A MUST for all Leavers- Rory Stewart on WTO ..

billie they can still trade but on WTO rules. They will in turn treat us as a third country and all our goods will have to go through their customs.

Surely no deal means that the EU would not be able to sell to us?

I wish more politicians, on all sides, would drop the buzzwords and argue as honestly as he does Varian.

Brexit: Rory Stewart says new deal claims 'misleading'

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48526999

Wow, a masterclass in ignoring evidence laid bare in the last few posts. None of you know if I am a leaver or remainer, you assume this from questions and answers I post. Whether these reflect my true opinion is my gift and I have not given it.
Secondly you have evidently not read or understood the content of my previous posts. Afghanistan and waste buckets are no way representative. Read the reality.

GG3 unfortunately I agree with you. I cannot get answers from leavers here or on Twitter, just soundbites. The nearest I have is this: twitter.com/itsVinodPrakash/status/1135751179823177728/photo/1

Pascal Lamy, former head of the WTO, explains what the UK's position would be post Brexit. This clip, being as it is from before the 2016 referendum, doesn't assume a UK working on WTO terms only, because before the ref. no-one was suggesting that we did anything so stupid as leave with no deal at all and trade solely on WTO.

mobile.twitter.com/brexitjoke/status/1135487494932312065

Varian and annodomini you are both right. We are too polite with these lazy comments.

I do not feel the need to do further research because, from what I have learned, he is right. If you feel he has got something wrong Joelsnan you need to be both explicit and put the counter argument. I'm afraid I have long since stopped seeing answers such as yours as either clever or informative.

I will take no proper answer to what he says as proof that you just don't know but would risk out futures regardless.

Varian, you should know by now that evidence means nothing to die-hard leavers. ?

Either Rory Stewart is right on this or he is wrong. Those who claim he's wrong should provide evidence to back up their view.

GGMK3
If you think he is wrong in the way he explains WTO, tell us in similar detail why. Weasal words have ceased to cut it

I agree he tried his best, but failed on content, he has got the kind of face you want to believe or he may cry. However, if you need to understand where he is wrong, I suggest you do some detailed research for yourself as you appear to ignore the evidence of others.

Another report out today although of course it is from 'Experts.

Brexit uncertainty continues to take toll on manufacturers - Make UK/BDO survey
03 June 2019

Economic lunacy of ‘No Deal’ scenario must be avoided at all costs

Key findings:
Domestic and export orders continue to weaken
Gap between output and orders increased
Export orders remain at weakest levels since referendum
Investment intentions paralysed
Manufacturing forecast to grow just 0.2% in 2019, 0.8% in 2020
www.bdo.co.uk/en-gb/news/2019/brexit-uncertainty-continues-to-take-toll-on-manufacturers-make-uk-bdo-survey?fbclid=IwAR0ksrhT3MLOK4pqrfx7OHLCAwFiZmu8WQWCRDawqQfvgCqpHb85nFmeTBE

... GGMK3's habitual derisory and shameful comments regarding Leavers make discussion with him/her a complete and utter waste of time. (Sun 02-Jun-19 23:25:09)

Day 6 I didn't mention "Leavers" in that post, just the words being used.

I don't know if you have read Nineteen Eighty-Four but, right at the very end, in an appendix, written as if it is well after the period in the book, it suggests Big Brother was defeated not by people but by the very language they tried to impose.

Newspeak was, and what we see now is, designed to narrow thinking. We have seen its possible defeat with NF and SJ using the quote about 'losers consent' and trying to twist its meaning. People will simply not agree - there are too many words in "Democracy depends on the consent of the loser" and it is possible to contradict their "foot on the face of humanity" explanation.

Way back then Orwell said " “In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible,”, so I am not sure why I am suddenly being attacked as being "beyond the pale" or "derisory and shameful". Perhaps that is what happens at the moment when you speak the truth.

Going back to the OP, the one thing Rory Stewart if doing is discussing - not using propaganda techniques but actually talking about the issues. I may not like his politics but I take my hat off to him for his attempts to bring some honesty into the debate. If you think he is wrong in the way he explains WTO, tell us in similar detail why. Weasal words have ceased to cut it.

Day6 I can't sign in to that link, as others have said please tell me who wrote it and when.

Author not link. Link is worthless as behind a paywall.

But you would rather "waste" time criticising me Day6, than give a link to the so called FT article and it's date, or explain the meaning of the leavers much loved Newspeak.

I totally agree Joelsnan.

GGMK3's habitual derisory and shameful comments regarding Leavers make discussion with him/her a complete and utter waste of time.

Hyperbole.
Again.

GGMK3
Goodness, didn't know you were into surveillance.

Your comments really are beyond the pale.

I don't have access to the FT, Day6. Would you be so kind as to tell us who wrote the piece you are quoting from?

The one thing I would say about Rory Stewart is that while recognising he has many views I don't agree with, is that he really doesn't go in for scaremongering sensationalist sound bites.

That, of course, will be the very reason why the obvious few did not even bother to watch the video before trying to put it down. There is that lovely quote which seems to apply to some of the posts above "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."

If you want to be seen as the lowest common denominator in the discussions about belonging or not belonging to the EU keep believing in the simplistic "Brexit means Brexit", "Leave means Leave", etc., which some don't yet seem to have realised mean absolutely nothing - they do not have a meaning. They are the equivalent to the mind control of Nineteen Eighty-Four.

From The Financial Times.

www.ft.com/content/82902f9e-f4a4-11e8-938a-543765795f99

"As the government’s fear-mongering ratchets up, we are hearing all sorts of myths about the WTO presenting a “cliff edge”. Nothing could be further from the truth. WTO rules are international laws that regulate trading relationships of its 164 member states and 98 per cent of global trade. This is not some deadly regime we all need to be afraid of. In fact British businesses that currently trade with American companies are making use of these rules. They have not “crashed out” of anything."

"Far from it. America is our biggest national export market and we run a surplus on our trade with them while having a huge deficit when it comes to EU trade. In fact, our exports to non-EU countries we trade on WTO terms with have grown three times as fast as our trade with EU countries since the mid-2000s. The US, China and India are among the EU’s biggest trading partners — and they trade on WTO terms as well."

"Opting for a “World Trade Deal” would prevent the EU from discriminating against UK businesses. The EU would not be able to set tariffs on our goods that are higher than those they impose on other countries. Arbitrary health and safety inspections at borders would not be lawful and the WTO’s new “ Trade Facilitation Agreement” would require the EU to maintain borders which are as frictionless as possible, using all the modern technologies at its disposal."

"Leaving the EU under these terms would be much better for our future prosperity than agreeing to Mrs May’s withdrawal agreement."

Well, Mrs May's WA is all but dead and buried. I believe substantial negotiations should have taken place by now to ensure that we can have a seamless and smooth transition to WTO rules once we wave bye-bye to Brussels and the EU.

There is no "crashing out". This is the language of Project fear. It sounds dramatic and scary, which is the aim of remainers.

For those with the time or will, here is a link to WTO GATT article 24 with some explanation. Maybe all prospective PM's should read and fully understand this before expousing their misinformation.

www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/ai17_e/gatt1994_art24_jur.pdf

Jura2
UK is unable to make trading agreements with other countries using WTO terms to form the agreements (which most other non EU countries use) until we fully leave EU, however informal trading talks are already taking place with a number of countries and, has been shown by WTO, providing these agreements comply with GATT section 24, they can be approved within days, so in many cases trade would continue as normal. The only real issue is the trading agreement with EU. If all the non trade issues were stripped out of the discussions, this agreement could also go through in days.
Afghanistan! FGS!

Did you take the time to listen to him- yes, Afghanistan as one of the only countries in the world who would trade on WTO rules only.