’s leading QCs on European law for the Unite trade union, which will reveal on Monday that it has been holding talks with the government about the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) deal between Europe and the US.

Unite believes the government has been keeping Britain in the dark over the impact of the deal and argues the NHS should be excluded from the trade deal. The government dismissed the idea that TTIP poses a threat as “irresponsible and false”.

TTIP would give investors new legal rights, which extend beyond both UK and EU law as well as NHS contracts, according to Michael Bowsher QC, a former chair of the Bar Council’s EU law committee who was tasked by Unite to prepare the advice.

Bowsher said he had concluded that the deal poses “a real and serious risk” to future UK government decision making regarding the NHS.

“We consider that the solution to the problems TTIP poses to the NHS – and which is likely to provide the greatest protection – is for the NHS to be excluded from the agreement by way of a blanket exception contained within the main text of TTIP,” Bowsher said.

In the most explicit warning from a figure of prominence about the potential threat to the NHS from the deal – which may yet prove a rallying point for leftwing out campaigners in the EU referendum – he also warned that it could allow private companies with links to NHS contracts to win higher levels of compensation through bypassing domestic courts.

He also said that TTIP’s procurement rules could force the NHS to contract out services it wants to keep in house or spin off them off as “mutuals”

Unite, which has already held a series of high-level meetings with officials from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and with the minister for trade, Francis Maude, will present Bowsher’s advice to the government on Tuesday.

Unite’s assistant general secretary, Gail Cartmail, said: “The UK government has no right to allow EU bureaucrats to negotiate away our ability to control the future of our NHS. David Cameron has the power to exclude the NHS from the trade deal – he must act and prevent the irreversible sale of our NHS.

Campaigners have already accused the government of blocking access to legal adviceshowing its impact on the health service and the extent to which private health companies could sue the government using a secret tribunal system if a Whitehall policy change were to hit their profits.

Unite said that Maude has admitted to having legal advice concerning the TTIP’s potential impact on the NHS but has blocked a freedom of information request to obtain the advice, citing “legal professional privilege”.

A BIS spokesperson said: “The NHS is under no threat whatsoever from the TTIP deal or any other trade and investment agreement. It cannot force the UK to privatise public services or prevent it from regulating in the public interest and any suggestion to the contrary is both irresponsible and false.

“It will remain up to the UK government and devolved administrations to decide how to run publicly funded health services, including whether private companies should be involved. Where a service has previously been provided by a private provider, this is not irreversible.”