BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Another proponent of the advantages of having full access to the EU. There's no telling where pragmatism rather than dogmatism will lead.
1 -
-
Airhead Leadsom was my MP, and for the (short term, £1.12 per month) time I signed up to get a #toryscum insider view. Constituency party as expected was essentially a clique handful of Brexshit enthusiasts keen to spread lies and disinfo.briantrumpet said:Another proponent of the advantages of having full access to the EU. There's no telling where pragmatism rather than dogmatism will lead.
So has Airhead turned solo? has she killed off the clique? has the clique got fed up with not having their army of low paid E European servants? are the #toryscum party factions splitting further?
One f-ed country. Thanks Airhead et al.0 -
So many questions.orraloon said:
Airhead Leadsom was my MP, and for the (short term, £1.12 per month) time I signed up to get a #toryscum insider view. Constituency party as expected was essentially a clique handful of Brexshit enthusiasts keen to spread lies and disinfo.briantrumpet said:Another proponent of the advantages of having full access to the EU. There's no telling where pragmatism rather than dogmatism will lead.
So has Airhead turned solo? has she killed off the clique? has the clique got fed up with not having their army of low paid E European servants? are the #toryscum party factions splitting further?
One f-ed country. Thanks Airhead et al.
My assumption is that she is a moron so does not realise the implication of what she is saying.0 -
surrey_commuter said:
My assumption is that she is a moron so does not realise the implication of what she is saying.
That's a fair assumption.
It really does make me wonder if there are any proper intellectually bright MPs. It's probably just as well we don't have an Enoch Powell around any more, but he had a very sharp mind, unlike most of the ones I can think of today. Hunt's not stupid, but I'd not put him in the intellectual bracket, though I think he's probably more mentally agile/aware than Sunak.0 -
The one I know personally was in most of my classes at school.briantrumpet said:surrey_commuter said:My assumption is that she is a moron so does not realise the implication of what she is saying.
That's a fair assumption.
It really does make me wonder if there are any proper intellectually bright MPs. It's probably just as well we don't have an Enoch Powell around any more, but he had a very sharp mind, unlike most of the ones I can think of today. Hunt's not stupid, but I'd not put him in the intellectual bracket, though I think he's probably more mentally agile/aware than Sunak.
Great at languages and English. Bottom set for science and maths.
0 -
I start to wonder if either people don't get selected/elected if they are (or are perceived) to be intellectual, so either outward intellectuals never try, never make it, or hide their ability, even if they get elected.
Johnson, OTOH, liked to play the intellectual, with his cod Latin and faulty use of literary references. But he's not as clever as his stage persona (or as he thinks he is).0 -
I think the main criteria is a willingness to put yourself and your family through a lot of sh!t.briantrumpet said:I start to wonder if either people don't get selected/elected if they are (or are perceived) to be intellectual, so either outward intellectuals never try, never make it, or hide their ability, even if they get elected.
Johnson, OTOH, liked to play the intellectual, with his cod Latin and faulty use of literary references. But he's not as clever as his stage persona (or as he thinks he is).0 -
AI knows...
Edit - Beat reply: "Rage at the Machine"We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
Sammy Wilson, bemoaning the damage done to organisations in his own constituency due to the ending of EU funding
Gullible fool
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Tell Sammy that this has aged well.
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/12/15/dup-brexit-spokesman-laughs-off-project-fear-u-boats-luftwaffe-couldnt-starve-us-out/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 -
A spot of good news.
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/uk-brexit-trade-deal-cptpp-victory-indo-pacific-pact1/
Quote:
Britain is poised to join an Indo-Pacific trade pact in a major post-Brexit win, as the economy pivots away from the European Union.
The Government is expected to shortly announce that Britain has become the first non-founding member of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Joining the partnership would give businesses easier access to markets worth a combined $10 trillion.
Ministers will hold meetings this week with counterparts in various Indo-Pacific nations to put the finishing touches to a deal.
The CPTPP, which was formed in 2018, currently covers 11 countries: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam.
CPTPP members account for 13pc of global domestic product (GDP) and 15pc of global trade.
The Prime Minister's spokesman said: "Negotiations have been proceeding well on CPTPP, and ministers are due to have discussions with their counterparts later this week."
The Department for Business and Trade has hailed “great progress” towards the UK’s accession.
Stephanie Rickard, professor of political science at the London School of Economics, said: “The UK is trailblazing. This is changing the agreement from being a regional agreement to a global agreement.”
Joining the CPTPP will bring a particular boost for Scottish whisky exports, and will likely boost electronic and digital trade, Ms Rickard said.
Trade with members of the CPTPP currently accounts for 8pc of British exports but is expected to grow rapidly after joining the trade deal.
Ms Rickard said: “There is a clear pivot towards the Indo-Pacific region.”
Martin Beck, chief economic adviser to the EY Item Club, said: “This is going to help reorientate our trade towards other parts of the world which are faster growing, both in terms of population growth and economic growth.
“It is a positive sign in terms of shifting the focus of the UK trade away from Europe.”"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
A spot of good news.
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/uk-brexit-trade-deal-cptpp-victory-indo-pacific-pact1/
Quote:
Britain is poised to join an Indo-Pacific trade pact in a major post-Brexit win, as the economy pivots away from the European Union.
The Government is expected to shortly announce that Britain has become the first non-founding member of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Joining the partnership would give businesses easier access to markets worth a combined $10 trillion.
Ministers will hold meetings this week with counterparts in various Indo-Pacific nations to put the finishing touches to a deal.
The CPTPP, which was formed in 2018, currently covers 11 countries: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam.
CPTPP members account for 13pc of global domestic product (GDP) and 15pc of global trade.
The Prime Minister's spokesman said: "Negotiations have been proceeding well on CPTPP, and ministers are due to have discussions with their counterparts later this week."
The Department for Business and Trade has hailed “great progress” towards the UK’s accession.
Stephanie Rickard, professor of political science at the London School of Economics, said: “The UK is trailblazing. This is changing the agreement from being a regional agreement to a global agreement.”
Joining the CPTPP will bring a particular boost for Scottish whisky exports, and will likely boost electronic and digital trade, Ms Rickard said.
Trade with members of the CPTPP currently accounts for 8pc of British exports but is expected to grow rapidly after joining the trade deal.
Ms Rickard said: “There is a clear pivot towards the Indo-Pacific region.”
Martin Beck, chief economic adviser to the EY Item Club, said: “This is going to help reorientate our trade towards other parts of the world which are faster growing, both in terms of population growth and economic growth.
“It is a positive sign in terms of shifting the focus of the UK trade away from Europe.”
If the EU do a deal with them too, as has been mooted, it wouldn't be an either/or.
Though it does sound rather like the EU:First, the CPTPP compares favourably with many other FTAs because it sets much higher and more pervasive standards. It aims to promote a market-driven economy. It provides for the elimination of tariffs and other trade barriers in a broad range of manufactures and agricultural commodities. It seeks the liberalisation of services trade by removing cross-border restrictions and protection against discrimination. It establishes rules to open markets to foreign investment and protect investors, lays out guidelines for e-commerce, intellectual property protection, labour market and environmental standards, and spells out rules and standards for the digital and communications sectors, and for transparency in business, state enterprises, competition, and procurement.
https://www.geostrategy.org.uk/britains-world/the-cptpp-and-britains-pacific-rim-engagement
So there will be at least a couple of questions:
What will the democratic oversight of the 'rules', 'standards' and 'guidelines' consist of?
And does the acceptance of such rules and standards mean that the UK would be handing over some of its 'sovereignty' to a grouping of other nations?
Given the lengths to which the Brexit prospectus was predicated on not having to follow others' regulations to ensure free trade, will this be classed as a 'win'?
And will we have a referendum on joining this FTA that would impose rules and regulations on the UK?1 -
I doubt that a trade agreement would trigger the need for a referendum as previous trade deals have not. Clearly it is very different from EU membership which comes with lots of strings attached and significant interference in the governance of a country.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:A spot of good news.
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/uk-brexit-trade-deal-cptpp-victory-indo-pacific-pact1/
Quote:
Britain is poised to join an Indo-Pacific trade pact in a major post-Brexit win, as the economy pivots away from the European Union.
The Government is expected to shortly announce that Britain has become the first non-founding member of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Joining the partnership would give businesses easier access to markets worth a combined $10 trillion.
Ministers will hold meetings this week with counterparts in various Indo-Pacific nations to put the finishing touches to a deal.
The CPTPP, which was formed in 2018, currently covers 11 countries: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam.
CPTPP members account for 13pc of global domestic product (GDP) and 15pc of global trade.
The Prime Minister's spokesman said: "Negotiations have been proceeding well on CPTPP, and ministers are due to have discussions with their counterparts later this week."
The Department for Business and Trade has hailed “great progress” towards the UK’s accession.
Stephanie Rickard, professor of political science at the London School of Economics, said: “The UK is trailblazing. This is changing the agreement from being a regional agreement to a global agreement.”
Joining the CPTPP will bring a particular boost for Scottish whisky exports, and will likely boost electronic and digital trade, Ms Rickard said.
Trade with members of the CPTPP currently accounts for 8pc of British exports but is expected to grow rapidly after joining the trade deal.
Ms Rickard said: “There is a clear pivot towards the Indo-Pacific region.”
Martin Beck, chief economic adviser to the EY Item Club, said: “This is going to help reorientate our trade towards other parts of the world which are faster growing, both in terms of population growth and economic growth.
“It is a positive sign in terms of shifting the focus of the UK trade away from Europe.”
If the EU do a deal with them too, as has been mooted, it wouldn't be an either/or.
Though it does sound rather like the EU:First, the CPTPP compares favourably with many other FTAs because it sets much higher and more pervasive standards. It aims to promote a market-driven economy. It provides for the elimination of tariffs and other trade barriers in a broad range of manufactures and agricultural commodities. It seeks the liberalisation of services trade by removing cross-border restrictions and protection against discrimination. It establishes rules to open markets to foreign investment and protect investors, lays out guidelines for e-commerce, intellectual property protection, labour market and environmental standards, and spells out rules and standards for the digital and communications sectors, and for transparency in business, state enterprises, competition, and procurement.
https://www.geostrategy.org.uk/britains-world/the-cptpp-and-britains-pacific-rim-engagement
So there will be at least a couple of questions:
What will the democratic oversight of the 'rules', 'standards' and 'guidelines' consist of?
And does the acceptance of such rules and standards mean that the UK would be handing over some of its 'sovereignty' to a grouping of other nations?
Given the lengths to which the Brexit prospectus was predicated on not having to follow others' regulations to ensure free trade, will this be classed as a 'win'?
And will we have a referendum on joining this FTA that would impose rules and regulations on the UK?
Do you see this trade deal as a good thing? And if not, why not?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
I doubt that a trade agreement would trigger the need for a referendum as previous trade deals have not. Clearly it is very different from EU membership which comes with lots of strings attached and significant interference in the governance of a country.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:A spot of good news.
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/uk-brexit-trade-deal-cptpp-victory-indo-pacific-pact1/
Quote:
Britain is poised to join an Indo-Pacific trade pact in a major post-Brexit win, as the economy pivots away from the European Union.
The Government is expected to shortly announce that Britain has become the first non-founding member of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Joining the partnership would give businesses easier access to markets worth a combined $10 trillion.
Ministers will hold meetings this week with counterparts in various Indo-Pacific nations to put the finishing touches to a deal.
The CPTPP, which was formed in 2018, currently covers 11 countries: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam.
CPTPP members account for 13pc of global domestic product (GDP) and 15pc of global trade.
The Prime Minister's spokesman said: "Negotiations have been proceeding well on CPTPP, and ministers are due to have discussions with their counterparts later this week."
The Department for Business and Trade has hailed “great progress” towards the UK’s accession.
Stephanie Rickard, professor of political science at the London School of Economics, said: “The UK is trailblazing. This is changing the agreement from being a regional agreement to a global agreement.”
Joining the CPTPP will bring a particular boost for Scottish whisky exports, and will likely boost electronic and digital trade, Ms Rickard said.
Trade with members of the CPTPP currently accounts for 8pc of British exports but is expected to grow rapidly after joining the trade deal.
Ms Rickard said: “There is a clear pivot towards the Indo-Pacific region.”
Martin Beck, chief economic adviser to the EY Item Club, said: “This is going to help reorientate our trade towards other parts of the world which are faster growing, both in terms of population growth and economic growth.
“It is a positive sign in terms of shifting the focus of the UK trade away from Europe.”
If the EU do a deal with them too, as has been mooted, it wouldn't be an either/or.
Though it does sound rather like the EU:First, the CPTPP compares favourably with many other FTAs because it sets much higher and more pervasive standards. It aims to promote a market-driven economy. It provides for the elimination of tariffs and other trade barriers in a broad range of manufactures and agricultural commodities. It seeks the liberalisation of services trade by removing cross-border restrictions and protection against discrimination. It establishes rules to open markets to foreign investment and protect investors, lays out guidelines for e-commerce, intellectual property protection, labour market and environmental standards, and spells out rules and standards for the digital and communications sectors, and for transparency in business, state enterprises, competition, and procurement.
https://www.geostrategy.org.uk/britains-world/the-cptpp-and-britains-pacific-rim-engagement
So there will be at least a couple of questions:
What will the democratic oversight of the 'rules', 'standards' and 'guidelines' consist of?
And does the acceptance of such rules and standards mean that the UK would be handing over some of its 'sovereignty' to a grouping of other nations?
Given the lengths to which the Brexit prospectus was predicated on not having to follow others' regulations to ensure free trade, will this be classed as a 'win'?
And will we have a referendum on joining this FTA that would impose rules and regulations on the UK?
Do you see this trade deal as a good thing? And if not, why not?
It all depends on the detail: what would the obligations be, and what would the trade-offs be? If it's anything like the Aussie/NZ trade deal, it would not be a good thing, as the traffic was all one way. If it's just signed off to say "We got a trade deal!", without looking critically at the benefits and downsides, it would be reckless.
The paragraph I quoted suggests 'higher standards' than a bog-standard trade agreement (if there is such a thing), which implies obligations, if it's to mean anything at all.
Obviously, if it improves trade without simultaneously shooting ourselves in both feet, it would be a good thing. But it's too early to tell.0 -
Oh, and one other point which may be of passing interest:
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/cptpp-uk-pacific-trade-deal-brexit-victory-analysis/
Quote:
"Accession to the partnership would be a huge event for Brexit Britain and would not have been possible inside the European Union. Accession would mean that the UK would not be able to rejoin the EU customs union.
Since the pact requires that the UK has control over its own regulatory system, dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster."
Possibly a subtle masterstroke by Rishi & Co?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
Oh, and one other point which may be of passing interest:
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/cptpp-uk-pacific-trade-deal-brexit-victory-analysis/
Quote:
"Accession to the partnership would be a huge event for Brexit Britain and would not have been possible inside the European Union. Accession would mean that the UK would not be able to rejoin the EU customs union.
Since the pact requires that the UK has control over its own regulatory system, dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster."
Possibly a subtle masterstroke by Rishi & Co?
So knowingly excluding an easy trading relationship with your nearest and most wealthy market is a masterstroke? OK.0 -
0
-
We voted to do that in 2016, mainly for reasons other than just trade. This deal gives access to a market of similar size, but which is much faster growing and does not have the same issues of interference in governance. Which is a valid consideration.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:Oh, and one other point which may be of passing interest:
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/cptpp-uk-pacific-trade-deal-brexit-victory-analysis/
Quote:
"Accession to the partnership would be a huge event for Brexit Britain and would not have been possible inside the European Union. Accession would mean that the UK would not be able to rejoin the EU customs union.
Since the pact requires that the UK has control over its own regulatory system, dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster."
Possibly a subtle masterstroke by Rishi & Co?
So knowingly excluding an easy trading relationship with your nearest and most wealthy market is a masterstroke? OK.
Kinda spoils your hopes of us rejoining though. C'est la vie."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
We voted to do that in 2016, mainly for reasons other than just trade. This deal gives access to a market of similar size, but which is much faster growing and does not have the same issues of interference in governance. Which is a valid consideration.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:Oh, and one other point which may be of passing interest:
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/cptpp-uk-pacific-trade-deal-brexit-victory-analysis/
Quote:
"Accession to the partnership would be a huge event for Brexit Britain and would not have been possible inside the European Union. Accession would mean that the UK would not be able to rejoin the EU customs union.
Since the pact requires that the UK has control over its own regulatory system, dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster."
Possibly a subtle masterstroke by Rishi & Co?
So knowingly excluding an easy trading relationship with your nearest and most wealthy market is a masterstroke? OK.
Kinda spoils your hopes of us rejoining though. C'est la vie.
I do find your desire to lock us out of the EU's wealth utterly bizarre.
But let's see, eh? Who knows what the deal would actually entail, and what a Labour Government will do?0 -
So it's ok to sign up to standards set by the Pacific partnership but out of the question to sign up to the European ones.
How do you square this phrase with it not interfering in the UK's governance?dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster.
I guess it must be dead simple to get out of and not be taking away any sovereignty, so shouldn't be any obstacle to joining the single market, or is it not?
0 -
Are there banana curvature regs?kingstongraham said:So it's ok to sign up to standards set by the Pacific partnership but out of the question to sign up to the European ones.
How do you square this phrase with it not interfering in the UK's governance?dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster.
I guess it must be dead simple to get out of and not be taking away any sovereignty, so shouldn't be any obstacle to joining the single market, or is it not?0 -
Were there ever?TheBigBean said:
Are there banana curvature regs?kingstongraham said:So it's ok to sign up to standards set by the Pacific partnership but out of the question to sign up to the European ones.
How do you square this phrase with it not interfering in the UK's governance?dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster.
I guess it must be dead simple to get out of and not be taking away any sovereignty, so shouldn't be any obstacle to joining the single market, or is it not?0 -
Don't know, but we might hear about chlorinated chicken again.TheBigBean said:
Are there banana curvature regs?kingstongraham said:So it's ok to sign up to standards set by the Pacific partnership but out of the question to sign up to the European ones.
How do you square this phrase with it not interfering in the UK's governance?dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster.
I guess it must be dead simple to get out of and not be taking away any sovereignty, so shouldn't be any obstacle to joining the single market, or is it not?
0 -
0
-
My point is not about what used to be in place, rather what we are putting in place - time to start looking forwards and not backwards.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
We voted to do that in 2016, mainly for reasons other than just trade. This deal gives access to a market of similar size, but which is much faster growing and does not have the same issues of interference in governance. Which is a valid consideration.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:Oh, and one other point which may be of passing interest:
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/cptpp-uk-pacific-trade-deal-brexit-victory-analysis/
Quote:
"Accession to the partnership would be a huge event for Brexit Britain and would not have been possible inside the European Union. Accession would mean that the UK would not be able to rejoin the EU customs union.
Since the pact requires that the UK has control over its own regulatory system, dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster."
Possibly a subtle masterstroke by Rishi & Co?
So knowingly excluding an easy trading relationship with your nearest and most wealthy market is a masterstroke? OK.
Kinda spoils your hopes of us rejoining though. C'est la vie.
I do find your desire to lock us out of the EU's wealth utterly bizarre.
But let's see, eh? Who knows what the deal would actually entail, and what a Labour Government will do?
So putting aside crying over EU spilt milk for a moment, what are your view on this new and fairly significant trade deal?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Oh and we are not locked the EUs wealth, we were still trading with it last time I looked. I do find it quite amusing how you try to portray the current state of affairs as some sort of total cessation of trade with EU countries "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
-
Yes. Less onerous than pre-existing U.K. regs and subsequently revoked but they were definitely a real thing! https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32011R1333briantrumpet said:
Were there ever?TheBigBean said:
Are there banana curvature regs?kingstongraham said:So it's ok to sign up to standards set by the Pacific partnership but out of the question to sign up to the European ones.
How do you square this phrase with it not interfering in the UK's governance?dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster.
I guess it must be dead simple to get out of and not be taking away any sovereignty, so shouldn't be any obstacle to joining the single market, or is it not?
It is actually quite hard to read such earnest legal texts (this is the same format and style as the GDPR for example) with a straight face when they relate to bananas. e.g. the definition of a Class 1 banana:
"Class I
Bananas in this class must be of good quality. They must display the characteristics typical of the variety and/or commercial type.
However, the following slight defects of the fingers are allowed, provided they do not impair the general appearance of each hand or cluster, its quality, its keeping quality or the presentation of the package:
—
slight defects in shape,
—
slight skin defects due to rubbing and other slight superficial blemishes not covering a total of more than 2 cm2 of the surface of the finger.
Under no circumstances may such slight defects affect the flesh of the fruit."
I think the issue with them was that the eurosceptic press billed them as outlawing bendy bananas where’s they were only ever to do with classification. Tbh, such regulations were an open goal for Eurosceptics because on reading them, they are not obviously not a parody of EU regulations.
And U.K. shoppers are much more demanding than eu regs anyway with the appearance of fruit and veg. As a group we apparently reject the less visually pleasing Class I fruit and veg when given the choice (eg when you pick your individual bananas and carrots etc off the shelf rather than going for a pre-packed bag.)
1 -
One problem with lauding the new CPTPP trade deal is that the announcement comes from the Daily Telegraph which has a particular viewpoint and potential bias. It’s really important when coming to an opinion on anything that consideration is made of what other sources say rather than just the one. At the moment there’s little out there from other sources about it.
Will be interesting to hear from a range of sources before anyone can take a definitive view.0 -
Stevo_666 said:
My point is not about what used to be in place, rather what we are putting in place - time to start looking forwards and not backwards.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
We voted to do that in 2016, mainly for reasons other than just trade. This deal gives access to a market of similar size, but which is much faster growing and does not have the same issues of interference in governance. Which is a valid consideration.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:Oh, and one other point which may be of passing interest:
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/03/29/cptpp-uk-pacific-trade-deal-brexit-victory-analysis/
Quote:
"Accession to the partnership would be a huge event for Brexit Britain and would not have been possible inside the European Union. Accession would mean that the UK would not be able to rejoin the EU customs union.
Since the pact requires that the UK has control over its own regulatory system, dynamic alignment of UK regulations with the EU would also not be feasible, except in those areas where EU regulation passes CPTPP muster."
Possibly a subtle masterstroke by Rishi & Co?
So knowingly excluding an easy trading relationship with your nearest and most wealthy market is a masterstroke? OK.
Kinda spoils your hopes of us rejoining though. C'est la vie.
I do find your desire to lock us out of the EU's wealth utterly bizarre.
But let's see, eh? Who knows what the deal would actually entail, and what a Labour Government will do?
So putting aside crying over EU spilt milk for a moment, what are your view on this new and fairly significant trade deal?
https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/uk-membership-of-the-trans-pacific-trade-agreement/The International Agreements Committee’s report included a summary of the Government’s own modelling of the economic impact of accession. It said that the estimated increase in UK GDP in the long run was 0.08%. However, it reported that larger gains would be available if CPTPP membership subsequently expanded to include Thailand and South Korea. The committee agreed that membership was not expected to bring “large-scale” economic benefits in the short term. However, it stated that most of its witnesses supported the Government’s aspiration to join CPTPP, in part because membership would allow the UK to influence its future development.
A good thing, if it doesn't lock us out of our continuing (and hopefully closer) trading with th EU. But it won't ever be a replacement for it.0
