Trading opportunities post brexit(30 Posts)
Hopefully this isn't too stupid a question - I'm Irish so have been following brexit mainly from the Irish media so haven't really been able to figure out the pro Brexit viewpoint.
Am reading today about Liam Fox promoting the deal and he says it would "maximise our access to the EU market without damaging the potential to benefit from trade opportunities elsewhere".
Does anyone know what these other trade opportunities actually are?
The Irish government agencies are very good at promoting foreign direct investment into Ireland and go on trade missions to loads of countries and I have never once heard a commentator taking about the EU restricting our ability to trade internationally. So genuinely interested to know what Britain will have access to in future that they don't now.
Liam Fox is a wazzock.
Like most of the ERG he does not understand international trade at all.
Half of the UK's trade is with the EU
Half is with the rest of the world
At the moment the UK is covered by massive trade deals with most of the world.
Monetary tariffs are low pretty much everywhere (except for Trump's silly new ones)
Regulatory controls are what keep dangerous goods and chlorine washed chicken out of the UK.
"Free Trade" deals only work when each side wants something from the other
the UK after Brexit will have little to offer.
They are like the ones we have only harder to arrange and on worse terms.
If you have ever had dealings with con men then you begin to understand that they want to offer you something for basically nothing.
Getting something for basically nothing means you are willing to cheat someone, somewhere in order to gain some type of advantage. That makes it easier for them from a moral standpoint to then cheat you.
For example, one day I was outside doing yard work and this guy pulls up in this big van and tells me he was suppose to deliver 40 boxes of meat to a store. Supposedly the paperwork had gotten fouled up and so he had 40 boxes he needed to get rid of.
He offered me the boxes at a greatly reduced price but seeing how I didn't really need 40 boxes of meat I said no thanks. Talking to one of my sisters about this, she said that they had stopped by her house a few days before mine and had given her the same story.
How would you know if there was meat in the boxes, that it had been certified and was not simply rotten?
It seems that the people pushing Leave two years ago were basically promising the people that they would get something for virtually nothing which may sound great, but which means at it's core the people willing to take the offer are ready to cheat someone, somewhere for their own benefit.
It's not that hard then, or certainly easier from a moral standpoint to say then short the pound when things go wonky according to your plan and make yourself a fortune.
Strangely in this case you are being offered something you already have anyway.
The 3 blokes in pub videos make this point repeatedly...
If you divide the wealth of the world, roughly it's
1/4 the rest all put together
So basically, if we make trade at all harder with EU, to get back to even keel, we have to work very hard to make up the difference with the others.
China & USA are tough negotiators, and the others (as a group) don't have much money to buy our stuff. There are not (at scale that all-Britain needs) lots of rich pickings out there to be had in lots of not-EU & not-USA places. When investors talk about 'emerging' markets, they are mostly talking about very poor places that started even very much poorer, they are still poor now compared to the high income countries. Investment & trade with emerging markets is still high risk. Always opportunities for single investors to get rich, but also to lose all their money. Not well suited for a large economy to expect good returns in trade, unless we resort to super exploitive 1890s style trade practices, I guess.
Funny that not much is happening on this thread isn’t it?
‘Making our own trade deals’ sounded great - until you actually questioned which countries and what products we were talking about, then it all went a bit quiet.
@ragged but Britain already trades with USA, China and the RoW so not sure what the difference will be - unless it's a "second order" difference about the standards applying to goods and services?
Is it that Britain will try to get similar tariff arrangements to the ones it has now but try to negotiate lower standards for its products and services than other European countries, thereby undercutting them. ( I totally understand short term issues - just trying to understand the end game)
I work in insurance (so to make an example in something I understand). Post brexit (if it was no deal), Britain could reduce insurance company solvency requirements, hold less capital and thereby sell insurance more cheaply to the rest of the world excl Europe. I.e. cheaper but also lower standard products)
But under TM's deal, to trade with Europe as well it would have to keep EU solvency requirements - so the same as now, except it would be a rule taker with decisions made by the EU 26. And it could in theory have ability to vary its standards depending on who it trades with.
But all of this obviously hinges on the rest of the world firstly accepting that it will trade with Britain under similar terms as the EU has - and will want the lower standards.
Just still trying to understand why the brexit end game is potentially better for Britain. It seems it is about standards applying to countries it currently trades with rather than "new " trading opportunities. Is that it?
It's ridiculous. There are NO magic trade deals - we already trade with everyone we want to actually trade with in an efficient manner backed up by long-negotiated agreements, many of which are via the EU. Its a HUGE lie long propagated that we can do better on our own.
Agree with PPs. I can't understand why anyone let alone 52% of voters, believed it.
If there were fantastic trade deals on the horizon politicians would be talking about them nonstop.
The only specific promise ever made was the £350 mil to the NHS thing, and that turned out to be bollocks.
Just still trying to understand why the brexit end game is potentially better for Britain
Simple. Its not.
May went to India to sound out a "Free Trade Deal"
India had one request - 100,000 visas for Indian workers
so May came home empty handed
May went to the USA to sound out a "Free Trade Deal"
And was informed that chlorinated chicken and GM soya were the deal
so May came home empty handed
its been the same all over
Britain already trades with USA, China and the RoW so not sure what the difference will be
EU has trading arrangements (formal, written down agreements both sides agreed to) with all these places. Those trading arrangements make trade as simple as it is, now.
Britain.does.not.have.those.arrangements. We don't have any agreements with anyone but EU. The ones we had from < 1971 all expired. We have to negotiate new ones from scratch.
How hard do you think those places will negotiate?
The weaker partner always gives up more access.
Some say that ERG want to make UK into Singapore in the North Atlantic. You can try to understand structure of Singapore trade agreements. Mostly they produce intellectual property & services. They don't produce own food or much manufactured goods.
All the stuff about solvency confused me, sorry, I don't understand any of that.
Sorry - I'm not looking for an argument - I'm not British or a Brexiter - only trying to understand the brexit proposition about why brexit will be better for world trade in the long term. Is it freedom to reduce standards and trade more cheaply? Or is it about accessing countries you can't sell to now (seems unlikely).
I think the reason you are finding it difficult to understand is because you are asking specific and logical questions. Problem is that if the leave side have thought this through in the way that you are, they are not communicating it.
The "details" as you are trying to understand seem to be non-existent. The ERG has only really spoken in sound bites and criticisms.
To remainers (and apparently foreigners such as the OP), it is astounding that this is seriously the situation.
Basically you are asking questions to which there are no answers. Other than "it is all aload of bollocks".
@Stripybeachbag I did think there had to be something deeper behind the sound bites such as Liam Fox (today) pitching a line about new trade deals and new trade opportunities.
I can (in an way) understand how they could say this sort of thing before the referendum but not at this stage - so close to the exit date - without something substantial to back it up.
I genuinely didn't think it was a "simple" a proposition as believing Britain would be able to negotiate better deals with RoW than it has as part of the EU (with maintaining free trade with Europe as an optional "nice to have").
Does anyone know what these other trade opportunities actually are?
The answer to this very good question OP is
that no one knows because there are no great opportunities .Even Liam Fox who is in charge doesn't know.
If there were any future promises they'd be trumpeted from the roof tops ( pun intended).
It's worthwhile remembering that when he was a Defence minister Liam Fox had to resign.
1. Set up a 'charity' to promote USA trade deals but it had to be dissolved after criticism by the Charity Commission that it didn't follow any of its purported charitable purposes.
2. Also he had organised for his friend Mr Werritty to help run this 'charity' and attend confidential government meetings overseas and at home without obtaining the necessary security clearance.
Yes this is the man whose lack of judgment meant he was rewarded by being put in charge of our greatrump trade deals, if any.
It's amazing isn't it (bad amazing not good amazing) that the brexiters still only have the possible reduction in regulations and WTO rules as their plan. There has literally been nothing more forthcoming in the two and half years since the referendum.
Just constant shooting down of proposals by TM and/or the EU, who are apparently bullying by coming up with a withdrawal agreement that satisfies both the GFA and the end of freedom of movement (which seem to be the two criteria that the WA has boiled down to).
You have considered more aspects than I have read or heard from a leaver. Although there is the thought that they have but they don't wish to tell us which regulations they want to get rid of or what the likely terms of WTO tariffs/deals will be until the UK has crashed out of the EU. Because the average person on the street will be royally screwed over. They may just be biding their time until is too late before they reveal their intricate plans. (Although their organizational capabilities have shown to be more piss-up-in-a-brewery level so far)
Is it freedom to reduce standards and trade more cheaply? Or is it about accessing countries you can't sell to now
Brexit central says... (links inserted for each country are mine)
"The majority of UK exports — over £300bn-worth — now go to non-EU countries. But getting a trade deal with those countries means getting all 28 EU member states to agree. Any one of them — and as we saw with the EU-Canada deal, any region in any one of them — can stymie things.
Outside, we can negotiate bilateral deals, with anyone, more quickly. Take India. UK exporters to India face 14.8% tariffs and Indian exporters face 8.4% EU tariffs. But still the EU has not concluded a deal. Brexit provides the UK with a huge opportunity to boost its £4.2bn exports to India by another £2bn. There are similar opportunities in China, New Zealand, Australia, Korea, the US and many more."
BrexitCentral also promoted WTO terms for trading, too. Not sure folk realise, but in USA, WTO is talked about by Libertarians in the same NOT endearing tone that EU is spoken of by UKIPers.
My link for Korea failed, but try again, this is quite positive about how the SK model could be emulated to make Britain rich. SK does not have immigration issues, though.
How much Trump loves the WTO (not).
USA setting WTO for crisis, resolution process could become impossible.
Americans talk about WTO infringing sovereignty, stifling true free trade, imposing unfair rules, impossibly slow process, unfit for purpose, outdated and 'We lose too many claims in disputes'. Sound familiar?
Sadly, Focalpoint, Brexit was all about sound bites and little detail. Of course we trade with other countries now under EU trade agreements. Bexiteers are so full of their own bull————, they thought the world would be rushing to us offering new trade deals. They are not. Unfortunately our politicians don’t have the skills to negotiate very much and many Brexiteer politicians have never run a company. They are journalists (Gove and Johnson), ex Army (Duncan Smith and Davis) and a Dr. They have never negotiated anything. Why people believed this rabble is beyond me.
Lots of countries see a trade deal with the UK, free of regulation. restrictions and tariffs imposed by the EU, as a huge opportunity for their agricultural produce - far East, Brazil & the US for example.
However their agricultural standards (for animal welfare, food quality & environmental protection) are much lower than ours - it's why their produce is cheaper.
So if we enter into a trade deal with those countries we simultaneously undermine our own domestic farming sector, jeopardising any potential gain in public goods & environmental enhancement here, and also export our environmental footprint to other parts of the world less able to deal with it.
Shitting all over the climate, wildlife and the environment frankly.
The point about the Indian trade deal is especially ironic when it was the British government, under pressure from the Eurosceptic Tories who blocked it because it involved increasing the number of visas given to Indian nationals.
The EU Trade Deal with India was being blocked by the UK because of India's insistence on more visa. I guess once the UK leaves, that means the EU can sign it
The EU Trade Deal with the US (TTIP) was being blocked by France and Germany (amongst others) because of concerns such as the Trade Resolution system (can't remember its official name) which would've allowed conglomerates to sue governments if their policies impacted on their profits It was only belatedly being blocked by the UK after an outcry over the potential impact on the NHS (after the Conservatives had already said they'd be happy to sign it ). As a
desperate distressed negotiator, the UK will no doubt sign a trade deal with the US, chlorinated chicken and NHS fire-sale included, as soon as it is able - especially as we won't be allowed to see the detail of the negotiations for, iirc, 4 years
According to Gove, who heads up Defra, we'll be able to sell pigs ears
yes really to China because as the moment they won't buy them because the EU insists as part of the tracking system that the ears are notched with an identifier . Except it doesn't. Defra does There is an acceptable shoulder stamp that is also allowed.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Get started »
Please login first.