When I listen to Merkel, I wonder just who is

[Workingman]

The 50 countries already have a deal with the EU, the EU does not have to negotiate with them. Once we Brexit it is the UK and UK alone which will have to negotiate 50 new trade deals as well as those often mentioned others with the rest of the world.

With CETA we must not forget that it falls way short of the level of access to the single market the UK currently enjoys as a member of the EU – particularly in services and financial services. It does not and never did call for the free movement of people, but then it does not allow Canada free access to all parts of the EU economy - it is a trade deal. It works heavily in favour of the EU and it was never intended for Canada to become part of the EU lite like Switzerland, so nobody is lying.

The only reason it is ever brought up by the Leave fraternity is because it could, might possibly, perhaps be a model for the EU and UK to work under once we Brexit. It is one of a number of models Leavers keep banging on about, but that is because they didn't have a plan to work to if the vote went their way. It appears that they still don't.

[Suff]

so nobody is lying.

Sorry have to challenge that.

The statement from the EU is "There is NO access to the EU market without freedom of movement".

This is not qualified, ever. It is a statement being trotted out constantly as if we'll lose total access to the EU the day we leave.

It's dishonest, it's disingenuous and it should be stopped and they should be made to quality what they mean. Because, clearly, there is access to the EU market without freedom of movement and everyone needs to remember that we don't use the access we have. We trade with the rest of the world instead. So we don't need full access, we just need limited access. Just like CETA.

[Workingman]

Of course there is access to the EU market without freedom of movement.

How do you think the EU trades with the rest of the world? I don't see the EU flooded with Chileans, South Africans, South Koreans, Israelis, Mexicans or people from any of the 34 countries it has free trade deals with.

It also has a whole raft of trade deals of different sorts with the majority of the RoW.

Another EU myth.

[Suff]

Actually not a myth. Take any statement out of the EU in the last month and you will see...

Donald Tusk Freedom of movement is non-negotiable if Britain wants access to single market
No access to single market without freedom of movement, EU tells Britain
European Union leaders have warned that the UK must honour the principle of free movement of people if it wants to retain access to the single market after it leaves the bloc

The only one which qualifies the whole thing is this one, which actually comes from the EU itself and tells the truth.

Juncker, who also confirmed Britain would lose unrestricted access to the internal European Union market if it did not accept free movement of workers

The key word is "unrestricted". We don't want unrestricted access, we don't use unrestricted access today, the EU uses it to get at the UK market. We trade with everyone else because the "unrestricted" bit is a myth. Almost all of the other 27 have created so many "local" regulations that doing business in the EU is a nightmare. Hence why our export trade with the EU shrinks every single year.

All I want is the truth. We can't have "unrestricted" access. Then we can tell them we don't want unrestricted access so they can go shove their freedom of movement. Then we can move on.

[Workingman]

You are conflating two different things; the customs union, the single market and the freedom of movement of workers, goods, capital and services, with trade deals.

The only countries to get full access in all areas are the 28 members of the EU - including the UK until Brexit.

A couple of models spring to mind where you are right about freedom of movement: the Norway and Switzerland models. Those two countries have had to give up ownership (sovereignty) of some of their own laws and rules to gain access to some, but not all, parts of the single market Neither model suits the UK.

Norway might as well be a full member of the EU for all the difference their EEA membership offers. Switzerland's model is a mish-mash of laws rules and regulation that need amending on a constant basis throughout every year.

Almost all of the other 27 have created so many "local" regulations that doing business in the EU is a nightmare.

Which "local" rules are they, who has them, and why and how do they impact the UK so much more than other members? Also, if they do exist, wont they still be there regardless of the type of Brexit we end up with?

By the way the links are from just after the referendum in 2016. They are talking about the single market and freedom of movement and they are telling the truth. The have been telling us the truth with elemental and monotonous regularity ever since.

[Suff]

I'm trying to be clear here.

The EU is saying "access to the market requires freedom of movement". Patently untrue as 50 countries have "access" over and above WTO rules, without freedom of movement.

In reality the EU means "unlimited" access but we are not talking about that.

That is the point which is rubbing me up the wrong way.

As for local rules? Eligibility to register for work and if you can't register you can't work. Rules on how we produce products in the UK which are applied locally but not mandatory in the UK.

There are hundreds of ways to be anti competitive and anti open market. Amongst the EU27 they have used them all. They are not at all like the UK who takes Danish meat products which are killed to a standard which is illegal in the UK. The UK is clueless about how the EU works and how to play it to the hilt. As such we should go away and take our trade with us.

As you say, the hardest of the hard Brexits is the only real path forward.

Whether or not the voters realised what they were doing or not is a moot point. They voted. They make mistakes every 5 years and have to live with them. If they're not sure now, they're going to have to live with it. Well that or vote in Liebor at the Election, possibly with a smattering of Lab Dims to totally gum the works up.

[Workingman]

Patently untrue as 50 countries have "access" over and above WTO rules, without freedom of movement.

But they do not have access to the customs union and single market in all areas, which is what the EU is and has been saying; they have a trade deal in some areas and those areas are limited and not universal to all the trade deals with others. This is what we are likely to get in some form - a bespoke trade deal.

Having said that I do not understand what deal we, the UK, are actually after. You Leavers are very coy on that. Hard Brexit is looking the most likely, but even so it has to be achieved through negotiation. All this crap about spitting dummies or ejecting toys from the pram does not work, as I have pointed out before. We cannot simply walk away, both sides are going to have to compromise on some things, as I am sure they will.

[Suff]

But they do not have access to the customs union and single market in all areas, which is what the EU is and has been saying;

And my point is this. The UK does not need "in all areas" any more than the rest of the world does. So the UK, also, does not need customs union.

Now take a look at that form the other side.

The EU _needs_ full access to the UK market or it will lose huge volumes of trade for some key states. Let's not try and fudge the figures with overall EU trade, the EU is not a single market and does not produce growth from all the countries in the same volume. Pushing the EU back to WTO regulations with the UK would damage EU growth, regardless of the % of EU trade. Let's face it, 18% of EU exports is enough to throw EU growth by about 3%. EU growth??? 1.2%. If the EU do not reach a deal with the UK, then they are in a world of pain.

Now comes the second bit. Because the EU _needs_ full access to the UK the EU also _needs_ customs union. Why? Because nobody is stupid enough to think the UK will sign a trade deal with the EU that allows full access to the UK market whilst the UK only gets limited access to the EU. So if they do a full two way access without customs union, the UK is free to import anything it wants from the rest of the world and export it to the EU without tariffs.

Hence the subtle lies coming out of the EU.

There _can_ be limited access to the EU single market, they have already done it, 50 times. But they need full access to the UK markets and, so, are trying to scare people and businesses into giving them what they want and making the UK pay for it.

Me? I'd give them the finger and walk.

[medsec222]

Giving them the finger seems ok to me. Pity Nigel wasn't on the negotiating team.

[Workingman]

Give them the finger and walk away.

Yeah. Right. Brilliant idea.

They then lock us out by refusing a free trade agreement deal and we join Russia and Belarus as the only European countries without one.

I do not understand what the UK market has that the EU needs 100% access to, but we can get away with only some access to theirs. The only thing I can think of is the Leaver daydream that "they need us more than we need them", which flies in the face of what happened today.

They obviously think that it is nonsense as it took the 27 leaders only fifteen minutes to rubber stamp their negotiating guidelines published a day after May delivered the A50 letter. Those guidelines didn't spring up overnight. They had been worked on and fine tuned and show that the EU was prepared for A50 for some time. Given all that I have to assume that they had advisers looking into as many aspects as could be predicted, including the "they need us..." scenario.

Barnier now has formal approval to negotiate to those guidelines. There are six headings and 26 points and a lot of them negate many of the things Leavers claimed, promised or threatened could not happen.