Quantcast
Should the UK remain a member of the EU - Page 867 - GF - General Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content

Welcome to the new and improved TLW!

 

Some of you may experience issues logging in and will get an 'incorrect password' error. Don't worry, you haven't typed it in wrong and your password hasn't been changed. You will need to reset it though in order to log in. Click the reset password link and you will receive an email with your new temporary password. Once logged in, you need to choose a new password (or restore to your old one) otherwise you will be locked out again.

 

If you have an out of date email address linked to your account, then you won't receive the new password. If that's the case then you'll need to email me (dave @liverpoolway.co.uk) or send me a tweet @theliverpoolway and I'll update your password manually. 

 

Any other problems or questions just let me know.

 

Thanks

Dave

Anny Road

Should the UK remain a member of the EU

  

264 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the UK remain a member of the EU

    • Yes
      211
    • No
      53


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, M_B said:

It means that if we leave without a deal then WTO tariffs will apply. Moog had wrongly assumed that we would be able to maintain zero tariffs under article 24 of GATT while we negotiated a trade agreement with the EU.

 

(I think)

Yep, this is what I understood of it from the various threads. Our biggest export, services would take a 5-10% hit in tariffs.

 

Essentially Art.24 is if we're entering into a free trade deal. We're doing the opposite. Bit of a schoolboy error from Mogg.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One for Gnasher to enjoy. Roland Rudd brother of Amber and Chairman of the peoples vote and has a certain Mandelson as godfather of one of his children. 

 

 

 
“Roland Rudd joins us live from Davos”. Not massively helping the perception that is run by a bunch of elites

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, M_B said:

It means that if we leave without a deal then WTO tariffs will apply. Moog had wrongly assumed that we would be able to maintain zero tariffs under article 24 of GATT while we negotiated a trade agreement with the EU.

 

(I think)

We could leave and trade under WTO and leave an open border between the republic and NI. As I understand it under WTO we have to treat all our trading partners the same as a default position unless superseded by a trade agreement. Given that the open border would in effect be between the UK and EU it would be a matter of minutes after we left before several other WTO members would complain as they'd be significantly disadvantaged by this arrangement.

 

The result would be a hard border. The Brexiteer's are being astonishingly disingenuous claiming that no deal would not lead to a hard border. In fact any of the outcomes beyond remaining in the single market would require a backstop to avoid this. The fall back is for the Brexiteer's to claim a technological solution can be used to overcome this despite the fact that there isn't an IT based solution in existence at the moment, it's theoretical.

 

That's my understanding anyway.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, M_B said:

It means that if we leave without a deal then WTO tariffs will apply. Moog had wrongly assumed that we would be able to maintain zero tariffs under article 24 of GATT while we negotiated a trade agreement with the EU.

 

(I think)

OK. That's obviously not going to be right is it. He wants zero tarrifs on everything coming in anyway he said on newsnight last week. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, clangers said:

We could leave and trade under WTO and leave an open border between the republic and NI. As I understand it under WTO we have to treat all our trading partners the same as a default position unless superseded by a trade agreement. Given that the open border would in effect be between the UK and EU it would be a matter of minutes after we left before several other WTO members would complain as they'd be significantly disadvantaged by this arrangement.

 

The result would be a hard border. The Brexiteer's are being astonishingly disingenuous claiming that no deal would not lead to a hard border. In fact any of the outcomes beyond remaining in the single market would require a backstop to avoid this. The fall back is for the Brexiteer's to claim a technological solution can be used to overcome this despite the fact that there isn't an IT based solution in existence at the moment, it's theoretical.

  

That's my understanding anyway.  

and surely the answer to all this would have been just to put a trade agreement in place with the EU. I don't quite understand how that hasn't become everyone's position. I realise it is too late now, but we have been looking at this for 2 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the trade agreement would have come after the withdrawal agreement, but that fell on its arse because of the backstop. Now she's trying to change the backstop, but the EU says it won't. We find ourselves living in Interesting Times....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, cloggypop said:

Netherlands aren't doing too bad at picking up leaving UK trade like. Might not be so bad after all. 

 

All the increased income in the Netherlands might mean you can pay for your TLW subscription......

 

Sorry. Sorry. I'm being naughty. Couldn't resist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Barry Wom said:

and surely the answer to all this would have been just to put a trade agreement in place with the EU. I don't quite understand how that hasn't become everyone's position. I realise it is too late now, but we have been looking at this for 2 years. 

 

Yes, but first we sent in David Davies armed with a sheet of A4 paper and, by all accounts, fortified by several large measures of alcohol. Then we sent in Rabb, who was shocked to discover that we are an island and don't share a land border with the EU. God knows what Barclay is doing....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Anubis said:

 

All the increased income in the Netherlands might mean you can pay for your TLW subscription......

 

Sorry. Sorry. I'm being naughty. Couldn't resist.

 

You should now expect a cease and desist letter from Rico's solicitor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
 
NEW: Labour MPs from leave constituencies going to see their chief whip this afternoon furious about People’s Vote amendment. One tells me “We’re pissed off, just because we’re silent people forget we’re in the majority. It’s like our working class communities are being ignored.
 
It’s no secret that the likes of and others are unhappy with the Remain wing of the party pushing for a PV. Quite a broad coalition of MPs from leave seats who wouldn’t necessarily agree on other issues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you fix this shit when both main parties are terrified of harming their party more than the country.

 

Labour are waiting for the Tory party to eat themselves whilst they are eating themselves.

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

How do you fix this shit when both main parties are terrified of harming their party more than the country.

Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

How do you fix this shit when both main parties are terrified of harming their party more than the country.

 

Labour are waiting for the Tory party to eat themselves whilst they are eating themselves.

The alpha and omega of the problem is the FPTP electoral system. In even the weakest proportional system, Cameron would have felt no need to offer a referendum because Brexiteers could have flounced off to Ukip then transferred back to the Tories on a second count. With FPTP, he was terrified that Ukip would take enough votes away to let in Labour and that Marxist (ha!) Miliband. The same calculation now paralyses both parties. What a mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The party v country debate isn't that clear cut though. Labour know that Brexit is going to be difficult, if not impossible, to stop. 

 

They could come out heavily in favour of remain/second referendum etc, but may be exposing themselves to a double whammy of losing seats and any chance of government all for supporting a potential dead duck. 

 

It's easy to sit on one side of the fence and trivialise the fallout of going against the referendum result if you back a small party who have next to no seats to lose anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×