BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Which bit? If sovereignty is the freedom from being bound by others, how does a treaty not cede some sovereignty? Obviously there is a question of degree, but the argument that we cannot sign anything that infringes our sovereignty leads to us signing nothing.TheBigBean said:
This is a particularly ridiculous argument.rjsterry said:
It is good news. It's a treaty: by definition all treaties involve some ceding of sovereignty.Stevo_666 said:
Definitely good news and an estimated £15bn pa boost to the economy.rjsterry said:
Ah, I see. So it's OK to cede some degree of sovereignty in a treaty, just so long as it's not with the EU. 😏TheBigBean said:Japan trade deal agreed
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement
What ceding of sovereignty do you see in this treaty?
Unless of course you take the AG's view that treaties are only binding as long as we feel like it.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
So specifically: what sovereignty have we ceded in this case?rjsterry said:
It is good news. It's a treaty: by definition all treaties involve some ceding of sovereignty.Stevo_666 said:
Definitely good news and an estimated £15bn pa boost to the economy.rjsterry said:
Ah, I see. So it's OK to cede some degree of sovereignty in a treaty, just so long as it's not with the EU. 😏TheBigBean said:Japan trade deal agreed
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement
What ceding of sovereignty do you see in this treaty?
Unless of course you take the AG's view that treaties are only binding as long as we feel like it."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
My error - that £15bn was over a period of years (going back to my original news source). However, I'm sure you appreciate that, given they you have often quoted the forecast cumulative impact of Brexit on the UK economy.surrey_commuter said:
4 paras down they seem to have moved the decimal pointStevo_666 said:
Definitely good news and an estimated £15bn pa boost to the economy.rjsterry said:
Ah, I see. So it's OK to cede some degree of sovereignty in a treaty, just so long as it's not with the EU. 😏TheBigBean said:Japan trade deal agreed
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement
What ceding of sovereignty do you see in this treaty?
UK businesses will benefit from tariff-free trade on 99% of exports to Japan. Government analysis shows that a deal with Japan will deliver a £1.5 billion boost to the UK economy and increase UK workers’ wages by £800 million in the long run.
the easiest way to see what we traded would be to see the equivalent japanese press release"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Sovereignty <------||||-----> Traderick_chasey said:The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
No-one interested in the Pelosi comments?
From what I've seen the Jap deal is veeery similar to the EU-Japan deal (which is no bad thing) with some minor flexes which suit both sides.0 -
I thought the consensus on here was that a US trade deal wouldn't be of any real benefit to the UK, in which case why worry? That seems to have been the reaction when I mentioned it in the past. In any event, let's see - a week is a long time in politics as they say.rick_chasey said:No-one interested in the Pelosi comments?
From what I've seen the Jap deal is veeery similar to the EU-Japan deal (which is no bad thing) with some minor flexes which suit both sides.
As for the UK-Japan deal, it does look similar to the EU-Japan deal on the face of it. A couple in our customs team are looking at it now to see what it's worth to us."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Any deal can be a benefit, just maybe not worth what we'd lose without an EU deal.0
-
I'm guessing that the reason you're hesitating replying is because the answer here is something along the lines of 'naff all'. Which takes us back to the point that we and other countries typically do not do trade deals where a material amount of sovereignty is given up. So why let the EU start, as they are out of line with our other trading partners?Stevo_666 said:
So specifically: what sovereignty have we ceded in this case?rjsterry said:
It is good news. It's a treaty: by definition all treaties involve some ceding of sovereignty.Stevo_666 said:
Definitely good news and an estimated £15bn pa boost to the economy.rjsterry said:
Ah, I see. So it's OK to cede some degree of sovereignty in a treaty, just so long as it's not with the EU. 😏TheBigBean said:Japan trade deal agreed
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement
What ceding of sovereignty do you see in this treaty?
Unless of course you take the AG's view that treaties are only binding as long as we feel like it."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Do you not understand the "if you start breaking treaties because you don't like them why should we bother signing treaties with you" argument?Stevo_666 said:
I thought the consensus on here was that a US trade deal wouldn't be of any real benefit to the UK, in which case why worry? That seems to have been the reaction when I mentioned it in the past. In any event, let's see - a week is a long time in politics as they say.rick_chasey said:No-one interested in the Pelosi comments?
From what I've seen the Jap deal is veeery similar to the EU-Japan deal (which is no bad thing) with some minor flexes which suit both sides.
As for the UK-Japan deal, it does look similar to the EU-Japan deal on the face of it. A couple in our customs team are looking at it now to see what it's worth to us.0 -
Of course. How often has the USA changed its stance on things in the last few years? And does Pelosi peak for the whole US government?rick_chasey said:
Do you not understand the "if you start breaking treaties because you don't like them why should we bother signing treaties with you" argument?Stevo_666 said:
I thought the consensus on here was that a US trade deal wouldn't be of any real benefit to the UK, in which case why worry? That seems to have been the reaction when I mentioned it in the past. In any event, let's see - a week is a long time in politics as they say.rick_chasey said:No-one interested in the Pelosi comments?
From what I've seen the Jap deal is veeery similar to the EU-Japan deal (which is no bad thing) with some minor flexes which suit both sides.
As for the UK-Japan deal, it does look similar to the EU-Japan deal on the face of it. A couple in our customs team are looking at it now to see what it's worth to us."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The equivalence would be us insisting on american gun control before we agree a trade deal. It has about as much logic as Pelosi's argument.rick_chasey said:0 -
A closer analogy would be us having a large population from an overseas nation such as India or Pakistan having a representative in UK parliament. That representation influencing foreign policy with regard to those nations. Something it is quite easy to imagine happening.john80 said:
The equivalence would be us insisting on american gun control before we agree a trade deal. It has about as much logic as Pelosi's argument.rick_chasey said:0 -
She (currently) speaks for a majority in a highly partisan Congress.Stevo_666 said:
Of course. How often has the USA changed its stance on things in the last few years? And does Pelosi peak for the whole US government?rick_chasey said:
Do you not understand the "if you start breaking treaties because you don't like them why should we bother signing treaties with you" argument?Stevo_666 said:
I thought the consensus on here was that a US trade deal wouldn't be of any real benefit to the UK, in which case why worry? That seems to have been the reaction when I mentioned it in the past. In any event, let's see - a week is a long time in politics as they say.rick_chasey said:No-one interested in the Pelosi comments?
From what I've seen the Jap deal is veeery similar to the EU-Japan deal (which is no bad thing) with some minor flexes which suit both sides.
As for the UK-Japan deal, it does look similar to the EU-Japan deal on the face of it. A couple in our customs team are looking at it now to see what it's worth to us.
Trade deals as I understand it need the approval of Congress
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
It doesn't need to have logic.john80 said:
The equivalence would be us insisting on american gun control before we agree a trade deal. It has about as much logic as Pelosi's argument.rick_chasey said:
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2020/09/11/cummings-and-johnson-are-breaking-down-the-entire-notion-of
Quite a good summary of where we're at generally.0 -
tailwindhome said:
It doesn't need to have logic.john80 said:
The equivalence would be us insisting on american gun control before we agree a trade deal. It has about as much logic as Pelosi's argument.rick_chasey said:
The only logic involved is that both parties will only sign a trade agreement if it benefits them, and that the larger party has more leverage. If either party wants to use that leverage to meet other objectives - including political ones - that's perfectly within their rights.
Given the relative sizes of the economies, it would take a brave (or idiotic) UK trade negotiator who thought that the UK had enough economic leverage (i.e. economic benefit to the US) to overcome the influence of the gun rights lobby in the US.0 -
isn't strange how one turn of phrase to turn you off the entire articlerick_chasey said:https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2020/09/11/cummings-and-johnson-are-breaking-down-the-entire-notion-of
Quite a good summary of where we're at generally.
as a mandate to fulfil fantasies nurtured since private school.0 -
Haha.surrey_commuter said:
isn't strange how one turn of phrase to turn you off the entire articlerick_chasey said:https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2020/09/11/cummings-and-johnson-are-breaking-down-the-entire-notion-of
Quite a good summary of where we're at generally.
as a mandate to fulfil fantasies nurtured since private school.
The bit I thought was really well put was this:They see democracy as an opportunity, not a mandate. They assume votes cast in a general election are carte blanche for their every whim. Anything that gets in the way is in the way of The People.
They are not Trumpists, though they are often Trumpish. Unlike the fascistic US president, there is no plausible prospect they would refuse to accept the result of an election. But their commitment to democracy is nominal - it stretches no further than the existence of elections. They have little regard for the democratic process, which takes in not just elections but how those elections are conducted, the role of money in politics, legal checks and balances, the free press, human rights - the whole infrastructure of transparency, safeguards and protections that make democracy actually function.
The former Conservative activist David Herdson, who quit the party the day Johnson became leader, recently wrote: "Democracy tends to be as fragile or robust as the desire of its practitioners to maintain it. The public understands neither the 'what' nor the 'why' of a lot of the essential system that supports it."
That first line in particular I found right on the button.0 -
You don't think they read Atlas Shrugged as schoolboys?surrey_commuter said:
isn't strange how one turn of phrase to turn you off the entire articlerick_chasey said:https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2020/09/11/cummings-and-johnson-are-breaking-down-the-entire-notion-of
Quite a good summary of where we're at generally.
as a mandate to fulfil fantasies nurtured since private school.0 -
Difficult to give specifics as the UK government website lists all the things Japan has agreed to give us and not very much at all on what we have given them in return.Stevo_666 said:
So specifically: what sovereignty have we ceded in this case?rjsterry said:
It is good news. It's a treaty: by definition all treaties involve some ceding of sovereignty.Stevo_666 said:
Definitely good news and an estimated £15bn pa boost to the economy.rjsterry said:
Ah, I see. So it's OK to cede some degree of sovereignty in a treaty, just so long as it's not with the EU. 😏TheBigBean said:Japan trade deal agreed
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement
What ceding of sovereignty do you see in this treaty?
Unless of course you take the AG's view that treaties are only binding as long as we feel like it.
To be clear I'm not knocking this deal at all and am very happy for us to commit to this or that in return for some reciprocating measures. It just seems to jar slightly with other government behaviour this week.
This suggests that really all the fuss about sovereignty is just there to keep the flag sha**ers on side.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
It's pretty consistently had Ireland's back.Stevo_666 said:
Of course. How often has the USA changed its stance on things in the last few years? And does Pelosi peak for the whole US government?rick_chasey said:
Do you not understand the "if you start breaking treaties because you don't like them why should we bother signing treaties with you" argument?Stevo_666 said:
I thought the consensus on here was that a US trade deal wouldn't be of any real benefit to the UK, in which case why worry? That seems to have been the reaction when I mentioned it in the past. In any event, let's see - a week is a long time in politics as they say.rick_chasey said:No-one interested in the Pelosi comments?
From what I've seen the Jap deal is veeery similar to the EU-Japan deal (which is no bad thing) with some minor flexes which suit both sides.
As for the UK-Japan deal, it does look similar to the EU-Japan deal on the face of it. A couple in our customs team are looking at it now to see what it's worth to us.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I suspect that the issues with the EU trade negotiation compared to the relatively smooth progress of the Japanese deal are mainly down to the fact that the Japanese were not making ridiculous demands to be able to interfere in UK matters in return for a trade deal.rjsterry said:
Difficult to give specifics as the UK government website lists all the things Japan has agreed to give us and not very much at all on what we have given them in return.Stevo_666 said:
So specifically: what sovereignty have we ceded in this case?rjsterry said:
It is good news. It's a treaty: by definition all treaties involve some ceding of sovereignty.Stevo_666 said:
Definitely good news and an estimated £15bn pa boost to the economy.rjsterry said:
Ah, I see. So it's OK to cede some degree of sovereignty in a treaty, just so long as it's not with the EU. 😏TheBigBean said:Japan trade deal agreed
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement
What ceding of sovereignty do you see in this treaty?
Unless of course you take the AG's view that treaties are only binding as long as we feel like it.
To be clear I'm not knocking this deal at all and am very happy for us to commit to this or that in return for some reciprocating measures. It just seems to jar slightly with other government behaviour this week.
This suggests that really all the fuss about sovereignty is just there to keep the flag sha**ers on side."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1 -
You'd probably expect that given the strong Irish lobby in the US. Question is whether that will win the day or not.rjsterry said:
It's pretty consistently had Ireland's back.Stevo_666 said:
Of course. How often has the USA changed its stance on things in the last few years? And does Pelosi peak for the whole US government?rick_chasey said:
Do you not understand the "if you start breaking treaties because you don't like them why should we bother signing treaties with you" argument?Stevo_666 said:
I thought the consensus on here was that a US trade deal wouldn't be of any real benefit to the UK, in which case why worry? That seems to have been the reaction when I mentioned it in the past. In any event, let's see - a week is a long time in politics as they say.rick_chasey said:No-one interested in the Pelosi comments?
From what I've seen the Jap deal is veeery similar to the EU-Japan deal (which is no bad thing) with some minor flexes which suit both sides.
As for the UK-Japan deal, it does look similar to the EU-Japan deal on the face of it. A couple in our customs team are looking at it now to see what it's worth to us.
As I've said, lets see - but many on here have cast doubt on the economic benefits of a US trade deal and also pointed out the living hell that would be having chlorine washed chicken on our supermarket shelves that you don't have to buy if you don't want to..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I assume that the UK and Japan wanted things to continue much the same as they are now. That's not what the UK wants from a deal with the EU.Stevo_666 said:
I suspect that the issues with the EU trade negotiation compared to the relatively smooth progress of the Japanese deal are mainly down to the fact that the Japanese were not making ridiculous demands to be able to interfere in UK matters in return for a trade deal.rjsterry said:
Difficult to give specifics as the UK government website lists all the things Japan has agreed to give us and not very much at all on what we have given them in return.Stevo_666 said:
So specifically: what sovereignty have we ceded in this case?rjsterry said:
It is good news. It's a treaty: by definition all treaties involve some ceding of sovereignty.Stevo_666 said:
Definitely good news and an estimated £15bn pa boost to the economy.rjsterry said:
Ah, I see. So it's OK to cede some degree of sovereignty in a treaty, just so long as it's not with the EU. 😏TheBigBean said:Japan trade deal agreed
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement
What ceding of sovereignty do you see in this treaty?
Unless of course you take the AG's view that treaties are only binding as long as we feel like it.
To be clear I'm not knocking this deal at all and am very happy for us to commit to this or that in return for some reciprocating measures. It just seems to jar slightly with other government behaviour this week.
This suggests that really all the fuss about sovereignty is just there to keep the flag sha**ers on side.0 -
How does that justify the EU desire to interfere in UK affairs?kingstongraham said:
I assume that the UK and Japan wanted things to continue much the same as they are now. That's not what the UK wants from a deal with the EU.Stevo_666 said:
I suspect that the issues with the EU trade negotiation compared to the relatively smooth progress of the Japanese deal are mainly down to the fact that the Japanese were not making ridiculous demands to be able to interfere in UK matters in return for a trade deal.rjsterry said:
Difficult to give specifics as the UK government website lists all the things Japan has agreed to give us and not very much at all on what we have given them in return.Stevo_666 said:
So specifically: what sovereignty have we ceded in this case?rjsterry said:
It is good news. It's a treaty: by definition all treaties involve some ceding of sovereignty.Stevo_666 said:
Definitely good news and an estimated £15bn pa boost to the economy.rjsterry said:
Ah, I see. So it's OK to cede some degree of sovereignty in a treaty, just so long as it's not with the EU. 😏TheBigBean said:Japan trade deal agreed
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement
What ceding of sovereignty do you see in this treaty?
Unless of course you take the AG's view that treaties are only binding as long as we feel like it.
To be clear I'm not knocking this deal at all and am very happy for us to commit to this or that in return for some reciprocating measures. It just seems to jar slightly with other government behaviour this week.
This suggests that really all the fuss about sovereignty is just there to keep the flag sha**ers on side.
The UK just want to deal with Japan (and any other trade partner) on the basis that the UK is an independent sovereign nation. The EU seems to have problems with this: I am not aware of any other trade partners or potential trade partner having this issue."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
We don't have part of the UK with an open border with Japan. That might be the difference. Imagine if Hokkaido was like NI. Then I think the deal might have been more tricky.
If the argument is that an effective border within the UK, and the consequent involvement of the adjoining customs territory in policing that border is unacceptable, then fair enough. I tend to agree. But this is precisely what Johnson sold as his solution to the WA negotiations and the deal on which he was elected. And everyone including Johnson knew this was the case at the time. If that involvement is ridiculous, why the hell did you vote for it?1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
The US and Canada manged to do a trade deal without any of these issues. They share quite a long border.rjsterry said:We don't have part of the UK with an open border with Japan. That might be the difference. Imagine if Hokkaido was like NI. Then I think the deal might have been more tricky.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
It would be pretty funny if Ireland turned its back on it biggest trading partner at the behest of the EU then having to save its economy by leaving the EU and forging a trade deal with the US. Give it a decade.Stevo_666 said:
You'd probably expect that given the strong Irish lobby in the US. Question is whether that will win the day or not.rjsterry said:
It's pretty consistently had Ireland's back.Stevo_666 said:
Of course. How often has the USA changed its stance on things in the last few years? And does Pelosi peak for the whole US government?rick_chasey said:
Do you not understand the "if you start breaking treaties because you don't like them why should we bother signing treaties with you" argument?Stevo_666 said:
I thought the consensus on here was that a US trade deal wouldn't be of any real benefit to the UK, in which case why worry? That seems to have been the reaction when I mentioned it in the past. In any event, let's see - a week is a long time in politics as they say.rick_chasey said:No-one interested in the Pelosi comments?
From what I've seen the Jap deal is veeery similar to the EU-Japan deal (which is no bad thing) with some minor flexes which suit both sides.
As for the UK-Japan deal, it does look similar to the EU-Japan deal on the face of it. A couple in our customs team are looking at it now to see what it's worth to us.
As I've said, lets see - but many on here have cast doubt on the economic benefits of a US trade deal and also pointed out the living hell that would be having chlorine washed chicken on our supermarket shelves that you don't have to buy if you don't want to...0 -
What the fuck are you talking about?john80 said:
It would be pretty funny if Ireland turned its back on it biggest trading partner at the behest of the EU then having to save its economy by leaving the EU and forging a trade deal with the US. Give it a decade.Stevo_666 said:
You'd probably expect that given the strong Irish lobby in the US. Question is whether that will win the day or not.rjsterry said:
It's pretty consistently had Ireland's back.Stevo_666 said:
Of course. How often has the USA changed its stance on things in the last few years? And does Pelosi peak for the whole US government?rick_chasey said:
Do you not understand the "if you start breaking treaties because you don't like them why should we bother signing treaties with you" argument?Stevo_666 said:
I thought the consensus on here was that a US trade deal wouldn't be of any real benefit to the UK, in which case why worry? That seems to have been the reaction when I mentioned it in the past. In any event, let's see - a week is a long time in politics as they say.rick_chasey said:No-one interested in the Pelosi comments?
From what I've seen the Jap deal is veeery similar to the EU-Japan deal (which is no bad thing) with some minor flexes which suit both sides.
As for the UK-Japan deal, it does look similar to the EU-Japan deal on the face of it. A couple in our customs team are looking at it now to see what it's worth to us.
As I've said, lets see - but many on here have cast doubt on the economic benefits of a US trade deal and also pointed out the living hell that would be having chlorine washed chicken on our supermarket shelves that you don't have to buy if you don't want to...
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
I’m not sure you quite appreciate how integrated the U.K. is with the EU and what the U.K. wants out of this ‘deal’.Stevo_666 said:
The US and Canada manged to do a trade deal without any of these issues. They share quite a long border.rjsterry said:We don't have part of the UK with an open border with Japan. That might be the difference. Imagine if Hokkaido was like NI. Then I think the deal might have been more tricky.
0
