European Single Market: Will Britain stay in?

[Young Master Smeet]

Or, "The EU with serial numbers filed off"Paul Mason now calling for commitment to join EEA:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/27/global-order-britain-survive-eu-alternative-economic-model?CMP=twt_guImagine if we went through all this, to go nowhere.  the real damage is to democracy, with lots of hurt and upset people I know now blaming the ignorant masses, and people all over the shop saying 'the politicians needed to sort this out' — they're the ones who buggered it up.

[SocialistPunk]

A divided nation, politicians in disarray, threats to split the union, tension building up on the streets. It's the stuff that civil wars are made of.

[ALB]

Yes, it really is the beginning of the end for "Great" Britain. Another Brexit, England just beaten 2-1 by  EEA member Iceland in which minor league they may end up playing.

[ALB]

So Paul Mason has joined the growing (capitalist) chorus that the only way forward now for British capitalism plc is to negotiate continued free access to the single European market on whatever terms they can get. But I don't see how Britain moving from the EU to the EEA represents a dent in "nei-liberalism". It's rather maintaining its logic.In fact, aren't the Tory leaders of the Leave campaign now openly admitting that they are "liberal Leavers" and not protectionists and isolationists, i.e. believe that the market, including the world market, should decide what is produced, where and when? The real end of "neo-liberalism" would be a return to "national Statism" where the state tried to isolate itself and its subjects from the pressures of the world market, a return to the "reformism in one country" of the 40s, 50s and 60s or even to the beggar (or is it bugger?)-my-neighbour policies of the 30s. I don't see anybody advocating that but, if things go wrong, and a trade war breaks out between Britain and the EU or if the EU breaks up then this could happen but I don't think that's likely.

[SocialistPunk]

Shock, horror!!! Johnson is not going to run for Tory leadership. Could it be he thinks it a likely outcome, that whoever takes the title now will get burnt big time and end up finished as an MP?http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-tory-leadership-not-run_uk_5774fe46e4b08b8610d78b58?icid=maing-grid7%7Cuk-ttg%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D475050

[ALB]

Here's Yanis Varouflakis writing in last week's Big Issue, i.e before the result. He was in favour of Remain:

Quote:

… why am I against Brexit? The reasons are two. First one is – you cannot leave, even if you vote to leave. You are stuck in the single market. The single market is not a free trade area – there are common industry standards, every service has to be policed according to regulations made in Brussels, environmental protection standards, legal market standards – all from Brussels. The same lack of sovereignty will continue when it comes to writing the rulebook for a great variety of economic and social activities. So why do you want to get out, if you can't get out? By getting out, you are ceding these rules to an alien force in Brussels, in which you are not even participating.The second reason is that Brexit will speed up the political process of Europe's disintegration. And that, of course, is going to make the economic crisis worse in Europe. That economic crisis, as it gets worse in Europe, is going to suck Britain in to a new depression. Even if you have left, that will happen.

[DJP]

I thought this video from Professor Michael Dougan, the leading EU lawyer was really informative. It follows on from his now well known "Industrail Dishonesty" video.https://www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/1304633102897424/

[rodmanlewis]

DJP wrote:

They've yet to invoke article 50. For this to happen, an act of Parliament will have to be passed. However, the vast majority of Parliament are in favour of "stay". The great charade is only just beginning.

The question put was "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?", which is asking for an opinion, not requesting a mandate. The question should have been: "Shall the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

[ALB]

Michael Gove is not just a misfit, he's a fruit cake. According to the BBC in his manifesto for the Tory party leadership contest,

Quote:

He pledged to leave the EU's single market

This would be consistent with what he promised during the referendum campaign (for instance here) but would be madness from a capitalist point of view as it would mean that British goods would no longer have tariff-free access to the European market. So it's not going to happen. The Tory party are not going to elect him leader and parliament wouldn't stand for it.Gove also pledged to implement the Leave campaign's other promises — more money for the NHS, reduction in VAT on domestic energy but, above all, the end of the free movement of labour. It seems that he stabbed Johnson in the back because he had come to realise that Johnson didn't believe in them but was just promising them to get the votes in. Which was no doubt true.

[ALB]

Philip Hammond, the Foreign Secretary (who is backing the Clergtman's Daughter May for Tory Leader, an appropriate Prime Minister for Little England, as opposed to the other woman who's a raving Christian as well as a Brexiteer and who now has the financial backing of the capitalist who funds UKIP ), gives in today's Daily Torygraph what diplomacy is involved

Quote:

It is already clear what the central trade off with the EU will be: access to the single market versus freedom of movement of people. Those who believe there is no need for such a trade-off have misunderstood something fundamental about the politics of the European Union.They have a principled belief in the "indivisibility of the four freedoms"; but they also have a political understanding that to give way to Britain on this question would likely lead to the unravelling of the EU. So we will need to come to a consensus as a nation on that central trade-off.The referendum result creates a new political reality: unfettered free movement of EU nationals, as it has worked hitherto, is no longer on the table. Our priority must be securing the best access we can for British businesses to the single market in goods and services, but within the limitations imposed by that political reality. That may be challenging for our economy, but we don't have to let it be a disaster.There is a range of outcomes between "no access" and "full unfettered access" to the market; and there is a range of possible restrictions on free movement and settlement.

Of course "we" don't need to come to a consensus on this, only the government acting on behalf of the British capitalist class as a whole does. The working class can just sit back and watch how they get out of the fix Cameron and Johnson have got them into.

[ALB]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Brexit – No changehttp://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2016/07/04/eu-accused-trying-push-through-toxic-trade-deal-ahead-brexitGlobal Justice Now have released an expert opinion on CETA and Brexit which argues that if the UK doesn’t formally leave the EU before CETA is ratified, then it would be tied into the trade deal for a period of twenty years after announcing any intention to leave the deal.

What makes these people think that a Brexit Britain would be opposed to such a deal with Canada? The Brexiteers argued that Brexit would allow Britain to sign such deals directly with other countries instead of as part of the EU. Also, the silly pro-Remain Treasury report trying to predict what things would be like in 14 years time in 2030 if Britain left (concluding we'd all be worse off, of course) was based precisely on Britain doing a deal with the EU similar to Canada's. See, for instance, here.Don't think much of their "expert opinion" either.  It seems just to be that of a post graduate student studying for his PhD.

[alanjjohnstone]

I thought one of their points was legal sovereignty. The power to pass laws in Westminister. Whether the majority of Brexit or Remain support proposed trade treaties is neither here or there. If they don't act soon the supposed  sovereignty of the national Parliament will be hypothetical for 20 years into the future. Plenty of professors rely upon their PhD students to do the research groundwork…no need for your academic snobbery, ALB. 

[ALB]

In our leaflet for the referendum we said:

Quote:

In order to do business, there will have to be arrangements with other governments, especially those that neighbour Britain. Pretty much all free trade agreements have an arbitration process, which will mean courts telling the British government what to do in order to comply with the treaties it signed.

Just read about the existence of a Court, similar to the European Court of Justice, which deals with cases concerning member countries of the European Economic Area that are not members of the EU (Norway, Iceland, Leichstenstein — the other members of the EEA are the 28 EU member states including Britain). So, if in the end, Britain has to opt for the Norway solution, i.e if it withdraws from the EU but not the EEA, so as to get free access to the single market, then Britain will be subject to its rulings. It is situated in Luxemburg.http://www.eftacourt.int/the-court/jurisdiction-organisation/introduction/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFTA_Court

[Young Master Smeet]

Useful argument from teh New SoS for Brexit:http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2016/07/david-davis-trade-deals-tax-cuts-and-taking-time-before-triggering-article-50-a-brexit-economic-strategy-for-britain.html

Quote:

Single countries, with the ability to be flexible and focussed, negotiate trade deals far more quickly than large trade blocs.  For example, South Korea negotiated a deal with the US in a single year, and with India, which is notoriously difficult, within three years.  Chile was even faster, negotiating trade deals with China, Australia and Canada in under a year.

and

Quote:

So within two years, before the negotiation with the EU is likely to be complete, and therefore before anything material has changed, we can negotiate a free trade area massively larger than the EU.  Trade deals with the US and China alone will give us a trade area almost twice the size of the EU, and of course we will also be seeking deals with Hong Kong, Canada, Australia, India, Japan, the UAE, Indonesia – and many others.

So, throw in regualtory changes, and active state aid, and the stage is set for a state capitalist economy, maybe that is why May is talking about social justice issues.  Maybe they want to be the home version of the Chinese communist party…

[ALB]

That's what he, the new Minister for Brexit thinks (dreams). Shrewd move by Maggie May to put Brexiteers in charge of the Brexit negotiatons. They'll have a better chance of selling what they come up with to keep access to the single market to the xenophobes who are more concerned with keeping foreigners out.

[Author]

Posts