The result of the EU referendum:

[jakswan]

There are no countries in the world like the UK if start making up categories of countries in such a way, besides I think you missed South Korea.

Why wouldn't the EU want a free trade deal?

Did you miss this?

[ProfessorDavey]

Did you miss this?

No I answered it in reply 591, in detail - I even linked the document setting out the South Korea - EU cooperation approach and reasoning.

The reasons South Korea is included are effectively in my category 5. If you don't wish to read the document, in a nutshell - South Korea is wedged between highly dangerous and potentially unstable states. The EU wants to ensure that South Korea is stable and a friend in the region and stable and will use the carrot of free trade to help ensure that.

I don't think that really applies to the UK, does it.

[ProfessorDavey]

4. Countries with developing economies

Sorry, my mistake - I meant category 5. Effectively to use free trade to ensure stability, develop values of democracy/freedom etc and a friend in the region, when pressures within the region might drive it in a different direction.

[jakswan]

Sorry, my mistake - I meant category 5. Effectively to use free trade to ensure stability, develop values of democracy/freedom etc and a friend in the region, when pressures within the region might drive it in a different direction.

Canada doesn't fall into your categories either they have recently signed a deal.

[jakswan]

So you assert, more #projectfear. So lets explore your position a little more, lets say as the debate progresses the EU signals they would welcome a free trade deal (lets be honest they'd be mad not to). Will you change your mind?

Apologies meant did you miss this.

[ProfessorDavey]

Canada doesn't fall into your categories either they have recently signed a deal.

You are incorrect.

There is no signed deal between the EU and Canada.

There is an agreement but it is yet to be signed and that is required for it to come into effect, and this illustrates the issues that could well face the UK very well.

First the deal is not as comprehensive as the free trade approach the UK current enjoys with other EU countries. So not all tariffs are eliminated and a range of other restrictions to trade will undoubtedly remain even if is was to come into force, which of course it hasn't.

Secondly, one of the big stumbling blocks to ratification and therefore implementation is the issue of visas - most notably for Eastern European countries. In effect they won't sign, and therefore the agreement cannot be implemented, unless Canada agrees to lift visa restrictions. So were the UK government to try to 'flex' its sovereignty 'muscle' to restrict immigration via visa controls to (lets say) Romania, then Romania can refuse to sign the agreement and it cannot come into force.

Thirdly - it is 2016 and the EU-Canada agreement hasn't come into force. Negotiations started, officially in 2008 (actually 2004 was the real starting point) - so it has taken between 8 and 12 years and there is still not an agreement in force. So if the UK voted to leave the EU in the summer and left in 2018, with negotiations on a trade deal starting on the 24th June this year, on the basis of the Canada example we would not have an agreement actually in force until perhaps 2024 or 2028. And this level of negotiation on trade deals isn't uncommon - I gather 7 years is the average from formal start.

So thanks for raising Canada, which is much better ammunition for my position than it is for yours.

[jakswan]

You are incorrect.

There is no signed deal between the EU and Canada.

There is an agreement but it is yet to be signed and that is required for it to come into effect, and this illustrates the issues that could well face the UK very well.

First the deal is not as comprehensive as the free trade approach the UK current enjoys with other EU countries. So not all tariffs are eliminated and a range of other restrictions to trade will undoubtedly remain even if is was to come into force, which of course it hasn't.

Secondly, one of the big stumbling blocks to ratification and therefore implementation is the issue of visas - most notably for Eastern European countries. In effect they won't sign, and therefore the agreement cannot be implemented, unless Canada agrees to lift visa restrictions. So were the UK government to try to 'flex' its sovereignty 'muscle' to restrict immigration via visa controls to (lets say) Romania, then Romania can refuse to sign the agreement and it cannot come into force.

Thirdly - it is 2016 and the EU-Canada agreement hasn't come into force. Negotiations started, officially in 2008 (actually 2004 was the real starting point) - so it has taken between 8 and 12 years and there is still not an agreement in force. So if the UK voted to leave the EU in the summer and left in 2018, with negotiations on a trade deal starting on the 24th June this year, on the basis of the Canada example we would not have an agreement actually in force until perhaps 2024 or 2028. And this level of negotiation on trade deals isn't uncommon - I gather 7 years is the average from formal start.

So thanks for raising Canada, which is much better ammunition for my position than it is for yours.

You still haven't answered my other question.

With regard to Canada Wiki:-

"Whether approval by all EU member states is also necessary is disputed. If approved, the agreement would begin to come into effect in 2016 at the earliest, at which time about 98% of the tariffs between Canada and the EU would be eliminated."

Travel without Visa is not the same full entitlement to work, benefits, etc. Also Canada is coming from a position of no trade agreement whereas the Uk will just want to status quo to remain.

The Canada situation refutes entirely your earlier post. 

[ProfessorDavey]

You still haven't answered my other question.

With regard to Canada Wiki:-

"Whether approval by all EU member states is also necessary is disputed. If approved, the agreement would begin to come into effect in 2016 at the earliest, at which time about 98% of the tariffs between Canada and the EU would be eliminated."

Travel without Visa is not the same full entitlement to work, benefits, etc. Also Canada is coming from a position of no trade agreement whereas the Uk will just want to status quo to remain.

The Canada situation refutes entirely your earlier post.

There is no implemented agreement with Canada, and might not be for years, depending on the views of some individual EU states.

You claim that the UK wants the status quo remain - indeed and of course the way to ensure that the status quo remains is, obviously, to remain in the EU.

To suggest you want to leave the club, but still retain all the benefits of being a member is naive, and frankly arrogant.

[ProfessorDavey]

The Canada situation refutes entirely your earlier post.

No it doesn't because the situation is that there is no free trade agreement implemented with Canada.

And there is no deal in place despite it being 8 or 12 years since the negotiations started.

So by my reckoning if Canada is your shining example of what can be achieved, in 2024 or 2028 there will be no deal in place between the UK and the EU on free trade. That really is a terrifying prospect, given that what investors, markets and economies hate is uncertainly. That's one hell of a long time of uncertainly.

[jakswan]

There is no implemented agreement with Canada, and might not be for years, depending on the views of some individual EU states.

You claim that the UK wants the status quo remain - indeed and of course the way to ensure that the status quo remains is, obviously, to remain in the EU.

To suggest you want to leave the club, but still retain all the benefits of being a member is naive, and frankly arrogant.

No what is naive is not recognising that a free trade area would benefit the UK and the EU, more #projectfear.

[jakswan]

No it doesn't because the situation is that there is no free trade agreement implemented with Canada.

And there is no deal in place despite it being 8 or 12 years since the negotiations started.

So by my reckoning if Canada is your shining example of what can be achieved, in 2024 or 2028 there will be no deal in place between the UK and the EU on free trade. That really is a terrifying prospect, given that what investors, markets and economies hate is uncertainly. That's one hell of a long time of uncertainly.

You asserted that free trade deals are only done with countries in certain categories, Canada is not in one of those categories yet a free trade deal is close to being signed, as I said you are refuted.

[jakswan]

So you assert, more #projectfear. So lets explore your position a little more, lets say as the debate progresses the EU signals they would welcome a free trade deal (lets be honest they'd be mad not to). Will you change your mind?

Reminder.

[ProfessorDavey]

So you assert, more #projectfear. So lets explore your position a little more, lets say as the debate progresses the EU signals they would welcome a free trade deal (lets be honest they'd be mad not to). Will you change your mind?

Change my mind on what - being a member of the EU?

In my view the EU provides all sorts of benefits above and beyond those associated with the economic benefits of free trade. So even if it were the case that the UK would not be affected economically (which is extremely unlikely as there will undoubtedly be a period of uncertainty which is affect economic confidence, investment and stability) we would still be affected negatively by our isolationist, petty nationalist-type approach. So no I still wouldn't support exit.

You seem to think that the only reason why people support being a member of the EU is because of economic benefit, or fear of the loss of economic benefit. That isn't true - there are plenty of us you think better cooperation, integration and working together to break down barriers and borders is a thoroughly good thing on principle. And that's why I support EU membership, just as I did not support Scottish independence. Both the UK leaving the EU and Scotland leaving the UK take us in the wrong direction in my view.

[jakswan]

Change my mind on what - being a member of the EU?

In my view the EU provides all sorts of benefits above and beyond those associated with the economic benefits of free trade. So even if it were the case that the UK would not be affected economically (which is extremely unlikely as there will undoubtedly be a period of uncertainty which is affect economic confidence, investment and stability) we would still be affected negatively by our isolationist, petty nationalist-type approach. So no I still wouldn't support exit.

You seems to think that the only reason why people support being a member of the EU is because of economic benefit, or fear of the loss of economic benefit. That isn't true - there are plenty of us you think better cooperation, integration and working together to break down barriers and borders is a thoroughly good thing on principle. And that's why I support EU membership, just as I did not support Scottish independence. Both the UK leaving the EU and Scotland leaving the UK take us in the wrong direction in my view.

I see so you see my position as 'isolationist, petty nationalist-type approach', none of which I've advocated, which boils to strawmen and name calling, which is pretty much all you have offered.

Oddly my mind could be changed, if could put a brake on immigration (which is still great news for the economy in the long term) build some houses and infrastructure to cope, have a better democratic system, see real reform of the EU, etc, then I'd be all for it!

I don't see all those supporting Scottish independence as 'isolationist, petty nationalists' either, there is a legitimate argument that Scotland is more left wing than rUK and they also have a democratic deficit which can only be cured by independence.

I accept there is a undercurrent of anti-English sentiment in Scotland which the SNP plays to with its grievance rhetoric. Its also not true that Scotland are left the rUK and the SNP has policies to the right but just spins left. You've questioned why someone can be for Scottish independence yet for the EU, the EU are not English.

[ProfessorDavey]

I accept there is a undercurrent of anti-English sentiment in Scotland which the SNP plays to with its grievance rhetoric. Its also not true that Scotland are left the rUK and the SNP has policies to the right but just spins left. You've questioned why someone can be for Scottish independence yet for the EU, the EU are not English.

As you appear happy to accept an undercurrent of anti-Endlish petty nationalism within the Scottish independence context, why are you not prepared to accept that a large part of the leave the EU brigade is driven by a similar undercurrent of anti-Europe petty nationalism. Indeed I would suggest rather more so - let's face it the main cheerleaders for EU withdrawal UKIP barely try to disguise their petty nationalism.

There is a nasty undercurrent in both camps and while I freely accept that not everyone who wants Scottish independence displays those rather unpleasant traits and the same is true for the EU leave camp, those unpleasant traits are a major undercurrent in both campaigns.

[Jack Knave]

As I said the EU is falling apart, especially the Eurozone, a Draghi (more like Drag-low) tries to keep it afloat with over the top monetary measures, which will never work. Who would want to stay with such an ill run monstrosity as that?!! Get us out, vote to Leave......not to mention the migrant crisis where Merkel is selling what little integrity the EU has to the Turks.

[jakswan]

As you appear happy to accept an undercurrent of anti-Endlish petty nationalism within the Scottish independence context, why are you not prepared to accept that a large part of the leave the EU brigade is driven by a similar undercurrent of anti-Europe petty nationalism. Indeed I would suggest rather more so - let's face it the main cheerleaders for EU withdrawal UKIP barely try to disguise their petty nationalism.

There is a nasty undercurrent in both camps and while I freely accept that not everyone who wants Scottish independence displays those rather unpleasant traits and the same is true for the EU leave camp, those unpleasant traits are a major undercurrent in both campaigns.

There may be an undercurrent in both camps I'm glad you recognise that not everyone who wants to leave stands for a 'isolationist, petty nationalist-type approach' , your earlier post didn't make that clear.

What do you think of TTIP?

[Bubbles]

The BBC have published a guide on their website.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887

These are the things David Cameron has managed to get agreed.

Child benefit - Child benefit payments to migrant workers for children living overseas to be recalculated to reflect the cost of living in their home countries

Migrant welfare payments - The UK can decide to limit in-work benefits for EU migrants during their first four years in the UK. This so-called "emergency brake" can be applied in the event of "exceptional" levels of migration, but must be released within seven years - without exception.

Eurozone - Britain can keep the pound while being in Europe, and its business trade with the bloc, without fear of discrimination. Any British money spent on bailing out eurozone nations will be reimbursed.

Protection for the City of London - Safeguards for Britain's large financial services industry to prevent eurozone regulations being imposed on it

Sovereignty - There is an explicit commitment that the UK will not be part of an "ever closer union" with other EU member states. This will be incorporated in an EU treaty change.

'Red card' for national parliaments - It will be easier for governments to band together to block unwanted legislation. If 55% of national EU parliaments object to a piece of EU legislation it will be rethought.

Competitiveness - The settlement calls on all EU institutions and member states to "make all efforts to fully implement and strengthen the internal market" and to take "concrete steps towards better regulation", including by cutting red tape.

Some limits on free movement - Denying automatic free movement rights to nationals of a country outside the EU who marry an EU national, as part of measures to tackle "sham" marriages. There are also new powers to exclude people believed to be a security risk - even if they have no previous convictions.

[jeremyp]

No what is naive is not recognising that a free trade area would benefit the UK and the EU, more #projectfear.

I don't think there is any doubt that the UK will be able to do some sort of free trade deal with the EU, but we will have to abide by terms and conditions that they impose, as we do now. But at the moment, our government has a say in what the terms and conditions are. If we leave the EU, it won't.

Not only that, but there will be tremendous uncertainty while the terms of our withdrawal are negotiated. This will do tremendous harm to our economy, plus multi national companies with significant operations in the UK may relocate to other EU states. Is the a risk you want to take for your dream of a country free from foreigners?

[jeremyp]

There may be an undercurrent in both camps I'm glad you recognise that not everyone who wants to leave stands for a 'isolationist, petty nationalist-type approach' , your earlier post didn't make that clear.

Yes they do, whether they think so or not.

What do you think of TTIP?

I thought we had decided that has nothing to do with the EU referendum.

[jakswan]

I don't think there is any doubt that the UK will be able to do some sort of free trade deal with the EU, but we will have to abide by terms and conditions that they impose, as we do now. But at the moment, our government has a say in what the terms and conditions are. If we leave the EU, it won't.

In a negotiation each side has a say on the terms and conditions.

Not only that, but there will be tremendous uncertainty while the terms of our withdrawal are negotiated. This will do tremendous harm to our economy, plus multi national companies with significant operations in the UK may relocate to other EU states.

Project fear, is there "tremendous uncertainty" in Canada whilst they negotiate or the US as TTIP is finalised?

Is the a risk you want to take for your dream of a country free from foreigners?

Yet another straw man, please stop being so dishonest it undermines your position greatly.

[jakswan]

Yes they do, whether they think so or not.

I thought we had decided that has nothing to do with the EU referendum.

No Prof asserted that, you don't think a major trade deal negotiated by the EU, whose terms we will be bound by, has anything to do with the EU?

What do you think of TTIP and why do you think it has nothing to do with the EU referendum?

[ProfessorDavey]

Project fear, is there "tremendous uncertainty" in Canada whilst they negotiate or the US as TTIP is finalised?

No, for the simply reason that while the Canada agreement or the TTIP fail to be finalised and in place, the current status quo remains - in other words Canada and the USA trade as now with the EU.

If the UK leaves the EU then until a new deal is struck then the current status quo (i.e. what we have now) will not remain, but the situation would be default imposition of standard tariffs until or unless a deal can be struck, which may well take 7 years or more, if the normal timeframe for negotiation of trade deals is a decent benchmark.

[ProfessorDavey]

In a negotiation each side has a say on the terms and conditions.

Indeed they do, but of course in negotiations between the EU and the UK one will have much, much more negotiating power as one economy is about 6 time the size of the other. And that block with the upper hand is the EU.

Also, don't forget that for an agreement to be reached all 27 remaining EU member states must agree. So if there is anything that any individual member state doesn't like, then no deal. Again this places the bargaining power very much with the EU as there will be no way they will ratify an agreement that is seen to be a compromise from the EU's perspective.

And don't forget that failure to get a deal is far less significant for any individual EU member state than it is for the UK, because of the balance of trade between individual member states and the UK.

[jakswan]

No, for the simply reason that while the Canada agreement or the TTIP fail to be finalised and in place, the current status quo remains - in other words Canada and the USA trade as now with the EU.

If the UK leaves the EU then until a new deal is struck then the current status quo (i.e. what we have now) will not remain, but the situation would be default imposition of standard tariffs until or unless a deal can be struck, which may well take 7 years or more, if the normal timeframe for negotiation of trade deals is a decent benchmark.

Actually if Uk leaves the same deal remains in place for two years anyway. Its a pretty simple deal, trade as we do now and we leave the EU. You keep insisting it will takes age and the EU will insist on free movement but its assertion on your part, why would the rest of the EU not want a free trade deal when

1) It represents a massive risk to EU
2) Its well on its way doing similar deals with Canada and the US
3) German car manufacturers would favour this deal
4) French farmers would favour this deal
50 Anyone who exports into the Uk would favour this deal