We'll get immigration to the tens of thousands...Originally Posted by Derby Tup
65 tens of thousands.
We'll get immigration to the tens of thousands...
65 tens of thousands.
They might be incompetent cockwombles, but they're our incompetent cockwombles.
#takebackcontrol
#makeblightygreatagain
#etcetcetc
Bit of guff from Boris about how large the Single Market access payments "should be"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...yments-access/
Last edited by shaunaneto; 04-12-2016 at 10:00 PM.
And a piece by Jon Snow
https://www.channel4.com/news/by/jon...k-and-mix-deal
In particular
When it comes to trade, ministers talk of negotiating trade deals through the World Trade Organisation (WTO), save that the WTO is run by the Quad, which consist of the USA, Canada, the EU, and Japan. So in leaving the EU, we might be automatically leaving the Quad. A source in the WTO tells me there is no prospect of the UK joining the Quad. India, China, and Brazil are in the queue ahead of us and the organisation is seemingly as resistant to change as is the UN Security Council structure.
See post 418 and related posts.
At the Exiting the EU Select Committee Mr Shankar Singham set out pretty well how we stand. His credentials are first class as his background is in international trade law, working with the WTO and involved in the accession of a variety of countries including China and India.
The UK is a WTO member.
The UK has effectively sub-contracted out it's negotiating position for the EU.
When we leave the EU we will be able to adopt the current tariff schedules as arranged for us by the EU and use them as a starting point.
The only real complication would be agriculture.
It's akin to us taking all the EU Law and putting it in to UK law for the purposes of leaving.
When asked by the committee about process, time-frame, objections from other WTO members Mr Singham was quite confident that it would not be a problem for the following reasons.
The UK, if it just transfers across the existing agreements, will not be seeking to or achieving any advantage from it's current position.
The UK is actually most likely going to offer more open trade, particularly with agriculture and this fits with the mantra of WTO.
Linked to this, the EU is most likely to have difficulties because some of it's deals such as CAP, depend on the size of the EU market and it will be shrinking by 20%.
You only need to see the statement from the Italian Ambassador ref Boris and his speech to the ambassadors. There's a lot of "mischief" going on. So many vested interests plotting (on both sides I hasten to add). It seems clear he didn't say what has been attributed to him.
I also watched what David Davis said last week live and he didn't say what was attributed to him.
Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
This is a general question, so it provides the Minister with plenty of scope to give some sort of response. Will the Government consider making any contribution in any shape or form for access to the single market?
Mr Davis
I note that the first half of the hon. Gentleman’s question was probably aimed more at you, Mr Speaker, than at me. The simple answer we have given previously—it is very important, because there is a distinction between picking off an individual policy and setting out a major criterion—is that the major criterion here—[Interruption.] I will answer him if he lets me do so. The major criterion is that we get the best possible access for goods and services to the European market. If that is included in what he is talking about, then of course we would consider it.
Whether we will or won't, it is another stock, non-answer. Davis can't say we will, he can't say we won't, he can only say it will be considered along with a range of options.
But it gets jumped on as if paying as Norway do is the plan.
Norway pays, but Norway has a huge trade surplus with the EU. Also 75% of Norway's trade is with the EU. If the balance of trade was the other way, I doubt they would consider paying.
Richard Taylor
"William Tell could take an apple off your head. Taylor could take out a processed pea."
Sid Waddell
TL DR
Bullet points WP. Like shaunetto your answers are so long that they put me off being arsed to read them
Perhaps a Podcast version, to accompany your 60 in 60...?!!
Actually no, I like it to be explained. If I wanted bullet points I would watch the BBC or read the newspapers. One line answers and "quotes" only give you what the person projecting it want's you to hear. It's like a debate where only one side turns up. I actually find this thread pretty useful as I get to hear the debate from both sides as WP usually portrays it. Bullet points are pointless points and really don't move the debate forward it just stagnates it.
Last edited by RaceTheSweeper; 05-12-2016 at 05:21 PM.
- It will all be OK Stolly
Richard Taylor
"William Tell could take an apple off your head. Taylor could take out a processed pea."
Sid Waddell
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote