Forums Forums National News Trade deficit

I wasn't, but now you mention it, some of the unjustified EU imposed austerity measures on Ireland are typical of why I don't trust the EU, there was absolutely no need other than dominance.

Germany have followed their planned post-war path almost to the letter, its about 25% behind schedule which isn't bad at all compared to any other long term Government project.

The Fourth Reich is here and we are blindly letting it progress. Germany has taken financial control, border control and currency control. How many EU countries really wanted the migrant intake, did they get any real say in the matter - no!

Fourth Reich indeed!

Even if it were true, its done more for the traditionally deprived areas of the UK than our own government.

As to the EU imposing restrictions on Ireland, you cannot really blame them wanting to ensure that money lent was spent on sensible things, not frittered away on garden bridges across the Liffey. It seems to have done the trick anyway. The patient seems well again.

And I admire Germany's response to migrants many of whom were driven out of their homes by UK supplied weapons.Would that our own government had the same humane attitude to folk in desperate need.

Not at all, apart from Merseyside and a couple of other small pockets, the various Governments have rebuilt a lot of the country since WW2, it generally progressed from city are to city area, you can't do everything the same day. Unfortunately Merseyside never put a strong enough case forward to get higher priority despite suffering so much damage during WW2.

One thing that slowed us down was we had to concentrate on getting Germany back on its feet as a priority. WW2 was caused primarily by the restrictions put on Germany after WW1 whereby Germany could not possibly recover. It was agreed (probably quite rightly) that to prevent a recurrence of this that Germany had to be rebuilt and placed into a position whereby it could become successful again. Various people in Germany realised this and took full advantage of it by stealth.

The EU only imposes another level of restrictions on rebuilding the UK, all the proposals and decisions come from UK Council's and the UK Government but the EU rules veto some. Furthermore the EU takes a cut out of that same money which originates from the UK.

Yes there will have been some benefits gained from the EU but these could well be very minor compared to what could have happened.

The EU acts the same as a bank manager does for a business, the business wants to do something so wants funds from the bank, the bank restricts those funds and also takes a cut. You could argue the bank does some good but I think you will find far more find it unduly restrictive most of the time.

We have now generated yet another layer of political interference in the form of City Regions, the hierarchy is getting far too long. Local Councils should be able to apply for funding directly to the (one) Government, that way there will be two authorities in the chain to prevent basic roguery and both are directly answerable to the general public.

The Westminster governments have had YEARS to get other cities up to a comparable level to London, and they have failed. Merseyside in particular was written off under Thatcher.

But we shall see. It looks very much as if we are heading for no agreement whatsoever, and God knows how we will manage then. It has disaster written all over it. I think you are deluded to imagine it will be better. It quite obviously won't be.

No doubt it will all be the EU's fault in the Mail and the Barmy Express and from various government sources. And no doubt most brexiteers will prefer that explanation to their own foolishness in voting to leave.

The EU want a trade deal but wouldn't negotiate it, very simple fact. Either you are in for negotiations or out, the EU made their choice clear. Effectively they wanted us to pay them a bribe to allow us to negotiate.

Balls in the EU's court now, either negotiate or walk away.

The EU has made no proposals other than "give us a wad of cash".

The EU argue both ways on the Irish border - "there must be a border between Ireland and the UK but there can't be a border", their last ditch blockage to ensure a stalemate decision.

They have wasted so much of our money in the past and now they continue. We are the second largest contributor to the EU yet we aren't the second by population (3rd) or area (11th?), we were a great cash-cow for Germany's ambitions.

I am not sure the EU cares whether we get a trade deal or not. It is something quite separate from brexit, which can come later, and is far less important to them than to us. At worse, it affects only 16% of their exports, and any tariffs we impose will probably result in a reduction by less than this. They are no doubt well aware that tariff barriers will result in our banking industry moving to them, and many of our manufacturers following. Overall the effect on them will be neutral. I don't think they would worry too much if there were no trade agreement.

They want, first, to establish agreement on the status of foreigners (on either side), how the northern Ireland border will be handled, and for the UK to pay its share of commitments made before the referendum. Perfectly reasonable to want to do these three essential parts of the separation first before moving on to future trading relations.

If the UK refuses to engage with these three matters and come to some agreement acceptable to both sides, then there will be no trade discussions. You cannot blame the EU for this sort of stupid refusal to discuss these matters first. You cannot, surely, believe that the departure of the UK - however it is done - will have much effect on the burgeoning EU economy.

It will have a very bad effect on us, I believe, even if our departure is handled well. If - as is clearly the case - it is done badly, it will be far, far worse. A 'no deal' departure would be a disaster, and if it happens there is nobody to blame for it but us.

16% of the whole EU but have you seen how it affects individual countries and their sectors. Poland is an obvious second leaver and the UK could do a lot of trade with them.

Poland seems only to be an obvious 'leaver' only to extreme brexiteers. The Deranged Express got very excited about it some time back, but I doubt anyone else took it seriously. Leavers in Poland amount to one or two percent.

As Poland's GDP is less than a fifth of the UK's, I think 'a lot of business' between the two countries would be overegging it a little, at least from the UK's point of view', even if it DID happen!

I was interested to hear of a Yougov poll this week, which put support for brexit in the UK at a record low of 42%. Those who think it is a bad idea amount to 47%. Support for it is clearly waning and given the continuing government chaos over it, and a hard brexit becoming ever more likely, I would not be at all surprised to find it not happening, followed by a dull thud as Farage's head explodes.

Yes, I meant from Poland's point of view. If they did leave they would be able to trade with us and not be quite so isolated.

Poland receives a lot of financial support from the EU which they won't want to give up, but they are also feeling that the EU are controlling them using that financial support. The money won't keep coming for much longer, the new waves of members will dilute the pool of money available, as will Brexit.

There are only around nine net benefactors and eighteen net beneficiaries, Poland is by far the biggest beneficiary receiving more than twice the next beneficiary, the UK is second largest benefactor.

Amazingly, Italy is the fourth (and fairly large) biggest benefactor despite their financial situation, I can't see them being happy with that much longer.