|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 31, 2023 12:06:00 GMT
The TPTPP is a trade group, naturally there are rules of membership and a system of arbitrating between members in the event of disputes or claims of unfair practice contrary to the rules of the association.
If the EU was the same as it used to be when the UK joined the EEC which I voted to remain in I would have no problem, but it isn't.
The EU is a single market and customs union. The EU has powers to regulates on a host of matters including agriculture, fisheries, environment, consumer protection (hence all the red tape trying to sell into the EU), employment, other social affairs, transport, trans European networks, energy, migration, public health and safety, research, and other matters.
But more importantly under Maastricht and I quote from the EU web site: "In certain areas, the EU alone is able to pass laws. The role of member countries is limited to applying the law, unless the EU authorises them to adopt certain laws themselves. In these areas, the EU has what the treaties call call exclusive competences." Furthermore all EU law is subject to legal judgement by the ECOJ .
Under Maastricht EU law and judicial decisions and citizenship take priority over national interests.
So for example Denmark wanted to stop the sale of petrol/diesel new car in 2030 like the UK are doing, but were stopped by the EU. The ECOJ forced the UK government to increase VAT on solar panels when the UK was a member. It isn't about what is justice, its about protecting German corporate interests. "He who pays the piper calls the tune".
Even more importantly the EU is committed to ever closer union and removing all effective power from individual countries. It has already started after the UK left with moves to fiscal control by the EU Commission. Matters like foreign policy, armed forces, common policing, etc. will follow. There are also moves to majority voting to speed up progress on legislation, but that will not be a simple majority but be rigged so that the interests of Germany and France cannot be oven rules by the rest.
Returning to trade, the EU customs union is much smaller with the loss of the UK and will not get much bigger. The EU organic growth is slow compared with the rest of the world's economy; it is quite reasonable to suppose that UK trade with the EU would actually decline in the future had the UK stayed in the EU as the east European states grow and take a larger share of the cake.
Conversely the CPTPP is growing in size and its members are also growing faster than the EU. It is the future.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Mar 31, 2023 13:55:46 GMT
The TPTPP is a trade group, naturally there are rules of membership and a system of arbitrating between members in the event of disputes or claims of unfair practice contrary to the rules of the association. If the EU was the same as it used to be when the UK joined the EEC which I voted to remain in I would have no problem, but it isn't. The EU is a single market and customs union. The EU has powers to regulates on a host of matters including agriculture, fisheries, environment, consumer protection (hence all the red tape trying to sell into the EU), employment, other social affairs, transport, trans European networks, energy, migration, public health and safety, research, and other matters. But more importantly under Maastricht and I quote from the EU web site: "In certain areas, the EU alone is able to pass laws. The role of member countries is limited to applying the law, unless the EU authorises them to adopt certain laws themselves. In these areas, the EU has what the treaties call call exclusive competences." Furthermore all EU law is subject to legal judgement by the ECOJ . Under Maastricht EU law and judicial decisions and citizenship take priority over national interests. So for example Denmark wanted to stop the sale of petrol/diesel new car in 2030 like the UK are doing, but were stopped by the EU. The ECOJ forced the UK government to increase VAT on solar panels when the UK was a member. It isn't about what is justice, its about protecting German corporate interests. " He who pays the piper calls the tune". Even more importantly the EU is committed to ever closer union and removing all effective power from individual countries. It has already started after the UK left with moves to fiscal control by the EU Commission. Matters like foreign policy, armed forces, common policing, etc. will follow. There are also moves to majority voting to speed up progress on legislation, but that will not be a simple majority but be rigged so that the interests of Germany and France cannot be oven rules by the rest. Returning to trade, the EU customs union is much smaller with the loss of the UK and will not get much bigger. The EU organic growth is slow compared with the rest of the world's economy; it is quite reasonable to suppose that UK trade with the EU would actually decline in the future had the UK stayed in the EU as the east European states grow and take a larger share of the cake. Conversely the CPTPP is growing in size and its members are also growing faster than the EU. It is the future. Oh, the irony! At what point will membership of the CPTPP be a 'threat' to our 'sovereignty' I wonder, at which point we'll probably go through the whole sorry debacle all over again!
|
|
|
Post by toppercorner on Mar 31, 2023 14:07:34 GMT
Genuine question, if we had to vote to leave our biggest and closest trading bloc, why don't we have to vote to join a lesser trading bloc?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Mar 31, 2023 14:16:25 GMT
The TPTPP is a trade group, naturally there are rules of membership and a system of arbitrating between members in the event of disputes or claims of unfair practice contrary to the rules of the association. If the EU was the same as it used to be when the UK joined the EEC which I voted to remain in I would have no problem, but it isn't. The EU is a single market and customs union. The EU has powers to regulates on a host of matters including agriculture, fisheries, environment, consumer protection (hence all the red tape trying to sell into the EU), employment, other social affairs, transport, trans European networks, energy, migration, public health and safety, research, and other matters. But more importantly under Maastricht and I quote from the EU web site: "In certain areas, the EU alone is able to pass laws. The role of member countries is limited to applying the law, unless the EU authorises them to adopt certain laws themselves. In these areas, the EU has what the treaties call call exclusive competences." Furthermore all EU law is subject to legal judgement by the ECOJ . Under Maastricht EU law and judicial decisions and citizenship take priority over national interests. So for example Denmark wanted to stop the sale of petrol/diesel new car in 2030 like the UK are doing, but were stopped by the EU. The ECOJ forced the UK government to increase VAT on solar panels when the UK was a member. It isn't about what is justice, its about protecting German corporate interests. " He who pays the piper calls the tune". Even more importantly the EU is committed to ever closer union and removing all effective power from individual countries. It has already started after the UK left with moves to fiscal control by the EU Commission. Matters like foreign policy, armed forces, common policing, etc. will follow. There are also moves to majority voting to speed up progress on legislation, but that will not be a simple majority but be rigged so that the interests of Germany and France cannot be oven rules by the rest. Returning to trade, the EU customs union is much smaller with the loss of the UK and will not get much bigger. The EU organic growth is slow compared with the rest of the world's economy; it is quite reasonable to suppose that UK trade with the EU would actually decline in the future had the UK stayed in the EU as the east European states grow and take a larger share of the cake. Conversely the CPTPP is growing in size and its members are also growing faster than the EU. It is the future. Oh, the irony! At what point will membership of the CPTPP be a 'threat' to our 'sovereignty' I wonder, at which point we'll probably go through the whole sorry debacle all over again! And of course we were a major player with a strong voice. Which we won't be under this shambles.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 31, 2023 14:29:38 GMT
Genuine question, if we had to vote to leave our biggest and closest trading bloc, why don't we have to vote to join a lesser trading bloc? No reason at all. In fact we could have a vote to join the EU, but it isn't a trading block, it's a customs union with legislative powers. If we voted to join, we could do the hokey cokey ; obvious my favourite tune! Heath took the UK into the EEC without a vote, or even an election mandate. He just adopted VAT and took us in. That is the sovereignty of Parliament. Wilson held a referendum to decide whether to stay in or leave the EEC.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Mar 31, 2023 14:33:29 GMT
The TPTPP is a trade group, naturally there are rules of membership and a system of arbitrating between members in the event of disputes or claims of unfair practice contrary to the rules of the association. If the EU was the same as it used to be when the UK joined the EEC which I voted to remain in I would have no problem, but it isn't. The EU is a single market and customs union. The EU has powers to regulates on a host of matters including agriculture, fisheries, environment, consumer protection (hence all the red tape trying to sell into the EU), employment, other social affairs, transport, trans European networks, energy, migration, public health and safety, research, and other matters. But more importantly under Maastricht and I quote from the EU web site: "In certain areas, the EU alone is able to pass laws. The role of member countries is limited to applying the law, unless the EU authorises them to adopt certain laws themselves. In these areas, the EU has what the treaties call call exclusive competences." Furthermore all EU law is subject to legal judgement by the ECOJ . Under Maastricht EU law and judicial decisions and citizenship take priority over national interests. So for example Denmark wanted to stop the sale of petrol/diesel new car in 2030 like the UK are doing, but were stopped by the EU. The ECOJ forced the UK government to increase VAT on solar panels when the UK was a member. It isn't about what is justice, its about protecting German corporate interests. " He who pays the piper calls the tune". Even more importantly the EU is committed to ever closer union and removing all effective power from individual countries. It has already started after the UK left with moves to fiscal control by the EU Commission. Matters like foreign policy, armed forces, common policing, etc. will follow. There are also moves to majority voting to speed up progress on legislation, but that will not be a simple majority but be rigged so that the interests of Germany and France cannot be oven rules by the rest. Returning to trade, the EU customs union is much smaller with the loss of the UK and will not get much bigger. The EU organic growth is slow compared with the rest of the world's economy; it is quite reasonable to suppose that UK trade with the EU would actually decline in the future had the UK stayed in the EU as the east European states grow and take a larger share of the cake. Conversely the CPTPP is growing in size and its members are also growing faster than the EU. It is the future. Overlooking the whole "Sovereignty " hypocrisy you may care to comment on the following 1. Government Economic Impact Assessment concludes it will add 0.08% to UK GDP over 10 years 2. UK Exports to EU in 2022 were £340Bn Exports to CPTPP Countries in 2022 were 17% of that at £60Bn. Where do you see that split going over next 5/10 years 3. The stated main benefit of joining CPTPP were access (UK already had that except for Malaysia and Brunei) and reduced or zero Tariffs. Under CPTPP rules of Origin to qualify for reduced Tariffs 70% must be sourced within CPTPP Members. Given current Import patterns how many years/decades do you think it will take UK Companies to avail of reduced Tariffs? Do you think CPTPP will have any Environmental effects by extending Import/Export distances? 4. Chapter 18 of CPTPP covers Intellectual Property This is what Ho Committee have to say, do you agree? a) The committee notes that the rules of the CPTPP agreement directly conflict with the European Patent Convention, which raises the prospect of significant economic damage to the UK's patent industry. b) The report raises questions about whether the CPTPP's approach to food standards could be at odds with the UK's current precautionary approach, under which domestic restrictions on the use of antibiotics and levels of pesticides can be imposed. Food imports produced to lower standards could risk undercutting UK farmers and undermining the UK's food standards regime. c) Overall, we found that immediate economic benefits of CPTPP membership are limited, but the agreement may open opportunities for collaboration and deeper relations in the Asia-Pacific region. “The marginal economic benefits in the medium term must be set against some clear risks to UK interests within the existing agreement. In particular, there are significant concerns in relation Intellectual Property protections, where CPTPP clauses clash with existing UK law. Accepting these could force the UK out of the European Patent Convention, from which our companies benefit, and increase costs to the NHS of generic medicines. “There are similar concerns over food standards, given the contradictions between the UK's precautionary approach and CPTPP's science-based approach to regulation. “If we cannot negotiate safeguards in these areas, then the economic gains from CPTPP accession could be severely curtailed, or disappear entirely. The biggest question, which the Government must answer, is whether carve-outs from any obligations at odds with UK interests will be on the table.” Are you OK with changing UK Law to comply with CPTPP Rules? committees.parliament.uk/committee/448/international-agreements-committee/news/158954/nhs-costs-food-standards-and-ip-must-be-protected-in-cptpp-trade-negotiations-says-committee
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Mar 31, 2023 14:36:28 GMT
Genuine question, if we had to vote to leave our biggest and closest trading bloc, why don't we have to vote to join a lesser trading bloc? No reason at all. In fact we could have a vote to join the EU, but it isn't a trading block, it's a customs union with legislative powers. If we voted to join, we could do the hokey cokey ; obvious my favourite tune! Heath took the UK into the EEC without a vote, or even an election mandate. He just adopted VAT and took us in. That is the sovereignty of Parliament. Wilson held a referendum to decide whether to stay in or leave the EEC.
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on Mar 31, 2023 14:40:45 GMT
yes, i can remember when that latvian dwarf mp told david cameron to fuck off when we were trying to negotiate some change to eu workings at the big conflab in riga. if we were the major player you suggest and not just bankrolling franco/german empire building , cameron would've come back with some tangible improvements and brexit might not have happened. as it turned out he came back embarrassed with his tale between his legs and the rest is history.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Mar 31, 2023 14:56:23 GMT
yes, i can remember when that latvian dwarf mp told david cameron to fuck off when we were trying to negotiate some change to eu workings at the big conflab in riga. if we were the major player you suggest and not just bankrolling franco/german empire building , cameron would've come back with some tangible improvements and brexit might not have happened. as it turned out he came back embarrassed with his tale between his legs and the rest is history. There have been lots of concessions and you know it. Have a look at the money we got back rather than what we put in. Facts not outright lies tend to be best mate.
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on Mar 31, 2023 14:58:33 GMT
the trouble with the money we got back was that the eu told us how we had to spend it .
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Mar 31, 2023 15:05:41 GMT
yes, i can remember when that latvian dwarf mp told david cameron to fuck off when we were trying to negotiate some change to eu workings at the big conflab in riga. if we were the major player you suggest and not just bankrolling franco/german empire building , cameron would've come back with some tangible improvements and brexit might not have happened. as it turned out he came back embarrassed with his tale between his legs and the rest is history. Why do you think he campaigned to remain in EU then? Is Ritual Humiliation popular amongst the Eton set?
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 31, 2023 15:06:44 GMT
The TPTPP is a trade group, naturally there are rules of membership and a system of arbitrating between members in the event of disputes or claims of unfair practice contrary to the rules of the association. If the EU was the same as it used to be when the UK joined the EEC which I voted to remain in I would have no problem, but it isn't. The EU is a single market and customs union. The EU has powers to regulates on a host of matters including agriculture, fisheries, environment, consumer protection (hence all the red tape trying to sell into the EU), employment, other social affairs, transport, trans European networks, energy, migration, public health and safety, research, and other matters. But more importantly under Maastricht and I quote from the EU web site: "In certain areas, the EU alone is able to pass laws. The role of member countries is limited to applying the law, unless the EU authorises them to adopt certain laws themselves. In these areas, the EU has what the treaties call call exclusive competences." Furthermore all EU law is subject to legal judgement by the ECOJ . Under Maastricht EU law and judicial decisions and citizenship take priority over national interests. So for example Denmark wanted to stop the sale of petrol/diesel new car in 2030 like the UK are doing, but were stopped by the EU. The ECOJ forced the UK government to increase VAT on solar panels when the UK was a member. It isn't about what is justice, its about protecting German corporate interests. " He who pays the piper calls the tune". Even more importantly the EU is committed to ever closer union and removing all effective power from individual countries. It has already started after the UK left with moves to fiscal control by the EU Commission. Matters like foreign policy, armed forces, common policing, etc. will follow. There are also moves to majority voting to speed up progress on legislation, but that will not be a simple majority but be rigged so that the interests of Germany and France cannot be oven rules by the rest. Returning to trade, the EU customs union is much smaller with the loss of the UK and will not get much bigger. The EU organic growth is slow compared with the rest of the world's economy; it is quite reasonable to suppose that UK trade with the EU would actually decline in the future had the UK stayed in the EU as the east European states grow and take a larger share of the cake. Conversely the CPTPP is growing in size and its members are also growing faster than the EU. It is the future. Overlooking the whole "Sovereignty " hypocrisy you may care to comment on the following 1. Government Economic Impact Assessment concludes it will add 0.08% to UK GDP over 10 years 2. UK Exports to EU in 2022 were £340Bn Exports to CPTPP Countries in 2022 were 17% of that at £60Bn. Where do you see that split going over next 5/10 years 3. The stated main benefit of joining CPTPP were access (UK already had that except for Malaysia and Brunei) and reduced or zero Tariffs. Under CPTPP rules of Origin to qualify for reduced Tariffs 70% must be sourced within CPTPP Members. Given current Import patterns how many years/decades do you think it will take UK Companies to avail of reduced Tariffs? Do you think CPTPP will have any Environmental effects by extending Import/Export distances? 4. Chapter 18 of CPTPP covers Intellectual Property This is what Ho Committee have to say, do you agree? a) The committee notes that the rules of the CPTPP agreement directly conflict with the European Patent Convention, which raises the prospect of significant economic damage to the UK's patent industry. b) The report raises questions about whether the CPTPP's approach to food standards could be at odds with the UK's current precautionary approach, under which domestic restrictions on the use of antibiotics and levels of pesticides can be imposed. Food imports produced to lower standards could risk undercutting UK farmers and undermining the UK's food standards regime. c) Overall, we found that immediate economic benefits of CPTPP membership are limited, but the agreement may open opportunities for collaboration and deeper relations in the Asia-Pacific region. “The marginal economic benefits in the medium term must be set against some clear risks to UK interests within the existing agreement. In particular, there are significant concerns in relation Intellectual Property protections, where CPTPP clauses clash with existing UK law. Accepting these could force the UK out of the European Patent Convention, from which our companies benefit, and increase costs to the NHS of generic medicines. “There are similar concerns over food standards, given the contradictions between the UK's precautionary approach and CPTPP's science-based approach to regulation. “If we cannot negotiate safeguards in these areas, then the economic gains from CPTPP accession could be severely curtailed, or disappear entirely. The biggest question, which the Government must answer, is whether carve-outs from any obligations at odds with UK interests will be on the table.” Are you OK with changing UK Law to comply with CPTPP Rules? committees.parliament.uk/committee/448/international-agreements-committee/news/158954/nhs-costs-food-standards-and-ip-must-be-protected-in-cptpp-trade-negotiations-says-committeeI don't understand "sovereignty hypocrisy". I am very happy to join the CPTPP along with my relatives in New Zealand and Australia and abide by its rules of membership just as for other international organisations like WTO. I was happy to be in the EEC when we joined in the 70. It is a shame Trump pulled the US out of the CPTPP, maybe a future American administration will take the US back in. We already have trade deals with many of the members but in the future those deals will become "deeper" as has been done with Japan and currently in progress with Canada. The UK is now negotiating new trade deals that suit the UK and not having to accept trade deals negotiated by the EU for the benefit of the EU. It is clear from your post that "project fear" now applies to joining other trade groups as it did during the revenue campaign about leaving the EU.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Mar 31, 2023 15:16:57 GMT
Overlooking the whole "Sovereignty " hypocrisy you may care to comment on the following 1. Government Economic Impact Assessment concludes it will add 0.08% to UK GDP over 10 years 2. UK Exports to EU in 2022 were £340Bn Exports to CPTPP Countries in 2022 were 17% of that at £60Bn. Where do you see that split going over next 5/10 years 3. The stated main benefit of joining CPTPP were access (UK already had that except for Malaysia and Brunei) and reduced or zero Tariffs. Under CPTPP rules of Origin to qualify for reduced Tariffs 70% must be sourced within CPTPP Members. Given current Import patterns how many years/decades do you think it will take UK Companies to avail of reduced Tariffs? Do you think CPTPP will have any Environmental effects by extending Import/Export distances? 4. Chapter 18 of CPTPP covers Intellectual Property This is what Ho Committee have to say, do you agree? a) The committee notes that the rules of the CPTPP agreement directly conflict with the European Patent Convention, which raises the prospect of significant economic damage to the UK's patent industry. b) The report raises questions about whether the CPTPP's approach to food standards could be at odds with the UK's current precautionary approach, under which domestic restrictions on the use of antibiotics and levels of pesticides can be imposed. Food imports produced to lower standards could risk undercutting UK farmers and undermining the UK's food standards regime. c) Overall, we found that immediate economic benefits of CPTPP membership are limited, but the agreement may open opportunities for collaboration and deeper relations in the Asia-Pacific region. “The marginal economic benefits in the medium term must be set against some clear risks to UK interests within the existing agreement. In particular, there are significant concerns in relation Intellectual Property protections, where CPTPP clauses clash with existing UK law. Accepting these could force the UK out of the European Patent Convention, from which our companies benefit, and increase costs to the NHS of generic medicines. “There are similar concerns over food standards, given the contradictions between the UK's precautionary approach and CPTPP's science-based approach to regulation. “If we cannot negotiate safeguards in these areas, then the economic gains from CPTPP accession could be severely curtailed, or disappear entirely. The biggest question, which the Government must answer, is whether carve-outs from any obligations at odds with UK interests will be on the table.” Are you OK with changing UK Law to comply with CPTPP Rules? committees.parliament.uk/committee/448/international-agreements-committee/news/158954/nhs-costs-food-standards-and-ip-must-be-protected-in-cptpp-trade-negotiations-says-committeeI don't understand "sovereignty hypocrisy". I am very happy to join the CPTPP along with my relatives in New Zealand and Australia and abide by its rules of membership just as for other international organisations like WTO. I was happy to be in the EEC when we joined in the 70. It is a shame Trump pulled the US out of the CPTPP, maybe a future American administration will take the US back in. We already have trade deals with many of the members but in the future those deals will become "deeper" as has been done with Japan and currently in progress with Canada. The UK is now negotiating new trade deals that suit the UK and not having to accept trade deals negotiated by the EU for the benefit of the EU. It is clear from your post that "project fear" now applies to joining other trade groups as it did during the revenue campaign about leaving the EU. Watched a item on the news the other day About the rapid rise in manufacturing in Mexico Where American companies are moving there production from China to Mexico It could be very useful to have a comprehensive trade deal with Mexico in the future
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Mar 31, 2023 15:18:17 GMT
Genuine question, if we had to vote to leave our biggest and closest trading bloc, why don't we have to vote to join a lesser trading bloc? First, because joining CPTPP hasn't been weaponised in the same ideological and career enhancing way that certain politicians chose to do with regard to leaving the EU. Therefore, I would wager that 90% of the public knows nothing about it, which suits the government and Brexiteers afraid of being accused of hypocrisy. Second, because of the damage that Brexit is continuing to do to the UK economy and public services, anything that might help ameliorate that damage, even to the tune of just 0.08% of GDP, is desperately welcome.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Mar 31, 2023 15:36:01 GMT
the trouble with the money we got back was that the eu told us how we had to spend it . Not necessarily a bad thing considering the conservatives spending record. At least it gets invested in initiatives across the country rather than in some tory donors back pocket.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Mar 31, 2023 15:40:25 GMT
Genuine question, if we had to vote to leave our biggest and closest trading bloc, why don't we have to vote to join a lesser trading bloc? First, because joining CPTPP hasn't been weaponised in the same ideological and career enhancing way that certain politicians chose to do with regard to leaving the EU. Therefore, I would wager that 90% of the public knows nothing about it, which suits the government and Brexiteers afraid of being accused of hypocrisy. Second, because of the damage that Brexit is continuing to do to the UK economy and public services, anything that might help ameliorate that damage, even to the tune of just 0.08% of GDP, is desperately welcome. So basically the government took an axe to the keel of our economy and we have to be grateful to them for stuffing a tissue in one of the gaping holes in the ship they actively chose to sink?
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 31, 2023 15:43:47 GMT
I don't understand "sovereignty hypocrisy". I am very happy to join the CPTPP along with my relatives in New Zealand and Australia and abide by its rules of membership just as for other international organisations like WTO. I was happy to be in the EEC when we joined in the 70. It is a shame Trump pulled the US out of the CPTPP, maybe a future American administration will take the US back in. We already have trade deals with many of the members but in the future those deals will become "deeper" as has been done with Japan and currently in progress with Canada. The UK is now negotiating new trade deals that suit the UK and not having to accept trade deals negotiated by the EU for the benefit of the EU. It is clear from your post that "project fear" now applies to joining other trade groups as it did during the revenue campaign about leaving the EU. Watched a item on the news the other day About the rapid rise in manufacturing in Mexico Where American companies are moving there production from China to Mexico It could be very useful to have a comprehensive trade deal with Mexico in the future Trade negotiations with Mexico started last May with a target to complete within 2 years. www.foley.com/en/insights/publications/2022/05/uk-mexico-free-trade-agreement-negotiationsI covered this in one of my quarterly reviews last year highlighting that Mexico's economy is expanding rapidly and will be a major economy by the 2030s. My guess is the government will seek to join the North American trade group when a deal is concluded with Mexico as a backdoor route to a trade deal with the US. That is unlikely to be the present Tory government of course! en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Mar 31, 2023 15:44:04 GMT
The TPTPP is a trade group, naturally there are rules of membership and a system of arbitrating between members in the event of disputes or claims of unfair practice contrary to the rules of the association. If the EU was the same as it used to be when the UK joined the EEC which I voted to remain in I would have no problem, but it isn't. The EU is a single market and customs union. The EU has powers to regulates on a host of matters including agriculture, fisheries, environment, consumer protection (hence all the red tape trying to sell into the EU), employment, other social affairs, transport, trans European networks, energy, migration, public health and safety, research, and other matters. But more importantly under Maastricht and I quote from the EU web site: "In certain areas, the EU alone is able to pass laws. The role of member countries is limited to applying the law, unless the EU authorises them to adopt certain laws themselves. In these areas, the EU has what the treaties call call exclusive competences." Furthermore all EU law is subject to legal judgement by the ECOJ . Under Maastricht EU law and judicial decisions and citizenship take priority over national interests. So for example Denmark wanted to stop the sale of petrol/diesel new car in 2030 like the UK are doing, but were stopped by the EU. The ECOJ forced the UK government to increase VAT on solar panels when the UK was a member. It isn't about what is justice, its about protecting German corporate interests. " He who pays the piper calls the tune". Even more importantly the EU is committed to ever closer union and removing all effective power from individual countries. It has already started after the UK left with moves to fiscal control by the EU Commission. Matters like foreign policy, armed forces, common policing, etc. will follow. There are also moves to majority voting to speed up progress on legislation, but that will not be a simple majority but be rigged so that the interests of Germany and France cannot be oven rules by the rest. Returning to trade, the EU customs union is much smaller with the loss of the UK and will not get much bigger. The EU organic growth is slow compared with the rest of the world's economy; it is quite reasonable to suppose that UK trade with the EU would actually decline in the future had the UK stayed in the EU as the east European states grow and take a larger share of the cake. Conversely the CPTPP is growing in size and its members are also growing faster than the EU. It is the future. Overlooking the whole "Sovereignty " hypocrisy you may care to comment on the following 1. Government Economic Impact Assessment concludes it will add 0.08% to UK GDP over 10 years 2. UK Exports to EU in 2022 were £340Bn Exports to CPTPP Countries in 2022 were 17% of that at £60Bn. Where do you see that split going over next 5/10 years 3. The stated main benefit of joining CPTPP were access (UK already had that except for Malaysia and Brunei) and reduced or zero Tariffs. Under CPTPP rules of Origin to qualify for reduced Tariffs 70% must be sourced within CPTPP Members. Given current Import patterns how many years/decades do you think it will take UK Companies to avail of reduced Tariffs? Do you think CPTPP will have any Environmental effects by extending Import/Export distances? 4. Chapter 18 of CPTPP covers Intellectual Property This is what Ho Committee have to say, do you agree? a) The committee notes that the rules of the CPTPP agreement directly conflict with the European Patent Convention, which raises the prospect of significant economic damage to the UK's patent industry. b) The report raises questions about whether the CPTPP's approach to food standards could be at odds with the UK's current precautionary approach, under which domestic restrictions on the use of antibiotics and levels of pesticides can be imposed. Food imports produced to lower standards could risk undercutting UK farmers and undermining the UK's food standards regime. c) Overall, we found that immediate economic benefits of CPTPP membership are limited, but the agreement may open opportunities for collaboration and deeper relations in the Asia-Pacific region. “The marginal economic benefits in the medium term must be set against some clear risks to UK interests within the existing agreement. In particular, there are significant concerns in relation Intellectual Property protections, where CPTPP clauses clash with existing UK law. Accepting these could force the UK out of the European Patent Convention, from which our companies benefit, and increase costs to the NHS of generic medicines. “There are similar concerns over food standards, given the contradictions between the UK's precautionary approach and CPTPP's science-based approach to regulation. “If we cannot negotiate safeguards in these areas, then the economic gains from CPTPP accession could be severely curtailed, or disappear entirely. The biggest question, which the Government must answer, is whether carve-outs from any obligations at odds with UK interests will be on the table.” Are you OK with changing UK Law to comply with CPTPP Rules? committees.parliament.uk/committee/448/international-agreements-committee/news/158954/nhs-costs-food-standards-and-ip-must-be-protected-in-cptpp-trade-negotiations-says-committee
Which begs the question, how can NI be in both the EU and the TPTTP, or am I overlooking something very obvious?
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Mar 31, 2023 15:44:05 GMT
mrcoke hypothetical question. But I presume if you were Scottish you would support independence from the UK? At least the "corrupt EU politicians" didn't regularly laugh and mock us in parliament while blocking off the national interest in a vote on independence.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Mar 31, 2023 15:56:34 GMT
mrcoke hypothetical question. But I presume if you were Scottish you would support independence from the UK? At least the "corrupt EU politicians" didn't regularly laugh and mock us in parliament while blocking off the national interest in a vote on independence. Still have a few relatives up in Scotland My father was born in the next village to Bannockburn Why would they want to leave their chief trading partner For the uncertainty of the eu
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 31, 2023 16:04:44 GMT
mrcoke hypothetical question. But I presume if you were Scottish you would support independence from the UK? At least the "corrupt EU politicians" didn't regularly laugh and mock us in parliament while blocking off the national interest in a vote on independence. An excellent question. The bottom line is I don't know. I'm sure if I was Scottish I would want the maximum amount of devolution of power. Peoples should be control of their own destiny. There is of course the question of whose paying. Scotland enjoy a lot of government expenditure per head. If Scotland were to get independence I hope I'm not expected to pay for it. One of my beefs with EU membership was in terms of wealth per head the UK was a middle ranking country in the EU but our financial contribution was the 5th highest per head of population. In terms of EU benefits the UK was fifth lowest per head of the 28 countries. We also have a massive trade deficit with the EU and spend a lot more on defence than most other EU countries. We are out now and others can pick up the tab.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Mar 31, 2023 16:15:50 GMT
Overlooking the whole "Sovereignty " hypocrisy you may care to comment on the following 1. Government Economic Impact Assessment concludes it will add 0.08% to UK GDP over 10 years 2. UK Exports to EU in 2022 were £340Bn Exports to CPTPP Countries in 2022 were 17% of that at £60Bn. Where do you see that split going over next 5/10 years 3. The stated main benefit of joining CPTPP were access (UK already had that except for Malaysia and Brunei) and reduced or zero Tariffs. Under CPTPP rules of Origin to qualify for reduced Tariffs 70% must be sourced within CPTPP Members. Given current Import patterns how many years/decades do you think it will take UK Companies to avail of reduced Tariffs? Do you think CPTPP will have any Environmental effects by extending Import/Export distances? 4. Chapter 18 of CPTPP covers Intellectual Property This is what Ho Committee have to say, do you agree? a) The committee notes that the rules of the CPTPP agreement directly conflict with the European Patent Convention, which raises the prospect of significant economic damage to the UK's patent industry. b) The report raises questions about whether the CPTPP's approach to food standards could be at odds with the UK's current precautionary approach, under which domestic restrictions on the use of antibiotics and levels of pesticides can be imposed. Food imports produced to lower standards could risk undercutting UK farmers and undermining the UK's food standards regime. c) Overall, we found that immediate economic benefits of CPTPP membership are limited, but the agreement may open opportunities for collaboration and deeper relations in the Asia-Pacific region. “The marginal economic benefits in the medium term must be set against some clear risks to UK interests within the existing agreement. In particular, there are significant concerns in relation Intellectual Property protections, where CPTPP clauses clash with existing UK law. Accepting these could force the UK out of the European Patent Convention, from which our companies benefit, and increase costs to the NHS of generic medicines. “There are similar concerns over food standards, given the contradictions between the UK's precautionary approach and CPTPP's science-based approach to regulation. “If we cannot negotiate safeguards in these areas, then the economic gains from CPTPP accession could be severely curtailed, or disappear entirely. The biggest question, which the Government must answer, is whether carve-outs from any obligations at odds with UK interests will be on the table.” Are you OK with changing UK Law to comply with CPTPP Rules? committees.parliament.uk/committee/448/international-agreements-committee/news/158954/nhs-costs-food-standards-and-ip-must-be-protected-in-cptpp-trade-negotiations-says-committeeI don't understand "sovereignty hypocrisy". I am very happy to join the CPTPP along with my relatives in New Zealand and Australia and abide by its rules of membership just as for other international organisations like WTO. I was happy to be in the EEC when we joined in the 70. It is a shame Trump pulled the US out of the CPTPP, maybe a future American administration will take the US back in. We already have trade deals with many of the members but in the future those deals will become "deeper" as has been done with Japan and currently in progress with Canada. The UK is now negotiating new trade deals that suit the UK and not having to accept trade deals negotiated by the EU for the benefit of the EU. It is clear from your post that "project fear" now applies to joining other trade groups as it did during the revenue campaign about leaving the EU. It's quite straightforward really and I'm quite sure you do understand The purpose of Brexit was allegedly to regain Sovereignty and I asked you very clearly if you were happy with UK changing Legislation to comply with CPTPP Rules. These changes in Law bind successive Governments unless withdraw from CPTPP which you have previously said was an anathema to you. I also asked you some very specific questions about the benefit of CPTPP and how it will operate. You chose not to answer which of course is your prerogative
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Mar 31, 2023 16:26:25 GMT
mrcoke hypothetical question. But I presume if you were Scottish you would support independence from the UK? At least the "corrupt EU politicians" didn't regularly laugh and mock us in parliament while blocking off the national interest in a vote on independence. Still have a few relatives up in Scotland My father was born in the next village to Bannockburn Why would they want to leave their chief trading partner For the uncertainty of the eu I don't know enough on the finer details to be honest with you. And looking online gives different details from different dates. This report here for example - www.transport.gov.scot/publication/transporting-scotlands-trade-2019-edition/3-scotlands-trade-13/According to that over half their exports went to the EU in 2018. Similarly around 40% of their imports came from the EU too. So I'm not too sure whether the UK actually was their biggest trade partner pre brexit. Their exports continue to grow at a much faster rate than the rest of the UK too. Plus they're also very energy rich too compared to the rest of the UK I believe. And then there are the laws where Scottish have little to no say on the majority of their laws. The EU membership being one example. I think Scotland would do quite alright when Independant. With alot of farming land, good energy production etc.. I imagine most things they would néed to import that they could probably get outside of the UK at a better rate too.
|
|
|
Post by smallthorner on Mar 31, 2023 16:51:21 GMT
CPTPP
Palm Oil.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Mar 31, 2023 17:17:31 GMT
First, because joining CPTPP hasn't been weaponised in the same ideological and career enhancing way that certain politicians chose to do with regard to leaving the EU. Therefore, I would wager that 90% of the public knows nothing about it, which suits the government and Brexiteers afraid of being accused of hypocrisy. Second, because of the damage that Brexit is continuing to do to the UK economy and public services, anything that might help ameliorate that damage, even to the tune of just 0.08% of GDP, is desperately welcome. So basically the government took an axe to the keel of our economy and we have to be grateful to them for stuffing a tissue in one of the gaping holes in the ship they actively chose to sink? Yeah.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Mar 31, 2023 17:20:21 GMT
mrcoke hypothetical question. But I presume if you were Scottish you would support independence from the UK? At least the "corrupt EU politicians" didn't regularly laugh and mock us in parliament while blocking off the national interest in a vote on independence. An excellent question. The bottom line is I don't know. I'm sure if I was Scottish I would want the maximum amount of devolution of power. Peoples should be control of their own destiny. There is of course the question of whose paying. Scotland enjoy a lot of government expenditure per head. If Scotland were to get independence I hope I'm not expected to pay for it. One of my beefs with EU membership was in terms of wealth per head the UK was a middle ranking country in the EU but our financial contribution was the 5th highest per head of population. In terms of EU benefits the UK was fifth lowest per head of the 28 countries. We also have a massive trade deficit with the EU and spend a lot more on defence than most other EU countries. We are out now and others can pick up the tab. A strangely uncharitable outlook for such a devout Christian. Are you quite sure you've grasped what Jesus was on about?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Mar 31, 2023 18:37:26 GMT
mrcoke hypothetical question. But I presume if you were Scottish you would support independence from the UK? At least the "corrupt EU politicians" didn't regularly laugh and mock us in parliament while blocking off the national interest in a vote on independence. An excellent question. The bottom line is I don't know. I'm sure if I was Scottish I would want the maximum amount of devolution of power. Peoples should be control of their own destiny. There is of course the question of whose paying. Scotland enjoy a lot of government expenditure per head. If Scotland were to get independence I hope I'm not expected to pay for it. One of my beefs with EU membership was in terms of wealth per head the UK was a middle ranking country in the EU but our financial contribution was the 5th highest per head of population. In terms of EU benefits the UK was fifth lowest per head of the 28 countries. We also have a massive trade deficit with the EU and spend a lot more on defence than most other EU countries. We are out now and others can pick up the tab. Your last paragraph- that’s because we horde wealth for only the very richest. So we have high gdp. Whereas many of the wealthier EU member states have more equal societies but lower gdp. That’s nothing to do with the EU. That’s to do with the Tory party and our undemocratic electoral system. Defence isn’t an EU issue either. Trade deficit is largely down to our government. It seems you have a problem with our government. Not the EU
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Mar 31, 2023 18:58:45 GMT
It's as good a summation as any All the things Brexiteers said was wrong with EU are being replicated but without the good bits Palm Oil will increase deforestation often done by burning Labour rights eroded and accepted by UK on the nod Food Quality placed in danger as CPTPP adopts a contrary position to UKs precautionary removing the onus from producer to comply Foreign Companies can sue UK in Secret Courts if UK enacts legislation which effect their profits e.g. Green measures The biggest joke of all is the HoC Committee that would normally oversea Trade Deals was disbanded last week and there will be no Parliamentary Oversight/Debate or Vote which was a key commitment in Brexit debate Government and others on here are barefaced lying
|
|
|
Post by smallthorner on Mar 31, 2023 19:30:26 GMT
It's as good a summation as any All the things Brexiteers said was wrong with EU are being replicated but without the good bits Palm Oil will increase deforestation often done by burning Labour rights eroded and accepted by UK on the nod Food Quality placed in danger as CPTPP adopts a contrary position to UKs precautionary removing the onus from producer to comply Foreign Companies can sue UK in Secret Courts if UK enacts legislation which effect their profits e.g. Green measures The biggest joke of all is the HoC Committee that would normally oversea Trade Deals was disbanded last week and there will be no Parliamentary Oversight/Debate or Vote which was a key commitment in Brexit debate Government and others on here are barefaced lying Never mind we will have lots of nice honey from Peru.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Mar 31, 2023 19:43:56 GMT
It's as good a summation as any All the things Brexiteers said was wrong with EU are being replicated but without the good bits Palm Oil will increase deforestation often done by burning Labour rights eroded and accepted by UK on the nod Food Quality placed in danger as CPTPP adopts a contrary position to UKs precautionary removing the onus from producer to comply Foreign Companies can sue UK in Secret Courts if UK enacts legislation which effect their profits e.g. Green measures The biggest joke of all is the HoC Committee that would normally oversea Trade Deals was disbanded last week and there will be no Parliamentary Oversight/Debate or Vote which was a key commitment in Brexit debate Government and others on here are barefaced lying Never mind we will have lots of nice honey from Peru. Marmalade surely?
|
|