Yes, it all seems very reasonable on the face of it. It's how the EU work. Rigidly stick to their self imposed rules forcing agreements to the very last minute through a combination of stubborn adherence to their rules and brinkmanship. I always find it ironic that the EU is a rules based organisation but is quite prepared to bend and break its own rules whenever it suits though. Germany and France persistently break GDP/debt with no sanction whatsoever, state bailouts of Italian banks, allowing Greek banks to use worthless government bonds as collateral to borrow from the ECB, Martin Selmayr's dodgy appointment.
If the members agree to flexibility, the EU is flexible, if the members do not then it isn't. And it is clear that the EU has, historically, sought to continue negotiations, internally and externally, until such a time as an acceptable compromise can be arrived at, it happened with the Lisbon Treaty, and with CETA, etc. It's possible to consider that tendency on the part of the EU to be laudable, rather than a cause of complaint. However, it is clear that they won't continue negotiations for the sake of it.
But, I don't really see the problem of being flexible to suit the needs of member states, so, allowing for bailouts of Italian banks is, in my view, much less heinous than allowing them collapse and wipe out ordinary peoples' savings. Nor do I see the idea of accepting Greek Government bonds as collateral for loans that Greek banks desperately needed as a terrible thing (but then, I should stress that the ECB is not the EU as a whole, and does have operational independence).
A person might even come to think that the EU and its institutions actually sought to benefit its members...
While I agree with the sentiment that rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools, the EU can't have it both ways really can it. Decide to be inflexible in its Brexit timetable but in many other areas, particularly the propping up of the Euro, ready to bend and break whatever rule it deems necessary. The Euro is badly constructed as it is, trying to save it by ignoring the rules it is designed around is not going to end well.
I'm still trying to figure out how the EU sought to benefit it's member Greece when it's economy shrank by 25%, unemployment went up to 25% (youth unemployment spiked at 60%) and the suicide rate increased by 35% following it's financial crisis. It may have been the Greek banks that desperately needed the money, but it was really for the French and German banks that were up the creek. That money went in and out of Greece without touching the sides.
Yes, it all seems very reasonable on the face of it. It's how the EU work. Rigidly stick to their self imposed rules forcing agreements to the very last minute through a combination of stubborn adherence to their rules and brinkmanship. I always find it ironic that the EU is a rules based organisation but is quite prepared to bend and break its own rules whenever it suits though. Germany and France persistently break GDP/debt with no sanction whatsoever, state bailouts of Italian banks, allowing Greek banks to use worthless government bonds as collateral to borrow from the ECB, Martin Selmayr's dodgy appointment.
If the members agree to flexibility, the EU is flexible, if the members do not then it isn't. And it is clear that the EU has, historically, sought to continue negotiations, internally and externally, until such a time as an acceptable compromise can be arrived at, it happened with the Lisbon Treaty, and with CETA, etc. It's possible to consider that tendency on the part of the EU to be laudable, rather than a cause of complaint. However, it is clear that they won't continue negotiations for the sake of it.
But, I don't really see the problem of being flexible to suit the needs of member states, so, allowing for bailouts of Italian banks is, in my view, much less heinous than allowing them collapse and wipe out ordinary peoples' savings. Nor do I see the idea of accepting Greek Government bonds as collateral for loans that Greek banks desperately needed as a terrible thing (but then, I should stress that the ECB is not the EU as a whole, and does have operational independence).
A person might even come to think that the EU and its institutions actually sought to benefit its members...
While I agree with the sentiment that rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools, the EU can't have it both ways really can it. Decide to be inflexible in its Brexit timetable but in many other areas, particularly the propping up of the Euro, ready to bend and break whatever rule it deems necessary. The Euro is badly constructed as it is, trying to save it by ignoring the rules it is designed around is not going to end well.
I'm still trying to figure out how the EU sought to benefit it's member Greece when it's economy shrank by 25%, unemployment went up to 25% (youth unemployment spiked at 60%) and the suicide rate increased by 35% following it's financial crisis. It may have been the Greek banks that desperately needed the money, but it was really for the French and German banks that were up the creek. That money went in and out of Greece without touching the sides.
Actually, like any international actor, the EU can have it both ways, if that's how you see it. It has rules and regulations that can be eased, in exceptional circumstances, to benefit its members, which is precisely what happens with derogations, opt outs, and the like (dare I say, even rebates?). But, this flexibility does not extend to the fundamentals of the organisation, and especially not for third parties (even prospective ones) - so, for example, the apparent UK belief that it can retain the benefits of full membership, without complying with the obligations, is flawed.
As for the ECB allowing Greek banks use effectively worthless bonds as collateral, it may be that much of any money raised was paid to foreign banks, but the end result was to keep Greek banks operating, and my experience of banking collapse, even vicariously, is that those that suffer are generally ordinary people.
In terms if the wider Greek economic crisis, while I personally disagree with the terms of the bail out (I would have liked to see more debt forgiveness, but I do not subscribe to the cloud cuckoo-land approach and narcissistic self-regard of Varoufakis) people keep going on about the EU being some kind of ogre, but the EU was acting only as the sum of its parts, including the UK.
The other member states were not prepared to simply let Greece off the hook for the inevitable consequences of decades of clientalism, tax evasion, political bribery and ingrained corruption. Their reaction reflected the (in my view flawed) political and economic consensus. Even a return to the Drachma is unlikely to have improved matters for Greece, and could well have been far worse.
"Impartial journalism is not giving equal airtime to two people one of whom says the world is flat and the other one says the world is round. That is not balanced, impartial journalism.”
It is why I stopped watching Question Time. The BBC seem to make it a priority to give equal air time to experts/professionals and completely wacko Brexit nut jobs.
"Peston said he consistently said on ITV News that leaving the EU would make the UK poorer. “Not massively poorer. I thought the Project Fear bit of the government’s campaign was overdone. But poorer.”
The hysteria of the Remain camp is based on the Project Fear message from the Establishment that "poorer" means the UK economy will be trashed if we leave the EU. So Peston would agree with me, it's misinformation. The projected drag on GDP over 30 years with a no deal Brexit was calculated by the Treasury in 2016 as a 6% drag on GDP which was presented as every household being £4,300 worse off. It has now moved to 8% over 15 years.
On the same basis the Treasury could have told us in 2008, had it been able to predict the drag on GDP of 20% to date, that every household will be £14,000 worse off by 2018. (£14k is a bit of guesstimate but it would be of that sort of order). That drag is the result of none of the anticipated 3% wage growth emerging and the prevailing levels of company investment not increasing in line with historic rates. Nor does GDP growth correlate to growth in spendable income - more misinformation avidly bought into unchallenged by Remainers. Instead of intelligently challenging the propaganda, Brexiteers made the mistake of saying the figures were made up. It's the propaganda use of the numbers which is the problem, not the numbers themselves.
An 8% drag over 15 years is liable to be impacted by 101 other events within and without our control. So fixating on Brexit as the number one danger for our economy is just plain Project Fear, but it seems an entrenched belief that Brexit will destroy any possibility of the UK economy growing.
Brexit should force government to focus on solutions that help the 90% of businesses that employ most of the UK workers and encourage exporting initiatives, instead of pandering to the global giants whose profits, in relative terms, do little to help the UK economy as compared to the small domestic employers.
The difference between the rate of GDP drag with a deal or no-deal is, according to the Treasury forecasts, a few percentage points, a few hundred pounds "per household" nonsense if you like, hardly worth accepting a half-baked Brexit for. The main difference will be on the extent of disruption in reorganisation of services and procedures for business.
You have been flogging this nonsense that Brexit will have an impact on the UK economy no greater than the impact of other big events in the past or in the future for about a year now. Are these forcasts from the idiot 2 or 3 Brexit economists we see rolled out every few months. Have you any evidence to back up your claims?
You seem to have lost track of the debate. Dismissing anything negative about Brexit as Project Fear worked during the referendum but since then the debate has been overtaken by events, facts and truth.
I don't know how many jobs you, or the forcasters you quote, are responsible for creating. I suspect the answer is zero. I do know that the people running small, medium and large manufacturing businesses in the UK responsible for creating 100s of thousands of jobs are unanimous in their view of how disastrous any kind of Brexit, let alone a bad Brexit, will be for the economy and all these jobs. You can't dismiss the views of the people who run these businesses as Project Fear or just more forecasts from so called experts that may or may not turn out to be correct. These people are not making forecasts. They are simply telling us what decisions they will be forced to take in the event of a Brexit that leaves us outside the customs Union and single market and without the benefits of frictionless trade.
I run a small business and the Brexit vote has had no impact on my business, in fact this year is the best one for ages. So we business owners are not unanimous I am afraid. I know many other business owners who say the same thing.
In fact, if you knew nothing about Brexit and avoided the media you would not see any appreciable difference in daily life in the UK between May 2016 and today, except there are fewer people unemployed. Wages are still stagnating, the NHS still has problems and the trains do not run on time. Plus ca change.
Hysterics like yourself appear increasingly eccentric when you claim we are all doomed. The problems we face here preceded Brexit and will carry on after it. The only real difference will be that our political class will no longer have the EU as a scapegoat.
Aaaaaaargh! I could have effing written that. In fact, I am pretty sure I did, about ten times. 😭
*A BREXIT deal was agreed last night which will temporarily keep the UK in the EU’s customs union according to ITV News political editor Robert Peston, in an explosive move which would leave the UK unable to sign its own trade deals.
The astonishing claim was made on ITV Peston, the current affairs show, during an interview with former Brexit Secretary David Davis.
Mr Peston said: “I have it from very good sources that last night Olly Robbins and his opposite number who works for Michel Barnier agreed to an outline of a deal which would keep the UK in the customs union for the period that a so-called backstop would have to operate.”
Olly Robbins is Theresa May’s top Brexit advisor and is seen as the architect of her controversial Chequers plan.
A backstop deal would come into effect if the UK and EU can’t reach a full agreement finalising their future relations.
Unless it is time limited it could theoretically see the UK stuck in the customs union indefinitely.
Mr Davis, who resigned from the Government in July in protest at Theresa May’s Chequers deal, made it clear on the programme such an agreement is unacceptable.
He said: “No I don’t approve it in the terms you’re talking about because there’s no backstop to the backstop.
“There’s no limit to the backstop, it only ceases when the EU agrees to it.
“Why should we ever agree?”
The European customs union is a free trade area which also maintains common tariffs on non-members.
As such, duties are not paid on trade between members, but are charged at a common rate to other countries.
All trade agreements are made by the European Commission, essentially the Government of the European Union.
Members states are consequently unable to make their own trade deals.
Should the UK stay in the customs union it would see the European Commission negotiate trade deals on behalf of the UK, despite the UK losing its European Commission representation after Brexit.
Yesterday former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson claimed staying in the customs union would turn the UK into a “permanent EU colony”.
He added: “This is far from take back control.
“In the referendum both sides said ‘Leave’ meant leaving the customs union and single market.”
I wonder what % of the 52 % could, even now, accurately explain what the "customs union" is....
Or indeed what % of Remainers? We have had this out many times, Prague, but the pro Brexit vote was more cultural and political than about economics. The ongoing failure of many Remainers to accept that just adds to the current dialogue of the deaf. Sometimes you just have to listen to what people say in order to understand them.
I wonder what % of the 52 % could, even now, accurately explain what the "customs union" is....
Or indeed what % of Remainers? We have had this out many times, Prague, but the pro Brexit vote was more cultural and political than about economics. The ongoing failure of many Remainers to accept that just adds to the current dialogue of the deaf. Sometimes you just have to listen to what people say in order to understand them.
its a well known fact that economics has a massive impact on both culture and politics, more so than those two with each other.
I wonder what % of the 52 % could, even now, accurately explain what the "customs union" is....
Or indeed what % of Remainers? We have had this out many times, Prague, but the pro Brexit vote was more cultural and political than about economics. The ongoing failure of many Remainers to accept that just adds to the current dialogue of the deaf. Sometimes you just have to listen to what people say in order to understand them.
For me as a remainer I have hardly commented on the financials. It is the cultural shift and practical details that interest me more.
I wonder what % of the 52 % could, even now, accurately explain what the "customs union" is....
Or indeed what % of Remainers? We have had this out many times, Prague, but the pro Brexit vote was more cultural and political than about economics. The ongoing failure of many Remainers to accept that just adds to the current dialogue of the deaf. Sometimes you just have to listen to what people say in order to understand them.
I think you are correct that the pro Brexit vote was more cultural and political than economical. Some people accept that the country may not be as prosperous after Brexit.
*A BREXIT deal was agreed last night which will temporarily keep the UK in the EU’s customs union according to ITV News political editor Robert Peston, in an explosive move which would leave the UK unable to sign its own trade deals.
The astonishing claim was made on ITV Peston, the current affairs show, during an interview with former Brexit Secretary David Davis.
Mr Peston said: “I have it from very good sources that last night Olly Robbins and his opposite number who works for Michel Barnier agreed to an outline of a deal which would keep the UK in the customs union for the period that a so-called backstop would have to operate.”
Olly Robbins is Theresa May’s top Brexit advisor and is seen as the architect of her controversial Chequers plan.
A backstop deal would come into effect if the UK and EU can’t reach a full agreement finalising their future relations.
Unless it is time limited it could theoretically see the UK stuck in the customs union indefinitely.
Mr Davis, who resigned from the Government in July in protest at Theresa May’s Chequers deal, made it clear on the programme such an agreement is unacceptable.
He said: “No I don’t approve it in the terms you’re talking about because there’s no backstop to the backstop.
“There’s no limit to the backstop, it only ceases when the EU agrees to it.
“Why should we ever agree?”
The European customs union is a free trade area which also maintains common tariffs on non-members.
As such, duties are not paid on trade between members, but are charged at a common rate to other countries.
All trade agreements are made by the European Commission, essentially the Government of the European Union.
Members states are consequently unable to make their own trade deals.
Should the UK stay in the customs union it would see the European Commission negotiate trade deals on behalf of the UK, despite the UK losing its European Commission representation after Brexit.
Yesterday former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson claimed staying in the customs union would turn the UK into a “permanent EU colony”.
He added: “This is far from take back control.
“In the referendum both sides said ‘Leave’ meant leaving the customs union and single market.”
Seems odd that this only appears to be reported in the Daily Express?
guy on Twitter talking about how Brexit means he is closing his business. The Czech aspect is a coincidence. Bought classic cars across the EU, got them fixed up in CZ (Czechs are good at that), and sold them in UK
I wonder what % of the 52 % could, even now, accurately explain what the "customs union" is....
Or indeed what % of Remainers? We have had this out many times, Prague, but the pro Brexit vote was more cultural and political than about economics. The ongoing failure of many Remainers to accept that just adds to the current dialogue of the deaf. Sometimes you just have to listen to what people say in order to understand them.
I think you are correct that the pro Brexit vote was more cultural and political than economical. Some people accept that the country may not be as prosperous after Brexit.
Yes, people like Rees-Mogg do, (and it seems, @southbank, sadly), because they personally will be alright, Jack.
and they claim the "cultural" high ground. I am sure they'll be outside the Job Centre in Sunderland in a couple of years time, handing out bacon sarnies to the queuing unemployed and saying "Chin up, dear chap, you've got your sovereignty back"
guy on Twitter talking about how Brexit means he is closing his business. The Czech aspect is a coincidence. Bought classic cars across the EU, got them fixed up in CZ (Czechs are good at that), and sold them in UK
Is that legitimate? Seems odd that you would take this decision now when the final details are yet to be decided, I wouldn’t be hugely surprised if we end up with FoM during a prolonged “backstop” “transition” “implementation” period (whatever term we’re using this week).
guy on Twitter talking about how Brexit means he is closing his business. The Czech aspect is a coincidence. Bought classic cars across the EU, got them fixed up in CZ (Czechs are good at that), and sold them in UK
Is that legitimate? Seems odd that you would take this decision now when the final details are yet to be decided, I wouldn’t be hugely surprised if we end up with FoM during a prolonged “backstop” “transition” “implementation” period (whatever term we’re using this week).
Of course it's legit. Why would it not be? It's what the single market is for (not just for the global multinats that @Dippenhall so dislikes)
A little way down the thread he explains why he is closing down now. Long lead time in what he does, capital tied up with each vehicle.
guy on Twitter talking about how Brexit means he is closing his business. The Czech aspect is a coincidence. Bought classic cars across the EU, got them fixed up in CZ (Czechs are good at that), and sold them in UK
Is that legitimate? Seems odd that you would take this decision now when the final details are yet to be decided, I wouldn’t be hugely surprised if we end up with FoM during a prolonged “backstop” “transition” “implementation” period (whatever term we’re using this week).
Of course it's legit. Why would it not be? It's what the single market is for (not just for the global multinats that @Dippenhall so dislikes)
A little way down the thread he explains why he is closing down now. Long lead time in what he does, capital tied up with each vehicle.
Because it’s Twitter, probably about 99.99% of things on Twitter are not legitimate.
guy on Twitter talking about how Brexit means he is closing his business. The Czech aspect is a coincidence. Bought classic cars across the EU, got them fixed up in CZ (Czechs are good at that), and sold them in UK
Is that legitimate? Seems odd that you would take this decision now when the final details are yet to be decided, I wouldn’t be hugely surprised if we end up with FoM during a prolonged “backstop” “transition” “implementation” period (whatever term we’re using this week).
Of course it's legit. Why would it not be? It's what the single market is for (not just for the global multinats that @Dippenhall so dislikes)
A little way down the thread he explains why he is closing down now. Long lead time in what he does, capital tied up with each vehicle.
Because it’s Twitter, probably about 99.99% of things on Twitter are not legitimate.
I'll try to slow down @A-R-T-H-U-R while you make your getaway...
guy on Twitter talking about how Brexit means he is closing his business. The Czech aspect is a coincidence. Bought classic cars across the EU, got them fixed up in CZ (Czechs are good at that), and sold them in UK
Is that legitimate? Seems odd that you would take this decision now when the final details are yet to be decided, I wouldn’t be hugely surprised if we end up with FoM during a prolonged “backstop” “transition” “implementation” period (whatever term we’re using this week).
Of course it's legit. Why would it not be? It's what the single market is for (not just for the global multinats that @Dippenhall so dislikes)
A little way down the thread he explains why he is closing down now. Long lead time in what he does, capital tied up with each vehicle.
Because it’s Twitter, probably about 99.99% of things on Twitter are not legitimate.
Ah, I thought you meant is his biz legit. Looked a bit too unusual a biz to just make up, to me, and his reasons for winding up now also made sense.
guy on Twitter talking about how Brexit means he is closing his business. The Czech aspect is a coincidence. Bought classic cars across the EU, got them fixed up in CZ (Czechs are good at that), and sold them in UK
Is that legitimate? Seems odd that you would take this decision now when the final details are yet to be decided, I wouldn’t be hugely surprised if we end up with FoM during a prolonged “backstop” “transition” “implementation” period (whatever term we’re using this week).
Of course it's legit. Why would it not be? It's what the single market is for (not just for the global multinats that @Dippenhall so dislikes)
A little way down the thread he explains why he is closing down now. Long lead time in what he does, capital tied up with each vehicle.
The long lead time sort of explains this, but ceasing trading back in June 2016 seems rather premature when so much was ... and still is ... very unclear.
It’s a pity as he seems a very entrepreneurial person.
guy on Twitter talking about how Brexit means he is closing his business. The Czech aspect is a coincidence. Bought classic cars across the EU, got them fixed up in CZ (Czechs are good at that), and sold them in UK
Is that legitimate? Seems odd that you would take this decision now when the final details are yet to be decided, I wouldn’t be hugely surprised if we end up with FoM during a prolonged “backstop” “transition” “implementation” period (whatever term we’re using this week).
Of course it's legit. Why would it not be? It's what the single market is for (not just for the global multinats that @Dippenhall so dislikes)
A little way down the thread he explains why he is closing down now. Long lead time in what he does, capital tied up with each vehicle.
The long lead time sort of explains this, but ceasing trading back in June 2016 seems rather premature when so much was ... and still is ... very unclear.
It’s a pity as he seems a very entrepreneurial person.
But thats the trouble. It's UNCLEAR. And it doesn't look good, does it. He could be stuck with cars that suddenly have duty slapped on them in 6 months time. He isn't a stinking rich fund manager like...er..Jacob Rees-Mogg.
As I understand it, he ceased trading, but didnt liquidate it, he waited to see what the deal was. Two years later, he's none the wiser so now he is actually winding it up.
I was speaking tp a local estate agent today about the recent downturn in house prices & he said the day after Mark Carney said prices COULD drop UP TO 35% that he had buyers ringing in to reduce their offers or even pull out.....one as much as £20k pn a £300k house.
thanks Mr Carney. You toddle off back to Canada & leave us to clear up your mess.
I was speaking tp a local estate agent today about the recent downturn in house prices & he said the day after Mark Carney said prices COULD drop UP TO 35% that he had buyers ringing in to reduce their offers or even pull out.....one as much as £20k pn a £300k house.
thanks Mr Carney. You toddle off back to Canada & leave us to clear up your mess.
That's funny because I was speaking to a local estate agent in Eltham, Ian Skinner, been around years, recommended by another Lifer, from early in 2017, and he said nothing of the kind had taken place. The market started to soften a bit around late 2017, just when we came to put it on the market. We sold our house at about a 5% discount on what it had been when we first spoke to him a year earlier.
I could be going out on a limb here, but some people suggest that not all estate agents are people of the highest integrity or competence. But of course as with IFAs they are a very mixed bunch.
I wonder what % of the 52 % could, even now, accurately explain what the "customs union" is....
Or indeed what % of Remainers? We have had this out many times, Prague, but the pro Brexit vote was more cultural and political than about economics. The ongoing failure of many Remainers to accept that just adds to the current dialogue of the deaf. Sometimes you just have to listen to what people say in order to understand them.
I think you are correct that the pro Brexit vote was more cultural and political than economical. Some people accept that the country may not be as prosperous after Brexit.
Yes, people like Rees-Mogg do, (and it seems, @southbank, sadly), because they personally will be alright, Jack.
and they claim the "cultural" high ground. I am sure they'll be outside the Job Centre in Sunderland in a couple of years time, handing out bacon sarnies to the queuing unemployed and saying "Chin up, dear chap, you've got your sovereignty back"
They are actually closing lots of them down too, my old mucker.
Comments
While I agree with the sentiment that rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools, the EU can't have it both ways really can it. Decide to be inflexible in its Brexit timetable but in many other areas, particularly the propping up of the Euro, ready to bend and break whatever rule it deems necessary. The Euro is badly constructed as it is, trying to save it by ignoring the rules it is designed around is not going to end well.
I'm still trying to figure out how the EU sought to benefit it's member Greece when it's economy shrank by 25%, unemployment went up to 25% (youth unemployment spiked at 60%) and the suicide rate increased by 35% following it's financial crisis. It may have been the Greek banks that desperately needed the money, but it was really for the French and German banks that were up the creek. That money went in and out of Greece without touching the sides.
As for the ECB allowing Greek banks use effectively worthless bonds as collateral, it may be that much of any money raised was paid to foreign banks, but the end result was to keep Greek banks operating, and my experience of banking collapse, even vicariously, is that those that suffer are generally ordinary people.
In terms if the wider Greek economic crisis, while I personally disagree with the terms of the bail out (I would have liked to see more debt forgiveness, but I do not subscribe to the cloud cuckoo-land approach and narcissistic self-regard of Varoufakis) people keep going on about the EU being some kind of ogre, but the EU was acting only as the sum of its parts, including the UK.
The other member states were not prepared to simply let Greece off the hook for the inevitable consequences of decades of clientalism, tax evasion, political bribery and ingrained corruption. Their reaction reflected the (in my view flawed) political and economic consensus. Even a return to the Drachma is unlikely to have improved matters for Greece, and could well have been far worse.
Aaaaaaargh! I could have effing written that. In fact, I am pretty sure I did, about ten times. 😭
The astonishing claim was made on ITV Peston, the current affairs show, during an interview with former Brexit Secretary David Davis.
Mr Peston said: “I have it from very good sources that last night Olly Robbins and his opposite number who works for Michel Barnier agreed to an outline of a deal which would keep the UK in the customs union for the period that a so-called backstop would have to operate.”
Olly Robbins is Theresa May’s top Brexit advisor and is seen as the architect of her controversial Chequers plan.
A backstop deal would come into effect if the UK and EU can’t reach a full agreement finalising their future relations.
Unless it is time limited it could theoretically see the UK stuck in the customs union indefinitely.
Mr Davis, who resigned from the Government in July in protest at Theresa May’s Chequers deal, made it clear on the programme such an agreement is unacceptable.
He said: “No I don’t approve it in the terms you’re talking about because there’s no backstop to the backstop.
“There’s no limit to the backstop, it only ceases when the EU agrees to it.
“Why should we ever agree?”
The European customs union is a free trade area which also maintains common tariffs on non-members.
As such, duties are not paid on trade between members, but are charged at a common rate to other countries.
All trade agreements are made by the European Commission, essentially the Government of the European Union.
Members states are consequently unable to make their own trade deals.
Should the UK stay in the customs union it would see the European Commission negotiate trade deals on behalf of the UK, despite the UK losing its European Commission representation after Brexit.
Yesterday former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson claimed staying in the customs union would turn the UK into a “permanent EU colony”.
He added: “This is far from take back control.
“In the referendum both sides said ‘Leave’ meant leaving the customs union and single market.”
Some people accept that the country may not be as prosperous after Brexit.
and they claim the "cultural" high ground. I am sure they'll be outside the Job Centre in Sunderland in a couple of years time, handing out bacon sarnies to the queuing unemployed and saying "Chin up, dear chap, you've got your sovereignty back"
A little way down the thread he explains why he is closing down now. Long lead time in what he does, capital tied up with each vehicle.
It’s a pity as he seems a very entrepreneurial person.
As I understand it, he ceased trading, but didnt liquidate it, he waited to see what the deal was. Two years later, he's none the wiser so now he is actually winding it up.
thanks Mr Carney. You toddle off back to Canada & leave us to clear up your mess.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/transport/road-transport/news/98978/watch-tory-mp-angry-clash-chris-grayling-over-no-deal
I could be going out on a limb here, but some people suggest that not all estate agents are people of the highest integrity or competence. But of course as with IFAs they are a very mixed bunch.