I think it is obvious by now that the UK government couldn't give two rats about the steel industry.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The UK votes to leave the European Union |OUT2| Mayday, Mayday, I've lost an ARM
- Thread starter Hasney
- Start date
- Status
I think it is obvious by now that the UK government couldn't give two rats about the steel industry.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
Right on cue: 'Sweetheart deal' between Nissan and ministers denied
My corporate to commoner translator just broke.
My corporate to commoner translator just broke.
He is basically just saying that no special deal exists for Nissan alone, everything is for the whole industry.
So whatever they promised Nissan will be applied all across the board.
So if we are talking about subsidies they are giving it to every car manufacturer.
AHA-Lambda
Member
And yet they won't say what those assurances are?
Hmm...
Hmm...
Royal_Phalanx
Member
Please be single market membership which can't be said out loud because Leavers would go ballistic? That bombshell will only be dropped after some tough negotiating? Wishful thinking here
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
That is amazing.
Mays student deportation programme in tatters as legal appeal falls apart
A long-running programme to deport foreign students from the UK on the basis of hearsay evidence was in ruins today, after the appeal court ruled against the Home Office.
The decision to quietly shelve the legal challenge is a damning moment for Theresa May, who presided over the department when it used flimsy evidence to threaten tens of thousands of foreign students with detention and deportation.
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2016...eportation-programme-in-tatters-as-legal-appe
A long-running programme to deport foreign students from the UK on the basis of hearsay evidence was in ruins today, after the appeal court ruled against the Home Office.
The decision to quietly shelve the legal challenge is a damning moment for Theresa May, who presided over the department when it used flimsy evidence to threaten tens of thousands of foreign students with detention and deportation.
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2016...eportation-programme-in-tatters-as-legal-appe
jufonuk
not tag worthy
calling it now, single market access stays, movement of EU citizens and vice versa
we get some kind of immigration brakes.
pay money to the EU, work out a way to get some tiny fraction of funding back to us via tax breaks or loopholes.
trade elsewhere bung a few deals to the EU.
abide by some EU laws but we can make up our own.
spin it as leaving the EU and taking back control.
have no actual say in EU law making become a silent partner will very limited influence.
fight for two years to get this kind of worse off, but we can trade with others??? and tell the EU to poke some laws and stop people coming in. (pleases the Daily mail and Sun)
I want to remain BTW
we get some kind of immigration brakes.
pay money to the EU, work out a way to get some tiny fraction of funding back to us via tax breaks or loopholes.
trade elsewhere bung a few deals to the EU.
abide by some EU laws but we can make up our own.
spin it as leaving the EU and taking back control.
have no actual say in EU law making become a silent partner will very limited influence.
fight for two years to get this kind of worse off, but we can trade with others??? and tell the EU to poke some laws and stop people coming in. (pleases the Daily mail and Sun)
I want to remain BTW
Royal_Phalanx
Member
Belgium has come to an agreement with all the regional parliaments. They are now able to sign CETA.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37788882
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37788882
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
This isn't even close to being done though.
https://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/one-step-closer-to-a-deal-here-are-belgiums-conditions-for-signing-ceta/
There will likely be no provisional agreement working in lieu of the final documents, it will have to be ratified federally by 28 different states which could take years.
Wallonia has essentially agreed to discuss their areas of concern with Canada. No signatures yet. Canada has to agree to the conditions.
Elaugaufein
Member
Conservative governments in Australia are actually pretty gung ho about subsidizing the heck out of private enterprise (Telstra is a terrible telecommunications company that maintened market dominance due to being privatised with massive tax payer funded infrastructure far larger than any possible competitor and continues to receive funding for rural/regional coverage which is pretty much the only competive advantage it uses to justify it's immense prices). Transfers of public wealth to private enterprise seem fine. It's not exactly uncommon in the US either (farm and energy subsidies are huge give aways to private enterprise). It's only spending that's in the public interest that's Verboten, since that kind of thing may lead to uppity commoners not taking crappy job offers to stave off a quick death.
You do understand that this isn't what is happening here, right? It's not getting more expensive because of something the EU has done or will do? It's going to get more expensive because of something we've done, or will do.
#takingbackcontrol
According to the EU trade commissioner yes, according to Liam Fox no.
Liam Fox believes that it'll happen as part of the A50 talks which require a qualified majority, the EU believe that since they're legally only allowed by treaty to do trade deals with 3rd parties (i.e not members of the EU) they can't do a trade deal until the UK leaves.
Any trade deal worthy of the name would almost certainly be a mixed competence deal (i.e touching on things defined as shared between the EU and it's member nations as per article 4 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union), a deal defined as mixed competence (such as CETA) requires unanimous support. Again Fox believes a limited deal could be reached which wouldn't be defined as mixed competence but it's hard to see how that could be the case.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Good news about Nissan, but it wasn't going to go any other way. The Sunderland plant is already one of, if not the most efficient in the Nissan-Renault Alliance, and one of the most efficient of all manufacturers in Europe. They would struggle to make the high-volume Qashqai anywhere else. Regarding the X-Trail, increasing tensions with Russia makes it sensible that they'd take one of their other best-selling products away from Avtovaz, and again, where else would they make it?
"We can't do thing because of rules we made up which didn't properly consider this scenario".
"We can't do thing because of rules we made up which didn't properly consider this scenario".
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
I expect one thing for sure (or almost sure): if freedom of movement and/or the status of current Eastern European citizens is/are challenged, Eastern European member states will want to extract their pound of flesh by grabbing as much manufacturing from the UK as they can, which may mean harsh or delayed negotiations.
The thing about the X-Trail is that it couldn't be manufactured elsewhere but in the UK. Nissan Spain's factory is huge but it essentially makes commercial vehicles (vans and trucks), so it's not equiped to build the new X-Trail. That leaves Nissan UK with no competition from other European sites at the moment. Everybody knows that Renault never had a serious chance. They may be part of the same group, but they operate as separate concerns and for the most part both brands carry themselves as their own entities. Japan wants it that way and Ghosn is happy with this entente.
At the same time, the new gen X-Trail is nothing but a larger Qashqai, which was going to remain in the UK for the very same reason. They don't have to engage in a huge retool and its main market is the UK, so it made little sense to import it from Japan. Claiming that getting the X-Trail or the Qashqai is a coup as part of the media is doing is incredibly disingenuous.
The European X-Trail was being made in Japan, not Russia. I had to check that yesterday when I first read the news. Russia usually (but not always) manufactures for the local market.
The thing about the X-Trail is that it couldn't be manufactured elsewhere but in the UK. Nissan Spain's factory is huge but it essentially makes commercial vehicles (vans and trucks), so it's not equiped to build the new X-Trail. That leaves Nissan UK with no competition from other European sites at the moment. Everybody knows that Renault never had a serious chance. They may be part of the same group, but they operate as separate concerns and for the most part both brands carry themselves as their own entities. Japan wants it that way and Ghosn is happy with this entente.
At the same time, the new gen X-Trail is nothing but a larger Qashqai, which was going to remain in the UK for the very same reason. They don't have to engage in a huge retool and its main market is the UK, so it made little sense to import it from Japan. Claiming that getting the X-Trail or the Qashqai is a coup as part of the media is doing is incredibly disingenuous.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Chassis is built in Japan, power train in Spain, final construction and fitting in Russia.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
That's the case for the Russian market units as many Russian car factories are basically screwing parts from aboard due to the lack of a local supply chain. European ones were being built and imported from Fukuoka as it used to be the case for so many Nissan 4x4 vehicles back in the day (I believe the European Patrol is still imported from Japan). The VIN number starts with JN.
Oddly enough, this is going to be good for Nissan Spain as around 30% of the Qashqai (and probably around the same part for the new X-Trail) is sourced from Barcelona. Which begs the question about what is ever going to happen if tariffs come into play, let alone further devaluation of the pound.
Nissan bet a lot by turning Sunderland into its premiere location for non-commercial (read: cars) European vehicles. They literally have no options to manufacture them elsewhere across the Union, unless they are willing to offload them to Renault, which doesn't have the capacity (and it's not like Nissan trusts Renault's QA). Russia is also probably out of the question because tariffs and Putin being a bastard. Nissan basically trapped itself in the UK. The only way it can see Nissan taking away production from the UK in a meaningful amount is building a new factory elsewhere, which is not cheap. But it may be necessary if one day the government decides not to subsidise them. Enter post-Article 50 negotiations and the Eastern European countries.
This is going to be a mess.
DarthMasta
Member
First, I'm not British. Portuguese, living in Portugal. Second, in the context of the British state making British cars cheaper to sell in the EU through the use of subsidies, the EU could then maybe apply specific taxes because of the subsidies.
I understand that if Britain leaves the single market, yadda yadda, products made in Britain get higher taxes / regulation costs in the EU, making them naturally more expensive than before.
It might all be moot though, since it appears the British state is going to apply some lateral thinking and "fix" it through the use of "not"-subsidies.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
The European units are also finished in Russia. I know this, having worked with Nissan R&D for 5 years until last year - I had to support the engineers in St. Petersburg receiving handover (in a fucking February - proper freeze your balls off climate). It made the most sense because the Murano is manufactured alongside it, and is almost identical. I don't think that has changed in the last year.
I agree that it's interesting that the parts sourced from continental suppliers, mostly Spanish, would incur a levy. So you would think that perhaps Nissan are aware of a commitment from the government that is yet publicly announced. Either via subsidy or a commitment to the single market.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
This is kind of weirding me out in a big way.
I was in the automotive press for close to a decade and until recently. Nissan's 4x4 have always been coming from Japan. Always. There would be times the homologation papers wouldn't even be European per se, but temporally issued by Nissan for driving in the EU an actual Japanese import. I can see some relatively minor work being made in Russia, but not full assemblage. That would shock me. Maybe engines/transmissions due to regulations, but Nissan doesn't seem to have that problem with other Japanese cars. As a matter of fact, Nissan always made a big deal about cars like the Patrol and the old X-trail being made in Japan and imported from there. This comes as absolute new news to me and doesn't make sense in my head unless this happened to be a recent/temporal remedy. I'd appreciate any information about it.
Feel free to PM if you think this may go way off-topic for the thread.
Audioboxer
Member
Ditched my "bait" avatar for the time being considering until it comes to it it's best to "show solidarity" with the rest of my British remain voters.
However once push comes to shove
will be back on display lol.
Brexit is going to be a long, painful and drawn out process.
However once push comes to shove
will be back on display lol.
Brexit is going to be a long, painful and drawn out process.
I see Tony Balir is still banging the drum for not doing Brexit. Can't say I disagree with him on this. Wish politicians in power actually had common sense instead of self preservation while walking off a cliff with their own parachute.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37797127
The former PM told the BBC the vote was a "catastrophe" and said it was vital to study the "real-life implications".
Mr Blair said he accepted the verdict of June's referendum, but recommended looking again at Brexit when "we have a clear sense of where we're going".
But Mr Blair told BBC Radio 4's Today programme he believed the Brexit vote was a catastrophe and argued that it was important that the views of the "16 million" people who had backed remaining in the EU should not be ignored.
He added: "If it becomes clear that this is either a deal that doesn't make it worth our while leaving, or alternatively a deal that's going to be so serious in its implications people may decide they don't want to go, there's got to be some way, either through Parliament, or an election, or possibly through another referendum, in which people express their view."
But he said the vote for Brexit could not be changed "unless it becomes clear that the British people have had a change of mind".
"We have to build the capability to mobilise and to organise. We have to prise apart the alliance which gave us Brexit."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37797127
The former PM told the BBC the vote was a "catastrophe" and said it was vital to study the "real-life implications".
Mr Blair said he accepted the verdict of June's referendum, but recommended looking again at Brexit when "we have a clear sense of where we're going".
But Mr Blair told BBC Radio 4's Today programme he believed the Brexit vote was a catastrophe and argued that it was important that the views of the "16 million" people who had backed remaining in the EU should not be ignored.
He added: "If it becomes clear that this is either a deal that doesn't make it worth our while leaving, or alternatively a deal that's going to be so serious in its implications people may decide they don't want to go, there's got to be some way, either through Parliament, or an election, or possibly through another referendum, in which people express their view."
But he said the vote for Brexit could not be changed "unless it becomes clear that the British people have had a change of mind".
"We have to build the capability to mobilise and to organise. We have to prise apart the alliance which gave us Brexit."
Yes. It is the same for all trade deals.
They considered it. The article was written like that to make sure everyone understood leaving is bad and stupid.
It's not rules per se. It's simply what was codified in the treaties the members signed. Given each of the members signed those treaties and the treaties were pretty difficult to negotiate, I'm not precisely sure why they should be chucking the provisions out because one soon to be ex member is acting against it's own self interest and needs more pandering.
PdotMichael
Banned
That's the reason why a deal in favour of the UK was such a stupid pipedream. Europe would rather start driving on the wrong side before UK gets even more bonuses.
I mean, will there even be a trade deal, given how divided Europe is these days?
PdotMichael
Banned
Which one of the divided sides want to give UK a good deal?
NekoFever
Member
I agree with him. It needs to be put to a vote once we know what Brexit actually entails. It's a far more complicated issue than in/out. While I'm sure there are plenty of rabid Express readers who would vote out no matter what, there are sane Leave voters who would change sides without single market access, or if the economy keeps slowing down.
But then again we can't go into negotiations with that possibility because it shows we're not negotiating in good faith and it gives the EU another bargaining chip (just offer a shitty deal, Brexit doesn't happen and the problem goes away).
DarthMasta
Member
If there's any possibility of invoking article 50 and then take it back there will never be anything but the shittiest deals on the table ever, otherwise, everyone could just do trial Brexits, see if the deal is any good, take it back if not.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
I'm not suggesting it would mean pandering. It just feels like they're rigidly adhering to rules that inadequately account for the scenario, even against their own best interests. The way I read it is that there's one rule that says it takes 2 years to leave, and another rule that says that a current member can't negotiate an independent trade arrangement. But there's no cross-function between those rules that says that a member who has activated a50 has committed to leave, therefore can negotiate trade that occurs after leaving - even with the EU itself.
I don't want us to leave, but this stuff doesn't exactly warm me any more to the EU. At best these regulations seem poorly-considered, at worst they seem draconian.
Edit: ugh, auto correct.
They're not regulations. They're the actual terms of the treaties. They're what everyone explicitly and actively agreed to via an negotiated process. It's not like the big bad EU sat and made the terms, it was the individual member states . And both articles individually make sense i.e if you're in a customs union you can't do individual external trade deals during that time.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Of course they make complete sense in isolation, that's besides the point. And I'm not that bothered about how they came into being, or the lack of foresight, really.
CyclopsRock
Member
May have to mod this in...
HAHAHA I laughed out loud at "Cameron's Shame".
PJV3
Member
I'm with Blair on the EU situation, a lot of Brexit people would follow their sat-nav off a cliff using current logic.
The government should honestly try to make the vote work, but the PM should have the freedom not to blindly crash the country without confirmation from the people if it's looking bad.
Camp Freddie
Member
In short, no, they can't specifically target the UK with higher tariffs
The EU has to follow WTO rules when dealing with 3rd countries, which means treating post-Brexit UK in exactly the same way as they deal with anyone else that they don't have a specific trade agreement with.
If the UK start subsidising car manufacturing, the EU could:
1) Do nothing
2) Demand compensation from the UK if the subsidy contravenes the WTO rules on 'dumping' or 'state aid'
3) Raise tariffs on car imports for all countries not covered by trade agreements
Ultimately, I think the UK will do nothing. Nissan can't leave in the short term, so anything they do will be a problem for the next government. And if it's still a Tory government at the time, well... making a bunch of mackems unemployed has never worried the Tories in the past.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
You cannot halt the exit process, correct? Except maybe with unanimous support from all members which would never happen.
Then no, after Article 50 is triggered trade deals should be negotiable to come into effect upon the (essentially unstoppable) exit. The fact that future trade deals outside the EU are not legally negotiable until after the 2 years is deliberate fuckery. Once the article in question is triggered it should be a go-ahead.
I think the EU has been a force for good generally, but that rule is pretty toxic and I don't see anyone ever rejoining after going through that.
anonymous_abc
Member
Honestly I doubt anyone really wants leaving and joining to be an easy exercise.
No matter how much I would regret it I wouldn't expect or want the UK to rejoin in our lifetime, if they decide to leave.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
The sweetheart deal would be gone forever, so I don't think it would ever happen.
AHA-Lambda
Member
EU States Fear Theresa May Is Using Controversial Alliances To Divide And Conquer
https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonar...sial-alliances?utm_term=.cqZVgo88j#.rwxE8nGG3
https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonar...sial-alliances?utm_term=.cqZVgo88j#.rwxE8nGG3
Switzerland may hold a second referendum on EU immigration:
https://www.neweurope.eu/article/switzerland-towards-second-referendum-eu-migrants/
anonymous_abc
Member
Good.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked