Brexit has began, http://www.smh.com.au/world/the-bre...ing--what-to-expect-next-20170330-gv9tiz.html All eyes are now on the process of negotiations and the cost which will be considerable. Many nations are sitting back and watching, waiting to see the outcome as they chaff under the leadership of the EU and also want out. Considering some of these nations, that would be the biggest mistake of all for them. BUT the biggest question is can the EU survive such??? Possibly but it will come only at the expense of decent reform and not simply political shuffle… SO what say others???
The EU are going to drag their feet as much as possible in the negotiation. They have already signalled as much, by stating that the Article 50 is reversible. Their tactic is that the UK would never leave without a trade deal in place. Considering that the UK is a net importer from the EU, that's a bold bluff. But the EU doesn't think in economic terms, they think in power terms. Which is partly why the UK is leaving, and why London will remain the banking centre of this timezone even without a trade deal.
And it's also why they want such a big 'divorce' payment. If they can't get our money in regular contributions they'll get it in any other way they can. The loss of our massive contributions could be enough to bring about the failure of the EU.
Yes, but seriously the settlement sounds large but I am not privy to the amount it cost the UK to be part of the EU each year. Since the cost on the EU is great to keep nations happy one has to wonder just how far 50b will get it. My opinion, not far. So will it provide enough stop gap to find alternative financial compensation to survive??? Russia is actively working to inflate economic costs against the EU one wonders just how long it will hold...
They charlatans will keep the show on the road for as long as they possibly can, because all their wealth is in Euros; I agree that when our 50b is used up it could well be the end of Le Grand Projet. On the other hand I don't think they're gonna get anywhere near 50b. I don't know about that - I don't believe a word written in the western press about Russia.
I think the UK's net contribution is about £7.5bln pa, which if we took the £50bln as an "investment" against a £7.5 annual "income", would provide an IRR of 15% and a pay-back period of 7 years. But this will be improved if we don't pay £50 out at once, but remain paying our obligations to the EU as, when and if they fall due. Ms May has indicated this is what she will do http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...s-clear-hint-britain-will-pay-brexit-divorce/
as to the value, well 2 years more fees while negotiations continue at least. and I am sure the price will be lower, it was just a number some nations are throwing about. As to Russia, one of the biggest importers to the EU of energy. you bet they are inflating the economy, not a lot but enough to recoup the billions the EU have indicated may well Welch on, you don’t need western media to let you know that you just need to hear what has been said and watch as prices rise...
Interesting, I listen carefully to her speech and the criticism of her stand. Most who sit on the other side of the negotiation table want to get the divorce settlement before entertaining any other deals the UK wish to make. This could actually be very messy indeed. Ms May sounds as if she would be prepared to entertain a reversal later in the scene and is trying to put a chock in the door. I wonder how the EU will really feel about that???
I wonder just how cut throat the negotiations will be??? In Australian terms I think the EU is playing for sheep stations...
I think you're right, but May has secured the "walk" option for herself. That is, if there is no deal we just exit onto the WTO platform. Noone wants that, but the EU has more to lose from it than the UK. May's history in the Home Office is to hold out to the 11 hour (literally 11pm) before closing a negotiation. So this could be quite hair-raising.
Worse, they're playing for honour and pride. We're not negotiating against a rational commercial entity. The "divorce" analogy is unfortunately very apt, we are up against a mascara-smeared jilted housewife who wants to punch us in the mouth but isn't allowed to. Its going to be a fight for the kids....
Realpolitk. Not very cut throat. Britain holds too much negotiating power. It's too unbalanced a trade relationship. We walk away and cease trading with the entire EU forever and we turn out to be richer. (Trading at a loss makes you poorer not richer). So we can be that cut throat if we wish. Not that we will. There is money to be made there and fun stuff to visit and buy. But we don't have to take any **** from them. None at all. The old two fingered salute. The more the EU mentions, the more it loses. The best deal for them is if they shut up and existing deals get cut and paste legislated into UK law. If they draw attention to themselves, the mob will spot their shadey deals and anull them. We'd rather trade with you. Everything we buy in Europe, other people sell. People I like more. People who fight on my side in war. Not people who try to kill me. So let's get to it. What did Australia used to sell to the UK that EU tariffs put an end to? Let's start with that one.
I do believe that May and many politicians are trying to maintain an appearance of propriety. As alluded by many, simple withdrawal is a possibility but does carry some reputational credit. In trading terms this ideal is good but it also does have considerable leverage in any negotiations. It would seem to me that May is giving more credit the EU position than to her own. I raised this in the Australian section thinking that an outside perspective might be of interest and help to bring some clarity, Shame that the current members in the sections are unable to stop navel gazing to see what is happening in the world... Anyway, I looked for a particular quote which to me said the EU is extremely worried and would be very prepared to do whatever deals they can to protect themselves. Basically they said the 24 member states are confident and supportive that Brexit will mean nothing. However, we then get this http://www.smh.com.au/world/nick-miller-brexit-feature-for-we-20170330-gva7go.html This is going to get very messy and they are already setting up the grounds to extend it.
Australia's main trade has been agricultural products. Australia possibly does stand to gain greatly on the back of Brexit and I do think this is one reason the EU is very worried. While they controlled the trade in the region they knew they could protect their wallets and bank accounts. Artificially supporting nations who are the beneficiaries and adding impositions on nations such as the UK to pay for said deals. The more you can spread the cost of short sighted policy the longer you can maintain the allusion on control and stability.
