No. We will now be free to negotiate trade deals with countries outside the EU (Which we currently are not able to do. The EU has been absolutely awful at trying to negotiate trade deals with other countries). We will negotiate a trade deal with the EU as a whole. Everyone in the UK knows those facts.
But on the other hand, as a Canadian whose government was in the process of negotiating a trade agreement with the EU, now we'll have to draw up two separate trade agreements, neither of which is as unbalanced in their favour as the original would have been.
That is to say, the EU without the UK has less leverage than before, and the UK without the EU has less leverage than before, so now neither the EU nor the UK has nearly as much bargaining power as they had combined.
Which is great for us in Canada! Another benefit is that negotiating with the UK individually rather than the EU as a whole should make it easier to get a deal done quickly.
Negotiating with the EU is a disaster. Too many special interests to deal with all at once! As the old saying goes: too many chefs spoil the broth.
And probably the slowest. If you can capture 10 faster markets then the slowest gets pressure to get going. But if you only have to deal with the slowest then it becomes even slower. Welcome to capitalism.
> We will now be free to negotiate trade deals with countries outside the EU (Which we currently are not able to do. The EU has been absolutely awful at trying to negotiate trade deals with other countries). We will negotiate a trade deal with the EU as a whole.
The second sentence of the parenthetical, if taken to be true, casts significant doubt on the claim in the final sentence.
I don't doubt that the requirement for consensus in the EU makes EU-to-outside trade deals difficult to negotiate. OTOH, that same fact makes successful negotiation of an EU-Britain trade deal (either as part of or subsequent to an exit agreement) uncertain.
> The EU has been extremely ineffective at negotiating trade deals between the 28 EU countries, and non EU countries.
Exactly, which casts strong doubts on the this claim from your earlier post: "We will negotiate a trade deal with the EU as a whole."
Because, you know, that is a trade deal between the 27 remaining EU countries and a non-(or soon to be non-)EU country, the exact thing you say that the EU isn't successful at doing.
Politics is not always rational. It is also in the interest of the survival of the EU to deal with the UK in a heavy-handed manner. If a precedent is set that shows leaving the union is all upsides with no downsides, why would other countries remain? IMO, France has the greatest risk of leaving next, and without France, the whole EU might collapse. The kid gloves are definitely going to come off in the negotiations: I have an inkling that's why the 'Leave' campaign is delaying the invocation of article 50.
People keep saying this, but punishing the UK for leaving could easily give further fuel to the French leave campaign. And of course an exited Britain could extend an olive branch to France.
What does "real income" mean to you? Income in USD?
The only sensible way to measure income is with purchasing power, and that's far more complex than an exchange rate (since many of the services and goods originate in the UK anyways).
Sure - but the converse - punishing them for leaving - confirms that the EU is a political hegemony whose purpose is to usurp sovereignty, rather than a mutually beneficial union of member states who are members by choice.
That would provide perfect ammunition for nationalists everywhere.
> I have an inkling that's why the 'Leave' campaign is delaying the invocation of article 50.
Seriously. Do you even know what you're talking about? Only our elected government (who were on the remain side), can invoke article 50, and it's up to them to decide when.
As a matter of fact, yes I do. Boris Johnson has come out and said there is "no need to rush", and he was on the Leave side.
> Only our elected government (who were on the remain side), can invoke article 50
That's just a roundabout way of saying "The Tories", innit? Cameron is a lame duck, and if the Leave wing of the Tories wanted him out tomorrow, he'd be out tomorrow.
It is in the EU's interest to make that deal less favourable for the UK than the current situation. Making a point about the benefits of the EU membership is really important right now.
You'll have lots and lots of smaller deals, all of them dissimilar to each other and with their own peculiarities.
Sounds like a nightmare to me. On the other hand, Switzerland seems to be doing well (although they are maybe focussing more on the EU than the Britain that you advocate).
Well I suspect Britain has much more trade going on within the EU than it has anywhere else, which makes that sort of trade deal critically important compared to other trade deals...
