Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
🗳️ ELECTION 2024: THE MSE LEADERS' DEBATE Got a burning question you want us to ask the party leaders ahead of the general election? Submit your suggestions via this form or post them on our dedicated Forum board where you can see and upvote other users' questions. Please note that the Forum's rules on avoiding general political discussion still apply across all boards.

If we vote for Brexit what happens

Options
18598608628648652072

Comments

  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    Combo Breaker First Post
    Options
    wotsthat wrote: »
    I keep seeing this sort of statement but I really don't see that the UK and EU would be after deals materially that different. We've managed to pool many decision making processes for over 40 years so I think this idea there's a gulf in desired outcome is imagined.

    It's one of those principles where it's important only the UK negotiates on behalf of the UK but, in practice, makes little difference to the outcome.

    on only needs to consider the EU agriculture policy to see one that the UK wouldn't duplicate
  • StevieJ
    StevieJ Posts: 20,174 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    mrginge wrote: »
    Erm. No I think you've got that wrong.

    TTIP is a EU deal negotiated on behalf of 28 countries. Any deal we look at would be negotiated solely by the UK, specific to the areas that we want it to be on.
    Erm, yes, do you mean like dismantling the NHS?
    'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher
  • wotsthat
    wotsthat Posts: 11,325 Forumite
    Options
    CLAPTON wrote: »
    on only needs to consider the EU agriculture policy to see one that the UK wouldn't duplicate

    We were talking about the differing desired outcomes with regard to a transatlantic trade deal. You might see a fundamental difference between what the EU wants vs what the UK would want - I don't.

    As for what the UK wouldn't replicate post-Brexit we'll have to enjoy idly speculating until we see the plan, the outcome of negotiations and what gets implemented. Maybe we should pencil in a date around 2022 when things will be, possibly, a little clearer and we can review what happened.
  • Masomnia
    Masomnia Posts: 19,506 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Options
    wotsthat wrote: »
    I keep seeing this sort of statement but I really don't see that the UK and EU would be after deals materially that different. We've managed to pool many decision making processes for over 40 years so I think this idea there's a gulf in desired outcome is imagined.

    It's one of those principles where it's important only the UK negotiates on behalf of the UK but, in practice, makes little difference to the outcome.

    The difference is that while no UK parliament can bind its successors, the EU could. For example, if Teresa May did a deal with the US and the next Labour chap didn't like it he could come in and tear it up.

    If the EU did a deal at European level, then future governments could not take us out of it while we remained members.

    Lots of us did vote for Brexit for reasons of sovereignty such as the above. The EU fundamentally challenges our constitution.
    “I could see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.” - P.G. Wodehouse
  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    Combo Breaker First Post
    Options
    wotsthat wrote: »
    We were talking about the differing desired outcomes with regard to a transatlantic trade deal. You might see a fundamental difference between what the EU wants vs what the UK would want - I don't.

    As for what the UK wouldn't replicate post-Brexit we'll have to enjoy idly speculating until we see the plan, the outcome of negotiations and what gets implemented. Maybe we should pencil in a date around 2022 when things will be, possibly, a little clearer and we can review what happened.

    it would seem entirely reasonable to think that the desired outcome from a UK point of view might well differ from that of all 28 : just as an agricultural policy for the UK will differ that that of the EU28

    as you will see absolutely no possible disadvantages to being a member of the EU then your conclusion follows immediately
  • TrickyTree83
    TrickyTree83 Posts: 3,930 Forumite
    Options
    Masomnia wrote: »
    The difference is that while no UK parliament can bind its successors, the EU could. For example, if Teresa May did a deal with the US and the next Labour chap didn't like it he could come in and tear it up.

    If the EU did a deal at European level, then future governments could not take us out of it while we remained members.

    Lots of us did vote for Brexit for reasons of sovereignty such as the above. The EU fundamentally challenges our constitution.

    This, and also whilst we're part of the EU it's not just our own interests, but those of the other 27 (current) members. So if something we want, like protection for a service, institution or industry is at odds with another member we may end up having to concede points to the other 27 as well as to the 3rd party.

    It would have been better to set up a single market where only by regulation can an industry participate, leaving countries to strike their own deals. So you can have your industry choose to participate in the single market, or not, depending on the bilateral deals you do yourself. Instead it's a massive protectionist bloc which moves at a political pace the same or marginally better than the UN.
  • Tromking
    Tromking Posts: 2,691 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    wotsthat wrote: »
    I keep seeing this sort of statement but I really don't see that the UK and EU would be after deals materially that different. We've managed to pool many decision making processes for over 40 years so I think this idea there's a gulf in desired outcome is imagined.

    It's one of those principles where it's important only the UK negotiates on behalf of the UK but, in practice, makes little difference to the outcome.

    Any deal this century would be nice, as long as it suits the UK`s needs and priorities of course.
    Frankly laughable that where once Remainiac`s were boasting about the UK being at the back of the queue and the EU were pressing ahead without us with a trade deal with the mighty US, the narrative has suddenly changed to one where the deal was obviously rubbish in the first place . Remainers are a strange bunch.
    “Britain- A friend to all, beholden to none”. 🇬🇧
  • wotsthat
    wotsthat Posts: 11,325 Forumite
    Options
    CLAPTON wrote: »
    it would seem entirely reasonable to think that the desired outcome from a UK point of view might well differ from that of all 28 : just as an agricultural policy for the UK will differ that that of the EU28

    as you will see absolutely no possible disadvantages to being a member of the EU then your conclusion follows immediately

    No Clapton. I didn't say desired outcomes wouldn't differ just that there wouldn't be a gulf in those desires other than what is imagined or peddled to highlight differences rather than similarities.
  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    Combo Breaker First Post
    Options
    wotsthat wrote: »
    No Clapton. I didn't say desired outcomes wouldn't differ just that there wouldn't be a gulf in those desires other than what is imagined or peddled to highlight differences rather than similarities.

    so there are differences but only imaginary
    amazing the compromises people make to support their religion.
  • wotsthat
    wotsthat Posts: 11,325 Forumite
    Options
    Masomnia wrote: »
    The difference is that while no UK parliament can bind its successors, the EU could. For example, if Teresa May did a deal with the US and the next Labour chap didn't like it he could come in and tear it up.

    If the EU did a deal at European level, then future governments could not take us out of it while we remained members.

    Lots of us did vote for Brexit for reasons of sovereignty such as the above. The EU fundamentally challenges our constitution.

    That's a difference of principle because, whatever your thoughts on challenges to sovereignty, in practice, it doesn't mean there's a gulf between what the UK and EU would want out of a transatlantic deal.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 8 Election 2024: The MSE Leaders' Debate
  • 343.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 450K Spending & Discounts
  • 236K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 609.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.4K Life & Family
  • 248.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards