If we vote for Brexit what happens

Kohoutek

Rinoa wrote: »

Single market overrated in the opinion of many

Not the CBI

Firms see five clear principles as key to economic success in future negotiations:

1. Retaining the ease of UK-EU trade that businesses gain from the Single Main

http://news.cbi.org.uk/news/5-key-principles-for-eu-negotiations/

Not the City

The UK is a global FRPS centre, and international trade and investment drive the UK’s pro le and performance. However, global markets offer untapped opportunities. To realise these in a post-Brexit scenario, we should:

• Maintain an effective UK/ EU relationship and sustain access to the single market for FRPS

https://www.thecityuk.com/assets/2016/Reports-PDF/UK-financial-and-related-professional-services-meeting-the-challenges-and-delivering-opportunities.pdf

Not the British Exporters Association

Services exports – from financial, insurance and legal services through to advertising, engineering, project management, media and the arts – have benefitted hugely from freedom of access across all territories of the EU and comprise a substantial proportion of our economy. It is essential to maintain access to EU markets, and without undue adverse entry conditions.

http://www.bexa.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/BExA-Manifesto-for-Exporters-Aug-2016.pdf

Not the Federation of Small Businesses

FSB members will want to see access to the Single Market retained, ensuring tariff free trading with a consumer base of over 500 million, business to business opportunities with 26 million businesses and a fair share of the £9 trillion in revenues earned by businesses across the EU. On third of our members export or import, with the vast majority doing so with other countries with the Single Market. Continued access is therefore vital for small firms in the UK

http://www.fsb.org.uk/docs/default-source/fsb-org-uk/letter-from-mike-cherry-fsb-chairman-to-rt-hon-oliver-letwin-mp.pdf?sfvrsn=0

CLAPTON

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

Both sides agree pre negotiation must be done before actually leaving. This can take many years hence delaying is sensible.
Cant sign the contracts but talking it through, drafting it up is probably best though things are always changing



UK has population growth and Japan has a demographic failure I would say. I dont think the two countries are comparable

http://seekingalpha.com/article/3956627-japanese-policy-failure-means-disaster-us
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-demographic-timebomb-crippling-japans-economy-12479

two years is sufficient : article 50 should be issued now.

AnotherJoe

CLAPTON wrote: »

triggering A50
-reduces general uncertainty
-it reduced the timescales when we can sign new deals with non EU countries and gives them certain dates
-we have no negotiating position until we trigger.
-it reduces EU grandstanding and means we move to meaning discussions

It doesn't reduce any uncertainty except the date, and leaves the UK exposed with fewer chances to be prepared when it happens and a huge amount of uncertainty about what the situation would be when we exit. Why not clear up as much of that as possible beforehand?
We absolutely do have a negotiating position. That's happening already, EU has started talking about phased exit for example despite all the bluster about no discussion or negotiations until 50 is triggered, that was guff by Juncker.
We can also get on discussing deals with non EU countries in parallel amd that will put us in a stronger position when we do trigger.
The reason for the grandstanding is that it's I their interest for us to trigger as it gives us less room for negotiation. Why on earth would we give up that bargaining chip until its the right time for us ?why help them screw us over ?

buglawton

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

Both sides agree pre negotiation must be done before actually leaving. This can take many years hence delaying is sensible.
Cant sign the contracts but talking it through, drafting it up is probably best though things are always changing

UK has population growth and Japan has a demographic failure I would say. I dont think the two countries are comparable

http://seekingalpha.com/article/3956627-japanese-policy-failure-means-disaster-us
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-demographic-timebomb-crippling-japans-economy-12479

Agree, UK and Japan are not directly comparable, hence my post was in reply to Hamish's where he was comparing the two countries ability to export services.

CLAPTON

AnotherJoe wrote: »

It doesn't reduce any uncertainty except the date, and leaves the UK exposed with fewer chances to be prepared when it happens and a huge amount of uncertainty about what the situation would be when we exit. Why not clear up as much of that as possible beforehand?
We absolutely do have a negotiating position. That's happening already, EU has started talking about phased exit for example despite all the bluster about no discussion or negotiations until 50 is triggered, that was guff by Juncker.
We can also get on discussing deals with non EU countries in parallel amd that will put us in a stronger position when we do trigger.
The reason for the grandstanding is that it's I their interest for us to trigger as it gives us less room for negotiation. Why on earth would we give up that bargaining chip until its the right time for us ?why help them screw us over ?

clearly we are ina better situation with the rest of the world if we dates are clear and unambiguous.

why do yu think our negotiating position with the EU is better the longer we leave it: how long do you want, an extra year, 2 years, 3 , 4 years?

gfplux

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Interesting article.

It touches on the challenge May will have in trying to achieve political legitimacy within the UK for any final deal to ensure it remains settled...

In order to settle this for the long term at the very least it will need a Parliamentary vote - and quite possible another referendum or General Election - and given 70% of MP's are anti-Brexit and more of the public want to stay in the Single Market than leave it this is not going to be easy for the govt.

There are many hoops to jump through, many problems to overcome but Britain is perfectly capable of getting out of the EU.
The sooner the better say many of the other 27 but Britain should try to stick to a timeline that is best for the UK.
However the uncertainty is a "killer"

gfplux

AnotherJoe wrote: »

It doesn't reduce any uncertainty except the date, and leaves the UK exposed with fewer chances to be prepared when it happens and a huge amount of uncertainty about what the situation would be when we exit. Why not clear up as much of that as possible beforehand?
We absolutely do have a negotiating position. That's happening already, EU has started talking about phased exit for example despite all the bluster about no discussion or negotiations until 50 is triggered, that was guff by Juncker.
We can also get on discussing deals with non EU countries in parallel amd that will put us in a stronger position when we do trigger.
The reason for the grandstanding is that it's I their interest for us to trigger as it gives us less room for negotiation. Why on earth would we give up that bargaining chip until its the right time for us ?why help them screw us over ?

You might not be aware but this is August. Anyone with any power in the EU is on a beach thinking of Lunch not Brexit.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

CLAPTON wrote: »

why do yu think our negotiating position with the EU is better the longer we leave it: how long do you want, an extra year, 2 years, 3 , 4 years?

Well for one thing we're just about to get into a European election cycle and the chances of getting a favourable deal are reduced if European politicians have to be seen to talk tough in order to please their domestic voters.

Latest polling data suggests voters in most key EU countries do not want to see the UK get any special treatment.

And then of course there's the election here in 2020. So there's no chance May will want to go into that in the middle of a recession brought on by leaving the Single Market in 2019.

Not to mention most MP's and Lords are against leaving anyway so getting a deal through Parliament here might be May's biggest challenge.... Actually scratch that, just getting a vote to proceed with Article 50 might be an equally big challenge.

Anyone who thought leaving was going to be quick or easy is badly mistaken.

AnotherJoe

CLAPTON wrote: »

clearly we are ina better situation with the rest of the world if we dates are clear and unambiguous.

why do yu think our negotiating position with the EU is better the longer we leave it: how long do you want, an extra year, 2 years, 3 , 4 years?

The objective isn't to leave it as long as possible but to leave it long enough to get a better idea through negotiation, of the scope of the shape of the likely outcome.

A rabid "just pull the trigger and get on with it" would leave far more uncertainty about what state the UKs trade agreements would be in, than a 6 month wait and then being able to announce we are pulling the trigger and can outline the whole likely timetable for new agreements, what will happen in the interim before those are fully agreed.

So there will be less uncertainty not more. And I'm only talking about a few months, after 40 years on this merry go round why fret about 6 months extra to get the UK in best shape to leave with minimised disruption and a smoother transition?

Unless you think May is just delaying for the heck of it, or you have paranoid it's all an excuse to not do it, perhaps she's come to the same conclusions, that's little bit of preparation before surgery is a good idea? You're like someone at a road accident shouting "operate NOW" :eek:

CLAPTON

AnotherJoe wrote: »

The objective isn't to leave it as long as possible but to leave it long enough to get a better idea through negotiation, of the scope of the shape of the likely outcome.

A rabid "just pull the trigger and get on with it" would leave far more uncertainty about what state the UKs trade agreements would be in, than a 6 month wait and then being able to announce we are pulling the trigger and can outline the whole likely timetable for new agreements, what will happen in the interim before those are fully agreed.

So there will be less uncertainty not more. And I'm only talking about a few months, after 40 years on this merry go round why fret about 6 months extra to get the UK in best shape to leave with minimised disruption and a smoother transition?

Unless you think May is just delaying for the heck of it, or you have paranoid it's all an excuse to not do it, perhaps she's come to the same conclusions, that's little bit of preparation before surgery is a good idea? You're like someone at a road accident shouting "operate NOW" :eek:

a 'better idea through negotiation' isn't more certainty : indeeed there is no guarantee that there will be any meaningful negotiation at all.
however the rest of the world is not going to see delay in a positive light.
2 years is sufficient