If we vote for Brexit what happens

Thrugelmir

Arklight wrote: »

And there's another two years of this. By the time we actually leave German removal vans will be packing up the Crown Jewels and emptying the stately homes of the nation...

Most are already privately owned by overseas investors or handed to the National Trust etc to avoid tax liabilities.

BobQ

mrginge wrote: »

Can you name those that want no deal?

Can you name those that actually want a deal?

But to answer your question, lets start with Jacob Rees Mogg, John Wittingdale Michael Gove,Teresa Villiers, David Davis, Boris Johnson and Liam Fox.

BobQ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

No longer have to adhere to the minimum standard rate of 15% as set by EU Directives. VAT is one area where equalisation could easily be implemented across EU states.

True but unless we change back to a different kind of purchase tax we can still trade on a compatible basis in terms of VAT. Not suggesting we could not do this with a different system (as we do with other countries) but it should make it easier with VAT if we are looking to have a transitional arrangement.

Herzlos

kabayiri wrote: »

On a (slight) side note.

Tim Farron on the radio today reckons that we could just abandon A50 at any time and go back into the EU, as though nothing had happened.

A few EU people, as well as the guy that wrote A50 have said it's reversable. Things will be sour, but we could still go back as if nothing happened.

Surely our hand is weakened now, if we were to remain? We would be assigned into the lower tier of this 2 speed Europe they are talking about.

Would you still be happy to be the 3rd biggest contributor and yet in the lower speed group?

I don't think that's whats meant by a 2-speed Europe. I think the idea is that you can either be in EU proper, or half-arsed. We'd get the same position and standing we would otherwise, but likely be the butt of Brexit jokes for a decade or 2.

kabayiri wrote: »

Well, of course, each company to their own.

I remember we looked at Polish resources, but there is such scale available now in China.

In a small radius, there were at least 16 different suppliers for the power regulators. That's just one component.

Then there's the price. Even with shipping it's just much cheaper to source from the East.

I still maintain there's a vast amount of choice out there.

China is likely always going to be cheaper than Poland, but there are other factors involved. You can get a huge order of tyres from Poland to any distribution hub or tyre fitter within maybe 3 days. You're probably looking at 3+ weeks for the same product from China. Which is fine if you can order enough in far enough in advance and store them somewhere, but pretty lousy if you need to order is as required.

davomcdave

kabayiri wrote: »

What is this problem with standards? Can someone give me concrete issues?

I'm familiar with implementing systems according to ISO standards.

So far, ISO has "21561 International Standards" (from their blurb).

This number will continue to grow, regardless of the EU/Brexit etc.

It's part of cooperative development now to publish common protocols and build to those.

Trade standards aren't the same as ISO standards.

For example if I want to sell a family car in Australia it needs to have a hook on the rear parcel shelf (a top tether strap) to which I can attach my child's car seat along with putting the seat belt across it. If I want to sell a family car in the EU it has to have ISOFIX. Non-ISO standards, like Australia's, are a form of protectionism and recognised as such.

The problem that many Brexit supporters don't seem to recognise is that if the UK is going to trade with the rest of the world it has to do so under a set of agreed standards. When it was part of the single market it was part of the largest single economy in the world and so the standards set by that group were pretty powerful and went a long way to setting standards for the world. In leaving the EU the UK has lost all power to influence those standards. Yes, the UK can set its own standards but if it sets different ones to the EU it is effectively cutting makers of that product off from being able to sell into the Single Market.

The power that the UK has outside the single market to make its own rules are largely illusory as with so much of this 'sovereignty' that Brexit supposedly recaptures.

cogito

davomcdave wrote: »

Trade standards aren't the same as ISO standards.

For example if I want to sell a family car in Australia it needs to have a hook on the rear parcel shelf (a top tether strap) to which I can attach my child's car seat along with putting the seat belt across it. If I want to sell a family car in the EU it has to have ISOFIX. Non-ISO standards, like Australia's, are a form of protectionism and recognised as such.

The problem that many Brexit supporters don't seem to recognise is that if the UK is going to trade with the rest of the world it has to do so under a set of agreed standards. When it was part of the single market it was part of the largest single economy in the world and so the standards set by that group were pretty powerful and went a long way to setting standards for the world. In leaving the EU the UK has lost all power to influence those standards. Yes, the UK can set its own standards but if it sets different ones to the EU it is effectively cutting makers of that product off from being able to sell into the Single Market.

The power that the UK has outside the single market to make its own rules are largely illusory as with so much of this 'sovereignty' that Brexit supposedly recaptures.

Nonsense. Since when did ISO have anything to do with the EU? It's an independent NGO based in Switzerland which sets standards designed to facilitate international trade. Why would the UK adopt a different set of standards? That makes no sense and sounds like more remainer scare mongering.

Herzlos

He didn't say that ISO was part of the EU. As the largest single market, it's got a reasonable amount of sway into how standards are formed, though (purely because of the number of EU members who are on the various standards committees).

Part of the benefits of Brexit, from what I can gather, was that we wouldn't need to follow so much EU red tape (mostly in terms of standards). Alas, most of that red tape will still need to be followed as it's either an international standard (ISO) or required to sell into the EU.

So whilst we could create and adhere to our own standards (part of our new found sovereignty), we probably won't. Of course, we can do the same sort of thing as India/China, where we build low quality stuff for local consumption and standard compliant stuff for export. But I'm not sure that's a win for anyone beyond the CEOs.

Conrad

davomcdave wrote: »

The power that the UK has outside the single market to make its own rules are largely illusory as with so much of this 'sovereignty' that Brexit supposedly recaptures.

We'll have our own full seat at global rule setting tables that hand rules down to Brussels.

Conrad

Herzlos wrote: »

Part of the benefits of Brexit, from what I can gather, was that we wouldn't need to follow so much EU red tape (mostly in terms of standards).

The point is that only those firms that wish to sell into the EU (a small minority) will have to abide by EU red tape.


But all those many often small firms that have nothing to do with the EU can be subject to British rules fit for the British market - as we slowly evolve our own rules. That's the point

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

...

So whilst we could create and adhere to our own standards (part of our new found sovereignty), we probably won't. Of course, we can do the same sort of thing as India/China, where we build low quality stuff for local consumption and standard compliant stuff for export. But I'm not sure that's a win for anyone beyond the CEOs.

We own 50+ of the core patents in Graphene. I'd say we are in a good place to influence standards in material science. This is nothing to do with being in/out of the EU.

Tim Berners Lee had a vision for the world wide web based on open standards. This has arguably had more global impact than any number of EU committees.

This doesn't mean to say we will be at the forefront. I expect the likes of China to take an increasing role in future. They now have the platform to do so. This will allow them to move further up the value chain.