Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Lornapink

Lawyers For Britain just published these conclusions about customs union membership;

Conclusions
Staying inside the EU Customs Union after ceasing to be a Member State would necessarily entail a severe and continuing curtailment of the UK!!!8217;s powers to govern itself as an independent state and would subject it to the continuing effective jurisdiction of the ECJ. In particular:

1. The UK would be obliged to operate a system of external tariffs according to the Common Customs Tariff decided by the EU, and would be obliged to follow future changes made to the Common Tariff, while not having a vote on those changes.

2. The UK would not be allowed to enter in to trade agreements involving reduced or zero tariffs with non-Member countries, which would make it in practice impossible to conclude meaningful trade agreements. It would in practice be obliged to follow the terms of trade agreements reached by the EU with non-Member countries or blocs, without having a vote on those agreements or on how they are negotiated. It is hard to see what useful purpose would be served by having a Department of International Trade.

3. The UK would be obliged, either directly or via an indirect mechanism similar to that of the EFTA Court under the EEA Agreement, to continue to be bound by past and future decisions of the ECJ on the interpretation of the common rules of the customs union.

4. If (as seems inevitable) the continuing customs union with the EU extends to non-tariff customs controls (such as certification of compliance with technical or safety standards, health requirements for food, etc) the UK would be obliged to follow the EU!!!8217;s future rule changes on all these matters as well as interpretations of the rules by the ECJ.

5. The UK would have to apply these same rules and regulations across its own domestic economy as well. WTO rules do not permit us to operate different or more stringent standards on imported goods than the rules under which we allow goods to be put on our domestic market.

5. Having to follow the EU!!!8217;s common rules on such non-tariff customs controls would (1) mean that the UK would be unable to negotiate changes to such controls with non-Member countries in order to facilitate trade with them and (2) make it in practice very difficult indeed for the UK to change its own rules for goods in its domestic market to differ from those applicable to imported goods under the Customs union common rules.

6. Overall, the UK would be significantly worse off than it is at present as an EU Member because it would be bound by the common rules of the EU customs union over wide areas of policy, be unable to operate an international trade policy independently of the EU, but have no vote on these matters.

Tromking

ukcarper wrote: »

I agree to some extent especially in council election but thier vote fell by 300,000 in 2017 GE and they were on of the only parties in England to campaign on staying in EU.

We’re on the cusp of economic disaster according to some and yet the only party advocating an end to Brexit is flatlining.
There’s a message there somewhere.

Herzlos

I'm not going over the whole "other countries trade with the EU" thing. They do, and they do so in different ways to us. We can trade with the EU under WTO terms and they sky won't fall in, but it'll cripple a lot of industries that have built up business models around the single market.

If, as you say, no-one was hampered in EU trade under WTO, why is everyone so keen to get a trade deal that suits them? I'm not going to bother explaining why those same trade deals (as offered by the EU) aren't a good fit for the UK, who's economy is built (wrongly or rightly) around the financial services sector.

Nothing else in that answers the question about why ever closer union is bad. It's not bad purely because some countries are moving right based on a populist movement.


I'm also not sure why you're talking about 15 year predictions, there's too many variables there for them to mean anything. Let's try 2 or 3 year predictions. What effect does the Department for Exiting the EU think Brexit will have on the UK economy? Given that this deparments entire existence is to understand the implications and make Brexit look good, their figures should be the most biased towards being positive.
How much better off do they claim we'll be?

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

I didn't make any comments on the accuracy of Treasury forecasts. All forecasts will have a pretty high level of inaccuracy.

But when they all show the same trend, do you assume there might be something to it, or that it's a conspiracy?

Can you show me a single forecast that shows Brexit has any economic improvement against 2016? So not any that show a return from the dip, but an actual improvement, and not the one from Reese Mogg which relies on slashing regulation and tax.

But you said we have almost become the poor man of Europe thats not a forecast.

Moby

Lornapink wrote: »

Lawyers For Britain just published these conclusions about customs union membership;

Conclusions
Staying inside the EU Customs Union after ceasing to be a Member State would necessarily entail a severe and continuing curtailment of the UK!!!8217;s powers to govern itself as an independent state and would subject it to the continuing effective jurisdiction of the ECJ. In particular:

1. The UK would be obliged to operate a system of external tariffs according to the Common Customs Tariff decided by the EU, and would be obliged to follow future changes made to the Common Tariff, while not having a vote on those changes.

2. The UK would not be allowed to enter in to trade agreements involving reduced or zero tariffs with non-Member countries, which would make it in practice impossible to conclude meaningful trade agreements. It would in practice be obliged to follow the terms of trade agreements reached by the EU with non-Member countries or blocs, without having a vote on those agreements or on how they are negotiated. It is hard to see what useful purpose would be served by having a Department of International Trade.

3. The UK would be obliged, either directly or via an indirect mechanism similar to that of the EFTA Court under the EEA Agreement, to continue to be bound by past and future decisions of the ECJ on the interpretation of the common rules of the customs union.

4. If (as seems inevitable) the continuing customs union with the EU extends to non-tariff customs controls (such as certification of compliance with technical or safety standards, health requirements for food, etc) the UK would be obliged to follow the EU!!!8217;s future rule changes on all these matters as well as interpretations of the rules by the ECJ.

5. The UK would have to apply these same rules and regulations across its own domestic economy as well. WTO rules do not permit us to operate different or more stringent standards on imported goods than the rules under which we allow goods to be put on our domestic market.

5. Having to follow the EU!!!8217;s common rules on such non-tariff customs controls would (1) mean that the UK would be unable to negotiate changes to such controls with non-Member countries in order to facilitate trade with them and (2) make it in practice very difficult indeed for the UK to change its own rules for goods in its domestic market to differ from those applicable to imported goods under the Customs union common rules.

6. Overall, the UK would be significantly worse off than it is at present as an EU Member because it would be bound by the common rules of the EU customs union over wide areas of policy, be unable to operate an international trade policy independently of the EU, but have no vote on these matters.

'Lawyers for Britain'...Lol.....All I take from that is that it follows we shouldn't be leaving at all then should we! https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/07/theresa-may-refuses-to-rule-out-nhs-contracts-from-us-trade-deals You can see what their plans are! We will be in hoc to Trump and ruled by swivel eyed loons who do not have the best interests of any of us workers and will be prepared to sell chunks of our public services to rapacious American companies! Welcome to the future folks....we will free ourselves from Europe only to be subject to the whims of America, China etc!

Herzlos

Lornapink wrote: »

Lawyers For Britain just published these conclusions about customs union membership;
...
6. Overall, the UK would be significantly worse off than it is at present as an EU Member because it would be bound by the common rules of the EU customs union over wide areas of policy, be unable to operate an international trade policy independently of the EU, but have no vote on these matters.

I agree entirely with all of that. Remaining in the customs union whilst not being an EU member is the worse of both worlds; we're giving up our say in order to claim we left the EU.

But given our reliance on being in the customs union (and single market), is that going to be worse for us that going WTO?

Herzlos

ukcarper wrote: »

But you said we have almost become the poor man of Europe thats not a forecast.

Indeed not, it's a statement. Our growth has gone from the top of the EU (despite our pre-existing economic strength) to almost the bottom of the EU in barely a year. That's a fact that can't be waved away.
We've shed a lot of jobs (not enough for Brexiteers, since a lot of them are the hated bankers) with nothing to replace them, are suffering staffing shortages in areas that make heavy use of migrants.
We'll see some bounce-back once the uncertainty has gone, but we're definitely in a worse state than we were 2 years ago.

Maybe we're not the poor man of Europe yet, but we're heading in that direction.

westernpromise

Moby wrote: »

'Lawyers for Britain'...Lol.....All I take from that is that it follows we shouldn't be leaving at all then should we! https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/07/theresa-may-refuses-to-rule-out-nhs-contracts-from-us-trade-deals You can see what their plans are! We will be in hoc to Trump and ruled by swivel eyed loons who do not have the best interests of any of us workers but will be prepared to sell chunks of our public services to rapacious private companies!

Your every post is like a blast of stale air from the 1930s.

You owe literally everything to private companies, the wealth they generate and the taxes they pay. Imagine if they hated you and this country like you do. We'd be North Korea in an instant.

Meanwhile you take out and put nothing in and the more you're given for nothing the more you whine for and feel entitled to. Snivelling after other people's money all the time is shameful, greedy and undignified.

Last year I paid for six nurses. Can you say the same? Thought not.

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

Indeed not, it's a statement. Our growth has gone from the top of the EU (despite our pre-existing economic strength) to almost the bottom of the EU in barely a year. That's a fact that can't be waved away.
We've shed a lot of jobs (not enough for Brexiteers, since a lot of them are the hated bankers) with nothing to replace them, are suffering staffing shortages in areas that make heavy use of migrants.
We'll see some bounce-back once the uncertainty has gone, but we're definitely in a worse state than we were 2 years ago.

Maybe we're not the poor man of Europe yet, but we're heading in that direction.

Thats not the same We have almost become the poor man of Europe.

Herzlos

westernpromise wrote: »

Last year I paid for six nurses. Can you say the same? Thought not.

I paid for seven. No-one cares about your internet willy-waving.

ukcarper wrote: »

Thats not the same We have almost become the poor man of Europe.

"almost".