Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The harsh facts that the leadership contenders need to face

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited July 5 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The harsh facts that the leadership contenders need to face

Lawyers are rarely regarded with affection.  Lawyers-turned-politicians even less so.  Nonetheless David Gauke’s speech at this week’s Lord Mayor’s banquet is worth a careful read, not least for its defence of the rule of law as a critical element underpinning democracy (a word never off the lips of some politicians wholly ignorant that something more than shouting “The people have voted” repeatedly is needed to sustain a democracy).  Gauke’s quiet praise for the unfashionable virtues of public service, intellectual rigour, a serious determination to grapple with complex problems, the wish to reach “a decision based on what is right and not necessarily what is superficially popular”, for the value of experience and evidence was doubtless welcomed by his audience.   But its applicability is wider, as he recognised.  He cannot be the only person who wishes that politicians would deal “with the world as we find it, not as we imagine or represent it to be.”

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,644
    first
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 19,234
    edited July 5
    Second, like Boris, in ability and honesty at least
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 25,474
    Great piece. (ie I agree from start to finish.)
  • glwglw Posts: 5,103
    FPT:
    Foxy said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Interesting BBC headline on the website, about May trying to restrict Boris' access to intelligence (ahem, make your own jokes).

    As interesting as the impact upon the leadership election (which, sadly, I think will be near zero) is that she thought to do that, but not fire him.

    How spectacularly dysfunctional is a government where the PM doesn't trust her own Foreign Secretary with security information?
    I'd be worried about Boris blabbing secrets to the next buxom blonde Tory aide that turns his head. If I was running the GRU such ladies would be my top recruiting target now.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 57,540
    Both Hunt and Boris voted for the Withdrawal Agreement but Boris is prepared to Leave w8th No Deal in October to deliver Brexit if no Deal delivered by then as is Hunt if no prospect of a Deal in September.

    It is Farage who is No Deal
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 75,750
    I’ve just completed a YouGov poll of Tory members.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 19,234
    On topic, their negotiating skills ought to be their key selling point; the bit they aren't highlighting is that most of the negotiation will be with their colleagues.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 75,750
    edited July 5
    On topic brilliant piece.

    Ken Clarke shows how lawyer-politicians are loved.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 1,986
    O/T

    I see that £350m/week is accurate. Who'd have thought it going by the comments on here.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 34,686
    HYUFD said:
    I presume magic grandpa didnt agree to this idea.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 3,063
    Good post. We are currently in an age, not of enlightenment, but of delusion. Brexit, and Boris Johnson are the articulation and personification of that national malady.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 3,595
    glw said:

    FPT:

    Foxy said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Interesting BBC headline on the website, about May trying to restrict Boris' access to intelligence (ahem, make your own jokes).

    As interesting as the impact upon the leadership election (which, sadly, I think will be near zero) is that she thought to do that, but not fire him.

    How spectacularly dysfunctional is a government where the PM doesn't trust her own Foreign Secretary with security information?
    I'd be worried about Boris blabbing secrets to the next buxom blonde Tory aide that turns his head. If I was running the GRU such ladies would be my top recruiting target now.
    I imagine they already have all the kompromat on the fat fuck that they'll ever need.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,003
    An excellent read on my way to work.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 75,750
    edited July 5
    Blue_rog said:

    O/T

    I see that £350m/week is accurate. Who'd have thought it going by the comments on here.

    Have you read the full judgment rather than the selective quoting by Boris Johnson’s spinner?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 16,708
    Posted my vote for Hunt this AM. Futile, I know, but still have to try and avoid Boris.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,370
    But manufacturing is no longer the principal way Britain earns its living. Services are

    Actually about 55% of the UK's exports are goods:

    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/exports

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/bulletins/uktrade/april2019#total-trade-deficit-widened-in-the-three-months-to-april-2019

    Or to put it another way 10% of the UK economy produced over half its exports.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 7,506
    Belief always defeats Facts.

    Those who claim to be swayed by Facts over Belief do so because they hold a Belief in Facts. So why is there a crisis of faith in Facts?
  • BromBrom Posts: 1,509
    Tom Watson and Jeremy Corbyn are a toxic combination destroying the Labour party. All we can do is get the popcorn out and watch.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 34,686
    edited July 5
    Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) is investing hundreds of millions of pounds to build a range of electric vehicles at its Castle Bromwich plant in Birmingham.

    The decision appears to contradict previous warnings by JLR that investment in the UK would be threatened by Brexit, and in particular a no-deal scenario.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 57,540
    Diehard Remainers must also face facts that they lost the referendum and Brexit must be delivered. A majority of Leave backing MPs in the Commons voted for the Withdrawal Agreement, it was diehard Remainer MPs who led the way in voting it down and cast the vast majority of the votes against it.

    If diehard Remainers refused to accept the result and pass the Withdrawal Agreement then they must accept that Leavers will still deliver it even if No Deal with the ultimate aim remaining a Canada style FTA allowing control of borders and regained sovereignty exactly as most Leavers voted for.

    Despite the pessimistic tone of the article remember too Liam Fox has already negotiated the basis for FTAs with Switzerland, South Korea and Australia ie significant economies and more besides.

    Canada is currently led by Trudeau who opposed Brexit and while not ruling out a FTA with the UK is in no rush to implement it, however his Liberal Party is currently neck and neck with the Conservative Party of Canada led by the pro Brexit Andrew Scheer in Canadian polls and Scheer has already promised the UK a FTA with all the trimmings if he wins the Canadian general election in the autumn (as former Conservative PM Harper has promised to help the UK negotiate a trade agreement with the EU similar to that Canada has)
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,370
    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    Why should Britain be desperate for FTAs ?

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 480

    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    Why should Britain be desperate for FTAs ?

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.

    You are making the Trump mistake of believing that trade deficits reflect trade policies rather than the savings and investment position of the economy. Putting up trade barriers of our own will make us poorer and have no effect on the trade deficit.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 30,634
    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,370
    Now while CycleFree has contributed another well written, thoughtful piece which I agree with does anyone spot what is missing ?

    Numbers especially numbers preceded by a £.

    And those £ are what trade is all about.

    Now when was the last time you heard a politician or a media 'expert' discussing trade in terms of £ ?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 480
    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers must also face facts that they lost the referendum and Brexit must be delivered. A majority of Leave backing MPs in the Commons voted for the Withdrawal Agreement, it was diehard Remainer MPs who led the way in voting it down and cast the vast majority of the votes against it.

    If diehard Remainers refused to accept the result and pass the Withdrawal Agreement then they must accept that Leavers will still deliver it even if No Deal with the ultimate aim remaining a Canada style FTA allowing control of borders and regained sovereignty exactly as most Leavers voted for.

    Despite the pessimistic tone of the article remember too Liam Fox has already negotiated the basis for FTAs with Switzerland, South Korea and Australia ie significant economies and more besides.

    Canada is currently led by Trudeau who opposed Brexit and while not ruling out a FTA with the UK is in no rush to implement it, however his Liberal Party is currently neck and neck with the Conservative Party of Canada led by the pro Brexit Andrew Scheer in Canadian polls and Scheer has already promised the UK a FTA with all the trimmings if he wins the Canadian general election in the autumn (as former Conservative PM Harper has promised to help the UK negotiate a trade agreement with the EU similar to that Canada has)

    People who are keen to negotiate an FTA with the UK after we have left the powerful trading bloc of the EU aren't necessarily doing it out of the kindness of their heart. Have you ever considered that perhaps they see a newly exited UK as in a historically weak position from which they can gain maximum concessions in the negotiations?
    There is an almost touching naivete to Brexiteers when it comes to the motives of English-speaking white foreigners.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 57,540

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 57,540

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers must also face facts that they lost the referendum and Brexit must be delivered. A majority of Leave backing MPs in the Commons voted for the Withdrawal Agreement, it was diehard Remainer MPs who led the way in voting it down and cast the vast majority of the votes against it.

    If diehard Remainers refused to accept the result and pass the Withdrawal Agreement then they must accept that Leavers will still deliver it even if No Deal with the ultimate aim remaining a Canada style FTA allowing control of borders and regained sovereignty exactly as most Leavers voted for.

    Despite the pessimistic tone of the article remember too Liam Fox has already negotiated the basis for FTAs with Switzerland, South Korea and Australia ie significant economies and more besides.

    Canada is currently led by Trudeau who opposed Brexit and while not ruling out a FTA with the UK is in no rush to implement it, however his Liberal Party is currently neck and neck with the Conservative Party of Canada led by the pro Brexit Andrew Scheer in Canadian polls and Scheer has already promised the UK a FTA with all the trimmings if he wins the Canadian general election in the autumn (as former Conservative PM Harper has promised to help the UK negotiate a trade agreement with the EU similar to that Canada has)

    People who are keen to negotiate an FTA with the UK after we have left the powerful trading bloc of the EU aren't necessarily doing it out of the kindness of their heart. Have you ever considered that perhaps they see a newly exited UK as in a historically weak position from which they can gain maximum concessions in the negotiations?
    There is an almost touching naivete to Brexiteers when it comes to the motives of English-speaking white foreigners.
    Given we are still the 5th largest economy in the world that is only really true of the USA, China and Japan and of course many countries export more to us than we do to them and will desperately want a FTA with us
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 75,750
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    Vote Leave, Boris Johnson included, said No Deal wouldn’t happen, a No Deal Brexit doesn’t respect democracy.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,370

    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    Why should Britain be desperate for FTAs ?

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.

    You are making the Trump mistake of believing that trade deficits reflect trade policies rather than the savings and investment position of the economy. Putting up trade barriers of our own will make us poorer and have no effect on the trade deficit.
    I would have thought it obvious by now that the UK is not going to live within its means and that our politicians are going to do everything they can to keeping the voters spending and house prices rising.

    Given that we need to consider what trade strategy works best for a country which continually over-consumes.

    Either that or accept we will steadily flog off our assets to foreign ownership and/or have a steadily depreciating currency.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 52,883
    edited July 5
    Interesting header, let me put a counterpoint if I will :

    On the subject of :
    "“a decision based on what is right and not necessarily what is superficially popular”"
    Let me put the counterpoint that sometimes doing what is superficially popular may well be right. In the USA, the Trump administration's willingness to throw the weight of the considerable US economy around is (bullying basically) paying dividends in terms of trade for them. It's also very popular with his base.
    Of course it might not always be the best thing to do, and Trump occasionally overreaches (A trade war with China isn't good for the world economy), but it's been a net positive for the US I feel.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,556
    edited July 5
    HYUFD said:
    It is too late for a campaign to 'Remain'. That ship has sailed. The campaign should be for the EU. The campaign that should have been run three years ago.

    A massive ad campaign in support of the EU. An initial £100 million spend. Aim it primarily at the young. Make being out of the EU look as old fashioned as not supporting gay marriage or climate change or paralympic sports. 'Proudly British Proudly European' would not be a good start.

    Just Do It!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 57,540
    edited July 5

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    Vote Leave, Boris Johnson included, said No Deal wouldn’t happen, a No Deal Brexit doesn’t respect democracy.
    Boris still wants to Leave the EU with a Deal ideally but he will Leave the EU with No Deal if necessary, so far as I recall the ballot paper said 'Should the United Kingdom Remain a member of the European Union or Leave the European Union' not 'Should the United Kingdom Remain a member of the European Union or Leave the European Union but only with a Deal with the EU'
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 11,138
    Pulpstar said:

    Interesting header, let me put a counterpoint if I will :

    On the subject of :
    "“a decision based on what is right and not necessarily what is superficially popular”"
    Let me put the counterpoint that sometimes doing what is superficially popular may well be right. In the USA, the Trump administration's willingness to throw the weight of the considerable US economy around is (bullying basically) paying dividends in terms of trade for them. It's also very popular with his base.
    Of course it might not always be the best thing to do, and Trump occasionally overreaches (A trade war with China isn't good for the world economy), but it's been a net positive for the US I feel.

    I can see a post-WTO Brexit where remainers start arguing against it based on what we're doing to other countries rather than what we're doing to our own.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 52,883
    Pulpstar said:

    Interesting header, let me put a counterpoint if I will :

    On the subject of :
    "“a decision based on what is right and not necessarily what is superficially popular”"
    Let me put the counterpoint that sometimes doing what is superficially popular may well be right. In the USA, the Trump administration's willingness to throw the weight of the considerable US economy around is (bullying basically) paying dividends in terms of trade for them. It's also very popular with his base.
    Of course it might not always be the best thing to do, and Trump occasionally overreaches (A trade war with China isn't good for the world economy), but it's been a net positive for the US I feel.

    Unfortunately we're not the US in terms of weight and size so we can't bully others post (no deal) Brexit ^^;
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 2,537

    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    Why should Britain be desperate for FTAs ?

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.

    You are making the Trump mistake of believing that trade deficits reflect trade policies rather than the savings and investment position of the economy. Putting up trade barriers of our own will make us poorer and have no effect on the trade deficit.
    Quite so. Trade barriers, including tariffs and NTBs only damage the imposer of such. There is a mercantalist thread running through the OP.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,186
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    Vote Leave, Boris Johnson included, said No Deal wouldn’t happen, a No Deal Brexit doesn’t respect democracy.
    Boris still wants to Leave the EU with a Deal ideally but he will Leave the EU with No Deal if necessary, so far as I recall the ballot paper said 'Do you want to Remain in the EU or Leave the EU' not 'Do you want to Remain in the EU or Leave the EU but only with a Deal with the EU'
    It's a shame we can't fast-forward to Boris Johnson being humiliated and the Tories below 15% in the polls.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 600
    "And yet it has repeatedly made clear that if the Withdrawal Agreement is rejected, the same issues (citizens, money and NI) will need to be addressed before a FTA can be contemplated. A hard Brexit does not remove these; it merely postpones them to a time and in circumstances considerably less favourable to Britain than now."

    Almost 1 million UK citizens live in other EU countries. A No-Deal Brexit means that the residency and travel* rights will be uncertain for a huge number of UK citizens as well as for millions of EU citizens in the UK.


    *Before someone says that travel accross borders will not not be affected, this is probably true for tourists. But if you are not a tourist, you need to prove a right to live in the country where your home address is. This is a right for EU citizens, but will overnight cease to be a right for UK citizens in the case of No-Deal Brexit. If you try and claim you are visiting as a tourist, to get back in to the country where you live, and you are found out, then you will have problems later applying to renew residency or applying for citizenship.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 9,385
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers must also face facts that they lost the referendum and Brexit must be delivered. A majority of Leave backing MPs in the Commons voted for the Withdrawal Agreement, it was diehard Remainer MPs who led the way in voting it down and cast the vast majority of the votes against it.

    If diehard Remainers refused to accept the result and pass the Withdrawal Agreement then they must accept that Leavers will still deliver it even if No Deal with the ultimate aim remaining a Canada style FTA allowing control of borders and regained sovereignty exactly as most Leavers voted for.

    Despite the pessimistic tone of the article remember too Liam Fox has already negotiated the basis for FTAs with Switzerland, South Korea and Australia ie significant economies and more besides.

    Canada is currently led by Trudeau who opposed Brexit and while not ruling out a FTA with the UK is in no rush to implement it, however his Liberal Party is currently neck and neck with the Conservative Party of Canada led by the pro Brexit Andrew Scheer in Canadian polls and Scheer has already promised the UK a FTA with all the trimmings if he wins the Canadian general election in the autumn (as former Conservative PM Harper has promised to help the UK negotiate a trade agreement with the EU similar to that Canada has)

    People who are keen to negotiate an FTA with the UK after we have left the powerful trading bloc of the EU aren't necessarily doing it out of the kindness of their heart. Have you ever considered that perhaps they see a newly exited UK as in a historically weak position from which they can gain maximum concessions in the negotiations?
    There is an almost touching naivete to Brexiteers when it comes to the motives of English-speaking white foreigners.
    Given we are still the 5th largest economy in the world that is only really true of the USA, China and Japan and of course many countries export more to us than we do to them and will desperately want a FTA with us
    Well, only those ones that do not have easy access to low tariff Brexit Britain. Why negotiate an FTA if you already have assymetrical low tariffs?

    Or are you siding with a high tarrif policy to punish British consumers, and reverse years of reducing trade barriers?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 18,543
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    Absolute fucking bollocks. Everything that is being done today from Widdicombe to Swinson is done within the context of a parliamentary democracy. Everyone is respecting democracy and are attempting to use democratic means to achieve their aim. Get a grip.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 19,234
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    Haven't you described Hunt as a "remainer" in previous posts?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 18,543
    ot - excellent header. Just a shame it has to be written (and rewritten and rewritten, no doubt).

    Most pertinent for me is the "special status" section. How very true - Little Englanders writ large.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 52,883
    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Interesting header, let me put a counterpoint if I will :

    On the subject of :
    "“a decision based on what is right and not necessarily what is superficially popular”"
    Let me put the counterpoint that sometimes doing what is superficially popular may well be right. In the USA, the Trump administration's willingness to throw the weight of the considerable US economy around is (bullying basically) paying dividends in terms of trade for them. It's also very popular with his base.
    Of course it might not always be the best thing to do, and Trump occasionally overreaches (A trade war with China isn't good for the world economy), but it's been a net positive for the US I feel.

    I can see a post-WTO Brexit where remainers start arguing against it based on what we're doing to other countries rather than what we're doing to our own.
    If that becomes the argument then we're winning but I think the major global blocs are too big to let that happen.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 11,138

    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    Why should Britain be desperate for FTAs ?

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.

    I reckon if there was a 15% tariff on imported cars, it would not make a blind bit of difference. People in Britain would still by BMWs and Mercs, it would just be a nice little earner for the Exchequer.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 75,750
    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,370
    geoffw said:

    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    Why should Britain be desperate for FTAs ?

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.

    You are making the Trump mistake of believing that trade deficits reflect trade policies rather than the savings and investment position of the economy. Putting up trade barriers of our own will make us poorer and have no effect on the trade deficit.
    Quite so. Trade barriers, including tariffs and NTBs only damage the imposer of such. There is a mercantalist thread running through the OP.
    22 consecutive years of trade deficit.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 11,138

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    If so, then we are most definitely not starving.

    That's not to say that I necessarily approve of a free for all, but some remainers have set the bar incredibly low for what constitutes success post-No Deal.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 18,543

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    No. Some of them. Some sectors would disappear overnight. But many are phlegmatic and have seen much change in their farming lifetimes but yes, it is a can of whoop-ass opened that most would prefer to have stayed shut.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 75,750
    TOPPING said:

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    No. Some of them. Some sectors would disappear overnight. But many are phlegmatic and have seen much change in their farming lifetimes but yes, it is a can of whoop-ass opened that most would prefer to have stayed shut.
    Ah well, that’s democracy, and that’s what they voted for.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 23,838
    TOPPING said:

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    No. Some of them. Some sectors would disappear overnight. But many are phlegmatic and have seen much change in their farming lifetimes but yes, it is a can of whoop-ass opened that most would prefer to have stayed shut.
    The EU Ref hustings I went to, which featured Douglas Carswell, also featured a farmer passionately in favour of leaving. His reason? Getting the EU subsidies involved a 30 page form!

    Wonder what that idiot thinks now.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,370
    tlg86 said:

    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    Why should Britain be desperate for FTAs ?

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.

    I reckon if there was a 15% tariff on imported cars, it would not make a blind bit of difference. People in Britain would still by BMWs and Mercs, it would just be a nice little earner for the Exchequer.
    There would likely be a shift at the cheaper end of the market to UK made cars but as you say a much smaller effect at the higher end.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 2,537

    geoffw said:

    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    Why should Britain be desperate for FTAs ?

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.

    You are making the Trump mistake of believing that trade deficits reflect trade policies rather than the savings and investment position of the economy. Putting up trade barriers of our own will make us poorer and have no effect on the trade deficit.
    Quite so. Trade barriers, including tariffs and NTBs only damage the imposer of such. There is a mercantalist thread running through the OP.
    22 consecutive years of trade deficit.
    Yes, we have been, and probably will continue to, live beyond our means.
    On that we agree. But I object to this "a few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous". That is self-harming mercantalism.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 1,526
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    As one who voted Remain, you'll never believe in Brexit. Not really. Not by enough.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,556
    PS. The agency that created this won 'agency of the year award' at Cannes.

    https://www.wk.com/work/nike-dream-further
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 23,838
    edited July 5
    BBC: 76% of Tory members think warnings of No Deal problems are made up or exaggerated.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 2,537

    TOPPING said:

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    No. Some of them. Some sectors would disappear overnight. But many are phlegmatic and have seen much change in their farming lifetimes but yes, it is a can of whoop-ass opened that most would prefer to have stayed shut.
    The EU Ref hustings I went to, which featured Douglas Carswell, also featured a farmer passionately in favour of leaving. His reason? Getting the EU subsidies involved a 30 page form!

    Wonder what that idiot thinks now.
    Why is he an idiot? Do you enjoy filling in forms?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 3,383
    MaxPB said:

    Posted my vote for Hunt this AM. Futile, I know, but still have to try and avoid Boris.

    Well done - but as you say, futile.

    I hope SI put a spread market up on BoJo vote share. I would buy it anywhere in the 60s.

    My prediction - 72/28.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 2,537
    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,186
    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    Nominations proposed by national governments, and yet to be confirmed by the elected parliament?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 2,537

    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    Nominations proposed by national governments, and yet to be confirmed by the elected parliament?
    Lovely jubbly.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,556

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!

    Hath not a Remainer eyes? Hath not a Remainer hands,
    organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same
    food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases,
    heal'd by the same means, warm'd and cool'd by the same winter
    and summer, as a Leaver is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If
    you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?
    And if you wrong us, do we not revenge?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,370
    geoffw said:

    geoffw said:

    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    Why should Britain be desperate for FTAs ?

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.

    You are making the Trump mistake of believing that trade deficits reflect trade policies rather than the savings and investment position of the economy. Putting up trade barriers of our own will make us poorer and have no effect on the trade deficit.
    Quite so. Trade barriers, including tariffs and NTBs only damage the imposer of such. There is a mercantalist thread running through the OP.
    22 consecutive years of trade deficit.
    Yes, we have been, and probably will continue to, live beyond our means.
    On that we agree. But I object to this "a few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous". That is self-harming mercantalism.
    Continually living beyond our means is self-harming.

    We need to consider what is harming the UK the most.

    And, as an example, would you support a FTA with the USA and accept its food standards ?

    It seems to me that if you'd don't support FTA with everyone then the discussion is where we should start erecting the barriers and how high they should be.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 3,383
    edited July 5
    What a very good header.

    Impossible to read this and not conclude (as I have long concluded) that we will (eventually) do one of two things -

    Either ratify the Withdrawal Agreement or cancel Brexit.

    Right now, I have it as a 75/25 chance respectively.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,370
    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Posted my vote for Hunt this AM. Futile, I know, but still have to try and avoid Boris.

    Well done - but as you say, futile.

    I hope SI put a spread market up on BoJo vote share. I would buy it anywhere in the 60s.

    My prediction - 72/28.
    Hunt has fallen more in my estimation than Boris has during the last two weeks albeit not to the level Boris is at.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 18,543
    kinabalu said:

    What a very good header.

    Impossible to read this and not conclude (as I have long concluded) that we will (eventually) do one of two things -

    Either ratify the Withdrawal Agreement or cancel Brexit.

    Right now, I have it as a 75/25 chance respectively.

    ratify/referendum

    I don't think we can cancel.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 12,766
    .
    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers must also face facts that they lost the referendum and Brexit must be delivered. A majority of Leave backing MPs in the Commons voted for the Withdrawal Agreement, it was diehard Remainer MPs who led the way in voting it down and cast the vast majority of the votes against it.

    If diehard Remainers refused to accept the result and pass the Withdrawal Agreement then they must accept that Leavers will still deliver it even if No Deal with the ultimate aim remaining a Canada style FTA allowing control of borders and regained sovereignty exactly as most Leavers voted for.

    Despite the pessimistic tone of the article remember too Liam Fox has already negotiated the basis for FTAs with Switzerland, South Korea and Australia ie significant economies and more besides.

    Canada is currently led by Trudeau who opposed Brexit and while not ruling out a FTA with the UK is in no rush to implement it, however his Liberal Party is currently neck and neck with the Conservative Party of Canada led by the pro Brexit Andrew Scheer in Canadian polls and Scheer has already promised the UK a FTA with all the trimmings if he wins the Canadian general election in the autumn (as former Conservative PM Harper has promised to help the UK negotiate a trade agreement with the EU similar to that Canada has)

    Diehard Tory line pushers must face the fact that repetition is rendering them increasingly tedious.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 14,956
    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    Given that two out of the last three pms (and extremely likely to be three out of four) have been appointed without the British electorate having a say, I'm not sure why anyone thinks there's any mileage in bleating about the undemocratic EU.
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 1,659
    kinabalu said:

    What a very good header.

    Impossible to read this and not conclude (as I have long concluded) that we will (eventually) do one of two things -

    Either ratify the Withdrawal Agreement or cancel Brexit.

    Right now, I have it as a 75/25 chance respectively.

    Sorry for not keeping up, but has Boris said there'll be another vote on the WA? The shift in attitude of Lisa Nandy et al is moot if there's no vote.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 9,385
    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    Yes, like the confirmation of cabinet appointees after the executive chooses. All part of the division of powers.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 9,834
    Scott_P said:
    Interesting reasoning about tax havens - I wonder why they are so keen to be taxed in the UK/Netherlands rather than Japan.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 19,234
    Surprisingly the Tory leadership contest seems to have done them a little good.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 11,556

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Posted my vote for Hunt this AM. Futile, I know, but still have to try and avoid Boris.

    Well done - but as you say, futile.

    I hope SI put a spread market up on BoJo vote share. I would buy it anywhere in the 60s.

    My prediction - 72/28.
    Hunt has fallen more in my estimation than Boris has during the last two weeks albeit not to the level Boris is at.
    I wonder who put the story out that No 10 kept secrets from Johnson when he was FS because he wasn't to be trusted? Mrs M perhaps? I mean she must loathe him. Most of us do and he hasn't even stabbed us in the back.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,186
    Foxy said:

    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    Yes, like the confirmation of cabinet appointees after the executive chooses. All part of the division of powers.
    Imagine if the UK parliament had to approve individual cabinet appointments...
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 600
    tlg86 said:

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    If so, then we are most definitely not starving.
    That's great news.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 1,499
    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    First off all substitute the word chairman for president as that is all it means.
    Secondly every single appointment requires either U.K. PM or elected MEPs involvement by peddling these lies you continue to try and perpetuate the myth of the ‘undemocratic’ EU. You’d be better challenging Farage to get off his arse and do some work to earn his salary.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    Vote Leave, Boris Johnson included, said No Deal wouldn’t happen, a No Deal Brexit doesn’t respect democracy.
    The ballot paper just said leave or remain , it didnt say how, you can blame your chum Cameron for that
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 4,368

    TOPPING said:

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    No. Some of them. Some sectors would disappear overnight. But many are phlegmatic and have seen much change in their farming lifetimes but yes, it is a can of whoop-ass opened that most would prefer to have stayed shut.
    The EU Ref hustings I went to, which featured Douglas Carswell, also featured a farmer passionately in favour of leaving. His reason? Getting the EU subsidies involved a 30 page form!

    Wonder what that idiot thinks now.
    Didn't Phil Hammond promise to replicate the subsidies in full from his war chest? Of course, he'll soon be out on his ear, but presumably Boris also has that expenditure inked in.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,186
    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    Vote Leave, Boris Johnson included, said No Deal wouldn’t happen, a No Deal Brexit doesn’t respect democracy.
    The ballot paper just said leave or remain , it didnt say how, you can blame your chum Cameron for that
    The 2017 election manifestos did say something about how, and more people voted for parties ruling out no deal than voted Leave in 2016.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    Vote Leave, Boris Johnson included, said No Deal wouldn’t happen, a No Deal Brexit doesn’t respect democracy.
    Boris still wants to Leave the EU with a Deal ideally but he will Leave the EU with No Deal if necessary, so far as I recall the ballot paper said 'Should the United Kingdom Remain a member of the European Union or Leave the European Union' not 'Should the United Kingdom Remain a member of the European Union or Leave the European Union but only with a Deal with the EU'
    Exactly
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 600

    Foxy said:

    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    Yes, like the confirmation of cabinet appointees after the executive chooses. All part of the division of powers.
    Imagine if the UK parliament had to approve individual cabinet appointments...
    That wouldn't take long. Just an hour in parliament. Only if the Prime Miister does not have the confidence in the hous would this be a problem.

    I think in Germany the cabinet ministers do have to be approved by the Bundestag.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 11,905
    The Independent story linked to is six months old. Have there been no developments since?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 18,543

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Posted my vote for Hunt this AM. Futile, I know, but still have to try and avoid Boris.

    Well done - but as you say, futile.

    I hope SI put a spread market up on BoJo vote share. I would buy it anywhere in the 60s.

    My prediction - 72/28.
    Hunt has fallen more in my estimation than Boris has during the last two weeks albeit not to the level Boris is at.
    Agree with that. Still voted for him, that said.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 2,802
    kinabalu said:

    What a very good header.

    Impossible to read this and not conclude (as I have long concluded) that we will (eventually) do one of two things -

    Either ratify the Withdrawal Agreement or cancel Brexit.

    Right now, I have it as a 75/25 chance respectively.

    I'd say it was the other way round.

    We will only ratify the WA if the ERG and DUP accept it. And the ERG will have to eat a veritable banquet of their own words to do that. The DUP will never accept the backstop. And the BXP will continue to cry betrayal if anything short of no deal is pushed through. And will Labour MPs back a Boris deal when they did not back the same deal under May? Hard to see that happening - Labour's contempt for Boris is more visceral than their dislike of May. I just do not see how a HoC majority can be built for a deal.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 14,956
    eristdoof said:

    tlg86 said:

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    If so, then we are most definitely not starving.
    That's great news.
    We'll probably be able to dispense with food banks..
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,186
    eristdoof said:

    Foxy said:

    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    Yes, like the confirmation of cabinet appointees after the executive chooses. All part of the division of powers.
    Imagine if the UK parliament had to approve individual cabinet appointments...
    That wouldn't take long. Just an hour in parliament. Only if the Prime Miister does not have the confidence in the hous would this be a problem.
    It's not hard to imagine the government as a whole having the confidence of the HoC but there being no majority to approve Chris Grayling's appointment, for example.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 18,543
    edited July 5

    TOPPING said:

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    No. Some of them. Some sectors would disappear overnight. But many are phlegmatic and have seen much change in their farming lifetimes but yes, it is a can of whoop-ass opened that most would prefer to have stayed shut.
    The EU Ref hustings I went to, which featured Douglas Carswell, also featured a farmer passionately in favour of leaving. His reason? Getting the EU subsidies involved a 30 page form!

    Wonder what that idiot thinks now.
    Didn't Phil Hammond promise to replicate the subsidies in full from his war chest? Of course, he'll soon be out on his ear, but presumably Boris also has that expenditure inked in.
    Brexiters: A No Deal Brexit will let us reclaim £39bn we would have paid to the EU.
    Also Brexiters: We will spend significantly more than £26bn from our war chest if we no deal Brexit.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 21,028
    nichomar said:

    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    First off all substitute the word chairman for president as that is all it means.
    Secondly every single appointment requires either U.K. PM or elected MEPs involvement by peddling these lies you continue to try and perpetuate the myth of the ‘undemocratic’ EU. You’d be better challenging Farage to get off his arse and do some work to earn his salary.
    Interesting definition of democracy.

    By the same logic the UK PM is involved in appointing new members to the House of Lords. So is the House of Lords democratic in your eyes? Are people who complain about the 'undemocratic' Lords "peddling lies" in your eyes?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 21,028
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    No. Some of them. Some sectors would disappear overnight. But many are phlegmatic and have seen much change in their farming lifetimes but yes, it is a can of whoop-ass opened that most would prefer to have stayed shut.
    The EU Ref hustings I went to, which featured Douglas Carswell, also featured a farmer passionately in favour of leaving. His reason? Getting the EU subsidies involved a 30 page form!

    Wonder what that idiot thinks now.
    Didn't Phil Hammond promise to replicate the subsidies in full from his war chest? Of course, he'll soon be out on his ear, but presumably Boris also has that expenditure inked in.
    Brexiters: A No Deal Brexit will let us reclaim £39bn we would have paid to the EU.
    Also Brexiters: We will spend significantly more than £26bn from our war chest if we no deal Brexit.
    Sounds like a good deal to me. Leaves £13 bn left.in war chest.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 9,018
    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    I used to say that a lot of misunderstandings regarding the EU derived from the fact that they use the word "president" to mean somebody who presides over a group, a usage which we used to use (eg "President of the Board of Trade") but which has been largely supplanted by the words "speaker", "secretary" or "chairman" in Anglophone usage. However, given my increasing conviction that people believe things not because they are true but that they serve their needs, there may be little point in explaining this to you. So I'll get on with understanding the world as it is, and you...well, you do you.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 18,543

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I am right in thinking No Deal absolutely screws (Leave supporting) farmers?

    No. Some of them. Some sectors would disappear overnight. But many are phlegmatic and have seen much change in their farming lifetimes but yes, it is a can of whoop-ass opened that most would prefer to have stayed shut.
    The EU Ref hustings I went to, which featured Douglas Carswell, also featured a farmer passionately in favour of leaving. His reason? Getting the EU subsidies involved a 30 page form!

    Wonder what that idiot thinks now.
    Didn't Phil Hammond promise to replicate the subsidies in full from his war chest? Of course, he'll soon be out on his ear, but presumably Boris also has that expenditure inked in.
    Brexiters: A No Deal Brexit will let us reclaim £39bn we would have paid to the EU.
    Also Brexiters: We will spend significantly more than £26bn from our war chest if we no deal Brexit.
    Sounds like a good deal to me. Leaves £13 bn left.in war chest.
    Depends how much "significantly more" is.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 9,385

    Foxy said:

    geoffw said:

    Don't you all love the democratic elections of the EU's multiple presidencies?

    Yes, like the confirmation of cabinet appointees after the executive chooses. All part of the division of powers.
    Imagine if the UK parliament had to approve individual cabinet appointments...
    Yes, many democratic organisations do, such as the USA. Not here though, even when the minister is from outside parliament.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,128

    Belief always defeats Facts.

    Those who claim to be swayed by Facts over Belief do so because they hold a Belief in Facts. So why is there a crisis of faith in Facts?

    Do you have any data to back that up?
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 4,368

    The Independent story linked to is six months old. Have there been no developments since?
    I suspect she just leapt on any story that was vaguely anti-EU without bothering to check the date. A bit of panic setting in amongst the Leavers?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 23,893
    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Diehard Remainers

    You voted REMAIN. That makes you a Remainer!
    No, it makes me someone who respects democracy and the Leave vote.

    Not a diehard Remainer who refuses to respect democracy and is determined to Stop Brexit
    Vote Leave, Boris Johnson included, said No Deal wouldn’t happen, a No Deal Brexit doesn’t respect democracy.
    The ballot paper just said leave or remain , it didnt say how, you can blame your chum Cameron for that
    No. Cameron wasn't arguing for leave; he was arguing for remain. He did the legwork, got an agreement with the EU, and that was remain's position. There was no way he could have set out leave's position as well.

    Leave, on the other hand, lied. They made contradictory promises that have proved impossible to reconcile, and hence we've ended up in the current position.

    Hardcore leavers - and especially the Brexiteers - need to start taking some responsibility for this mess.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 2,537
    edited July 5

    geoffw said:

    geoffw said:

    A country which sells services needs to think much harder than Britain has done about how to do so in a world where other countries are able and may – in order to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis a Britain desperate for FTAs – be very willing to erect NTBs against Britain’s service sectors.

    ..snip ..

    A country which has had 22 consecutive years of trade deficits might not be following the most appropriate trade policy.

    Especially when those trade deficits are based upon trade deficits from its biggest FTA.

    Perhaps before Britain thinks about how to get more FTAs it needs to think first whether FTAs are good for Britain.

    A few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous.

    You are making the Trump mistake of believing that trade deficits reflect trade policies rather than the savings and investment position of the economy. Putting up trade barriers of our own will make us poorer and have no effect on the trade deficit.
    Quite so. Trade barriers, including tariffs and NTBs only damage the imposer of such. There is a mercantalist thread running through the OP.
    22 consecutive years of trade deficit.
    Yes, we have been, and probably will continue to, live beyond our means.
    On that we agree. But I object to this "a few more NTBs against other countries might be advantageous". That is self-harming mercantalism.
    Continually living beyond our means is self-harming.

    We need to consider what is harming the UK the most.

    And, as an example, would you support a FTA with the USA and accept its food standards ?

    It seems to me that if you'd don't support FTA with everyone then the discussion is where we should start erecting the barriers and how high they should be.
    "Continually living beyond our means is self-harming."
    The exchange rate has been too high.
    "would you support a FTA with the USA and accept its food standards ?"
    That is a matter of negotiation. I am not against chlorine-washing. Like many people I consume chlorine-washed pre-packed salads. The food standards thing is an NTB hidden behind the guise of phyto-sanitary standards. But I would be pleased if we and they improved those standards to an acceptable level.
    "It seems to me that if you'd don't support FTA with everyone then the discussion is where we should start erecting the barriers and how high they should be."
    There is a simple and obvious alternative, namely to remove all our own tariffs. That benefits UK consumers. Those producers who need to be behind tariff/NTB will obviously need to adapt.
This discussion has been closed.