UK Quarter 3 2016 GDP +0.5%

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Graham you're premature. It's going to be years (if ever) before you can claim victory in this argument.

Well I'm not claiming victory.

Just stating that it's strange that, after the event. you are now preaching to the preacher.

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I know - you'll find MANY posts from me stating exactly that. But I was told, not by yourself, but by many on here that this wasn't the case, factories would go to Germany etc.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=70981755&postcount=78

You may remember the manufacturer of plane wings thread. I said exactly what you sttae above on that very thread. Our Scottish friend, and many others denied it was the case, people would move etc etc.

The whole premise was that manufacturers would move into the EU away from the UK to sell their goods within the EU. My premise was good luck to them - they need to find and retrain staff, up all of their manufacturing equipment etc etc which would be a HUGE expense.

As you say above, you are not a remainiac, but you've certainly supported such posts, if not used your own words. Just funny you are now stating the very same things others have been stating for a while.

What about the bribe Note the words 'to counter any damage from leaving the EU'

The decision to build the new model at Britain's largest car plant, rather than elsewhere in Europe, was won with what a source described as a package of support pledged by May's government to counter any damage from leaving the EU

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

What about the bribe Note the words 'to counter any damage from leaving the EU'

Well firstly, I'd hardly call it a bribe.

Secondly, I'd just ask how this is different from corporation tax, or rescus packages for banks, or north seal oil etc.

Third, I'd rather we secured jobs like these in Nissan, than pay copious amount of taxpayers money to Amazon to employ expensive lawyers to avoid paying tax to ensure Amazon stays with in the UK.

I've long said, the savings from not being in the EU shouldn't just be used to fill a hole, they should be used to bolster the UK economy, sort farmers out etc etc. They shouldn't just get a subsidy for subsidies sake, but should get help once we have left the EU.

In other words, the monies saved from leaving the EU should be invested into the UK. And that's exactly what's happening here.

I know I'm supposed to be angry about it, but why would I be? It's what many of us have been suggesting for some time to ensure we continue to prosper.

TrickyTree83

wotsthat wrote: »

You can't be a proponent of free trade and then say a tariff system would benefit the UK.

It's no comfort to me that my food shop has gone up by 10p but my Portguese friend's has gone up by 12p.

lol of course I can.

I can ideologically align differently to understanding a rationale that describes a certain outcome based on a set of circumstances.

I completely believe that it would be better if everyone was trading freely without tariffs. If tariffs are to be imposed on us, then it would make sense to reciprocate and try to mitigate against the tariffs imposed upon us.

Conrad

Nice being able to offer inducements without falling foul of EU dic-tats, just as we argued all along...

A_Medium_Size_Jock

StevieJ wrote: »

What about the bribe Note the words 'to counter any damage from leaving the EU'

I will quote what I say in another thread:

Consider that Carlos Ghosn is also in charge of Renault.
So - quite besides France as possible sites for production or even Romania as with Dacia - he could have gone with say Argentina:
http://blog.alliance-renault-nissan.com/content/renault-nissan-alliance-investment-argentina-tops-us-800-million
Or perhaps Brazil:
http://press.renault.co.uk/Corporate/e74933d0-ff99-4d11-91ee-802dc9ceca57.aspx
Or maybe Pakistan:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-pakistan-autos-idUKKCN0XW2HP

Of course, none of these would ever DREAM of providing any form of "assistance" to Nissan/Renault, now would they?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well firstly, I'd hardly call it a bribe. .

It's being reported that the UK Govt had to agree to compensate Nissan against any tariff costs post Brexit.

What else would you call it?

Now of course if we stay in the single market that won't be a problem... :whistle:

Masomnia

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

It's being reported that the UK Govt had to agree to compensate Nissan against any tariff costs post Brexit.

What else would you call it?

Now of course if we stay in the single market that won't be a problem... :whistle:

One man's bribe is another man's illegal state aid, is another man's investment in UK industry. As I said in the other thread I think the UK government is taking a calculated risk that there won't be tariffs on cars in and out of the country, we import a huge amount of cars from Europe at the end of the day so it's not in either side's interest.

In terms of the single market I thought at first we probably would remain members with some kind of workaround in terms of free movement of 'labour' rather then 'people'. But I'm not so sure now. As May has said we won't be bound by the ECJ I don't see how that is compatible with membership, but I suppose we will have to wait and see.

StevieJ

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

It's being reported that the UK Govt had to agree to compensate Nissan against any tariff costs post Brexit.

What else would you call it?

Now of course if we stay in the single market that won't be a problem... :whistle:

Good point.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

It's being reported that the UK Govt had to agree to compensate Nissan against any tariff costs post Brexit.

What else would you call it?

Now of course if we stay in the single market that won't be a problem... :whistle:

It may be reported as such in some corners of the media - but it's not in others. And I'm surprised to find you are now hoodwinked by the leftist media. But anyway....

The BBC do not suggest that the UK government HAD TO agree.

"The support and assurances of the UK government enabled us to decide that the next-generation Qashqai and X-Trail will be produced at Sunderland," said Carlos Ghosn, Nissan's chief executive, saying he welcomed Prime Minister Theresa May's "commitment to the automotive industry in Britain".

A senior executive at Nissan Europe, Colin Lawther, said the company had received "no special deal".
"It's just a commitment from the government to work with the whole of the automotive industry to make sure the whole automotive industry in the UK remains competitive," he told the BBC.
"We would expect nothing for us that the rest of the industry wouldn't be able to have access to. We see this as a whole industry thing, not a Nissan thing."

The treasury have not yet released the terms of the deal. So anything is speculation at this time.

However, I don't see this as anything different to what's happened with banks, north sea oil, Amazon, Vodafone and corp taxation.

We have always done deals (to which I've always seen you welcome) to attract business to the UK.

This is the first time I've ever seen you against government action to secure large scale business in the UK.

If you have suddenly changed your mind on such deals to do business in the UK, fair enough. But you seemed to think that scrapping perfectly decent cars to entice people to buy new ones was the bees knees. Same principle.