EU Trade Talks Thread

[TheCat]

I'll dip my toe in again and see how we go......:)

This seems like a bit of a red herring of an argument Sephiroth...Dual standards seems pretty sensible to me....I mean your talking like its an unfathomable logistical exercise for businesses to sell products into different markets with different standards. Of course initially businesses will have to work out where the demand is an adjust production/farming processes accordingly. But businesses all over the world already do this dont they?

How is that we can buy US Beef, New Zealand Lamb, Fruit from Morrocco? How do farmers in those market handle different standards? In financial services here in the UK there are different regulations for how you can structure and market financial products/advice for the EU as compared to when one does so for other markets (im aware goods production is slightly more involved than a service - but the point stands). Yes it would be easier to only have to worry about 1 set of standards - but it hardly seems anything close to prohibitive. what am I missing?

[Sephiroth]

And there was nothing stopping uk producers doing the same before Brexit was there

It?s not that it?s unfathomable. It?s that it?s overhead in costs and red tape - which is the opposite of what was promised by leave. But the leave have broken pretty much every promise so just add it to the list

I see the government are planning 4 months of ?shock and awe? information campaign to wake people up to the fact they need to prepare for end of transition

I?d say anything that needs shock and awe is probably best avoided

[diable rouge]

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It?s not that it?s unfathomable. It?s that it?s

> overhead in costs and red tape - which is the

> opposite of what was promised by leave.

This. Even Gove has admitted that 50,000 'form fillers' will be required for the Gov's preferred Canada style deal with the EU. So much for doing away with EU bureaucracy...

[KidKruger]

No point trying to apply logic to Brexit, is there ?

There's no logic to racism, xenophobia or Nationalism, either.

It was a knee-jerk vote, based on lies.

[JohnL]

diable rouge Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sephiroth Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > It?s not that it?s unfathomable. It?s that

> it?s

> > overhead in costs and red tape - which is the

> > opposite of what was promised by leave.

>

> This. Even Gove has admitted that 50,000 'form

> fillers' will be required for the Gov's preferred

> Canada style deal with the EU. So much for doing

> away with EU bureaucracy...

But the form filler academy is going to churn out thousands of form fillers

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/brexit/brexit-uk-to-set-up-academy-for-50000-customs-form-fillers-39178486.html

[pk]

?We also need the cooperation of the French to intercept boats and return migrants back to France.

I know that when the British people say they want to take back control of our borders ? this is exactly what they mean.?

Priti Patel Aug 2020

Unedited

[Blah Blah]

The migrant boat issue highlights perfectly how hard it is to close borders when you are an island. It also illustrates how leaving the EU does not free us from international law and many other things we are signed up to outside of the EU. Many people voted Brexit falsely believing we could ignore all of that after leaving. I even asked one guy yesterday how he proposed we force the French to let us land and unload boats and planes of migrants we are refusing to process after he demanded we force them back to France. It's easy to get angry. Not so easy to find solutions that work.

[TheCat]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The migrant boat issue highlights perfectly how

> hard it is to close borders when you are an

> island. It also illustrates how leaving the EU

> does not free us from international law and many

> other things we are signed up to outside of the

> EU. Many people voted Brexit falsely believing we

> could ignore all of that after leaving. I even

> asked one guy yesterday how he proposed we force

> the French to let us land and unload boats and

> planes of migrants we are refusing to process

> after he demanded we force them back to France.

> It's easy to get angry. Not so easy to find

> solutions that work.

'Many' people voted Brexit believing we could ignore international law?

[Blah Blah]

Yes, because they don't understand the difference between international law and EU law.

[TheCat]

Does it comfort you to pretend that 'many' people who made a different choice to you are truly that stupid?

[keano77]

Fair point Blah Blah. I certainly know nothing of International Law but I understand we (Britain) need to abide by it. I understand next to nothing about EU Law either but don?t think my life has been any the worse for my ignorance in that area.

But your point about the migrant boat issue does raise interesting questions.

Why, contrary to what you might read in certain media, do relatively wealthy economic migrants pass through many EU countries, pay thousands if not tens of thousands to gangsters, to risk life and limb to try to get to Britain?

What do these relatively wealthy people find so unappealing about EU countries? What opportunities do they see for a better life in Britain that millions of Remainers apparently couldn?t see?

Interesting issue you raise Blah Blah

More than 4,000 have crossed Channel to UK in small boats this year

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/09/number-migrants-crossing-channel-uk-passes-4000-this-year

[TheCat]

It's not just these migrants taking a view on UK versus EU nations....apparently the heads of some mult-national business's too....

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/mainland-europe-is-finally-coming-to-terms-with-brexit

I expect it probably becuase they're all just ill-informed though....

[malumbu]

I understand that Britain has often been seen to be a great country by others around the world. Would fit in to some of the little England views across our nation (obviously not wanting mass immigration). 100 odd years ago Churchill (as a Liberal was among most politicians in that we didn't need immigration control as we were the best place in the world and it was only right that we should let people in who wanted to be part of this. Of course many would have been wealthy professionals.

I think in more recent years Germany became more favoured due to open door policy but now that has changed perhaps we are #1 again.

May be talking out of my backside but I picked that up from various documentaries.

[diable rouge]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What do these relatively wealthy people find so

> unappealing about EU countries?

The number of asylum applications received by European countries in 2019:

Germany: 165,615

France: 128,940

Spain: 117,795

Greece: 77,275

UK: 44,835

[keano77]

diable rouge Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> keano77 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > What do these relatively wealthy people find so

> > unappealing about EU countries?

>

> The number of asylum applications received by

> European countries in 2019:

>

> Germany: 165,615

> France: 128,940

> Spain: 117,795

> Greece: 77,275

> UK: 44,835

Statistics, statistics. No breakdown on your pasted figures between genuine humanitarian asylum seekers v economic migrants.

A cynic might say:

Germany stops accepting refugees over coronavirus

The EU has taken drastic action to attempt to slow the spread of COVID-19, effectively shutting borders to non-citizens. Germany will stop taking in refugees, including thousands stranded at the Turkish-Greek border.

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-stops-accepting-refugees-over-coronavirus/a-52826716

Bugger all to do with Covid. One of Merkel?s biggest mistakes politically (although I sympathise with her humanitarian gesture)

France - your fail to mention 85,750 were rejected by France. France will help stem the flow to Britain for ?30 million

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/08/08/french-ask-30m-police-channel/

Need I go on?

[Blah Blah]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Does it comfort you to pretend that 'many' people

> who made a different choice to you are truly that

> stupid?

Not it doesn't comfort me at all. Ignorance always leads to poor choices and poor choices have consequences.

[Blah Blah]

To answer your question Keano, asylum seekers settle in many countries and the UK is not as badly affected as many other EU countries either. Some facts on asylum seekers here.

https://fullfact.org/immigration/why-do-migrants-and-asylum-seekers-want-come-uk/

[keano77]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TheCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Does it comfort you to pretend that 'many'

> people

> > who made a different choice to you are truly

> that

> > stupid?

>

> Not it doesn't comfort me at all. Ignorance always

> leads to poor choices and poor choices have

> consequences.

Ignorance can be a slippery concept. What is regarded as knowledge in a particular era can be shown to be incorrect as knowledge develops. The atom was supposed to be indivisible, the earth flat, the Universe comprised the Milky Way and so on.

Some people might argue that poor choices made by successive British governments allowing us (The UK) to be ensnared in an EU spider?s web, the consequences of which we are still trying to extricate ourselves from. Were those politicians (and Remainers) ignorant?

[keano77]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> To answer your question Keano, asylum seekers

> settle in many countries and the UK is not as

> badly affected as many other EU countries either.

> Some facts on asylum seekers here.

>

> https://fullfact.org/immigration/why-do-migrants-a

> nd-asylum-seekers-want-come-uk/

Again Blah Blah, like Red Devil, you haven?t defined your terms. ?Asylum seekers? covers a multitude of Reasons (and excuses)- fleeing wars/famine, ethnic cleansing, sexual orientation discrimination etc etc.

The boat people you referred to are economic migrants who probably have more money in their pockets than you or I.

[Blah Blah]

No Keano, asylum seeker means a person who asks for the right to remain on asylum terms. That is what 'seeker' means. This is very easily measured. Whether or not those asylum applications are successful or not, is a different matter.

And since when did a person's means define their need for asylum? A person fleeing torture can be either wealthy or poor. As for the migrants arriving daily, I have no idea if they are genuine refugees or not. Nor do you. So it is best to not pretend to know eh? Leave it to those whose job it actually is to determine who is genuine and who is not. FYI, around half of all applications are successful.

On ignorance, there ARE absolutes. The law as it stands is an absolute. Most leave voters do not have the first understanding of any aspect of EU law, hence their inability often to cite a single piece of legislation that negatively impacts them.

[pk]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blah Blah Wrote:

>

> Ignorance can be a slippery concept. What is

> regarded as knowledge in a particular era can be

> shown to be incorrect as knowledge develops. The

> atom was supposed to be indivisible, the earth

> flat, the Universe comprised the Milky Way and so

> on.

>

sounds like the argument of someone without much of an argument

[Sephiroth]

"The boat people you referred to are economic migrants who probably have more money in their pockets than you or I."

am I missing something? why is this remotely relevant. If you are on a dinghy, risking life and limb (and rejection) to get to a country surely you can accept there are bigger issues in their life?

Why are they coming here? Because they may have family here? - because they can speak English and not German or French?

And why does it bother you SO MUCH?

[nxjen]

"The boat people you referred to are economic migrants who probably have more money in their pockets than you or I."

In that case why are they trying to come to the UK when it would be in their interests to stay in the country where they were financially successful?

[KidKruger]

Having some cash and a bit of jewellery stuck in their pocket doesn't mean anything like they were financially successful in their home country, it only means they have some cash and a bit of jewellery stuck in their pocket.

Anybody who wants to speculate on how the person has the property in their pocket has an agenda.

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "The boat people you referred to are economic

> migrants who probably have more money in their

> pockets than you or I."

>

> In that case why are they trying to come to the UK

> when it would be in their interests to stay in the

> country where they were financially successful?

[Sephiroth]

In history - let's say 20th century - is there any record of people who were not penniless themselves, fleeing across the world? Including Britain? And how were they treated then?

oh...