No Deal Brexit - Bring it on

[Bearbehind]

It’s economic suicide but there’s clearly no other way to demonstrate to Leavers what a shit show this all is.

Leavers resolutely refuse to listen to anything negative after 3 years, so fuck it.

I feel for those who woukd be affected by it but I didn’t cause it.

The irony is there’s not a Tory MP with the guts he cone PM and then to do it - so this mess will go on indefinitely.

The point being that all the stuff the UK trades in or out as part of the EU has to be renegotiated. The EU have said they won't start negotiating until the WA is signed.

With a snag that the EU is an integral part of the vast majority of the stuff that the UK wants. Much of it traversing through the EU.

Do you understand that WTO rules apply to the EU as well (unless specific trade agreements have been made), when trading with non-EU nations? They're not going to brick the Channel up and stop crossings unless trade sanctions are passed.

The point being that all the stuff the UK trades in or out as part of the EU has to be renegotiated.

It doesn't have to be for goods to flow in each direction (though, in the long term, an agreement will likely be beneficial). Yet again, this is why the WTO exists: to allow the flow of goods between nations who do not have specific trade agreements. The EU has already agreed to abide by WTO rules, therefore, they have agreed to trade with a No Deal Britain under the same rules until a different arrangement can be agreed upon.

I understand that wishing otherwise is convenient for building a case for ignoring the Referendum but, at this stage, it's essentially scaremongering.

DippyAvocado
Many of those trade deals on the government website are classed as incomplete though.For example, only 3 out of 17 MRAs with Switzerland have been rolled over.

Switzerland seems to be the only example they want to highlight - the other agreements must involve minimal disruption.

{It doesn't have to be for goods to flow in each direction}
With a 'no deal' the UK ceases to exist in a legal sense and the EU is not compelled to trade with the UK at all. The UK simply becomes a rock in the Atlantic with some seabirds on it.

Gronky As a matter of practical international trade law, yes, the UK will revert to basic WTO tariffs with all but the very few countries where our DIT and the disgraced etcetc Liam Fox MP have secured some specific agreements - see Clavinova's link. What that means practically for the UK at the UK border is an absence of sufficient and experienced Customs staff, so traded goods, wherever they come from initially or the last port, will be slowed up for sometime.

WTO rules only apply to traded goods. The UK's main exports are services - currently to he EU covered by the Single Market - after leaving with no deal, who's to say what will happen?

Leaving with no deal is a practical possibility, with many pitfalls. It is also a political issue though - how would any counterparty country or group of trading states view negotiating with a state that had decided to walk away from obligations, such as those included in the Withdrawal Agreement. Does this action by the UK make us stronger or weaker if we have to begin trade negotiations ab initio, barring those in Calvinova's link referred to above?

{Switzerland seems to be the only example they want to highlight - the other agreements must involve minimal disruption.}

Hmmm, the trade talks that Fox had with the USA, the ones that have to remain secret for 4 years, bet those will be interesting.

With a 'no deal' the UK ceases to exist in a legal sense and the EU is not compelled to trade with the UK at all.

Absolutely fantastical nonsense. No one is compelled to trade with the UK at the moment. The EU facilitates trade, it does not force it and, without specific sanctions, it cannot stop it. If a French farmer wakes up tomorrow and decides he wants to sell apples to South Sudan, the European Commission can't do jot about it unless they specifically sanction that trade.

WTO rules only apply to traded goods. The UK's main exports are services - currently to he EU covered by the Single Market - after leaving with no deal, who's to say what will happen?

That was the case 25 years ago, before GATS. The main issues with services sold to the EU is accreditation but that doesn't necessarily require EU approval, it would be decided reciprocally by relevant regulatory bodies as well as, in certain cases, ISO.

I do agree that the situation is more complex for services, I mainly disagree with the idea that goods (particularly food) will somehow completely stop rolling into the UK as 1tisILeClerc suggested:

the real world implications are that the EU will simply wait for the UK to starve

{ I mainly disagree with the idea that goods (particularly food) will somehow completely stop rolling into the UK as 1tisILeClerc suggested:}

So with no regulations regarding food safety, who and how will the UK sue people in the EU who might put mercury into fruit. With no labelling (or a free for all) how will you know where goods come from?
Ripping up 750 or so treaties on 31 Oct can have a lot of implications.
The EU, partly out of their generosity to the people of the UK have legislated for a 'skeleton' service to exist for 9 months or a year to enable ferries, flights, cover for truck drivers etc to prevent severe hardship. If these are not in the EU's interests they can be withdrawn immediately.

So with no regulations regarding food safety, who and how will the UK sue people in the EU who might put mercury into fruit.

The same way one might sue a person in Brazil who puts mercury in their fruit.

With no labelling (or a free for all) how will you know where goods come from?

This is governed by the Food Standards Agency, not the EU. Even if certain regulations were implemented as a result of EU decision, the UK government is perfectly able and capable of retaining these regulations without any consent from the EU.

Why are you so desperate to push this 'UK starving to death' narrative?

I never mentioned 'death'.
The fact that the UK has foodbanks and the UK government, rather than trying to eradicate them simply denies they are necessary. Something that has nothing to do with the EU and could have been addressed years ago. Similarly with the NHS, Schools, transport and a host of others, why has the UK been pratting about with Brexit rather than dealing with these issues?

I never mentioned 'death'.

Allow me to rephrase: why are you so desperate to push this 'EU being able to inflict starvation upon the UK' narrative?

The Conservative Party is only going to elect a new PM that gives a 100% guaranteed commitment to us leaving the EU at Halloween. And if they renege on that promise the party will literally be destroyed.

The WA is dead, cremated and scattered to the winds. So unless the EU are willing to agree something more acceptable before October then by the end of this year the UK will get its Independence back.

What else can realistically happen?

Gronky in the absence of EU membership many recirprocal services regulatory arrangements will fall away and, as for trade, require renegotiation ab initio.

Why would we want to rely on the EU's skeleton unilateral nod to the UK to keep ferries, flights, trucks etc at least moving for an indeterminate but probably short period of time post 31 October or 'leaving with no deal' day? In what way is that 'taking back control' or, indeed, 'leaving with no deal'?

On a personal reflection, last Monday my DH was having a PET scan and as I waited it occurred to me that, had this been post 'leaving with no deal', per the UK's Article 50 notice letter my DH would not have been able to have, as easily or possibly at all, said PET scan as it requires an isotope that is not made in the UK. Very much putting us, medically speaking, indeed back to the mid 70s before EEC and subsequently EU membership.

{What else can realistically happen?}

Wouldn't you like to know?

The WA is a legally prepared document signed by 28 countries, it is far from dead.

pollyannaperspective
I trust all goes well with you.

Thanks 1tis. It is a progressive condition that has been diagnosed and now trying to determine best treatment going forward. We have spent considerable time in NHS specialist centre hospital over the last three months. I am reminded each time of the many individuals that it takes to make a hospital run, the many different people attending as patients and visitors all with diverse backgrounds and histories. We are fortunate to have the NHS, even though not everyone agrees or supports the concept it is there when even those people step across the threshold, no judgement made.

We won't know what we had until it is gone - on so many levels.

The WA is a legally prepared document signed by 28 countries, it is far from dead
Another remainer unicorn? Do you really believe Boris a new Conservative PM is going to push Theresa Mays WA through parliament? LOLOLOL I suppose you could call it the walking dead withdrawal agreement?

On a personal reflection, last Monday my DH was having a PET scan and as I waited it occurred to me that, had this been post 'leaving with no deal', per the UK's Article 50 notice letter my DH would not have been able to have, as easily or possibly at all, said PET scan as it requires an isotope that is not made in the UK. Very much putting us, medically speaking, indeed back to the mid 70s before EEC and subsequently EU membership.

It depends on the material used. Some are definitely produced in the UK, molybdenum-99 (precursor to technetium) is produced outside the EU (please see the attached chart) as well as within it (and exports from the EU to non-EU countries already take place) so the issue would be with implementing an independent nuclear regulatory framework from EURATOM (i.e. it wouldn't require any agreement on the part of the EU).

“The same way you might sue someone in Brazil” god that’s funny. You tried that recently?

“The same way you might sue someone in Brazil” god that’s funny. You tried that recently?

Not personally but I did have some limes from Brazil so, amazingly, it appears that food is able to be brought into the UK from outside the EU. In terms of settling a legal dispute (over these terrifying mercury filled fruits), were the Brazilian government to obstruct my hypothetical legal case, the UK government would be able to bring a dispute via the WTO.

I think you will find that we have also included EURATOM in the Art 50 departure letter - so not so straightforward Gronky. How long do you think it will take to negotiate all the new trade agreements, arrangements, regulatory recognitions etc for the 700 plus that the UK currently accesses by virtue of our EU membership, that excludes the small number included in Clavinova's link earlier that have been achieved in the last 2 years 11 months? Someone (?) better step up the pace perhaps.

{Do you really believe Boris a new Conservative PM is going to push Theresa Mays WA through parliament}
Well considering it is a summary of the legal ties there is not much chance of it being changed.

{Someone (?) better step up the pace perhaps.}
Columbia is in the list so at least some coffee might be sorted.

The WA is a legally prepared document signed by 28 countries, it is far from dead

Please stop with this nonsense.

The WA is dead if we don’t sign it.

We then leave without a deal and negiotiations start again.

You are literally the only person, Leave or Remain, arguing otherwise.