What in the hell is he doing? David Davis has now said that the Brexit deal isn't legally enforceable and that we're not liable to pay anything if we don't get a deal. This is the frigging DExEU minister who has supposedly just spent the last nine months negotiating said deal!
Brexit Thread III - How to instantly polarise your country without even trying
- Status
You could say it is a Deux eu machina.
What I am not seeing, on the other hand, is how one could believe that a serious solution was found in the space of two days. Wasn't it beyond obvious it was based on mutual pretending?
Cheetah
Deity
The EU still sees it as a binding agreement, so I suppose if the UK tries to walk back on it, there will be no deal at all. Not 'legally enforceable' is true, since we're talking about deals between sovereign states (well, state and a group of states). But that doesn't mean there won't be consequences to not honouring one's promises.
And since I'm pretty convinced now that a majority of the power players in the UK have concluded that a no-deal solution is unacceptable, I don't really care too much about what Davis is blathering about.
The guy still wants trade in services, something which will require that the UK is part of the single market, which will include free movement of people. Maybe the government will label it something else, but in practical terms, it will have to be equivalent.
This is just hot air.
GinandTonic
Saphire w/ Schweps + Lime
- Joined
- May 25, 2005
- Messages
- 8,898
Doesnt the text contain "under the proviso that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" right at the start? I mean Davis is a fool but he isnt going to throw away one of his very few cards.
agree
strictly speaking Davis is right based on that clause.
the question or better perhaps the issue raised by referring to that clause is what parties will think of that mentioning.
No effect: The EU won't bother and continue as if they can now start with the details, the heap of paper. The Canada deal was 1500 pages and the UK deal so far 10 or so.
Is that a positive effect ?: The Brexit nationalist wing has a bone thrown at them.
The negative: The immigrants and the business has still no real sound feeling from that statement and bungles on.
Sounds all to me as a completely unnecessary statement.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,060
Much as I dislike the individual, he is right in this: no deal is an exit and just that. The idea of a payment to the EU budget only exists within the framework of some deal yet to be reached.
This will inevitably turn into a game of chicken. If it was only the EU bureaucracy versus the UK, the EU would chicken out first and offer an accommodating deal: they want that money. But the interests of the big states can influence the outcome too (the smaller ones, not). Thus it will also depend on the positions taken by Germany and France in mid and late 2018. Which in turn will depend on any events that influence internal politics there between now and then. If nothing changed (caretaker government still in Germany, that seems impossible) I'd guess that the germans would be accommodating to a deal, the french wouldn't. Germany's government mostly belongs to its industrial lobbies, France to its financial ones.
People have been saying that the EU will buckle first for 18 months ("the easiest trade deal in history", etc.) So far, that particular delusion has steadfastly refused to even begin to come true.
Senethro
Overlord
Armchair generals think they could have won Vietnam as well.
Verbose
Deity
The EU bureaucracy probably would buckle, since it doesn't really have all that much agency or volition. Regardless of conspiracy theories about Brussels and its faceless bureaucracy, this comes down to the member states, who have it.
Inno claiming anyone who isn't France or Germany in the EU can ever have agency or volition, and actually make it work, has to stand for him of course. Herding cat's is hard, but it helps if you have either a lot of bulk and leverage, like France and Germany, OR know exactly what you want and have tons of motivation — which is where the smaller EU members tend to concentrate. And whether Inno believes it or not, they tend to be able to effective under the right conditions. Works for Ireland so far...
(Essentially I think Inno tends to present some kind of inverted version of the Brexit fantasies about how Germany would make everyone else give the UK free stuff, because the German car industry would instruct Merkel to give the UK free stuff.)
Inno claiming anyone who isn't France or Germany in the EU can ever have agency or volition, and actually make it work, has to stand for him of course. Herding cat's is hard, but it helps if you have either a lot of bulk and leverage, like France and Germany, OR know exactly what you want and have tons of motivation — which is where the smaller EU members tend to concentrate. And whether Inno believes it or not, they tend to be able to effective under the right conditions. Works for Ireland so far...
(Essentially I think Inno tends to present some kind of inverted version of the Brexit fantasies about how Germany would make everyone else give the UK free stuff, because the German car industry would instruct Merkel to give the UK free stuff.)
The car industry is an interwoven fabric of suppliers, each being just a link in the chain.
The strenght of the German metal industry, with the car industry together with the machine building industry in the leadsing position, is something not that much available in other countries.
There is a special law the "Haftungspflicht", handling guarantees from one company in the support chain to the other, that has no comparison in the world.
Just a simple law, with a whole commercial insurance system around it, to deal with what needs heaps of paper in tfor example the UK for every long term partnership.
It is strongly clustered, and logistically connected by a very good motorway system
There is a longstanding tradition in Germany for discipline, reliability, technical quality.... other country cultures, especially UK managers making jokes about German Krauts, call that "overengineering"
(No joke this and no irony as well... just explaining the industrial cultural gap !!!)
Every time a certain component has to be imported from whatever other country than Germany, German engineers resent that very much.... it is their financial managers that push the technical people to swallow that outsourcing for cost reduction (Turkey, Poland, Italy etc) or for political reasons (like UK). AND at the background of all that: when some stup[id Wall Street bubble implodes again, they can source back all that work to their own production capacities, to safeguard German employement rate. They just resent the dirty workshops, the lack of skills, etc, and the eternal excuses when again something went wromg and you get promise after lies....
THAT is the environment seen by the industrial decision makers.
It does not show up in the press, it is too undiplomatic to state for people who know.
But my gut feeling is that these industrial decision makers will have a very hard time to explain to themselves, their key managers, and the unions, why to stay or invest one more Pfennig in the UK.
Cheetah
Deity
For German industry this is very easy, something they have stated loud and clear now for a very long time: Their absolute priority is to preserve the EU's internal market. That is, and will continue to be, Germany's stand. The EU will not buckle first because it can't give up on this point. If the UK gets to make their pick from the single market, then the entire economic argument for the EU will collapse.
Furthermore, a no-deal conclusion will hurt, and the hurt will start to become evident in early fall 2018. Which is why there will be a deal.
If there isn't, the first thing regular people will notice, in addition to a possible economic downturn (but that doesn't affect everyone right away), is that airlines will stop selling tickets between the UK and the EU for flights after March 2019. That will be noticed.
Furthermore, a no-deal conclusion will hurt, and the hurt will start to become evident in early fall 2018. Which is why there will be a deal.
If there isn't, the first thing regular people will notice, in addition to a possible economic downturn (but that doesn't affect everyone right away), is that airlines will stop selling tickets between the UK and the EU for flights after March 2019. That will be noticed.
That is political blablabla when some captains of industry are asked about it and they give the social and political convenient answers.
Do you really think a commercial German company is that interested in general stuff ?
He has his company, besides the market, and the not yet written off investments, his key managers, his owners and the stability of the knowledge base of his laborers.... that is what counts... and he takes his decisions from there... and from nowhere else
Cheetah
Deity
Could you rephrase that? I can only guess what you're saying...
Do I think a German company is interested in keeping their tariff-free, customs-free, border-check-free supply chain and market access in the EU? Absolutely.
Do I think a German company knows that if the UK gets to break the rules of the single market, other countries will follow, and the market will fracture? Absolutely.
Do I think a German company is interested in keeping their tariff-free, customs-free, border-check-free supply chain and market access in the EU? Absolutely.
Do I think a German company knows that if the UK gets to break the rules of the single market, other countries will follow, and the market will fracture? Absolutely.
What I say is that a typical industrial company does not bother with that, because they know that what you say is already with high priority on the agendas of the national governments, afraid of losing GDP.
No need to bother with that, just sing along with the choir when asked about it.
It is primarily in the interest of the companies to nave the best competitive position towards their competitors,
and that means, that they will stop investing in the UK because of the high risk profile and will use any opportunity to withdraw from the UK.
Also because they never liked it in the first place because of industrial cultural differences.
and there is not much the UK can do against it.
They cannot pressurise Merkel, because she really has no say in such individual company decisions.
They can threaten to buy for example cars elsewhere... well that's like being bitten by the dog or the cat, because the EU does not differ there regarding threats, does not differ from the US, or China
They can ofc make nice financial "arrangements", but the UK will need that kind of money already badly to prevent her own parade companies like Rolls Royce suddenly moving to somewhere else in the world.
The only way the UK can keep production within that chain of supply is by getting a high future reliability that "nothing is going to change"....
GoodSarmatian
Jokerfied Western Male
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 9,408
Depends on the company. The big ones (i.e. the ones with political influence) are more concerned about long-term risks than short-term losses. Their profits will suffer if the UK gets to impose tariffs, but the EU wide supply chains and talent pools are more important.
Their political blablabla may be political blablabla, but there's a good reason why they spout this particular political blablabla and not some other political blablabla.
Cheetah
Deity
I'm very confused... I thought you were arguing against me, but now it looks like you're kinda arguing my point, but from a different perspective?
It's not that it would expend its entire marketing budget lobbying German politicians to stand firm, but whenever German politicians want to know the company's stance, it would be weird if it didn't tell them that it strongly supports them not giving in to the UK's demands.
Here we disagree slightly at least. If the company knows that it is in its best interest to protect the supply chain and customer market, and knows that a fractured EU will hurt it, why wouldn't it be against letting the UK pick and choose as it likes?
It's not that it would expend its entire marketing budget lobbying German politicians to stand firm, but whenever German politicians want to know the company's stance, it would be weird if it didn't tell them that it strongly supports them not giving in to the UK's demands.
Sorry if I made the impression to take an opposite side or so
I should have added a line first re that.
I was just highlighting the far more primitive way and blunt direct way the mindset of those decisionmakers IN the industry is.
And adding to that
ofc those managers are aware of the political instrument. Almost all of them are CDU-CSU, there are all kinds of associations, circles of influence, that they use. They DO sing along in the choir mainly because of stability.
But again
A companies prime priority is NOT to improve GDP in general, but stability and forecastability of her own business.
THAT was also the issue between Japan and the UK a couple of months ago.
Japanese companies, alrerady having a culture of very long term thinking, longer than Germany, muchhh longer than the UK culture, were totally upset, that there was no clarity of the future, for their long term plans of investments in the UK.
Companies seek primarily stability (to prevent burning capital of wasted investments and relocations) and the competitive edge to their direct competitors.
EDIT
perhaps I should add that the technical quality authorisation to change a technical process, and that includes a relocation, means that that new total "process" has to be authorised again, meaning either completely redo testing (expensive !!!) or.... or some manager has to take the decision that "it is the same", which will cost his job when something goes wrong.
It is not childrens toys "made in China"
Cheetah
Deity
Which first and foremost means a continuing European market, no?
Which first and foremost means a continuing European market, no?
Yes,
But again, the governments, solely from their own main priority, a growing GDP, the chief whip of any government, will take care of that.
The only thing a car company needs to contribute there is to supply some numbers to the government for a better estimate BY the government for the government's precious GDP forecast (hopefully shared by the IMF) otherwise the bonds become more expensive.
Believe me... those big guys don't waste their time on this.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
