If there is a second referendum ...

Herzlos

buglawton wrote: »

Only a Remainer PM and a presumed Remainer Parliament would drag their feet on obviously needed planning & execution that should have started 2 years ago.

It's got nothing to do with her being a Remainer, it's all to do with not tearing the party apart. The referendum and everything since has just been an attempt to stop the Tory party splitting up over Europe.
If there was any way out that wasn't (a) a total disaster for the Tories or (b) a total disaster for the UK (in that order), she'd have jumped on it 2 years ago.


All outcomes are disastrous, so she's still stalling for time in the hope a unicorn will ride to her rescue, or she finds a plausible way to pin all the blame on the EU. That's why she's going back to the EU to re-negotiate something she herself agreed on and is no longer open to negotiation - because she can waste a week or 2 being told to sod off in 27 different languages.

StevieJ

Herzlos wrote: »

It's got nothing to do with her being a Remainer, it's all to do with not tearing the party apart. The referendum and everything since has just been an attempt to stop the Tory party splitting up over Europe.
If there was any way out that wasn't (a) a total disaster for the Tories or (b) a total disaster for the UK (in that order), she'd have jumped on it 2 years ago.


All outcomes are disastrous, so she's still stalling for time in the hope a unicorn will ride to her rescue, or she finds a plausible way to pin all the blame on the EU. That's why she's going back to the EU to re-negotiate something she herself agreed on and is no longer open to negotiation - because she can waste a week or 2 being told to sod off in 27 different languages.

Is it true that the backstop was actually the idea of the UK negotiators?

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

Is it true that the backstop was actually the idea of the UK negotiators?

Unlikely, it's the best compromise that could be agreed during the negotiations. Parliament always had the last say. Given their are 29 other Parliaments to verify the agreement. There's a long way to go yet before any final deal is struck..........

cogito

Herzlos wrote: »

It's true. Most of the vocal Brexiteers have no skin in the game.

My skin in the game is that my income is in Sterling.

cogito

mayonnaise wrote: »

Spewing blind hatred for the EU on these forums...while enjoying its hospitality.

There's nothing blind about my views on the EU. The blind ones are those who not only fail to see it for what it is but don't even look.

'The hospitality of the EU' Curious turn of phrase. I've enjoyed the hospitality of about 23 of its members over the years. Is that against the law?

Herzlos

cogito wrote: »

My skin in the game is that my income is in Sterling.

Yet apart form concerns about Sterling falling and losing free healthcare you're pretty well insulated from everything else.

Arcaine

gfplux wrote: »

The tariffs for good under WTO rules are already in place. They have not been agreed between the UK and WTO.
If Britain trades under WTO the tariffs and rules will be imposed on Britain.

Perhaps there should be a referendum to take back control from the WTO.

No this is not correct. Each country sets the tariffs they wish to charge, in accordance with WTO rules not the other way round.



Under WTO rules, each member must grant the same 'most favoured nation' (MFN) market access, to all other WTO members.1 This means that exports to the EU would be subject to the same customs checks, tariffs and regulatory barriers that the UK and EU currently charge on trade with countries such as the US.


https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/10-things-know-about-world-trade-organization-wto

BobQ

adindas wrote: »

Which organisation punish their member to leave ??

Depends what you regard as punishment.

I resign from my golf club
I ask them to use the clubhouse.
They so no

Are they punishing me? You seem to suggest they are.

Arcaine

kabayiri wrote: »

This is true. But there was someone on the radio the other day from South America who said that they would be keen to accept some of this tariff hit.

I can understand why. The gain in business can potentially offset any additional costs they incur, and ultimately the UK has proven quite a good customer.

I suppose a problem for us is an opportunity for others.

They can reduce their cost but a 15% tariff is a 15% tariff and is charged at the point of entry by the UK. Trading under WTO rules means there can be no favoured nation and if one country starts selling below cost then this can be legally challenged as dumping.


https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/agrm8_e.htm

Arcaine

Arcaine wrote: »

Maybe, most of the docks in the UK are working a plan for Brexit so maybe the things like fresh fruit and veg will get through with minimul delay. The actual delay will likely come from issues about clearance and payments of duty and VAT. Currently all goods can only enter free circulation once duty and VAT have been paid. Any items coming from the EU are tariff free but VAT technically still applies. Companies can self charge the VAT and then claim it back on the same return, this has nil impact on cashflow. However now VAT and Duty must be paid on ALL imports at the point of entry. So either we allow goods to clear without these payments or the goods must wait until payment is cleared and the entries are done onto the CHIEF system. This, in my opinion, will be the biggest hold up at the ports.

Want to just state that I was incorrect in my facts yesterday. I did some checking today and VAT will be postponed on all imports if there is no deal so there will be no cashflow issues. The HMRC guidance for VAT is attached for anyones interest. (Will do better with my fact checking before posting next time.)



https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-for-businesses-if-theres-no-brexit-deal/vat-for-businesses-if-theres-no-brexit-deal