My Mazamet

Life at № 42 by E.M. Coutinho

First there was the vote. What now? The future of Brexit.

“The widespread assumption that Britain would remain in the EU gave way, after the June referendum, to the antithesis: the prospect of “hard” Brexit. Now, courtesy of Japanese carmaker Nissan, we have glimpsed the possible synthesis: a soft Brexit whereby Britain would retain full membership of the EU single market.

Last week the company announced it would build the next generation of two models at its plant in Sunderland, north-east England. I cannot see how Nissan could have taken that decision without firm commitments from Prime Minister Theresa May, who met Carlos Ghosn, Nissan chief executive, two weeks ago. It makes no sense for the company to build these cars unless they expect to remain in the customs union and the single market.”

Source: The Nissan deal hints at a route for Brexit Britain, FT

Excellent article by Wolfgang Münchau. He lays out the options of what may be going on with the Nissan deal and what that means regarding policy. It’s something people should read because there still seems to be a whole lot of wishful thinking circulating as if it were fact. EUCU (customs union) and financial passporting rights are not small matters that can be dismissed with “it’ll all be all right on the night.”- Consider that they even affect (very) small business owners like me. The EUCU means I’m free to buy artwork all over the EUCU area without paying any extra fees. Then transport it within the union (let’s say for restoration), then choose the absolute best venue for sale. No extra paperwork, no delays, no time wasted. If I want to sell a piece of art in New York or São Paulo… whole other story. Which is why 99.9% of the time I only operate within the EUCU. That’s just one small example. Imagine the effects on industry?

12 comments on “First there was the vote. What now? The future of Brexit.

  1. tildeb
    October 31, 2016

    I think is prescient.


    • It looks like it’s a good way of *faking it* to everyone’s satisfaction 😀

      Liked by 1 person

      • john zande
        October 31, 2016

        You think that’s possible? The European’s don’t appear terribly enthusiastic about letting the UK have its cake and eat it too.


      • The UK wouldn’t be getting its way, at all. As the article points out:
        (regarding the EUCU and common market)
        “I believe that Mrs May will in the end conclude that this is the best option for Britain, not least because this is where events will pull her. Right now she may overestimate the number of Brexit options. Last week she admonished an MP from the opposition Labour party for failing to comprehend that “the way in which you deal with the customs union is not a binary choice”. The MP is right. She is wrong.

        The EU will not offer a sector-specific customs union. It will not split the four freedoms: movement of labour, capital, goods and services. Nor will it allow a split within any of those four. Free movement of cars but not of bicycles is a non-starter.”

        Liked by 2 people

  2. Hariod Brawn
    October 31, 2016

    That’s behind FT’s paywall. Gillian Tett’s Twitter gets you behind it with natty shortlinks, but she’s not yet posted this.


  3. Sirius Bizinus
    October 31, 2016

    I don’t think the article fully delves into the consequences of showing the UK any ultimate mercy when it comes to leaving. By being kind to the UK, it invites other countries to threaten to leave to get what they want. Similarly, any kindness the EU might show logically should only exist to preserve and protect the interests of member nations. Following that reasoning, the net synthesis ought to be an agreement where things get progressively worse for the UK as member nations slowly take actions to find alternative sources for things the UK once supplied.

    Liked by 1 person

    • What it did that I liked was show there aren’t *many possibilities* as the Brexit people kept promising.
      In the customs union means no controls and following EU regulations, out means no controls and then they’re free to do as they please. There’s no in between. The same is true of the common market. There’s no world in which they’re allowed to stay in the common market only in the sectors that are of interest to the UK (the financial industry & services + automotive production)

      Liked by 1 person

      • Sirius Bizinus
        October 31, 2016

        All this fallout makes me think that the Brexit vote was headed by people who didn’t actually want it to happen. That is, it was supposed to be like the Scottish vote to leave the UK: an attempt to get a better bargaining position. Do you think this is possible?

        I don’t know if such a situation would be better or worse, considering that it would mean the UK just conducted a major historical act without having its shit together.

        Liked by 1 person

      • There was some of that, but I think mostly it was a battle for the power of the conservative party. And there were no clear winners.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


This entry was posted on October 31, 2016 by in activism and tagged , , , , .
<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: