Does "Full alignment" with the Internal Market and Customs Union also mean keeping Freedom of Movement?
So basically very little would change?
Yeah we're basically paying £40bn to have no vote.
Does "Full alignment" with the Internal Market and Customs Union also mean keeping Freedom of Movement?
So basically very little would change?
It’s easy for Farage to just sit on the sidelines criticising everything. His rhetoric led the country to a vote which should never have happened and has likely cost the country Billions.
If I'm not mistaken, it's only for the ones that are already in the UK or on the continent. For the rest, it will depend on the deal, even though the lack of Irish border will almost inevitably lead to a full single market adhesion and therefore all freedoms will be enforced.
By the way, if I'm not mistaken all EEA/EFTA members are also Schengen members. I wonder if the current members are willing to offer an exemption if the UK were to join them.
HehTurns out Brexit didnt mean Brexit after all.
If the UK want a Norway style free trade then that might be another sticking point. I think that will come onto the negotiating table at the next round.Does "Full alignment" with the Internal Market and Customs Union also mean keeping Freedom of Movement?
So basically very little would change?
It isnt clear at this stage, but i would be shocked if May agreed to Freedom of movement. She wouldnt make it through the weekend without 20 metaphorical knives in her back.Does "Full alignment" with the Internal Market and Customs Union also mean keeping Freedom of Movement?
So basically very little would change?
Brexit means Soft Brexit.Turns out Brexit didnt mean Brexit after all.
Is your final paragraph sarcasm or a genuine possibility?
What are we supposed to have been stunned by?Errr what?![]()
On the BBC it suggested the 4 freedoms would remain.I dont think the UK side have given up on ending free movement yet, on the basis that they have clearly briefed journalists they are working towards a Canada-type deal, rather than a Norway one. I think the distinction between the two (although someone please correct me if Im wrong) is that Norway implies free movement and Canada doesnt. Though I suspect this will end up being a compromise for the future, it seems a bit pointless to capitulate on everything else but accept that our banks have to leave London in order to do business in Europe.
Looks like youre right. The Canada reference looks like it is about not being part of the CU or SM or ECJ jurisdiction, rather than free movement.On the BBC it suggested the 4 freedoms would remain.
What are we supposed to have been stunned by?
Looks like youre right. The Canada reference looks like it is about not being part of the CU or SM or ECJ jurisdiction, rather than free movement.
I'd say that would depend on your position surely?
I, for example, am stunned that an agreement, of sorts , was reached as I was certain talks would collapse and stunned just how far back the UK have had to row from their initial position.
Points 49 and 50 seem to imply we're not leaving the EU
But Canada is free to make free trade deals with other countries? That's what this is all about from the British perspective, no? So despite the concessions we made today, is an outcome where the UK gets to arrange awesome new free trade deals with the US, China and India still on the table? Hypothetically of course.To make it clear CETA creates a custom union between the EU and Canada. It's just that technically Canada doesn't join the EUCU.
Talks were never going to collapse. No politician would have the bottle for a hard Brexit.
No border between Ireland and NI and no border between NI and the UK.Points 49 and 50 seem to imply we're not leaving the EU![]()
Without freedom of movement, wouldn’t we be back to square one on the problem of the Irish border?It isnt clear at this stage, but i would be shocked if May agreed to Freedom of movement. She wouldnt make it through the weekend without 20 metaphorical knives in her back.
Full allignment is more likely to do with regulations/law pertaining to trade etc.
But Canada is free to make free trade deals with other countries? That's what this is all about from the British perspective, no? So despite the concessions we made today, is an outcome where the UK gets to arrange awesome new free trade deals with the US, China and India still on the table? Hypothetically of course.
We are making a big deal out of our insistence on leaving the customs union. But we are accepting regulatory alignment and - by the looks of it - free movement as well. Freeing ourselves from those things were two of the main reasons we gave for wanting out of the customs union in the first place. The only other significant reason to leave it, as far as I can see, would be for new trade deals.
So I guess if things develop as currently expected we would be free to pursue trade deals with other countries as long as in doing so we didnt diverge from EU rules? So does that mean, for example, that if we did a deal with the US we would not be able to agree to US food standards in the UK, as that would violate the terms of our deal with the EU?
But Canada is free to make free trade deals with other countries? That's what this is all about from the British perspective, no? So despite the concessions we made today, is an outcome where the UK gets to arrange awesome new free trade deals with the US, China and India still on the table? Hypothetically of course.
We are making a big deal out of our insistence on leaving the customs union. But we are accepting regulatory alignment and - by the looks of it - free movement as well. Freeing ourselves from those things were two of the main reasons we gave for wanting out of the customs union in the first place. The only other significant reason to leave it, as far as I can see, would be for new trade deals.
So I guess if things develop as currently expected we would be free to pursue trade deals with other countries as long as in doing so we didnt diverge from EU rules? So does that mean, for example, that if we did a deal with the US we would not be able to agree to US food standards in the UK, as that would violate the terms of our deal with the EU?
I dont think so, i think the FOM bit is to be negotiated in Phase 2. To be clear - i am not an expert!Without freedom of movement, wouldn’t we be back to square one on the problem of the Irish border?
Its almost as though this whole thing has been a complete waste of time.In other words, the same trade deals we could have had already without leaving.
I dont think so, i think the FOM bit is to be negotiated in Phase 2. To be clear - i am not an expert!
Brexiters will claim that May threw the match of course.This is like the end of a UFC fight where one guy gets his ass kicked for 3 rounds but still holds his hands up in triumph at the final bell.
Your response confuses me a bit. We have border controls with the US, agreeing a free trade deal with the US wouldnt change that as the scope of the agreement would be limited. So we could in theory have open borders with the EU AND a trade deal with the US, as long as we didnt allow anything into the UK from the US that violated EU rules. Which is what I said.The lack of borders and border controls make that almost impossible because the EU do not want US agricultural products. That's the entire problem here, if the UK were willing to actually implement borders than your assumption would be correct.
Your response confuses me a bit. We have border controls with the US, agreeing a free trade deal with the US wouldnt change that as the scope of the agreement would be limited. So we could in theory have open borders with the EU AND a trade deal with the US, as long as we didnt allow anything into the UK from the US that violated EU rules. Which is what I said.
Whether this is a prize worth having is another matter entirely, as is the question of whether we will even be allowed this limited freedom. But it is at least theoretically possible, I think.
I see, your objection was with my use of the word "awesome".Right, but in that case the deals won't be awesome and it would be very stupid to negotiate deals that basically comply with CETA without going to the negotiation table with all the CETA members. But you are right you could negotiate with everyone.
Mmm, I wonder what that will entail.It seems that the EU27 will allow the UK to retain the four freedoms with absolutely no say in any new regulations whatsoever, no veto, no vote, no controls which I hope the Brexiters are thoroughly happy with as No More Control was exactly what they wanted.
I see, your objection was with my use of the word "awesome".
That was indeed a legitimate objection. There were never going to be any awesome free trade deals. But there might have been ones that significantly eroded regulatory standards. If today's development makes that a bit less likely then its another reason to be happy today.
Yeah, equated awesome with outside of EUCU framework which is only possible if you accept borders. The borders are the real key here, even more than the financial passports that were hogging front pages.