According to Condell -

[Stevlin]

In practical terms, why do you believe that? What input do you think the UK will have?



5th largest economy yes, but still far outside the truly major economic powers of the world which are the USA, China and the EU. Other economies with either huge populations, significant resources — or indeed both — are also on the rise and will seek to assert themselves as the century progresses. These economies aren't simply going to sit back and say — oh London is the financial capital of the world and that's just the way it is — they will seek to shift the narrative and shift the balance of power and influence.



Yes, the UK will likely remain an important conduit for global business in the immediate future. The presence of London ensures this, for a while at least. But as its own ability to project influence declines, it becomes more difficult for the UK to keep its hand on the reins and maintain its status in the face of larger economies turning the screw.

What the hell is it with you??? Your continuance of Project Fear is plain fantasy....unless of course you can credibly deny that the vast majority of nations with healthy economies are NOT MEMBERS of an UNDEMOCRATIC political entity..

It is such a ridiculous concept, that sensible nations HAVE NOT emulated it.

Nobody will deny that the UK will undertake an initial economic hit, ( unless a mutual advantageous trading deal is agreed - because it will take time to 'reorganise' ), but there is nothing to be afraid of in reverting to the sensible NORM....which is of course why you are constantly unable to support your dire predictions!!

[Conchúr]

Yes the larger economies have more influence when deciding WTO rules . As the 5th largest economy in the world I really do think we will have more influence in global trade regulations than being 1/28th of an EU represented at the WTO by Phil Hogan of Ireland .

In practical terms, why do you believe that? What input do you think the UK will have?



5th largest economy yes, but still far outside the truly major economic powers of the world which are the USA, China and the EU. Other economies with either huge populations, significant resources — or indeed both — are also on the rise and will seek to assert themselves as the century progresses. These economies aren't simply going to sit back and say — oh London is the financial capital of the world and that's just the way it is — they will seek to shift the narrative and shift the balance of power and influence.



Yes, the UK will likely remain an important conduit for global business in the immediate future. The presence of London ensures this, for a while at least. But as its own ability to project influence declines, it becomes more difficult for the UK to keep its hand on the reins and maintain its status in the face of larger economies turning the screw.

[Streetwalker]

But there is a great difference between the term "oversee" and the term "influence".  Regardless of what rules the WTO puts in place, the influence of the direction of those rules and indeed how they pan out in practice remains dominated by larger economies. This is a simple phenomenon of critical mass — where the regulatory spheres of major global economic blocs like the USA, China and the EU (these three being by far the biggest) set the tone for both their neighbours and indeed global business and trade.



In essence, you really only have to look at the Withdrawal Agreement itself to get a sense of where the trajectory of Brexit is heading. From the very start, the country has accepted a form of economic partition — which was once described as "something no British Prime Minister could ever agree to". It has also set out its intention to remain closely aligned to the EU, which was of course inevitable for the reasons outlined in my first paragraph. Alignment of a single economy to a larger major economic sphere — without a say within that sphere — invariably means one thing.



So if this is the starting point, and the EU can glean these kinds of concessions from the very beginning, then what do you think the likes of China and the US will attempt to coax from the UK (especially in the knowledge that the country will be desperate for deals post-Brexit)?

Yes the larger economies have more influence when deciding WTO rules . As the 5th largest economy in the world I really do think we will have more influence in global trade regulations than being 1/28th of an EU represented at the WTO by Phil Hogan of Ireland .

[Streetwalker]

The UK agreed a veto on further UK integration. Also there are some EU decisions made that require all countries to agree, such as new members. Can you tell me what EU regulations have been passed that you would like the UK to remove post brexit.

Repealing the 1972 communities act would cover most of it .

[Conchúr]

As you say Conchur its a global regulatory system overseen I might add by the World trade organization . An organization of which we will now have a seat at the table ,a table that regulates World trade including the EU .

So when we say we will have some regulatory alignment with the EU it doesn't mean we are a rule taker having been part of the rule making process at a higher level than the EU with our seat at the WTO .



That's not to say I disagree with Condell . He is right in that we have been backed into a corner and its no longer leave or remain but Tory leave or Labour remain

Ill take the Tory leave for now as a better starting point for phase 2 of  independence for the UK

But there is a great difference between the term "oversee" and the term "influence".  Regardless of what rules the WTO puts in place, the influence of the direction of those rules and indeed how they pan out in practice remains dominated by larger economies. This is a simple phenomenon of critical mass — where the regulatory spheres of major global economic blocs like the USA, China and the EU (these three being by far the biggest) set the tone for both their neighbours and indeed global business and trade.



In essence, you really only have to look at the Withdrawal Agreement itself to get a sense of where the trajectory of Brexit is heading. From the very start, the country has accepted a form of economic partition — which was once described as "something no British Prime Minister could ever agree to". It has also set out its intention to remain closely aligned to the EU, which was of course inevitable for the reasons outlined in my first paragraph. Alignment of a single economy to a larger major economic sphere — without a say within that sphere — invariably means one thing.



So if this is the starting point, and the EU can glean these kinds of concessions from the very beginning, then what do you think the likes of China and the US will attempt to coax from the UK (especially in the knowledge that the country will be desperate for deals post-Brexit)?

[GerryT]

Trouble is we don't have a veto do we . Though the UK government has agreed with most of the legislation coming out of Brussels on the few occasions they have opposed it ,just around 70 times they have lost and the legislation has gone through .

I do still believe for what its worth that the UK will after all the unnecessary delay of Brexit eventually strike a trade deal with the EU that also gives us the freedom to trade with the growing markets of the world without having to consider goat herders in Bulgaria or whats left of  the German car industry when agreeing terms .

As you say most WTO countries which includes the EU trade under FTA's that suit their own economies . The trouble with the EU of course is that its own economy is based on euroland and not on individual nations.



I don't think we are placing our faith in anyone but ourselves and that is how it should be  and 17.4 million people would agree with me .

The UK agreed a veto on further UK integration. Also there are some EU decisions made that require all countries to agree, such as new members. Can you tell me what EU regulations have been passed that you would like the UK to remove post brexit.

There is a compromise being part of the EU, the deals the 18.5T market of the EU can strike is far better than what individual countries can do, the UK will find this out soon. I don't think the colonial model of raping countries of their raw product to sell finished goods is sustainable, the middle man is being removed and that's not caused by the EU.

So 17.4 m or less than 30% of the UK agree with you, so you say. What about the other 48m, do they count ?

[Streetwalker]

So going from an organisation of 28 countries where you have a veto and a way of blocking certain rule changes to an organisation where there are 164 countries and you have no veto is progress ?

You do realise that most WTO countries do most of their trade via FTA's which are outside WTO and that each country sets its own tariff schedule and then prays that the remaining 163 countries agree to it.

To me anyway WTO is a massive backward and risky step, going there places your faith in the hands of all other WTO countries.

Trouble is we don't have a veto do we . Though the UK government has agreed with most of the legislation coming out of Brussels on the few occasions they have opposed it ,just around 70 times they have lost and the legislation has gone through .

I do still believe for what its worth that the UK will after all the unnecessary delay of Brexit eventually strike a trade deal with the EU that also gives us the freedom to trade with the growing markets of the world without having to consider goat herders in Bulgaria or whats left of  the German car industry when agreeing terms .

As you say most WTO countries which includes the EU trade under FTA's that suit their own economies . The trouble with the EU of course is that its own economy is based on euroland and not on individual nations.



I don't think we are placing our faith in anyone but ourselves and that is how it should be  and 17.4 million people would agree with me .

[GerryT]

As you say Conchur its a global regulatory system overseen I might add by the World trade organization . An organization of which we will now have a seat at the table ,a table that regulates World trade including the EU .

So when we say we will have some regulatory alignment with the EU it doesn't mean we are a rule taker having been part of the rule making process at a higher level than the EU with our seat at the WTO .



That's not to say I disagree with Condell . He is right in that we have been backed into a corner and its no longer leave or remain but Tory leave or Labour remain

Ill take the Tory leave for now as a better starting point for phase 2 of  independence for the UK

So going from an organisation of 28 countries where you have a veto and a way of blocking certain rule changes to an organisation where there are 164 countries and you have no veto is progress ?

You do realise that most WTO countries do most of their trade via FTA's which are outside WTO and that each country sets its own tariff schedule and then prays that the remaining 163 countries agree to it.

To me anyway WTO is a massive backward and risky step, going there places your faith in the hands of all other WTO countries.

[Streetwalker]

It makes perfect sense because whether the deal had been agreed yet or not, this was the inevitable ending point. The idea that the U.K. — "unbound" by its EU obligations — could unilaterally rewrite the rulebook on the global regulatory system without being heavily influenced by the EU sphere was fanciful from the start.  Remainers argued that Brexit would make the U.K. a rule-taker than a rule-maker, and this is appears to be precisely where the process is leading.

As you say Conchur its a global regulatory system overseen I might add by the World trade organization . An organization of which we will now have a seat at the table ,a table that regulates World trade including the EU .

So when we say we will have some regulatory alignment with the EU it doesn't mean we are a rule taker having been part of the rule making process at a higher level than the EU with our seat at the WTO .



That's not to say I disagree with Condell . He is right in that we have been backed into a corner and its no longer leave or remain but Tory leave or Labour remain

Ill take the Tory leave for now as a better starting point for phase 2 of  independence for the UK

[Conchúr]

Doesn't make sense, because 'from the beginning' there was no Brexit deal.

It makes perfect sense because whether the deal had been agreed yet or not, this was the inevitable ending point. The idea that the U.K. — "unbound" by its EU obligations — could unilaterally rewrite the rulebook on the global regulatory system without being heavily influenced by the EU sphere was fanciful from the start.  Remainers argued that Brexit would make the U.K. a rule-taker than a rule-maker, and this is appears to be precisely where the process is leading.

[Sheepy]

How did the camper go? Welcome back.  :hattip

Its a Motorhome and my mate calls it my nuclear bunker .All stocked ready to go.

[Barry]

Bolted up by the Westminster party,well I never.

How did the camper go? Welcome back.  :hattip

[Sheepy]

Bolted up by the Westminster party,well I never.

[Scott777]

It was always niave for people to believe that leaving the EU would result in the UK no longer being subject to geopolitical forces.



All that will happen is the UK will find itself trying to navigate these forces on it's own rather than as a senior and infuencial member of the largest trade bloc in the world.



How anyone believed we'd be in a stronger position outside of the EU is beyond me.

Who ever said the UK would no longer be subject to geopolitical forces?



I wouldn't want the UK being influential in the EU, if the UK is represented by people that I have no influence over (i.e. not a democracy).

[Scott777]

What I found interesting about that video is his very accurate description of how the Brexit deal is not the "freedom" / "independence" that people allegedly voted for.  The reason it's interesting is because this was essentially part of the Remain argument from the very beginning — that Brexit would not actually bring about independence

Doesn't make sense, because 'from the beginning' there was no Brexit deal.