Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%

  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%
  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tubey said:
The table at the 6:12 mark is fascinating isn't it - people genuinely didn't have a clue what they were voting for, yet were bound by the stupidity of it all anyway due to an inept ruling Tory party and PM.
Click to expand...

I certainly didnt have a clue what Leaving meant in the wider context. One of the reasons I voted to stay.
 
peteblue said:
Did you have a clue what Staying meant in the wider context......
Click to expand...
Yes, as we sort of errrmm have that now, we therefore know what it looks like.

It’s a barrel scraping angle that I’ve heard Brexiteers resort to before, as now you try and make out things that we’d have never agreed to and vetoed would or could have happened. Project Fear eh.....
 
Foot Long Hot Dog said:
Yes, as we sort of errrmm have that now, we therefore know what it looks like.

It’s a barrel scraping angle that I’ve heard Brexiteers resort to before, as now you try and make out things that we’d have never agreed to and vetoed would or could have happened. Project Fear eh.....
Click to expand...

I’m pretty sure, I asked that question to Roydo.......
 
Dymak said:
Fair enough, I accept that the official position of the UK is fragmented at the moment. However, only the most idiotic of leavers or remainers would turn that down, and it's that type of trade agreement that represents a reasonable option for both parties.

After the melodrama finally comes to an end, I expect the EU and the UK to see sense and agree a similar deal to CETA. Both parties win. Britain regains its sovereignty.
Click to expand...

But CETA isn't possible without border checks - something the UK government has said it won't do in Northern Ireland?

Also the CETA includes a ‘most favoured nation’ (MFN) clause in chapter 8 on investment, as well as chapter 9 on cross-border provision of services and chapter 13 on financial services.

This means that any offer the EU makes to the UK that is better, in terms of market access, than what the EU has granted to Canada, must automatically be extended to Canada.

Other EU FTAs also include MFN clauses.

So if the CETA model were followed, it would also mean that for the chapters covered, any better access granted by the UK to a third country would also be automatically extended to the EU.

In other words the inclusion of MFN clauses in chapters of FTAs already negotiated by the EU reduces the willingness of the EU to make concessions to the UK.

On the flip side an EU–UK FTA based on CETA would also effectively limit the UK’s options in trade policy, because it would restrict what it could offer, for example to the US or Australia in an FTA.
 
Charlie Sweet said:
But CETA isn't possible without border checks - something the UK government has said it won't do in Northern Ireland?

Also the CETA includes a ‘most favoured nation’ (MFN) clause in chapter 8 on investment, as well as chapter 9 on cross-border provision of services and chapter 13 on financial services.

This means that any offer the EU makes to the UK that is better, in terms of market access, than what the EU has granted to Canada, must automatically be extended to Canada.

Other EU FTAs also include MFN clauses.

So if the CETA model were followed, it would also mean that for the chapters covered, any better access granted by the UK to a third country would also be automatically extended to the EU.

In other words the inclusion of MFN clauses in chapters of FTAs already negotiated by the EU reduces the willingness of the EU to make concessions to the UK.

On the flip side an EU–UK FTA based on CETA would also effectively limit the UK’s options in trade policy, because it would restrict what it could offer, for example to the US or Australia in an FTA.
Click to expand...

It’s complicated isn't it. Maybe we should just leave with no deal and go with WTO.......
 
Foot Long Hot Dog said:
Yes, as we sort of errrmm have that now, we therefore know what it looks like.

It’s a barrel scraping angle that I’ve heard Brexiteers resort to before, as now you try and make out things that we’d have never agreed to and vetoed would or could have happened. Project Fear eh.....
Click to expand...

We don’t have that now, and we didn’t have it in 2016, because the EU is still evolving. Remember all the denials about the possibility of an EU Army. You seem to believe that our ‘veto’ would have saved the day, which is fair enough, but what about when they go to majority vote, which they are moving toward. The EU that exists today is not the Common Market that I voted to join. They just do it in little steps.....
 
peteblue said:
We don’t have that now, and we didn’t have it in 2016, because the EU is still evolving. Remember all the denials about the possibility of an EU Army. You seem to believe that our ‘veto’ would have saved the day, which is fair enough, but what about when they go to majority vote, which they are moving toward. The EU that exists today is not the Common Market that I voted to join. They just do it in little steps.....
Click to expand...

Name a major decision made by the EU that the U.K. objected to during its entire period of membership and had it foisted upon it?

In your own time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top