ChatterBank4 mins ago
Brexit
Can someone explain to me how, without Customs Posts or Passport Controls, you can have a
"soft" border between Ireland(in the EU) and Northern Ireland(outside the EU)? Would this not require both parties to accept free movement of people and membership of the customs union?
Many politicians state a "soft border" as their objective but none explain how.
"soft" border between Ireland(in the EU) and Northern Ireland(outside the EU)? Would this not require both parties to accept free movement of people and membership of the customs union?
Many politicians state a "soft border" as their objective but none explain how.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by rich47. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Eddie, have you ever taken notice the amount of HGV's that come into the UK, Dover along handles 100s per day, Hull, and many other ports, not one HGV pay a penny towards the damage to UK roads "WHY" there is often out cries from the loony brigade regards UK HGVs & the damage they cause, there was talk about charging them, I've yet to see this happen, regards the EU / Brexit, can you honestly believe these company's that bring their good to the UK from all corners of the world saying, sod the UK? I doubt it very much, this Government are scaremongering & nothing else, I do know one thing, thay have not got a fecking clue what they are doing.
TWR
Will we still have the same buying power from countries outside the EU? Those lorries you mention are one thing, but what about the container ships docking all over out ports from countries outside the EU, which we have favourable trading contracts with, because we were part of a massive trading bloc?
One of the accountants in our company explained it like this - Sainsbury's can sell groceries at knock down prices because it can buy in huge bulk, which gives it a trading advantage over suppliers.
Your local independent shop doesn't have the same buying power, which is why groceries are more expensive there.
Aren't we going to be closer to the latter than the former?
Will we still have the same buying power from countries outside the EU? Those lorries you mention are one thing, but what about the container ships docking all over out ports from countries outside the EU, which we have favourable trading contracts with, because we were part of a massive trading bloc?
One of the accountants in our company explained it like this - Sainsbury's can sell groceries at knock down prices because it can buy in huge bulk, which gives it a trading advantage over suppliers.
Your local independent shop doesn't have the same buying power, which is why groceries are more expensive there.
Aren't we going to be closer to the latter than the former?
It's not the whole story, though, SP. There are in some cases massive tariffs imposed on imports from countries outside the "free market". And one of the reasons I voted against first time round.
People of my age will remember the massive hike in the cost of imports of previously cheap food from the EFTA countries(bacon, dairy products etc from countries like Denmark), the Commonwealth (sugar from the Caribbean, lamb from New Zealand etc).
Everybody in Britain saw food prices soar as a direct result of entering the Common Market (as it was then). Oh, and we shafted lots of our friends at the same time (see above).
People of my age will remember the massive hike in the cost of imports of previously cheap food from the EFTA countries(bacon, dairy products etc from countries like Denmark), the Commonwealth (sugar from the Caribbean, lamb from New Zealand etc).
Everybody in Britain saw food prices soar as a direct result of entering the Common Market (as it was then). Oh, and we shafted lots of our friends at the same time (see above).
I saw a list of some of the current tariffs in the Spectator some while ago. See if I can find it. Can't find a simple list with a quick Google.
Meanwhile, if we can get rid of the EU yoke, like out of the Customs Union, we will be able to buy some goods at world prices that are cheaper than EU ones.
These arguments were developed by the economists who were were anti-EU (yes, there are some), most notably Professor Minford who campaigned actively for Leave.
PS: I make no claim to economic competence or judgment. I voted Leave for other reasons.
Meanwhile, if we can get rid of the EU yoke, like out of the Customs Union, we will be able to buy some goods at world prices that are cheaper than EU ones.
These arguments were developed by the economists who were were anti-EU (yes, there are some), most notably Professor Minford who campaigned actively for Leave.
PS: I make no claim to economic competence or judgment. I voted Leave for other reasons.
"...but what about the container ships docking all over out ports from countries outside the EU, which we have favourable trading contracts with, because we were part of a massive trading bloc?"
Leaving aside financial services (which are slightly different but for which, incidentally, there is no Single Market) the goods that arrive in the UK from outside the EU are for consumption or use in the UK. Traders from abroad do not transport their goods to the UK if they are to be consumed in other EU countries. They trade with is in such goods because we are the UK, not because we are part of the EU.
As far as food imports go, because of the restrictive and protectionist policies pursued by the EU, food imported from outside the Union is far more expensive than it needs to be. This is because the EU imposes hefty tariffs on imports where alternatives from within the EU are available (and in some cases on goods that are not available from Europe). It is quite correct what v_e says and I too recall the hefty increases on foods which we previously bought from outside the EU.
But as I keep saying, Brexit is about more than just a few pence on a leg of lamb.
Leaving aside financial services (which are slightly different but for which, incidentally, there is no Single Market) the goods that arrive in the UK from outside the EU are for consumption or use in the UK. Traders from abroad do not transport their goods to the UK if they are to be consumed in other EU countries. They trade with is in such goods because we are the UK, not because we are part of the EU.
As far as food imports go, because of the restrictive and protectionist policies pursued by the EU, food imported from outside the Union is far more expensive than it needs to be. This is because the EU imposes hefty tariffs on imports where alternatives from within the EU are available (and in some cases on goods that are not available from Europe). It is quite correct what v_e says and I too recall the hefty increases on foods which we previously bought from outside the EU.
But as I keep saying, Brexit is about more than just a few pence on a leg of lamb.
This an excerpt (with stress added by VE) from this document:
https:/
"2) Agriculture
Although barriers to trade between Member States have been removed, agriculture is probably the most protected sector in the European Union interms of external barriers, through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
The costs of protectionism in this sector are possibly the most damaging to economic welfare and provide a good illustration of why the UK should remain a force for more outward-looking reforms in the EU.
At the broadest level, it is estimated that the CAP costs EU citizens roughly €100 billion a year: €50 billion to consumers through higher food prices and €50 billion to the taxpayer. The UK, as a net food importer, suffers particularly from higher food prices, impacting both on the consumer and on the food processing industry, which accounts for around 7% of GDP [Philippidis?]. Minford et al (2005) estimated that the CAP costs the UK 0.5% of GDP, and in economic and budgetary terms is probably the most costly factor of EU
membership.
These costs arise in a number of different ways, and have different effects.
The most significant economic distortion occurs through market price support, in the form of border protection (tariffs and import quotas), keeping cheap imports out and permitting artificially high prices12. The results are manifold: welfare losses to consumers who pay a high cost through higher prices, resources diverted to agriculture from more productive sectors of the economy, and losses to third country producers through lack of access to markets and depressed (and volatile) prices.
The second element of protection arises through budgetary transfers (of the order of €30 billion) in the form of direct payments to farmers. Having said this, in June 2003 and April 2004, the EU agreed reforms to break the link between production and receipt of payments for many important products, albeit with some scope for a continuation of the status quo.
Surplus produce is subsidised (the third element) and „dumped‟ on third markets."
https:/
"2) Agriculture
Although barriers to trade between Member States have been removed, agriculture is probably the most protected sector in the European Union interms of external barriers, through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
The costs of protectionism in this sector are possibly the most damaging to economic welfare and provide a good illustration of why the UK should remain a force for more outward-looking reforms in the EU.
At the broadest level, it is estimated that the CAP costs EU citizens roughly €100 billion a year: €50 billion to consumers through higher food prices and €50 billion to the taxpayer. The UK, as a net food importer, suffers particularly from higher food prices, impacting both on the consumer and on the food processing industry, which accounts for around 7% of GDP [Philippidis?]. Minford et al (2005) estimated that the CAP costs the UK 0.5% of GDP, and in economic and budgetary terms is probably the most costly factor of EU
membership.
These costs arise in a number of different ways, and have different effects.
The most significant economic distortion occurs through market price support, in the form of border protection (tariffs and import quotas), keeping cheap imports out and permitting artificially high prices12. The results are manifold: welfare losses to consumers who pay a high cost through higher prices, resources diverted to agriculture from more productive sectors of the economy, and losses to third country producers through lack of access to markets and depressed (and volatile) prices.
The second element of protection arises through budgetary transfers (of the order of €30 billion) in the form of direct payments to farmers. Having said this, in June 2003 and April 2004, the EU agreed reforms to break the link between production and receipt of payments for many important products, albeit with some scope for a continuation of the status quo.
Surplus produce is subsidised (the third element) and „dumped‟ on third markets."
"....so in effect, we should be going for a hard Brexit?"
Absolutely, sp. I have never advocated anything else. In fact I have never believed that anything else is “Brexit”. Many dozens of countries have "access" to the European Single Market without paying a penny for the privilege other than the standard tariffs where appropriate. They certainly do not have their integrity compromised in the way that the UK will if the concessions which are sure to be demanded by the EU are agreed to. More than that, at no time has the UK government raised the issue of reciprocal payments by the EU for access to the UK’s market. Bearing in mind that the EU sells to the UK far more than the UK buys from Europe this is an important omission.
Trying to secure a “deal” is not in the UK’s interests. Nothing the EU agrees to will be anything other than of a benefit to the EU. Quite frankly the conduct of the UK’s team has been nothing short of a disgrace. Despite reports of compromises on the three issues discussed so far, the EU has made just one concession (on the matter of the ECJ’s jurisdiction over EU citizens’ rights). Everything else they have demanded they have got. This is no way to conduct negotiations between supposed friends and partners and we must bear in mind that these discussions took part under the duress imposed by our “European Friends” where they refused point blank to move forward until those three issues have been resolved to their satisfaction.
There is no doubt in my mind (and there never has been) that the EU will agree to nothing less than total capitulation to their demands. If we are not careful our reckless and spineless politicians will commit us to paying huge sums for something far worse than we have now and enormous concessions will be needed even to achieve that.
Absolutely, sp. I have never advocated anything else. In fact I have never believed that anything else is “Brexit”. Many dozens of countries have "access" to the European Single Market without paying a penny for the privilege other than the standard tariffs where appropriate. They certainly do not have their integrity compromised in the way that the UK will if the concessions which are sure to be demanded by the EU are agreed to. More than that, at no time has the UK government raised the issue of reciprocal payments by the EU for access to the UK’s market. Bearing in mind that the EU sells to the UK far more than the UK buys from Europe this is an important omission.
Trying to secure a “deal” is not in the UK’s interests. Nothing the EU agrees to will be anything other than of a benefit to the EU. Quite frankly the conduct of the UK’s team has been nothing short of a disgrace. Despite reports of compromises on the three issues discussed so far, the EU has made just one concession (on the matter of the ECJ’s jurisdiction over EU citizens’ rights). Everything else they have demanded they have got. This is no way to conduct negotiations between supposed friends and partners and we must bear in mind that these discussions took part under the duress imposed by our “European Friends” where they refused point blank to move forward until those three issues have been resolved to their satisfaction.
There is no doubt in my mind (and there never has been) that the EU will agree to nothing less than total capitulation to their demands. If we are not careful our reckless and spineless politicians will commit us to paying huge sums for something far worse than we have now and enormous concessions will be needed even to achieve that.
Latest Posts
Other Sports5 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
Am I Right To Be Feeling This Way?
Family Life15 mins ago
Technology28 mins ago
