I found David Davis's article on his economic strategy for Brexit to be quite illuminating. Here it is:
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
The main points are as follows:
1) Britain should start making trade negotiations now
2) We should sound out the EU prior to invoking Article 50
3) We should invoke Article 50 when we're good and ready (e.g. by year end)
4) The EU will in all likelihood yield to our demands to access the single market
5) We should be prepared to walk away from the EU (to WTO rules)
6) Many trade deals can be in place within 2 years.
7) Our long term future is rosier outside of the EU.
Another source of (quite blunt) views on Brexit come in the comments sections of The Express, and other tabloids who have been feeding their readers all sorts of anti-EU pro-Brexit stories which have stoked up their readership into a Brexit frenzy. They also echo the same ideas: Europe will cave in and allow Britain access to the common market, because doing so would be bad for them, and if they don't then it's no great loss. Most want to invoke Article 50 straight away. Let's be clear: a lot of people want full Brexit.
The British Prime Minister (Theresa May) has installed some very influential Brexiters to run the whole Brexit shebang, and they will get free rein in delivering it. I actually think this is quite a sensible choice. Overturning the referendum would quite likely result in revolt (quite rightly), and there is no choice but to proceed as positively as possible. Negative sentiment is also damaging to the British economy, so we may as well make the most of a bad situation. If things go wrong, Theresa May has created sufficient distance between herself and Brexit, that she can survive politically, and point the blame firmly at the Brexit camp.
Theresa May will quite likely be persuaded by David Davis's optimism, and therefore allow him to invoke Article 50 as much of the UK population is demanding. She has little choice. In any case, delay creates uncertainly, and is ultimately bad for the UK. She was in any case not a strong advocate of Remain, and may well be quite personally persuaded that Leave might be the right thing to do.
There may well be a stand-off between the EU and the UK over A50. This is the only real power the UK has in the whole process. The UK may feel is can negotiate with the EU prior to invoking it, and may wish to secure some kind of verbal agreement. The EU is however likely to be quite principled on this, and not be able to guarantee any outcomes, and the pressure on the UK government to invoke A50 will be immense. The EU knows this. So expect A50 at the beginning of 2017. Delaying A50 a little makes sense, for example to set up a new department and do some planning (which should have been done prior to June 23rd but never mind).
David Davis's optimism regarding our access to the single market is utterly misplaced. It could happen, but the concessions the UK would have to make would not be acceptable to the Brexit crowd. There's also the technicality that getting all EU nations to agree to a deal in the time frame is unlikely, and Britain has no real leverage here. Even if Germany wants the UK to remain in the common market, there are plenty of other forces that don't. Davis has already signalled that if all his demands are not met, then we simply leave the EU and trade by WTO rules. This is quite likely to happen.
Another possibility is that the sheer amount of legal work required to exit the EU is so overwhelming that the deadline for dropping out gets extended and extended. But the simplest agreement is no agreement, so that is the most likely and everyone goes home.
The next point where Davis is wrong is in the time it takes to set up new trade agreements. By all accounts, comprehensive agreements take upwards of ten years. We may well get some interim agreements before then. But, these won't cover our losses from the EU, and the terms will not be very favourable to us because we are in a hurry to set them up and lack the expertise and leverage. Even in 15 years when long-term agreements are in place, we are unlikely to recoup our losses.
David Davis is living in cloud cuckoo land. There's simply no evidence to back up his claims. All facts and numbers supplied by the Leave side have shown themselves to be so deceitful and faulty that it is hardly likely that this strategy will fare any better.
The question is how long it will take for the lie to be exposed, and who will pay the consequences. At what point will he throw his hands up and say "I've been such a fool". Or will he be like an embattled Tony Blair, who still holds out for vindication?
The first sign things are unravelling occurs when the EU has not changed its position prior to A50, and we are essentially pressured into invoking A50. For sure, there will be meetings with the EU to cover various admin, and some EU politicians will make noises, but nothing more.
The second sign things are unravelling will be when the talks appear to be deadlocked for up to a year, with no obvious progress and both sides having some distance.
The third sign is when pro-EU sentiment grows in the EU, and the popular sentiment in the EU will turn against the UK. The general elections in Germany and France will cement this view.
The fourth sign will be when the focus of the talks starts to shift towards WTO rules. This is still within David Davis's gameplan, both in terms of brinkmanship and in terms of acceptable outcomes.
The 5th sign will be when the UK formally exits the common market and trades under WTO rules, with no other interim agreement in place. Indeed, this is actually what "Leave the EU" means, so should surprise nobody.
The 6th sign of failure is that the UK accepts a deal with the EU which is in every way worse than our current obligations: higher payments, less influence, same movement of people, same rules but we don't have a say over them. (Unlikely unless public opinion changes significantly.)
The 7th sign will be when the UK's economy starts to falter. GDP is down, unemployment up, recessions, horrid government debt, and these are not alleviated by "trade deals".
The 8th sign will be when trade deals which were supposed to take 2 years actually take 5 or more years, and any that we do have are minor, problematic or in no way compensate for the losses with the EU.
The 9th sign is where the UK economy starts to diverge downwards relative to the rest of the EU. The compounding factor is that the Eurozone is suffering a debt crisis caused by faulty assumptions in the way the Euro was set up.
The 10th sign is that Scotland holds a referendum for independence.
The 11th sign is that the pound dips below $1.20, then eventually reaches parity with the USD.
Unfortunately, we are looking at 10-15 years before the folly is truly revealed. Even though it's accepted academic opinion that leaving the EU is a seriously bad idea, it seems that popular opinion still needs to be convinced. Now I admit that all these doomsday scenarios aren't all that likely, but would represent irrefutable proof that the UK really goofed up on June 23rd 2016.
But several of these signs will be apparent in the next couple of years. If they do, then we know that we will be in for a really rough ride. If by some miracle, we keep access to the single market for goods and services, then it will probably be ok. But now we just have to wait and see, and have a big dolloping of "I told you so" on standby.
I predict a humbling few years for the UK, and I'm glad that politicians who voted Leave are at the helm to receive the flak they deserve.
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
The main points are as follows:
1) Britain should start making trade negotiations now
2) We should sound out the EU prior to invoking Article 50
3) We should invoke Article 50 when we're good and ready (e.g. by year end)
4) The EU will in all likelihood yield to our demands to access the single market
5) We should be prepared to walk away from the EU (to WTO rules)
6) Many trade deals can be in place within 2 years.
7) Our long term future is rosier outside of the EU.
Another source of (quite blunt) views on Brexit come in the comments sections of The Express, and other tabloids who have been feeding their readers all sorts of anti-EU pro-Brexit stories which have stoked up their readership into a Brexit frenzy. They also echo the same ideas: Europe will cave in and allow Britain access to the common market, because doing so would be bad for them, and if they don't then it's no great loss. Most want to invoke Article 50 straight away. Let's be clear: a lot of people want full Brexit.
The British Prime Minister (Theresa May) has installed some very influential Brexiters to run the whole Brexit shebang, and they will get free rein in delivering it. I actually think this is quite a sensible choice. Overturning the referendum would quite likely result in revolt (quite rightly), and there is no choice but to proceed as positively as possible. Negative sentiment is also damaging to the British economy, so we may as well make the most of a bad situation. If things go wrong, Theresa May has created sufficient distance between herself and Brexit, that she can survive politically, and point the blame firmly at the Brexit camp.
Theresa May will quite likely be persuaded by David Davis's optimism, and therefore allow him to invoke Article 50 as much of the UK population is demanding. She has little choice. In any case, delay creates uncertainly, and is ultimately bad for the UK. She was in any case not a strong advocate of Remain, and may well be quite personally persuaded that Leave might be the right thing to do.
There may well be a stand-off between the EU and the UK over A50. This is the only real power the UK has in the whole process. The UK may feel is can negotiate with the EU prior to invoking it, and may wish to secure some kind of verbal agreement. The EU is however likely to be quite principled on this, and not be able to guarantee any outcomes, and the pressure on the UK government to invoke A50 will be immense. The EU knows this. So expect A50 at the beginning of 2017. Delaying A50 a little makes sense, for example to set up a new department and do some planning (which should have been done prior to June 23rd but never mind).
David Davis's optimism regarding our access to the single market is utterly misplaced. It could happen, but the concessions the UK would have to make would not be acceptable to the Brexit crowd. There's also the technicality that getting all EU nations to agree to a deal in the time frame is unlikely, and Britain has no real leverage here. Even if Germany wants the UK to remain in the common market, there are plenty of other forces that don't. Davis has already signalled that if all his demands are not met, then we simply leave the EU and trade by WTO rules. This is quite likely to happen.
Another possibility is that the sheer amount of legal work required to exit the EU is so overwhelming that the deadline for dropping out gets extended and extended. But the simplest agreement is no agreement, so that is the most likely and everyone goes home.
The next point where Davis is wrong is in the time it takes to set up new trade agreements. By all accounts, comprehensive agreements take upwards of ten years. We may well get some interim agreements before then. But, these won't cover our losses from the EU, and the terms will not be very favourable to us because we are in a hurry to set them up and lack the expertise and leverage. Even in 15 years when long-term agreements are in place, we are unlikely to recoup our losses.
David Davis is living in cloud cuckoo land. There's simply no evidence to back up his claims. All facts and numbers supplied by the Leave side have shown themselves to be so deceitful and faulty that it is hardly likely that this strategy will fare any better.
The question is how long it will take for the lie to be exposed, and who will pay the consequences. At what point will he throw his hands up and say "I've been such a fool". Or will he be like an embattled Tony Blair, who still holds out for vindication?
The first sign things are unravelling occurs when the EU has not changed its position prior to A50, and we are essentially pressured into invoking A50. For sure, there will be meetings with the EU to cover various admin, and some EU politicians will make noises, but nothing more.
The second sign things are unravelling will be when the talks appear to be deadlocked for up to a year, with no obvious progress and both sides having some distance.
The third sign is when pro-EU sentiment grows in the EU, and the popular sentiment in the EU will turn against the UK. The general elections in Germany and France will cement this view.
The fourth sign will be when the focus of the talks starts to shift towards WTO rules. This is still within David Davis's gameplan, both in terms of brinkmanship and in terms of acceptable outcomes.
The 5th sign will be when the UK formally exits the common market and trades under WTO rules, with no other interim agreement in place. Indeed, this is actually what "Leave the EU" means, so should surprise nobody.
The 6th sign of failure is that the UK accepts a deal with the EU which is in every way worse than our current obligations: higher payments, less influence, same movement of people, same rules but we don't have a say over them. (Unlikely unless public opinion changes significantly.)
The 7th sign will be when the UK's economy starts to falter. GDP is down, unemployment up, recessions, horrid government debt, and these are not alleviated by "trade deals".
The 8th sign will be when trade deals which were supposed to take 2 years actually take 5 or more years, and any that we do have are minor, problematic or in no way compensate for the losses with the EU.
The 9th sign is where the UK economy starts to diverge downwards relative to the rest of the EU. The compounding factor is that the Eurozone is suffering a debt crisis caused by faulty assumptions in the way the Euro was set up.
The 10th sign is that Scotland holds a referendum for independence.
The 11th sign is that the pound dips below $1.20, then eventually reaches parity with the USD.
Unfortunately, we are looking at 10-15 years before the folly is truly revealed. Even though it's accepted academic opinion that leaving the EU is a seriously bad idea, it seems that popular opinion still needs to be convinced. Now I admit that all these doomsday scenarios aren't all that likely, but would represent irrefutable proof that the UK really goofed up on June 23rd 2016.
But several of these signs will be apparent in the next couple of years. If they do, then we know that we will be in for a really rough ride. If by some miracle, we keep access to the single market for goods and services, then it will probably be ok. But now we just have to wait and see, and have a big dolloping of "I told you so" on standby.
I predict a humbling few years for the UK, and I'm glad that politicians who voted Leave are at the helm to receive the flak they deserve.
Comments