If we vote for Brexit what happens

cells

antrobus wrote: »

Going to? Redcar closed in October. It hasn't been doing anything for almost six months. And yes, most of it's $1.5 billion worth of sales did go to Asia (about $1.3 billion), but then it was importing all the iron ore anyway, and making a cracking loss turning it into slab steel, so I would not have though that it's disappearance has made that much of an impact on the balance of payments.

$1.5 billion is really a drop in the ocean of total UK exports.

I used to work there for a short period many many moons ago

iirc sales were about $500 a ton while raw materials were closer to $250 a ton and quantity was about 3 million tons a year

So about $1.5 billion export, $0.75 billion imports the difference of which went to the trade balance. $750 million is not insignificant its quite important imo

Actually thinking about it, it was higher as some of the coke used in the furnace was local. Maltby coal was used iirc which was dug up in Yorkshire and perhaps other blends

cells

antrobus wrote: »

$1.5 billion is really a drop in the ocean of total UK exports.

not really, whats the biggest export? Cars? @ $30B a year?
So its 5% of the biggest export, im sure a 5% upswing in the biggest export wouldnt be considered a drop in an ocean. More like a couple of drops in a shot glass

CLAPTON

mayonnaise wrote: »

Amazing, how our non-EU trade has flourished while being inside the EU.

important to remember
that if UK exports to non EU countries increases then that's a reason to stay in the EU
if the UK exports to non EU countries stay constant then that a reason to stay in the EU
if the exports to non EU countries then that's a reason to stay in the EU

the above is obviously based on unbiased detailed PWC economic reasoning

Rinoa

mayonnaise wrote: »

Amazing, how our non-EU trade has flourished while being inside the EU.

Countries buy stuff because it's good value, not because it's made in Europe.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Rinoa wrote: »

Countries buy stuff because it's good value, not because it's made in Europe.

And often because the EU has negotiated advantageous access deals to those markets as a result of reciprocal access to a population of 550m...

Like it or not market size matters in negotiating trade deals.

An iScotland would not get as good a deal as the UK in many cases, and the UK will not get as good a deal as the EU in many cases, for all the same reasons.

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And often because the EU has negotiated advantageous access deals to those markets as a result of reciprocal access to a population of 550m...

Like it or not market size matters in negotiating trade deals.

An iScotland would not get as good a deal as the UK in many cases, and the UK will not get as good a deal as the EU in many cases, for all the same reasons.

do you have specific examples where the EU has fantastic good deals and Australia has very poor ones
I guess it should be the majority of trade deals really given Aus puny population

Rinoa

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The United States is our second biggest export market outside the EU and has stated repeatedly they have no intention of offering us a separate free trade deal outside of the Europe one currently being passed.

Well, we haven't got one now. And we sell more services to the US than anywhere else.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And even from the ones that might, it stretches the bounds of credulity to think we'd get better terms as a market of 60m people than the EU can get as a market of 550m people.

Not so sure the EU has many free trade deals so far. Certainly not with the US, not with Russia, nor China, India, Japan etc. The EU, for all their supposed bargaining power, have very few trade deals because different EU countries can't agree terms over what should be offered.

chewmylegoff

BobQ wrote: »

I agree that the UK cannot repeal an EU Regulation but it can legislate that it cannot be enforced in the UK. The EU members would then need to take action under international law. In practice it would be a right mess but could be done.

No, the EU members would not need to take action under "international law", the EU commission would be able to take action against us under EU law in the European Court of Justice and we would obviously lose and get fined. There wouldn't be a "right mess" there is a clear legal pathway and it has happened before eg. The UK's failure to comply with the EU directive re air pollution.

I suppose we could refuse to pay the fine in such a case but there would presumably be consequences.

HornetSaver

CLAPTON wrote: »

do you have specific examples where the EU has fantastic good deals and Australia has very poor ones
I guess it should be the majority of trade deals really given Aus puny population

Fruit, vegetables and books.

HornetSaver

chewmylegoff wrote: »

I suppose we could refuse to pay the fine in such a case but there would presumably be consequences.

When the French are unhappy with something the UK does they bring in an obscure nanny-state type law (for instance quietly bringing in a new car-related regulation, or making Red Bull illegal), and base 80% of nationwide enforcement resources in the pas-de-Calais area.