The EU plays hard ball.

[Workingman]

News is breaking that the EU Commission will be the EU's sole negotiator with regards to Brexit.

The UK will not be allowed bilateral talks with any of the other 27 members, only the Commission. The Commission will take the lead supported by the EU Council, but the EU Parliament will be sidelined.

Once A50 is triggered EU foreign ministers will hand over to the General Affairs Council, which will present the agreed negotiation directives, then everyone steps back and only chief negotiator, Michael Barnier and his team, will be available to the UK.

I am not in the least surprised by this news and I suspect that after the meeting in Brussels tomorrow any first draft will have plans to scupper a lot of the UK's 'soft Brexit' wishes.

[Suff]

The Commission will take the lead supported by the EU Council, but the EU Parliament will be sidelined.

One of the other key reasons I was Leave.

This, for me, is good news. However it won't last. Because when the UK says "great we'll stick 50% tariff on cars", Germany will roll over the commission like a "Leapord 2".

That is another reason I was for leave. There are Those. And there are absolutely Such as Those. In the EU. The commission is very wary of biting the hand that feeds it.

[Workingman]

This, for me, is good news. However it won't last. Because when the UK says "great we'll stick 50% tariff on cars", Germany will roll over the commission like a "Leapord 2".

Rubbish!

The EU and UK are members of the WTO in their own right. Once we leave, barring any other deal, WTO rules will apply. As WTO members the EU cannot impose restrictive tariffs on the UK, nor we on them. They have to give us the Most Favoured Nation terms they are currently giving to other countries outside the EU, and we have to reciprocate. The EU tariff on cars is 10% and that is the max the UK could apply.

[Suff]

Have to be careful there.

China is a member of the WTO and the EU has slapped 50% taxes on products from China.

So it CAN be done and if we want it WILL be done. If the EU don't like it they can go and review their own actions.

The WTO is not a straitjacket.

[Workingman]

No need to be careful.

The EU imposes restrictive tariffs on some Chines goods, mainly steel, as anti-dumping measures, and it is all within WTO rules. These goods are being sold for less than they cost to make.... It is unlikely that the Germans would be selling us their Mercs, BMWs, Audis and VWs for less than they cost to make.

[Suff]

Not just Steel. China is the cheapest manufacturer of solar equipment in the world, panels specifically. These are not being dumped, they are being sold at near cost which is lower than anywhere else in the world.

Regardless of WTO rules and regulations, solar manufacturers in the US and the EU went to the courts to try and block China from selling their goods in these countries. In the EU they were successful and a 50% tariff was levied on Chinese solar products.

in 2015 this led to

The biggest Chinese solar manufacturer, Suntech, went bankrupt partly as a result of global protection against cheap solar panels that China was able to “dump” on the world market.

Oh there was a claim of "dumping" but it was not true. They were just so efficient and had most of the raw materials available to produce them with cheap Chinese labour that the cost of manufacture was below that of anyone else in the world. Had they been selling below cost, they would have gone under long before as they would not have been able to service their expansion loans.

This is pure protectionism and if the EU can do this to the point of bankrupting Chinese companies, then the UK can do it too.

Steel and solar panels are not the only goods this has been done for and they won't be the last. Steel is a different issue. China produced the steel for expected orders then the world market shrank. So they sold it for a loss. Better than holding it for too long and going bust. Western companies do it too. But, again, when it comes down to pressure groups and politicians, the WTO rules take a battering.

The EU has a significant trade imbalance with the UK. Just as China does with the EU. If the EU don't like our "protectionism", they can lump it. Just as we tell China. "Look at the rest of the trade and accept".

[Suff]

I see that the Parliament is playing hardball with the Commission.

i.e. deal us in or we probably won't approve.

However with the whole EU rhetoric being around how the UK is going to lose, why would the commission care? It could just organise what it wants, do it's job and if the Parliament don't approve it then it's the UK's loss isn't it....

Or was that whole position nothing more than a bluff, as has already been said by one Danish Lawyer....

More fun and games in a room called the EU, all brought to you by the press with a spin.

[Workingman]

A couple of things spring to mind re how the EU deals with Brexit.

Firstly, the EU is losing its second largest net contributor, and that is going to hurt as the rest will, in some way, have to pick up the slack. It will, therefore, try to be as obstinate as possible with the UK.

The second follows on from the first. The EU wants to show any waverers just how bad the process of, and leaving, will be for them. Only Germany comes anywhere close to the UK, the rest are on shaky ground both domestically and economically, so the EU is subliminally sending out the message 'stay with us, you will be safe'.

[Suff]

There are other net costs for the EU too.

The UK is the largest reducer of CO2 in the EU. Yes Denmark may be 30% reduction to our 20% between 2000 and 2014, but Danish emissions are so small that they make very little difference to the overall total. The latest commitments by the EU on CO2 reductions were predicated strongly on the fact that the UK, voluntarily, would continue to take a large portion of the reductions.

Germany is increasing slightly due to the decision to drop Nuclear, France is stuck, they're power scarce and won't commission any new Nuclear. Their ability to drop emissions is small, although windmills are popping up everywhere over here.

The EU always had a lot to lose. Net contributions, €60bn in trade imbalance, CO2 emissions reductions, technology leadership for many technologies in the EU, a permanent seat on the UN security council and also an Oil producer.

When you look at the way they are behaving and have behaved, the only thing I can see is stark terror over the rest of the countries allied to an overarching sense of superiority verging on megalomania..

I see the Government has just squashed the €50bn babble. After all, if they want Hard Brexit, they don't get anything. They can talk about "long term liabilities", but those liabilities were taken on as part of the membership of the EU. Yes wherever the UK has a responsibility for pensions that has to be met. But the rest? We're not in, we're not contributing.

It's like being told that if you vote for £2 a week for your local Club as an additional tariff, you are therefore somehow liable for it forever, even if you leave.

Not likely. Just because the EU wanted to take our money and give it away does not mean that we have to keep on paying it. That also goes for the EU stability funds and any bailouts we have paid into in the past. Those are EU responsibilities. We fork up when we have the responsibility. When we leave we do not and we don't pay.

Notably they pay _nothing_ to us. £0.00. So they can't really threaten us with the withdrawal of it can they??