• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Brexit Vote: 51.9% leave, 48.1% stay

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
84
Points
530
Furniture said:
Canada needs a Conservative government to prevent the mass confiscation of private property for the hope of buying a few more votes in Toronto and Montreal.

Trade with the UK will happen under any smart government. We are more UK than we are anything else...
Trade with the Brits is going to be tricky. Their financial services sector is going to want more canadian access. Do we want our big banks facing more competition from the Brits?  Probably not.

Meanwhile,  Canada is going to want to export more agricultural products.  Will the Brits, facing more competition and less market access to the EU want to open up their farmers to more competition?  Especially in those rural areas that mostly votes for Boris Johnson?  Unlikely.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
48
Points
530
It's amazing how everything has "concerns" associated with it.  I'm surprised anything gets done.
 

The Bread Guy

Army.ca Relic
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
35
Points
630
Brad Sallows said:
It's amazing how everything has "concerns" associated with it.  I'm surprised anything gets done.
That's going to happen whenever any solution appeals to less than 95% of the population, no matter what party's in power.  It's easy to do things when everyone likes them and it's good for everyone.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5
Points
430
The biggest fear that politicians have is of the governed discovering that the politicians don't control much of anything. 

We were communicating, trading, migrating and farming long before there were politicians (or priests) - regardless of the weather.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
332
Points
830
Chris Pook said:
The biggest fear that politicians have is of the governed discovering that the politicians don't control much of anything. 

We were communicating, trading, migrating and farming long before there were politicians (or priests) - regardless of the weather.

The origin of political control (and bureaucracy, and organized religion with a priestly class) can be directly linked to the beginning of agriculture. While yes, there was minor and early barter trade pre-politics 'trade' in any sense that would be meaningful today isn't really something that can exist absent our various institutions.

The reality relevant today is that anything crossing borders is going to be very influenced by political actors. The statutory and regulatory system is very firmly entrenched. Disruptive political shifts aren't something that can just be ignored because it wasn't a problem in early tribal society.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
480
Points
880
tomahawk6 said:
With his big majority the PM should achieve his Jan. goal of BREXIT.

Just watch how blurry those Brexit 'lines in the sand' (or Irish Sea) get, though. As Churchill said:

'The English never draw a line without blurring it.' :)

 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5
Points
430
Brihard said:
The origin of political control (and bureaucracy, and organized religion with a priestly class) can be directly linked to the beginning of agriculture. While yes, there was minor and early barter trade pre-politics 'trade' in any sense that would be meaningful today isn't really something that can exist absent our various institutions.

The reality relevant today is that anything crossing borders is going to be very influenced by political actors. The statutory and regulatory system is very firmly entrenched. Disruptive political shifts aren't something that can just be ignored because it wasn't a problem in early tribal society.

Your primary assumption is the concept of the "border".  The related assumption is that of the integrity of the border. 

Modern maps show the world neatly divided into nice tidy Westphalian packages with a singular capital city.  My first atlas, purchased in 1963, still showed many countries with dotted lines where borders might be and some of those dotted lines terminate in deserts and mountains distant from the sea.  There were still places on the Arabian peninsula and the Sahara where there was no recognized national structure.  Border wars.  Autonomous border regions.  National movements.  Subnational regions.  Debates over the placement of capitals.  Capital authority. Role of the city.  Urban-rural splits. Federal-Provincial-Municipal turf wars.  Supranational-International-Global-National-Regional-Tribal-Religions (traditional, political, environmental) -Local-Individual.

I would suggest that there is no consensus on any of the issues.  That there is continuing tension on all of those issues.  And that those tensions continue to put the concept as well as the placement and integrity of borders at risk.  History is not finished with us yet. Nor for that matter is Geography.  Borders are maintained by force majeure and the artificial entity known as the State.  The State proclaims a monopoly on force majeure.  That monopoly is debatable and debated.

And just for the record.  It appears from the archaeological evidence around Sanliurfa and Gobeklitepe that priests and temples arose from nomadic hunter-gatherers before agriculture.  Temples may have been originally meeting places for annual trade and partying opportunities.  7000 years before the Egyptians and the Mesopotamians and 9000 before the Romans, Greeks and Phoenicians.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5
Points
430
daftandbarmy said:
Just watch how blurry those Brexit 'lines in the sand' (or Irish Sea) get, though. As Churchill said:

'The English never draw a line without blurring it.' :)

That is called pragmatism.  And it is why Napoleon dismissed us as a nation of shop-keepers, unfettered by principle. Groucho Marx was closer.  "I have principles.  If you don't like those I have others".

The key element is that as of a date certain none of Brussels, Geneva, the Hague or New York will be imposing terms.  London will be agreeing to terms as its parliamentarians see fit.
 

QV

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Chris Pook said:
That is called pragmatism.  And it is why Napoleon dismissed us as a nation of shop-keepers, unfettered by principle. Groucho Marx was closer.  "I have principles.  If you don't like those I have others".

The key element is that as of a date certain none of Brussels, Geneva, the Hague or New York will be imposing terms.  London will be agreeing to terms as its parliamentarians see fit.

And isn't that great!
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
180
Points
680
Chris Pook said:
...
And just for the record.  It appears from the archaeological evidence around Sanliurfa and Gobeklitepe that priests and temples arose from nomadic hunter-gatherers before agriculture.  Temples may have been originally meeting places for annual trade and partying opportunities.  7000 years before the Egyptians and the Mesopotamians and 9000 before the Romans, Greeks and Phoenicians.

I'm with you on this. Even in early family-based hunter-gatherer societies, thousands of years before agriculture, there was always a "priestly" caste be it shamans, story-tellers, medicine men, healers or elders whose role it was to keep and often enforce the entities' traditions and social norms. Their roles increased as family groups consolidated into larger social groups and tribes. Consistent with the wide variety of such hunter-gatherer societies are creation stories, and spirits or entities (whether natural or supernatural) that explained mysteries and gave examples of acceptable and non acceptable behaviour as well as setting the annual rhythm of the group, (such as moving to different hunting areas or winter quarters etc)

As societies became more complex (much of which dealt with the development of agriculture which fixed tribes etc to fixed locations rather than ranges), the structures of priest classes, soldier classes and other administrative entities and control over territories and maintenance of the tribe's underlying mythology (including religion) became much more defined and pronounced. That progress continued and grew through the consolidation of tribes into  nations and subsequently nation states.

:cheers:
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Myth
Donor
Reaction score
298
Points
830
I think this sums it up.

https://twitter.com/chinarhyming/status/1223574819096141824
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
48
Points
530
So both the Brexit and impeachment losers are reduced to trading mediocre remarks on Twitter?  That's a long, hard fall.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
480
Points
880
Brad Sallows said:
So both the Brexit and impeachment losers are reduced to trading mediocre remarks on Twitter?  That's a long, hard fall.

The Chattering Classes have taken a good kicking lately.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5
Points
430
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Europe_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

Here is the answer to "Why Brexit?"

Because the UK (45k per person per annum) aspires to be as wealthy as Iceland, Norway and Switzerland  (91k, 85k and 90k).  Or even Ireland (85k). 

We'll not talk about Luxembourg, home of Jean Claude Juncker (125k). 

 

Remius

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
103
Points
630
Brad Sallows said:
So both the Brexit and impeachment losers are reduced to trading mediocre remarks on Twitter?  That's a long, hard fall.

I guess maybe they are taking their cues from the guy who lost the popular vote in the US.... ;D
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
332
Points
830
Remius said:
I guess maybe they are taking their cues from the guy who lost the popular vote in the US.... ;D

Tantrums on twitter are only juvenile and pathetic when the Left does it. Try to keep up.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
48
Points
530
>I guess maybe they are taking their cues from the guy who lost the popular vote in the US....

So they became that which they despise and want to remove and replace?  OK...
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
480
Points
880
Brihard said:
Tantrums on twitter are only juvenile and pathetic when the Left does it. Try to keep up.

Are you suggesting that, perhaps, they are 'overly woke'? ;)

https://vimeo.com/276940268
 

Retired AF Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
9
Points
430
From Politico an interesting article on what a Canada-UK trade detail could look like:

What would a Canada-style trade deal with the UK look like?

Despite Boris Johnson’s enthusiasm, this is not a recipe for frictionless trade.

By Barbara Moens and Eleni Courea

1/31/20, 4:53 PM CET

Updated 2/3/20, 4:53 AM CET

Boris Johnson has long made clear that he wants to strike a post-Brexit deal similar to the one the EU has with Canada.

In a speech in London on Monday, the prime minister is expected to map out his demands for the upcoming negotiations with Brussels and confirm he is seeking to mirror the Canada free-trade agreement, according to the Times.

POLITICO guides you through the main questions surrounding such a deal.
Why didn’t anyone think of this before?

They did. On the European side, EU Brexit chief negotiator Michel Barnier offered Canada as a scenario in the now-famous “Barnier slides” of 2017. When all the options that transgressed Britain's red lines (e.g. free movement) were put aside, Canada was pretty much the only model left.

Johnson has stressed several times that he’s looking for a "super Canada-plus" agreement with the EU rather than a closer economic partnership. “When they say Canada, they don’t mean literally Canada. They mean an equivalent balance of access and obligation,” Sam Lowe, a senior research fellow at the Centre for European Reform, said.

What would this mean for trade in goods?

The access that comes with the EU’s deal with Canada – which is in the same ballpark as its deals with Japan and South Korea – allows for almost tariff-free trade in goods. More precisely, CETA removes duties on 98 percent of products that the EU trades with Canada. Customs duties for almost all goods will be removed within seven years. But although it slashes tariffs, the export of food is still restricted by quotas and phytosanitary controls. Also, this kind of free-trade deal would create a whole new set of costs, paperwork and border checks for companies wishing to trade under such an agreement. This is not "frictionless" trade.

Both the EU and the U.K. sides have already said that they want a future trade deal with “zero tariffs, zero quota.” However, the EU has added “zero dumping” to this line, stressing that it wants a level playing field. If Britain wants a sweeping deal, the EU wants some kind of regulatory convergence.
What would this mean for trade in services?

In services, CETA is one of the most far-reaching agreements the EU has concluded and takes into account sectors ranging from telecoms to tourism. It also has a special chapter on financial services that creates a financial services committee to supervise and regulate the sector.

“Largely what this financial chapter does in the agreements with Canada or Japan is set up a framework through which regulators can have dialogue so as to avoid creating unnecessary new barriers in the future,” said Lowe. “So just to keep them talking. You can imagine something like that being in there, but it doesn't do much at all when it comes to market access. We're not talking about creating market access or keeping the source of access we have now.”

For example, the EU-Canada deal stops way short of allowing the so-called passporting that U.K. financial firms are keen to retain to enable them to operate throughout the single market having only registered in one EU member country.

“A free-trade agreement, such as the EU-Canada deal, is going to push up a lot of challenges for the U.K.” said David Henig, a former British government trade official and director of the European Centre for International Political Economy. “It doesn’t do a lot for services compared with the rules of the World Trade Organization.”

Given how economically important and politically sensitive the financial services sector in London is, that might change in a deal with the U.K.

When asked about the Canada model, a spokesperson for TheCityUK, a financial services lobby group, said this negotiation is a different one. “What is unique about the future relationship discussion between the U.K. and the EU is that it starts with a shared rule book already in place. EU regulations in financial services have been written with the U.K. around the table and often holding the pen, since it is the largest financial center in Europe,” he said.

The U.K. government wants to strike a comprehensive agreement on services too, however, given that they are a major part of the British economy. “We've been clear that we are looking for services to be included and I believe the Political Declaration also includes that,” Johnson’s spokesman said on Friday. EU trade chief Phil Hogan already suggested that financial services access might be one of the trade-offs at the end of the negotiations, for example for fishing rights.
Is such a deal possible in less than a year?

Johnson said he does not want an extension of negotiations beyond December 2020. That raises eyebrows with trade experts.

“It’s very difficult to negotiate even a Canada-style agreement in less than 10 months,” Henig said. “It took several years to complete the trade deal with Canada. And the start of these negotiations isn’t going very well. The EU and the U.K. are not speaking the same language, which makes it extra difficult.”

On the other hand, there is political will. While the EU has stressed the risks of the brutal timeframe, both sides want to avoid a catastrophic cliff edge of tariffs and trade barriers from January 2021. A lot will depend on the degree of regulatory alignment the U.K. is ready to accept as a price for its access to the EU market. One of the chief fears of the EU is that Britain could emerge as a light-regulation competitor to the EU after Brexit.

Didn’t the EU-Canada agreement take forever to ratify?

Yes. The agreement was signed in 2016 and provisionally entered into force in 2017 but is still not ratified by parliaments in all EU countries. “Don’t underestimate the difficulty of ratification,” Barnier has warned, referring to the EU-Canada trade deal almost scotched by lawmakers in the assembly in Wallonia, the French-speaking part of Belgium.

The legal architecture of the future deal with the U.K. is not clear yet. Depending on how ambitious the deal ends up being, it may touch on certain sectors, such as transport or the environment, where the EU needs to involve some 40 national parliaments in the ratification process. In briefings for EU diplomats, the European Commission said it was not yet sure whether the Brexit deal would be such a “mixed” agreement, as was the case with Canada.

Will the EU accept this?

The key sticking point is that there is no “off-the-shelf” version of the Canada deal available. The EU has made it clear that it expects the U.K. to sign up to a level playing field in areas including workers’ rights and environmental protections, so as to avoid the U.K. undercutting the EU. The EU-Canada trade deal has far less ambitious provisions in these sectors, and its dispute settlement mechanism to enforce these provisions is far from the “robust” policing tools that the EU wants to establish in its U.K. deal to avoid “competitive undercutting or free-riding."

“We’re bigger and closer than Canada, and we do a hell of a lot more trade [with the EU],” said Anand Menon, director of think tank U.K. in a Changing Europe. “As far as the EU are concerned we’re far more of a potential competitive threat for them.”

Lowe concurs that the issue is that the U.K. is “big and near” to the EU. “The difficulty is that the EU is putting preconditions in place. This is where we end up talking about level playing field and access to fishing waters. That’s what most of the negotiation is about.”

Link
 
Top