but realilty is the UK is going to be in a very a weak position regarding ALL of its future trade negotiations - not just those with the EU - regardless the WA.
Besides, do you honnestly think that when you'd have to negotiate with the EU from a position of hard Brexit first, you'll be in a more favouable position?
I have to disagree here negotiations with other nations will not have the animosity and malevolence.displayed like the current relations of the EU/UK, the UK negotiations will be no different from the perspective of a smaller economy like say Australia or New Zealand each will have their goals and interest to protect its just a matter if they can find an equal equilibrium.
Given the much higher economic shock this will likely have brought along? I doubt it...
In fact -and they could be dead wrong of course-, the EU has said they expect the UK to become far more lenient after a hard Brexit due to the sense of urgency which will be much higher.
That's open to speculation, commentary on economic conditions on a hard exist vary wildly from economists depending on their own bias to the situation, yes initially I expect hiccups and mistakes made its to be expected even in the best economic times government laws can have unexpected consequences
Seriously, it's Brexit which puts the UK in an unfavourable position, not the WA that somehow has to go with Brexit, as the whole 'they need us more than we need them' mantra is now shown to be a false claim, I hope you can agree to that.
The WA always had the potential to put us in an unfavourable and untenable position to the final objective of leaving the CU/SM.That's never been my slogan/mantra but one trotted out by both sides when they cant make their own rational argument
BTW- If you fear the EU to take advantage of the position the UK is is during the future trade negotiations, you better not enter into negotiations with other countries then.
Its the nature of the beast all sides try to get an advantage however slight trade offs in one area might be gains in another, you have to work out are they worth it or walk away something TM didn't learn was to walk away from a bad deal
Indeed, so exactly as the WA then in fact, isnt it?
No once the backstop provisions are enacted in the WA it becomes an international treaty with no unilateral exit clause built in only with joint consent can the UK leave. The UK will be bound to comply with it under international law, regardless of the wishes of a future government or Parliament hence it binds our successor
Where's the guarantee that those countries will be willing to replace those TCAs quickly and fairly with FTAs on those mythical better terms?
Their is none, that's why they are called negotiations
What you say about the WA and the FTA with the EU that is supposed to succeed it, goes for any of those TCAs just as well, you know?
No routinely free trade agreement will either have a time limit built in where both parties have to agree to continue or contain termination clauses, where no such mechanism is built in then Article 56 Denunciation of or withdrawal from a treaty containing no provision regarding termination, from the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969 can be invoked, this provision does not apply to the WA as the treaty expressly saus the UK cannot leave without consent from both parties
That's because the WA is in essence a TCA, plus a treaty on continued citizen rights plus a settlement of the accounts.
It's highly remarkable that the analogy is completely lost on Brexiteers, and the UK politicians are just focussing on the TCA with the EU (aka the WA) whereas they clearly have no problem to enter into identical arrangements with others, meanwhile...
That's because you are correct as we have a different perspective as you said we view it as a trade association and not a political union
A TCA effectively locks you into a permanent standstill on EU based rules between the UK and a third country, until and unless that third country agrees to change anything to it, to the single exception of the TCA with South Korea so far, which has a very brief period of validity only, purely because Seoul has already said openly it thinks it can extract far better terms from the UK than it enjoys now! Sobering prospect, isn't it?
Remember when I said the they can be changed with consent between both parties as we will no longer be under legislative or judicial supremacy of the EU and either party can withdraw at any time that's what sovereignty is all about, unlike the WA which turns the UK into a vassal state of the EU
Not to nitpick but that is not entirely correct.
In fact, there's a whole bunch of unresolved issues surrounding those TCAs in case of a no-deal departure even, ranging from 'silly' things as copy-right violations of the texts (rights which are held by the EU, not the UK) to very real things like quota etc...
They wont be word for word copy and past, copyright is exactly like the house plans from home builders you only have to change one wall and then it no longer infringes on copyright. I know that from when I built my house
The TCAs are signed on the assumption that there's a deal between the EU and the UK on all these matters, first; if not, it's yet another can of worms to deal with for your politicians, one they clearly haven't spent much time thinking on, so far, obsessed with the single one with the EU at present!
The obsession is to leave with a fair deal and to leave the EU, As has been the case of the currently signed Mutual Recognition Agreement/Trade Continuation Agreements their are prior negations to make them relevant to the situation.
Besides, the idea the UK will have time to adapt any of those TCAs while also negotiate a bunch of FTAs is quite entertaining, but purely theoretical: for the next 15 years, the trade department will be overloaded with work just to prevent it from falling behind on the basics; there won't be much time for finetuning or faciful updates, let that be clear!
This is really turning into a rant on your behalf, so what on how long it take to complete each individual agreement you just have to look at how long the EU has taken to ratify agreements, EU agreements are notoriously difficult to negotiate we only have to come to an agreement between 2 parties not 28. But their are a host of nations which have already indicated that they want to make agreements when the UK is free to do so
Could you tell me why you think others who've entered in a TCA with the UK are going to be willing to sign up to a FTA which is supposed to be more favourable to the UK, than that TCA is? Again, all of your reasoning against the EU's bad faith, is equally valid for all those third countries in the world too, you know?
I have never said that we will get agreements on better terms, but its only logical agreements will be replicated as near as to the terms as current, do you think that nations will want to increase the cost of their products within the UK because of higher tariffs and possibly lose market share to their competitor.
It really strikes me how much bad faith you put in the EU, whereas it is the only trading partner in the whole wide world who's willing to sign up to a formal commitment not to act in bad faith through the political declaration, whereas all those others you clearly see as run by Mr. Nice Guys. Sure, the "life boat of Brexit Britain", Trump's USofA, might come to the rescue… if he's still around by then, because we're talking of 2021 here, remember, and even then, it remains to be seen what's his temper on that specific day then.
oh please really take a good look on what you have written, like in any parliament and country in the world their are internal factions which have their own interests above all others, the European union is no different. its in the Europeans own interest to keep the UK as a part of it for budgetary and internal trade purposes
Anyway, I hope you can at least see the asymmetry in your reasoning here, and admit it comes from a negative mindset towards the EU more than anything else...
All the bad things you see the EU capable of doing during trade negotiations with the WA in its hands first, you can just as well attribute with far more certainty to any other country the UK has meanwhile signed a TCA with and even more so to those who are not even willing to sign one, like Canada for instance, which has explicitly said it doesn't want to sign any TCA because it hopes to extract maximum profit from its position of rejection, later!
It takes 2 to tango, and like parliament has shown if an agreement is not in our interest it wont be ratified
Seriously, if I were an MP, it'd vote for the TCA with the EU, called the WA, asap, to avoid even greater humiliation later!
That's because you are looking thru rose tinted glasses