If we vote for Brexit what happens

angrypirate

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I've just come across something rather interesting on this point about existing deals and future deals.

"Speaking at the G7 summit in Japan on Monday, Mr Osborne said: “If we left the EU, we would have a two-year period to negotiate our exit with 27 other countries.

“We would then have to negotiate new arrangements with them and at the same time conclude over 50 trade deals with countries that aren’t even in Europe. That would be extremely difficult to do.”

This was echoed by a Remain spokesman, who said: “The legal position is clear. We’d have to start from scratch, which would take years if not decades, meaning ongoing uncertainty for trade, investment, jobs and livelihoods.”

But this was rejected by the report’s author Martin Howe QC, one of Britain’s leading EU experts, who yesterday confirmed that, far from having to abandon the deals, “Britain would have existing trade deals in place” from the first day after Brexit.

The report says: “Both the EU and the member states are parties to the free trade agreement with the Republic of Korea, concluded in 2011.

“There would be no difficulty in the UK continuing to comply with the obligations of this FTA after Brexit and Korea on a reciprocal basis would have no difficulty continuing to apply these substantive provisions both to the UK and the EU. This step would not require any renegotiation.”

Mr Howe added that there was already a legal precedent for this.

He said: “It was applied when Czechoslovakia became the Czech Republic and Slovakia. That’s a much more extreme example than Brexit. Those people who are saying it is not true are buying into their own mythology without checking legal facts.”

Mr Littlewood added: “What this document asserts is that everything we could need would still be in place on June 24. It is not a reboot on your computer with all the software missing. All the apps will be there.

"This is very important and it needs to be perfectly communicated to the wider electorate.

"The nature of the referendum campaign is in my view a decider by the Remain campaign that there will be total uncertainty, and that we will be leaping into a void if we vote to leave.

“This report clearly and cogently establishes that the opposite is the case. Thanks to our international arrangement with groups other than the EU we would have everything we could wish for in the event of Brexit, and could negotiate from there.

“This could have a decisive impact on how people who are understandably nervous and confused will finally cast their vote on June 23.”"

The very author of the report used by Osborne said he mis-represented the report and actually the opposite is true and that the UK would continue to benefit from free trade arrangements around the world. I'm regretting voting Conservative, even though they gave us the chance to make the choice on the EU.

Edit: Article here

Lets put this in perspective
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_free_trade_agreements

The biggest countries that have signed free trade agreements in force are Switzerland, Norway and South Korea. Other countries include Turkey, South Africa, Mexico, Iceland and Chile.

Big economies who dont have signed free trade agreements in force include Japan, US, Canada, India, China, Australia and New Zealand. Based on the fact we dont have free trade agreements in force with these countries now (who we do most of our business with anyway), what makes you and the rest of the Bremainers think it'll be such an issue trading with them in the event of a Brexit?

[Deleted User]

tommysaver wrote: »

Haha, agreed! I must admit, from everything I'm reading, everyone I'm speaking to, all the comments on the BBC, Telegraph, Dailymail, Facebook, at work, it's a resounding OUT. I'm genuinely feeling to lump some on at current odds of 3.75 to 1.

Cheers, Tom

Its all very well saying that.., but there's 20 odd days to go yet (long time for political opinion) and the polls are only showing a slight change in results.

Personally, whatever the immediate negative effect (but with the to me important long term benefits like control over what happens in this country) I can't understand why the No vote isn't showing a strong lead.

I'm not so confident..., I wish I was.

TrickyTree83

angrypirate wrote: »

Lets put this in perspective
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_free_trade_agreements

The biggest countries that have signed free trade agreements in force are Switzerland, Norway and South Korea. Other countries include Turkey, South Africa, Mexico, Iceland and Chile.

Big economies who dont have signed free trade agreements in force include Japan, US, Canada, India, China, Australia and New Zealand. Based on the fact we dont have free trade agreements in force with these countries now (who we do most of our business with anyway), what makes you and the rest of the Bremainers think it'll be such an issue trading with them in the event of a Brexit?

I think you have misunderstood.

I absolutely agree that trade is not dependent on trade deals. Business goes where business wants ultimately.

However for those who worry that we would have no trade deals at all I thought it was good to point out that Mr Osborne has been caught lying and someone has gone on record (the author of the report Osborne used to back up his claims no less) telling us that is such, what the reality of the situation is (in a legal sense too!) and how important it is to the vote and yet we hear very little about it from government.

michaels

gfplux wrote: »

Why do you think that. Amazon et al avoiding VAT and Corporation Tax has NOTHING to do with Britain being in or out.

Please read: VAT, Amazon sell everything to the UK from Luxembourg because it has a lower VAT rate (15%). With Brexit obviously that would not happen any more - Amazon would charge 5% more and thus compete on a level playing field with uk sellers and UK would pocket the 20% VAT.

Immediately conflating a different issue when confronted by an uncomfortable fact - do you work for the stay campaign?

michaels

deannatrois wrote: »

Its all very well saying that.., but there's 20 odd days to go yet (long time for political opinion) and the polls are only showing a slight change in results.

Personally, whatever the immediate negative effect (but with the to me important long term benefits like control over what happens in this country) I can't understand why the No vote isn't showing a strong lead.

I'm not so confident..., I wish I was.

Looking at scotland polls were about 50 no, 45 yes, 5 dk and final result ws 55% stay, 45% leave - ie dks all went for status quo. Turn out was extremely high but perhaps both sides were motivated so may be no direct read across to brexit?

My theory on the GE is that Tory voters were scared of labour and voted where as labour voters were unenthused and didn't. This would transalate into will 'vaguely stayers' decide to vote because they are frightened enough? No wonder the stay campaign are painting brexit as economic armageddon rather than noticibly but marginally worse off.

TrickyTree83

michaels wrote: »

Looking at scotland polls were about 50 no, 45 yes, 5 dk and final result ws 55% stay, 45% leave - ie dks all went for status quo. Turn out was extremely high but perhaps both sides were motivated so may be no direct read across to brexit?

My theory on the GE is that Tory voters were scared of labour and voted where as labour voters were unenthused and didn't. This would transalate into will 'vaguely stayers' decide to vote because they are frightened enough? No wonder the stay campaign are painting brexit as economic armageddon rather than noticibly but marginally worse off.

I'd recommend every voter watch as many debates as you can.

This one is a particular favourite of mine: Spectator Debate

For me the Remain politicians don't have any answers, they are negative about Britain, positive about the EU but have no rebuttal to the negatives proposed by the Leave side. They seem to spout bluff and bluster with no real substance to what they're saying.

I would say Farage came across badly, taking part in the debate in the gutters compared to Hannan and Hoey. Umuna was the best for the Remain side, I felt he was honest about the situation in parts and then imparted his beliefs in a sensible way and I thought Clegg and Kendall were a complete disaster. Exactly the type of politicians we don't want to have in the House of Commons. Question dodgers and truth benders.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

Looking at scotland polls were about 50 no, 45 yes, 5 dk and final result ws 55% stay, 45% leave - ie dks all went for status quo. Turn out was extremely high but perhaps both sides were motivated so may be no direct read across to brexit?

My theory on the GE is that Tory voters were scared of labour and voted where as labour voters were unenthused and didn't. This would transalate into will 'vaguely stayers' decide to vote because they are frightened enough? No wonder the stay campaign are painting brexit as economic armageddon rather than noticibly but marginally worse off.

People vote for the status quo. I read somewhere at the start of the Brexit campaign that to secure victory they'd need something in the region of a 10 point lead going into the final days. I'm not convinced that the polls are reliable but I'd be surprised that they would be showing a lead for Remainiacs on average if the reality was that Brexit was storming it.

By definition a Leave vote involves change and people don't like change as a rule. The best bet for the Brexitiers is probably to point out that remaining in the EU means change. Unfortunately Mr C can point to the opt out on 'ever closer union' for plausible deniability.

We'll see the result soon enough.

wotsthat

I'm less than convinced at polls showing a swing one way or the other. No side has come up with a killer argument or made a terminal mistake.

The vote should have happened weeks ago. I'd suggest >99% of people will be voting as they thought they would when the vote was first announced.

TrickyTree83

Something else to chew the cud over, and probably a topic which hasn't gotten enough air time or discussion in the run up to the vote.

The UK's Liability to EU Financial Mechanisms

Apparently (I hope it's not the case) there is no veto on this, if the invoice lands on the desk in Number 10, we have to pay it. The scary part is Italy, a massive economy compared to Greece could well go under (insolvent banking sector, terrible debt:GDP ratio) and we'd be on the hook for hundreds of billions of pounds.

This is a shocking statement in the article for me:

"A Member State’s guarantee of the European Union’s debts is joint and several, so if 26 Member States fail, the 27th pays everything." So those that can pay to bail out failing countries - do! Being tied to a failing Eurozone (not EU!) in which there's a risk associated to the following countries:

- Ireland
- Spain
- Portugal
- Italy
- Greece

Apparently Dave has negotiated that we'll be insulated from this (please correct me if I'm wrong on this), if that's true then it's a fantastic part of the negotiation if the general public vote to remain. Of course that is assuming the negotiation is ratified once it's put to the relevant EU institutions after a remain vote.

If we are not insulated from this then voting to remain for me is the leap in the dark. Outside the EU we won't have to bail out Eurozone countries but would still be affected by the instability in the Eurozone. Inside the EU not only will we be exposed to the instability and reduced spending power after the bail outs but we'll have to stump up massive amounts of cash.

Generali

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Something else to chew the cud over, and probably a topic which hasn't gotten enough air time or discussion in the run up to the vote.

The UK's Liability to EU Financial Mechanisms

Apparently (I hope it's not the case) there is no veto on this, if the invoice lands on the desk in Number 10, we have to pay it. The scary part is Italy, a massive economy compared to Greece could well go under (insolvent banking sector, terrible debt:GDP ratio) and we'd be on the hook for hundreds of billions of pounds.

I got through 3 pages of it before dismissing it as twaddle. For example, why would an equity holder in an entity have any liability? This is hardly produced by a disinterested party.

And if as an equity holder in the ECB the BoE did have a liability, why would that dissolve on quitting the EU? My UK pension investments in Mercedes and Carrefour aren't just going to disappear because the UK leaves the EU, why would the BoE's share holdings?