11 ms·
> Yes - but now we can trade with those countries on our terms, not an aggregated decision on how we can trade set by EU legislation. No, we trade with those
by sleavey 6y ago
> Yes - but now we can trade with those countries on our terms, not an aggregated decision on how we can trade set by EU legislation.
No, we trade with those countries on the terms of our trade agreements with those countries, which will more or less be the higher of each partners' standards on each involved aspect (unless there is no trade agreement at all, then it's WTO terms which are the same the EU would get).
The only realistic difference to trade policy being out of the EU is that we can lower our standards with respect to the EU when negotiating deals with third countries. The EU already had some of the highest standards in the world for workers rights, food safety and animal welfare and safety, and I don't think we'll be selflessly rising above those any time soon.
- hardlianotion 6y agoI think parent means that those terms would be negotiated by UK with only UK interests at heart, and not submerged in other countries interests.
- breakfastduck 6y agoYep, preceiely what I was getting at. Our deals with other countries now can, at least, be specialized deals in our own trading interest.
- CraigJPerry 6y agoWhat does that mean in practice? I get that you can save some pages in a trade agreement that would otherwise be dedicated to protecting Spanish oranges (insert any other good produced in EU but not in Britain here) but those pages were never of consequence to Britain anyway.
- krona 6y ago> and I don't think we'll be selflessly rising above those any time soon. The UK has expressed continued interest in raising animal standards beyond those enforced by the EU - the PM even mentioned it in his speech as an example where the UK will go further in regulation.
- TheOtherHobbes 6y agoThe PM also said the NHS would be getting an extra £350m a week as a result of a Brexit dividend. Some people believed that too - although rather fewer believe it now.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- hardlianotion 6y agoIn most cases, UK standards exceed EU standards. Nobody is interested in a race to the bottom.
- Zenst 6y agoThat certainly was so in many areas, less so as they synchronised more over time (many EU standards born out of originating UK ones). But definitely an opportunity to raise standards. Now - how that works if say the UK raises a standard and the impact upon EU imports. For example the EU regulations for `carper dust sucker` was questioned by Dyson for being flawed. Now if the UK does it's own standards that have to be followed for `carpet dust sucker` to be sold in the UK that exceeds EU standards then that could be interesting. So the prospect of a trade war via standards used to limit external competition and sudo subsidise companies in that cunning way - could be something we could well see down the line. That equally could work both ways. Which all makes how this trade agreement is worded in need of scrutiny as rules to protect one way, will also word both ways in such agreements to lock-in standards. Now if they refer to just EU standards as a base and no reference to equally protection to UK standards or whatever is the higher. Small details like that could have some interesting ramifications later on. One thing is for sure - we are still a long way off from a standard global shoe size that is used by all. Which say's little and lots about trade and standards country to country.