Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz66]

What is so difficult in applying WTO to services?

To ask that question is to answer it too. The entire world has been seeking to do just that for as long the WTO has existed and to date failed to do so. So do you not think the idea that this could be easily done overnight because it would suit the UK is even a tad unrealistic ?

If you want to know why the whole world has failed to make such agreements on services via the WTO for as long as it has exited to today, I will happily explain but its not necessary to know that to be able to understand the point I am making above

[erolz66]

Do you seriously believe that, as I said previously ..... we will have one set of rules at 23:59 on the 31/10/19 and at 00:01 on the 1/11/19 we have a whole new set of rules? Only an imbecile would even consider attempting that!

A no deal exit would mean that overnight there would be one set of rules that exist and are in place, covering 100s of things with a 150 ish countries, and the next day they no longer legally exist. It would be like deciding that you are going to change your land line phone supplier, mobile phone supplier, internet service provider, bank and and quit you job to start looking for a new one , all on the SAME DAY (but you will maintain your current pension adviser (WTO)). How imbecilic would that be ? Because that is what a no deal exit means.

Actually the above personal scenario above is even more idiotic in the sense that we are not proposing to change 'mobile phone supplier' actually we are proposing to cancel the existing contract and replace it with a new contract from exactly the same supplier. And I could add 'find and hire 3 new gardeners to start work on that same singular day (hire train and put in place by that day 100's of new border security staff and more besides)

[erolz66]

Let's try an imaginary scenrio RH, on the basis that you can even entertain the notion that you might be wrong (or more wrong) than me and if this is the case the consequences are pretty server.

Let's imagine for simplicity sake that the RoC is not in the EU but does have an 'open skies' agreement with the EU (and agreement to allow each nations planes to fly in each others airspace).

Imagine you are the RoC minister for tourism. Imagine I am the interior minster. We are in a cabinet meeting to discus impact of no deal exit on 1st October.


You - We are all prepared. We have a bi lateral open skys agreement written up and ready to be signed the minute the UK leaves the EU and is not covered by the existing EU one. I do not need to remind you gentlemen of the importance of the tourist trade to the RoC economy and how large the UK market is. We are all prepared for 'zero disruption' to flights between UK and and RoC following their exit.

Me - Hang on a minute. Let's not be so hasty here. Could there not be an opportunity here ? The UK will be doing these kind of things that they are doing with us with 100+ other countries, all at the same time. Their government will be under all sorts of pressure to minimise disruption of leaving on their citizens. The fact that there are so many UK RoC tourists could be a blesssing as well as problem, given that whilst it means that any disruption will cost a lot here in tourism revenue terms it also means a lot of angry British citizens who's holidays are being interrupted, who will be angry at their government that told them there would be no such disruptions. It is 1st October and peak tourism season is over. It would not affect tourist from anywhere other than the UK. Would it not be at least worth considering NOT doing the open skys deal to make zero disruption but to actively delay doing so if only for a couple of week and see if we can not in return get some concession from the UK over the sovereign base issues, or cyprob issues, as payment for singing the open sky deal ? This may be a once in a lifetime opportunity to be able to do this and the window for doing so will close a bit as the Uk does replace agreements with the 150 odd other countries it needs to do this with. What do you Mr Minister for tourism ?

---------------------------------

Now all of this is 'hypothetical' but to me credibly possible. Replicate this over all the 150 other countries the Uk will be doing such 'bi lateral' agreements with (and is there a country in the world that does not have some kind of grudge with the UK, ongoing or historic), Not just re 'open sky'. Not just re 'open skys and trade'. But about these and other things too defined by international agreements, that currently exist ? All at the same time. All whilst under intense pressure from having told the UK people there will be next to no disruption.

This kind of hypothetical scenario totally changes if the means of leaving the EU is not a no deal one. If it involves a managed exit (TM's deal or any variant of it but NOT your unicorn 'WTO deal') where by we (UK) is free legally from being in the EU and thus can sign such agreements but where the default position is for two years that if we have not the position remains legally the same as it was before legal exit from EU.

Now do you understand why 'WTO rules' is not just another version of 'the deal' ? Why there is some justification to describe a no deal exit as a 'crash out' one and why your 'WTO deal' theory dopes not change that ? Its not just all about trying to scare people. There is a material difference between a deal that includes a 2 year transition period and one that does not ? That that difference is all about the default position of exiting deals once we have left but whilst still in the transition period ?


( I should be charging the RoC government for all this free consultancy )

[erolz66]

we can see this kind of thing playing out already (that is if we are capable of allowing ourselves to see such over through our fears that everyone who did not vote leave is just trying to stop us from leaving at all)

Canada. A country that could rightly be considered a nation 'friendly' to the UK , that we have strong historical ties to. Currently the EU has a free trade deal agreement with them (a level 2 one in the list I quoted before) and by extension so does the UK right now. Yes it took 7 years to negotiate. Yes it was almost scuppered by one federal element of one EU member state, which btw could only potentially scupper it because, despite all the myths, not just do member states within the EU still retain total sovereignty on whole swathes of areas of competency but even their federal elements do. But the EU did manage to get it over the line.

We have been to the Canadian government, as said in essence, hey guys we know we are going to trade once the UK is out of the EU. It would really really help us out if you could announce now, that after the UK leaves, you will be signing a bi lateral agreement with the UK that is the same as the EU one but just between you and us. Help us out a bit, we could sure use such an announcement back home to shut those dam remoaners up.

Canada declined our 'generous offer'. It has not said it will NOT do this after our exit but nor is it willing to say right now it will. It is going to see what actually happens first before making these decisions. This is even more the case given that the UK has announced in the immediate aftermath of a no deal exit, from day one, it will not be imposing any tariffs on a whole range of imported goods (but not all) for some unspecified period, from anywhere. So Canada has 'reserved its right to wait and see'. That may well lead to an easy duplication of the existing EU Canada deal but it might not. There is in reality no such thing as a 'friendly country' in such bi lateral negotiations. There is only self interest. Canada may well decide to try and get 'something' by dint of the fact that the UK government will be under all sorts of intense pressure and political pressure if no deal exit does prove disruptive to millions of UK citizens lives, when they had been told it would not be.

[Lordo]

sometimes people like to believe somethings because it suits their politics and they convince themselves of it despite the reality being so different.

if wto rules are ok, why has canada and japan been negotiating a customs union with the eu. it is just beyond beleif that the proof of what it is like is out there.

one simple example is lamb. there is 45% tax on lamb to be exportes to the eu. the farmers in this country will simply go bust with such high levels of tax. first find out wto rules mean before you can propose them. this is what happend in 2016. brexteers have been saying that without freedom of movement, we can have a free trade deal despite reality. just a year before the vote switzerland said that they will remove the freedom of movement and were told by the eu that if they did such a thing they would negate their agreement with the eu. the brexiteers knew this and yet they calaimed that outside the eu we would have a better deal ta=han from within. i mean to believe that is just plain stupid. what more can anybody say except lets have brexit so stupid people can see howstupid they have been. if nothing else for just to learn a lesson in life.

[erolz66]

if wto rules are ok, why has canada and japan been negotiating a customs union with the eu.

Actually they have not negotiated a customs union (level 3 trade agreement) but a free trade agreement (level 2). Your point remains the same however.

If they were to want to negotiate a level 3 trade agreement with the EU (customs union) that would then require them to be willing to accept that they then could not unilaterally negotiate trade deals with other third countries. They would be required to do so communally with all other members of the EU customs union only. This is what Turkey has done. This requirement, despite what some may think or want to think is not 'political'. It is not a requirement that could be removed if there was sufficient political will on both sides to do so. It is a 'mechanical' requirement of a customs union, pretty much what a customs union IS. That any deal that does not have this requirement in it would not BE a customs union.

[Lordo]

if wto rules are ok, why has canada and japan been negotiating a customs union with the eu.

Actually they have not negotiated a customs union (level 3 trade agreement) but a free trade agreement (level 2). Your point remains the same however.

If they were to want to negotiate a level 3 trade agreement with the EU (customs union) that would then require them to be willing to accept that they then could not unilaterally negotiate trade deals with other third countries. They would be required to do so communally with all other members of the EU customs union only. This is what Turkey has done. This requirement, despite what some may think or want to think is not 'political'. It is not a requirement that could be removed if there was sufficient political will on both sides to do so. It is a 'mechanical' requirement of a customs union, pretty much what a customs union IS. That any deal that does not have this requirement in it would not BE a customs union.

but in reality being a member of level three is idea, becasue you have off the shelf deals aready agreed to the maximum benefit cause eu is not about to agree any deal which would disadvantage any member.

the real problem has been kept away from the great unwashed. they wanted eu human rights removed and the city finacial district protected from the eu rules. and of course there is always the delusion of rule britania and all that claptrap too thinking that they have an empire with all that johny foreigner just had to behave and pay his dues like a good little boy.

[Robin Hood]

Erolz66:

Let's try an imaginary scenrio RH, on the basis that you can even entertain the notion that you might be wrong (or more wrong) than me and if this is the case the consequences are pretty server.(severe?)

I will give you an ACTUAL Cyprus scenario, not an imaginary one.

When this referendum result was known there were those, on this forum, preaching the usual doom scenario for those UK citizens that received their health care as if they were Cypriot. All this was going to end, we would all be cut off from health care and have to take out very expensive insurance or go back to the UK etc etc. It was the same old story .... people anticipating something they thought might happen because we were leaving the EU. The fact these arrangements had been in place years before Cyprus was even in the EU missed the gloom mongers .... they just blanked out a common sense approach.

Simple common sense said this was most unlikely for exactly the reason any sane person would take into account. TO DO SO WOULD HAVE REPERCUSIONS for non UK citizen Cypriots living in the UK. But this simple bit of common sense was dismissed and given no consideration at all.

I even had a conversation with a senior high ranking civil servant in the MoH and she said that there was a reciprocal arrangement and nothing would change. Even this was not good enough for the doom merchants.

Well guess what? I and thousands of other UK Citizens , many of whom like me have been here for a couple of decades or more, have just signed up to the new General Health Service (GESY) and are treated in exactly the same way as a Cypriot National. We are guaranteed that nothing will change and we will still be able to access the health service as we always have done.

I am pretty sure leaving the EU will be just the same. Don’t forget in your scenario that the UK also has airspace? As I said “Two can play at that game!’ ...... there are thousands of flights that pass through British air space and/or land at UK airfields every day, if we were as stupid as you seem to believe everybody but you is, we could close our airspace and re-code all our beacons and navigation aids so that only we could use them. But how stupid would that be.

IMO: What you are saying is all hypothesis with a virtually zero consideration for pragmatism or common sense. I am betting on these highly paid civil servants to have sorted things out like they have with Cyprus GHS, quietly in the background, so that there will be as few problems as possible. If they have been sitting on their arses doing nothing inspite of being in a far better position than you or I to see the obvious ....... then the UK and a lot of other countries are in the shit ..... big time!

So, I will not panic ..... I will take some sensible measures ...... and see what happens because one thing is for sure, I am not alone.

[Paphitis]

For starters Plonker you would be better off. The pound in your pocket will be worth a lot more than it currently is.
Trading now at below
1.09 euros. Only an absolute idiot can not see that the prospect of Brexit is harmful to their wealth, did you get that Absolute idiot ??

Yeah, yeah! It's not fair!
Yeah, yeah! It's not fair!
I'm so upset.
I'm so upset! I'm so upset!
Yeah yeah!

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse for Miltiades!

[miltiades]

Miltiades doesn't stand to lose much if Madam Sterling, currently trading at 1.085 to the euro, goes down further, and it wiil, since I invest wisely using my head and not as you do my arse.
Since my investements are mostly in Euros and dollars , remember way back in March 2017 I converted Stg to US dollars ?
By the way there is still time to convert pounds into Nigerian Niara !! You get loads of dosh.
What a load of absolute Plonkers.