I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said the
UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ, Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

Perhaps those who have argued that we do already have such trade deals
could enlighten those of us who have said we do not have them in our own
right and would need to negotiate them from scratch.

Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said the
UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ, Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where we
pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where no
fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other WTO
members.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate those,
the two years for the EU exit process is rather short for the usual
negotiations, but the carrot to the EU to get their finger out would be
continuing to sell their cars (and windmills, etc) to us without duty
slapped on the price.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 12:54:40 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia, China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where we
pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where no
fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other WTO
members.

Yep, I get that.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that the
UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals. Reference was made
to India as an example but what I have seen clearly states that we have
no current trade deal with India.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:17:33 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

Correct. And that's been the situation since we joined the common market
in 1973.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ, Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

The EU has no trade deal with the USA - that's what TTIP will be.

The EU has no trade deal with Australia or NZ - last year, there was an
announcement that discussion towards one would be starting in 2017.

The EU has no trade deal with China - this year, there's been some
discussion about starting to think about one.

The EU has no trade deal with India - negotiations started in 2007, but
stalled when Modi came into government in 2014. There's some discussion
that they might restart.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:31:19 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals, since there are
no deals in place currently between the UK and any other nation. We could
ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of it, assuming that's
what we wanted to have, but until that was negotiated and agreed, there
would be nothing in place.

On 17/06/2016 13:31, Mark Allread wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 12:54:40 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia, China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where we
pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where no
fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other WTO
members.

Yep, I get that.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that the
UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals. Reference was made
to India as an example but what I have seen clearly states that we have
no current trade deal with India.


This is supposed to be a DIY group so can people please consider doing a
bit of research rather than posting "a bloke in the pub said" stuff?
And also please cite your sources?

Eg a quick look at the map at

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/149622.htm

will show the *EU* does not have "trade deals" in force with the USA,
NZ, Australia, China or India. But it is more advanced than the UK
since we can't do owt separate from the EU.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On 17/06/2016 12:54, Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said the
UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ, Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where we
pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where no
fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other WTO
members.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate those,
the two years for the EU exit process is rather short for the usual
negotiations, but the carrot to the EU to get their finger out would be
continuing to sell their cars (and windmills, etc) to us without duty
slapped on the price.



As I understand it, you don't *have* to have trade deals in order to
trade with other countries - but it sometimes helps.

Again, as I understand it, neither the UK nor the EU currently has a
trade deal with the USA - this is what TTIP is all about, but hasn't yet
been agreed. But we *still* do a lot of trade with the US.

[As far as I can see, TTIP would be bad news for us anyway - so if we're
not in the EU at the time when it's finally agreed, so much the better!]
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On Friday, 17 June 2016 12:17:35 UTC+1, Mark Allread wrote:
I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said the
UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ, Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

So your saying if we vote out I wn;t be able to order a New Mac or buy a T-shirt from china.

If we don't have a trade deal with china how can we buy their steel ?
Sound like good news for the UK steel interesty we can;t trade with china.




Perhaps those who have argued that we do already have such trade deals
could enlighten those of us who have said we do not have them in our own
right and would need to negotiate them from scratch.

Our ancestors managed that when exporting tin from cornwall before JC.

Jesus christ Not jeremy corbyn or jeremy clarkson.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:24:04 +0100, Robin wrote:

On 17/06/2016 13:31, Mark Allread wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 12:54:40 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we
aren't allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia, China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where
we pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where
no fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other
WTO members.

Yep, I get that.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals. Reference was
made to India as an example but what I have seen clearly states that we
have no current trade deal with India.


This is supposed to be a DIY group so can people please consider doing a
bit of research rather than posting "a bloke in the pub said" stuff? And
also please cite your sources?

Eg a quick look at the map at

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/149622.htm

will show the *EU* does not have "trade deals" in force with the USA,
NZ, Australia, China or India. But it is more advanced than the UK
since we can't do owt separate from the EU.

Oh, the source? Right, its the Vote Leave campaign literature.

Odd how they say we don't have any trade deals but Brexiteers on the
Group have claimed we do.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 13:11:37 +0000, Adrian wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:31:19 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals, since there
are no deals in place currently between the UK and any other nation. We
could ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of it, assuming
that's what we wanted to have, but until that was negotiated and agreed,
there would be nothing in place.

You know that and I know that and the Vote Leave campaign knows that but
sadly from the exchanges on here too many Brexit supporters do not.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 13:07:06 +0000, Adrian wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:17:33 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

Correct. And that's been the situation since we joined the common market
in 1973.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

The EU has no trade deal with the USA - that's what TTIP will be.

The EU has no trade deal with Australia or NZ - last year, there was an
announcement that discussion towards one would be starting in 2017.

The EU has no trade deal with China - this year, there's been some
discussion about starting to think about one.

The EU has no trade deal with India - negotiations started in 2007, but
stalled when Modi came into government in 2014. There's some discussion
that they might restart.

I agree - sadly others seem to have been misinformed in the past. At
least the most recent Vote Leave lealet has attempted to correct some
impressions.

On 17/06/16 14:11, Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:31:19 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals, since there are
no deals in place currently between the UK and any other nation.


Utter complete COCK

The EU and Britain separately trade billions with India despite any
trade deals being in place.

You don't need a trade deal, to trade.


We could
ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of it, assuming that's
what we wanted to have, but until that was negotiated and agreed, there
would be nothing in place.

Which matters less than the square root of sweet fanny adams.

Trade deals are nice to haves. Not have to haves.


--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

On 17/06/16 14:24, Robin wrote:
On 17/06/2016 13:31, Mark Allread wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 12:54:40 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia, China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where we
pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where no
fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other WTO
members.

Yep, I get that.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that the
UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals. Reference was made
to India as an example but what I have seen clearly states that we have
no current trade deal with India.


This is supposed to be a DIY group so can people please consider doing a
bit of research rather than posting "a bloke in the pub said" stuff? And
also please cite your sources?

Eg a quick look at the map at

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/149622.htm

will show the *EU* does not have "trade deals" in force with the USA,
NZ, Australia, China or India. But it is more advanced than the UK
since we can't do owt separate from the EU.

WE can and do.


--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels

On Friday, 17 June 2016 14:07:09 UTC+1, Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:17:33 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

Correct. And that's been the situation since we joined the common market
in 1973.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ, Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

The EU has no trade deal with the USA - that's what TTIP will be.

I can go into the Apple store in stratford 'city' and by a computer.

I'm not into cars but I'mm pretty sure I could buy a car made in the USA.

The EU has no trade deal with Australia or NZ - last year, there was an
announcement that discussion towards one would be starting in 2017.

So no boomerans until, no fosters lager :-@ then how will we survive.

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...g-to-australia

Contact a UKTI Australia export adviser for a free consultation if youre interested in exporting to Australia.

why don't they say "No chance you ****wit if you live in the UK..
"Over 1,000 British businesses operate in Australia, including well-known companies like BP, HSBC, Virgin, British Airways and BT, as well as hundreds of small and medium sized companies. Australia is ranked by the World Bank as the 10th easiest country in which to do business. You can set up a new business in Australia within 2 days."

Now you tell us why it takes 2+ YEARS for a trade deal with the EU




The EU has no trade deal with China - this year, there's been some
discussion about starting to think about one.

we have about 80 chineses research studetns about one a week get's their PHD from us at this moment in time.

On 17/06/16 14:38, Mark Allread wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:24:04 +0100, Robin wrote:


Eg a quick look at the map at

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/149622.htm

will show the *EU* does not have "trade deals" in force with the USA,
NZ, Australia, China or India. But it is more advanced than the UK
since we can't do owt separate from the EU.

Oh, the source? Right, its the Vote Leave campaign literature.

Are you serious? That is an official EU website!


--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.

Groucho Marx

On 17/06/16 14:39, Mark Allread wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 13:11:37 +0000, Adrian wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:31:19 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals, since there
are no deals in place currently between the UK and any other nation. We
could ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of it, assuming
that's what we wanted to have, but until that was negotiated and agreed,
there would be nothing in place.

You know that and I know that and the Vote Leave campaign knows that but
sadly from the exchanges on here too many Brexit supporters do not.

Indeed we do not, because it is not true!

You don't need a trade deal to trade.


--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:41:46 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

At least the most recent Vote Leave lealet has attempted to correct
some impressions.

I wonder if that's the one I just received this morning?

The one that STILL uses the £350m/wk figure?

The one that devotes half of one of the four pages to a map showing the
five applicant countries - oh, plus Iraq and Syria highlighted - without
mentioning they're nowhere near joining, and every member will have a
veto anyway?

I forget all the other misrepresentation-verging-on-lies in it, because
it got screwed up and lobbed in the bin in anger.

Ah, yes... It started off with an "OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION" header, and
only mentioned which side was sending it at the very, very end.

Utterly pathetic, and deliberately designed to misinform and mislead

On 17/06/16 14:11, Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:31:19 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals,

No, it wouldn't.


since there are
no deals in place currently between the UK and any other nation.


So what?


We could
ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of it, assuming that's
what we wanted to have, but until that was negotiated and agreed, there
would be nothing in place.



And trading would continue, as normal.



--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

In article ,
Mark Allread wrote:
But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals. Reference was
made to India as an example but what I have seen clearly states that we
have no current trade deal with India.

Of course it doesn't *have* to negotiate any trade deals. Most countries
do allow trade with others. It's the terms of that trade which need a deal.

For example, India might put a tarrif on all imports from countries where
it hasn't got a deal. Say 25%. Obviously they'd be happy to *sell* to the
UK tarrif free. But this would put the UK at a trade disadvantage over
another country that had a deal with India to sell to them tarrif free.

Such trade deals tend to take ages to negotiate. Some ongoing for many
many years. Even more so between a large country like India and a small
one like the UK. A large country is going to be keener to make a deal with
another large one.

--
*If a parsley farmer is sued, can they garnish his wages?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Friday, 17 June 2016 15:00:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Mark Allread wrote:
But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals. Reference was
made to India as an example but what I have seen clearly states that we
have no current trade deal with India.

Of course it doesn't *have* to negotiate any trade deals. Most countries
do allow trade with others. It's the terms of that trade which need a deal.

For example, India might put a tarrif on all imports from countries where
it hasn't got a deal. Say 25%. Obviously they'd be happy to *sell* to the
UK tarrif free. But this would put the UK at a trade disadvantage over
another country that had a deal with India to sell to them tarrif free.

So it's a bit liek supermarkets next to each other in the high street doing deals with the stockests so someimes store A is cheaper than store B sometime the local corner shop is cheaper because they buy from cash and carry.

This is what's good we have a choice.




Such trade deals tend to take ages to negotiate.

depending on teh negoaiters and what's in it for them.

despite not having a trade deal with teh USA I and the EU can buy Apple products how does that work.

are yuo saying if we had a trade deal with the USA we'd get iphones for half the price we do now.
who should decide what an iphone costs Apple the USA UK or the EU ?





Some ongoing for many
many years. Even more so between a large country like India and a small
one like the UK. A large country is going to be keener to make a deal with
another large one.

about 6 years ago I asked for a maglock on my labs central doors as they are meant to remain open all day and close when the fire alarm sounds.
I sill have to push the door open in teh mornings and put a bit of wood under them and close them when the fire alarm sounds.
They want me to be a fire marshal who's responsible for such things, so I"ve declined.

How long does it take to put a mag-lock on a door.

(they already spend a few £100 on replacing teh door then having a foam strip installed by an outside company.

See this could be a DIY question.

again 6 years ago I asked for a spare key to be cut, still waiting.
How long does it take to make a deal between us and a key cutter ?
latest I''ve been told is that I need to find someone that will cut a key and we can pay with a CC.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia, China or India to name but a few.

So your saying if we vote out I wn;t be able to order a New Mac or buy a
T-shirt from china.

If we don't have a trade deal with china how can we buy their steel ?

Why do you think anyone would refuse to sell you anything?

It's getting others to buy your goods that is the difficult bit. So you
have money to buy the things you want.

--
*If you lived in your car, you'd be home by now *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Mark Allread wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

*free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that the
UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals. Reference was made
to India as an example but what I have seen clearly states that we have
no current trade deal with India.

europa.eu site confirms that EU has no deal with Inda, in fact the
number of agreed, signed and implemented deals is rather thin on the
ground, most of the planet seems to be a patchwork of provisional, or
signed but unimplemented, or initialled but not signed deals, or no deal
at all ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_free_trade_agreements#/media/File:EU_FTAs.svg

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
despite not having a trade deal with teh USA I and the EU can buy Apple
products how does that work.

Try trading a Amstrad with them in exchange for that Apple, then.

--
*One nice thing about egotists: they don't talk about other people.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:47:00 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals, since there
are no deals in place currently between the UK and any other nation.
We could ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of it,
assuming that's what we wanted to have, but until that was negotiated
and agreed, there would be nothing in place.

You know that and I know that and the Vote Leave campaign knows that
but sadly from the exchanges on here too many Brexit supporters do not.

Indeed we do not, because it is not true!

You don't need a trade deal to trade.

Who - apart from Whisky Dave - ever thought you did?

Of course a newly exited UK could trade without any trade deals in place,
but it wouldn't be very competitive, compared to those nations and groups
of nations between which there were deals in place.

In article ,
Roger Mills writes:
On 17/06/2016 12:54, Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said the
UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ, Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where we
pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where no
fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other WTO
members.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate those,
the two years for the EU exit process is rather short for the usual
negotiations, but the carrot to the EU to get their finger out would be
continuing to sell their cars (and windmills, etc) to us without duty
slapped on the price.

It's *much* more important for the EU to ensure that we fail if we're
outside the EU than it is to sell extra German cars to us. Failure to
ensure we struggle outside the EU will lead to rapid collapse of the whole
EU, something the commission knows only too well. In any case, even without
any duty, German cars will almost certainly become significantly more
expensive as the pound slides.

(I think the EU will eventually collapse either way, but I'd much rather
we were a key part of repairing it than outside it.)

As I understand it, you don't *have* to have trade deals in order to
trade with other countries - but it sometimes helps.

You need trade deals if you want duty-less trade.
There's a duty applied to many goods imported from the US, and they
do likewise to many goods we export to them. Also, the regulatory
issues make that more expensive for manufacturers, as individual
trade deals each have to meet completely different product standards,
which is not the case in the EU free trade area due to standards
harmonisation.

Again, as I understand it, neither the UK nor the EU currently has a
trade deal with the USA - this is what TTIP is all about, but hasn't yet
been agreed. But we *still* do a lot of trade with the US.

[As far as I can see, TTIP would be bad news for us anyway - so if we're
not in the EU at the time when it's finally agreed, so much the better!]

I don't think there's any chance the EU countries will agree to TTIP
as currently leaked. I would be much more concerned about our
government agreeing to it if we're outside the EU.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 17/06/16 15:31, Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:47:00 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals, since there
are no deals in place currently between the UK and any other nation.
We could ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of it,
assuming that's what we wanted to have, but until that was negotiated
and agreed, there would be nothing in place.

You know that and I know that and the Vote Leave campaign knows that
but sadly from the exchanges on here too many Brexit supporters do not.

Indeed we do not, because it is not true!

You don't need a trade deal to trade.

Who - apart from Whisky Dave - ever thought you did?

You, when you said we needed to negotiate any trade deals.

We dont.

The blatancy of your lying is staggering

Of course a newly exited UK could trade without any trade deals in place,
but it wouldn't be very competitive, compared to those nations and groups
of nations between which there were deals in place.


Which are very very few and far between in reality.

the whole 'EU free trade' issue is a total straw man. WE don't benefit
from it at all.


It will have almost no impact when we leave.


--
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.

On 17/06/16 15:37, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
Roger Mills writes:
On 17/06/2016 12:54, Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said the
UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ, Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where we
pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where no
fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other WTO
members.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate those,
the two years for the EU exit process is rather short for the usual
negotiations, but the carrot to the EU to get their finger out would be
continuing to sell their cars (and windmills, etc) to us without duty
slapped on the price.

It's *much* more important for the EU to ensure that we fail if we're
outside the EU than it is to sell extra German cars to us. Failure to
ensure we struggle outside the EU will lead to rapid collapse of the whole
EU, something the commission knows only too well. In any case, even without
any duty, German cars will almost certainly become significantly more
expensive as the pound slides.


Excellent point.

Of course if our failure ensures that German car manufactures fail, then
an EU that plays that trick, when its major sponsors are in fact large
European manufactures like Mercedes VAG Siemens, Bosch....is not going
to find itself too popular.

The EU isn't this wonderful almost world giovernment it pretends to be.
Its a cobbled together patchwork of laws and regulations and money flow
that binds a lot of disparate interests together because they all think
they are getting more out of it than they put in, or are so in debt to
the EU banks that they have sold themselves into slavery anyway.

Remove those reasons, and they have no reason to support it.

(I think the EU will eventually collapse either way, but I'd much rather
we were a key part of repairing it than outside it.)

Its BER mate.

Its like my old house, It looked pretty good from the outside, until we
tried to renovate it, and couldn't find a single sound timber in it.

Then rather than keep the ugly patched design it was cheaper to knock
the ****er down and start over

As I understand it, you don't *have* to have trade deals in order to
trade with other countries - but it sometimes helps.

You need trade deals if you want duty-less trade.

Not even then,. Countries (outside the EU) may unilaterally decide not
to impose tariffs.

There's a duty applied to many goods imported from the US, and they
do likewise to many goods we export to them. Also, the regulatory
issues make that more expensive for manufacturers, as individual
trade deals each have to meet completely different product standards,
which is not the case in the EU free trade area due to standards
harmonisation.


I think you will find that USA standrds are harmonised and are far far
bigger than the EU.


And nearly every country will accept products to US or EU standards.,
You don't suddenly need a special RFI standard for Sao Taome and Principe..

Again, as I understand it, neither the UK nor the EU currently has a
trade deal with the USA - this is what TTIP is all about, but hasn't yet
been agreed. But we *still* do a lot of trade with the US.

[As far as I can see, TTIP would be bad news for us anyway - so if we're
not in the EU at the time when it's finally agreed, so much the better!]

I don't think there's any chance the EU countries will agree

There are no EU countries involved. There is the EU, and that's that.



--
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:37:55 -0700, whisky-dave wrote:

On Friday, 17 June 2016 12:17:35 UTC+1, Mark Allread wrote:
I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia, China or India to name but a few.

So your saying if we vote out I wn;t be able to order a New Mac or buy a
T-shirt from china.

You do understand what a trade agreement is don't you?

If we don't have a trade deal with china how can we buy their steel ?
Sound like good news for the UK steel interesty we can;t trade with
china.

You do understand what a trade agreement is don't you?


Perhaps those who have argued that we do already have such trade deals
could enlighten those of us who have said we do not have them in our
own right and would need to negotiate them from scratch.

Our ancestors managed that when exporting tin from cornwall before JC.

You do understand what a trade agreement is don't you?

You do understand that the world has changed somewhat in the last couple
of thousand years don't you

On 17/06/16 16:10, Mark Allread wrote:

You do understand that the world has changed somewhat in the last couple
of thousand years don't you?

Looking at the average knuckle dragging Lefty****, not nearly as much as
one might have hoped.



--
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper
name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating
or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its
logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of
the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead. They must
face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.

Ayn Rand.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:45:45 -0700, whisky-dave wrote:

On Friday, 17 June 2016 14:07:09 UTC+1, Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:17:33 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we
aren't allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

Correct. And that's been the situation since we joined the common
market in 1973.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia,
China or India to name but a few.

The EU has no trade deal with the USA - that's what TTIP will be.

I can go into the Apple store in stratford 'city' and by a computer.

I'm not into cars but I'mm pretty sure I could buy a car made in the
USA.

You do understand what a trade agreement is don't you?

The EU has no trade deal with Australia or NZ - last year, there was an
announcement that discussion towards one would be starting in 2017.

So no boomerans until, no fosters lager :-@ then how will we survive.

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...-to-australia/
exporting-to-australia

Contact a UKTI Australia export adviser for a free consultation if
youre interested in exporting to Australia.

Great - have you considered what a trade agreement is and what it means?

why don't they say "No chance you ****wit if you live in the UK..
"Over 1,000 British businesses operate in Australia, including
well-known companies like BP, HSBC, Virgin, British Airways and BT, as
well as hundreds of small and medium sized companies. Australia is
ranked by the World Bank as the 10th easiest country in which to do
business. You can set up a new business in Australia within 2 days."

Hmm 2 of those listed are not UK owned of course so its arguable that
they are British businesses


Now you tell us why it takes 2+ YEARS for a trade deal with the EU

Because if we opt out then its not in their interests to have a trade
deal with us.


we have about 80 chineses research studetns about one a week get's
their PHD from us at this moment in time.

??? since when was a Chinese student a trade agreement??? They come here
because of the benefits of a UK university - but how long will such
benefits be around once the EU pulls its grants for research?

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 10:18:03 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

You do understand what a trade agreement is don't you?

W_D doesn't understand very much at all. About anything. But he is
terribly well-named.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 13:47:30 +0000, Adrian wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:41:46 -0500, Mark Allread wrote:

At least the most recent Vote Leave lealet has attempted to correct
some impressions.

I wonder if that's the one I just received this morning?

The one that STILL uses the £350m/wk figure?

It does qualify it but you have to read on past the scary red bullet
point first - how many do you think do that?

It also omits to say that whilst some of the money that comes back is
earmarked by EU the great majority of the funding is for the projects
that the Government itself has identified and applied for funding for.

The one that devotes half of one of the four pages to a map showing the
five applicant countries - oh, plus Iraq and Syria highlighted - without
mentioning they're nowhere near joining, and every member will have a
veto anyway?

I forget all the other misrepresentation-verging-on-lies in it, because
it got screwed up and lobbed in the bin in anger.

Ah, yes... It started off with an "OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION" header, and
only mentioned which side was sending it at the very, very end.

Utterly pathetic, and deliberately designed to misinform and mislead

Yes.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:46:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 17/06/16 14:38, Mark Allread wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:24:04 +0100, Robin wrote:


Eg a quick look at the map at

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/149622.htm

will show the *EU* does not have "trade deals" in force with the USA,
NZ, Australia, China or India. But it is more advanced than the UK
since we can't do owt separate from the EU.

Oh, the source? Right, its the Vote Leave campaign literature.

Are you serious? That is an official EU website!

What are you saying? That the EU supports the point made by the Vote
Leave literature and you don't like that?

I was referencing the Vote Leave document.

In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
On 17/06/16 15:31, Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:47:00 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and
that the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals, since
there are no deals in place currently between the UK and any other
nation. We could ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of
it, assuming that's what we wanted to have, but until that was
negotiated and agreed, there would be nothing in place.

You know that and I know that and the Vote Leave campaign knows that
but sadly from the exchanges on here too many Brexit supporters do
not.

Indeed we do not, because it is not true!

You don't need a trade deal to trade.

Who - apart from Whisky Dave - ever thought you did?

You, when you said we needed to negotiate any trade deals.

We dont.

The blatancy of your lying is staggering

Of course a newly exited UK could trade without any trade deals in
place, but it wouldn't be very competitive, compared to those nations
and groups of nations between which there were deals in place.


Which are very very few and far between in reality.

the whole 'EU free trade' issue is a total straw man. WE don't benefit
from it at all.

It means that UK manufacturer goods or services don't attract additional
taxation when sold/proviided to the rest of the EU. If you don't know
that, then you shouldn't be discussing the subject.

It will have almost no impact when we leave.

It will have amajor impact on sales to thn EU

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:47:00 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals, since there
are no deals in place currently between the UK and any other nation.
We could ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of it,
assuming that's what we wanted to have, but until that was negotiated
and agreed, there would be nothing in place.

You know that and I know that and the Vote Leave campaign knows that
but sadly from the exchanges on here too many Brexit supporters do not.

Indeed we do not, because it is not true!

You don't need a trade deal to trade.

Who - apart from Whisky Dave - ever thought you did?

Most of the Remainers

Of course a newly exited UK could trade without any trade deals in place,
but it wouldn't be very competitive, compared to those nations and groups
of nations between which there were deals in place.

there are hundreds of country pairs that happily trade with each other
without a separate deal in place. the idea that it is difficult is nonsense

tim

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
On 17/06/16 15:31, Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:47:00 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and
that the UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals.

Of course the UK would need to negotiate any trade deals, since
there are no deals in place currently between the UK and any other
nation. We could ask for any pre-existing EU deal to be the basis of
it, assuming that's what we wanted to have, but until that was
negotiated and agreed, there would be nothing in place.

You know that and I know that and the Vote Leave campaign knows that
but sadly from the exchanges on here too many Brexit supporters do
not.

Indeed we do not, because it is not true!

You don't need a trade deal to trade.

Who - apart from Whisky Dave - ever thought you did?

You, when you said we needed to negotiate any trade deals.

We dont.

The blatancy of your lying is staggering

Of course a newly exited UK could trade without any trade deals in
place, but it wouldn't be very competitive, compared to those nations
and groups of nations between which there were deals in place.


Which are very very few and far between in reality.

the whole 'EU free trade' issue is a total straw man. WE don't benefit
from it at all.

It means that UK manufacturer goods or services don't attract additional
taxation when sold/proviided to the rest of the EU. If you don't know
that, then you shouldn't be discussing the subject.

In many sectors the standard WTO tariff is negligible, it will make little
difference to our trade with the EU.

Only those sectors where tariffs are significant will we "need" to negotiate
a deal.


It will have almost no impact when we leave.

It will have amajor impact on sales to thn EU

Only if the EU wants to cripple its trade to the UK

tim

"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 17/06/2016 13:31, Mark Allread wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 12:54:40 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia, China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where we
pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where no
fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other WTO
members.

Yep, I get that.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that the
UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals. Reference was made
to India as an example but what I have seen clearly states that we have
no current trade deal with India.


This is supposed to be a DIY group so can people please consider doing a
bit of research rather than posting "a bloke in the pub said" stuff? And
also please cite your sources?

Eg a quick look at the map at

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/149622.htm

will show the *EU* does not have "trade deals" in force with the USA, NZ,
Australia, China or India. But it is more advanced than the UK since we
can't do owt separate from the EU.

But is also likely to be hung up on something that is of no interest to us
like the protection of Spanish orange growers and Austrian Cuckoo clock
makers.

Getting a trade deal that has the support of 28 countries' vested interests
is going to be a lot more difficult than getting a deal where only one
country's concerns need to be considered.

Despite starting second, I bet that we can conclude an individual trade deal
with many of these important countries long before the EU does.

tim

On Friday, 17 June 2016 15:28:56 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
despite not having a trade deal with teh USA I and the EU can buy Apple
products how does that work.

Try trading a Amstrad with them in exchange for that Apple, then.

how about arm for intel.

In article ,
charles wrote:
the whole 'EU free trade' issue is a total straw man. WE don't benefit
from it at all.

Right. That explains why we were desperate to join - and no government of
any colour since has wanted to take us out.

So Turnip right - the vast majority of those directly involved, wrong.

It means that UK manufacturer goods or services don't attract additional
taxation when sold/proviided to the rest of the EU. If you don't know
that, then you shouldn't be discussing the subject.

It will have almost no impact when we leave.

It will have amajor impact on sales to thn EU

It will have a major impact on lots of things.

If there really were no trade benefits from being in the EU, every single
UK manufacturer would have said so. After all, why put up with EU regs etc
if nothing in it for them at the end of the day?

--
*It doesn't take a genius to spot a goat in a flock of sheep *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 17/06/16 14:24, Robin wrote:
On 17/06/2016 13:31, Mark Allread wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 12:54:40 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Mark Allread wrote:

I just picked up a snippet of information showing that those who said
the UK is already negotiating its own trade deals is wrong as we
aren't
allowed to do so whilst in the EU.

This means that we currently have no trade deal with USA, NZ,
Australia, China or India to name but a few.

We are still a member of WTO (twice in fact, directly as the UK where
we
pay the membership fees, and indirectly as a member of the EU where no
fees are paid) so that would give as a basic trade deal with other WTO
members.

Yep, I get that.

But it wouldn't be a *free* trade deal, we'd have to re-negotiate
those,

and that is where I was told I was wrong (along with others) and that
the
UK would *not* need to re-negotiate any trade deals. Reference was made
to India as an example but what I have seen clearly states that we have
no current trade deal with India.


This is supposed to be a DIY group so can people please consider doing a
bit of research rather than posting "a bloke in the pub said" stuff? And
also please cite your sources?

Eg a quick look at the map at

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/149622.htm

will show the *EU* does not have "trade deals" in force with the USA,
NZ, Australia, China or India. But it is more advanced than the UK
since we can't do owt separate from the EU.

WE can and do.

careful now, you're making his point for him

tim