Lord Elpers wrote:
I note you have not answered my questions.
You questioned my stat so it is reasonable to ask you to put your forward your figures.
To begin with, you did not differentiate between trade in Goods and trade in Services.
In terms of trade in goods the UK has had a balance of trade
deficit with both the EU
and the rest of the world for quite some time.
Services are what puts us in trade surplus with the rest of the world.
I have already said that the services area needs the same attention to harmonisation that the EU gave to the trade in goods.
Secondly, for some reason, you chose a random stat from 2011 (or nearly, it looked about £2bn out to me) rather than either a trend view over a longer period of time or more recent numbers.
We operate on a more level playing field in the EU these days, if Germany can produce a goods surplus, so could we ... but that would mean being more German in our approach and, going by your comments so far, I can't see that sitting comfortably with you.
Lord Elpers wrote:
I also asked you to state the net monetary benefit or otherwise p.a. to the UK of current EU membership, as you claim to be aware of where to find all the facts?
I have never claimed to be aware of all the facts.
Perhaps you can oblige?
How you are going to monetarise the EUs geopolitical clout remains to be seen.
Lord Elpers wrote:
The UK is about to (or already has) overtaken France as the 3rd largest economy in the EU and a major net contributor financially.
As contributions are calculated by the richest putting the most in and the poorest getting the most development out, that is not a surprise.
Lord Elpers wrote:
Don't confuse the argument by comparing our situation with Norway, Switzerland or Turkey. Our position is totally different and the EU would be so much weaker without us and the EU needs to keep open acces to our market.
At present there are a limited number of ways that a non-EU state can trade with the EU, by mentioning Norway/Turkey/Switzerland I was considering whether we could emulate any of the current examples.
Regarding your assertion that the EU needs us more than we need them ... about half of our exports go to the EU, but only about 20% of the EU's exports come to us ... we must also remember that the impact of possible loss of that 20% is diluted by a spread of up to 26 countries ... who has the whip hand?
Lord Elpers wrote:
Do you agree that our PM should try and improve the UK's terms of membership as a time when the EU embarks on a course of change its self?
Of course .... but that would naturally be part of the discussions, as it has been with all treaties preceding it ... it doesn't require a) Advance veto (as Cameron tried and failed with before, and excluded himself from discussions) or b) Posturing and a promise of a referendum years ahead, as a sop to the Bill Cash tendency, whilst destabilising inward investment as investors try to second-guess the outcome of a referendum to decide whether the terms gained were satisfactory, when those desired terms have not yet been articulated in anything other than a vehement but vague desire for repatriation of powers. (I am in favour of subsidiarity where it is warranted ... so might be happy to see specifics be discussed).
Lord Elpers wrote:
And as you missed the PM's speech and questions at Davros this morning, have you managed to hear it all yet?
Who said I missed it?
Lord Elpers wrote:
We are the 6th largest trading nation in the world with 63 free trade agreements with other non-EU countries and with a heathly trade surplus unlike the large and growing deficit with the EU.
Whoah there, those free trade agreements were all negotiated and put in place by the EU.
Lord Elpers wrote:
As an autonimous trading nation we would be free to open up free trade with the US and if we were to join in a new EFTA arrangement whilst remaining ‘associated but not absorbed’ as Churchill put it, we could prosper exponentially into the future.
Earlier you said that I was confusing the argument by mentioning Norway and other traders into the EU but now you bring up EFTA, of which Norway is one of the the biggest economies, if not the biggest.
I had chosen Norway as an example precisely because it is an EFTA member.
Would you have preferred me to compare the UK with Lichtenstein or Iceland?
