What about Liechtenstein?
1 Like
1 Like
No also, a completely imbalanced comparison and conclusion. It is in one sense easy to compare each sides to the novelty of the situation. I was approaching it from international law, where there is simply no equating extraterritoriality with access to a market. They do not equate, extraterritoriality undermines the State system, access to markets goes on everywhere. Better to buy grapes when they are fresh. This is the nub, in reality, the EU are going all in for sour grapes and insisting on incongruities.
In effect they are, as we always expected ransoming the UK for access to the market.
1 Like
Will UK exit from Metric System as well??? Just curious.
2 Likes
Ok. Youāre the lawyer so I bow to your supreme knowledge of international law.
(Although I secretely think itās complete bollocks and not applicable to this trade negotiation) 
2 Likes
I am really not doing that to you. Its just extraterritoriality really is a big deal, market access less so. I wanted us to remain. There is a lot of bollocks to this; and secretly a better way of looking at it is a bitter divorce (in moral not legal terms); she has left him and heāll do anything to make it difficult for her, she does not have a new man yet, but everyone looks at him differently now.
1 Like
The biggest problem from the start is that the UK thinks itās an equal to the EU. Itās not. No endless staring contest can change that.
6 Likes
This raises an interesting point. Weāll stay metric but currently we use Eurocodes for all structural design work in the UK. Highways Agency, Network Rail, and a lot of local councils etc. will all insist that designs are produced to these standards.
Are we going to rewrite all the British Standards now and revert back to them? What about steel sections? Are we going to move towards a UK based section sizes?
This is actually one reason why I voted against it. This is basically implementing changes for the sake of change. It will cost this country a heap of money for no real gain other than the badge that will appear on the front of the document.
2 Likes
Proof enough you should always invest in a good Ruler.
3 Likes
Havenāt we got a great and benevolent one? 
5 Likes
Which one, the ones worth over Ā£80bil for holding down golden chairsā¦dont get me started.
3 Likes
Bigger desk required when using Eurocodes sadly. But there are plus sides to them too.
2 Likes
3 Likes
I wont claim to become a specialist in divination from this, because we all knew.
Covid, China and Iran, No deal Brexit, whats to look forward toā¦the arrival of the Archangel Michael.
3 Likes
Going back to old BS standards would be MUCH safer in my industry.
But weād have a 4 year turn over period as we did last time. By then weāll have adopted the US standard which would make everything crap. My moneyās on us staying the same. Although who holds the rights to CE markings?
2 Likes
Yes, itās funny. The British Standards Kitemark developed a deserved international reputation long before the EU was even a thing but for some reason people expect our standards to fall far below those of the EU. More often than not itās the contrary.
2 Likes
I very much agree here. I would like to note that such emotional matters are perfect if you are populist, such matters are perfect to use rhetorically and politically.
I am not saying that it is of no importance mind you. Fishing rights, well, as a Scandinavian I can understand that, but I also remembered during the Brexit debate, before the vote. People were warned that it would probably not be possible to replicate existing trade deals concerning fishery if the UK was outside the economic union, since the EU block would demand more.
2 Likes
Iād be interested to know how much involvement Norway has on this issue given how influential it is at EEA level on the CFP. Whatās the view in Norway?
1 Like
From a structural design perspective the BS were good and as with many things they were refined and improved to provide more economical designs etc. (BS 449 moved to BS5950 for example). To be fair the Eurocodes were an extension, a further refinement if you will and in many areas they were simplified so that many aspects were simply tabulated saving reams of calculation.
what complicated them was every nation within the EU had a National Annex within which they could specify certain parameters which would form part of that design. These included stuff like safety factors, wind strengths, snow loads etc. That was a whole other book that needed to be on the desk at the same time as the Eurocode itself and the for steel the steel section properties book.
Changing them would be stupid. I suppose you could pull them together into one UK document which would be ok. Where it could be stupid is if the UK decides to start making itās own steel sections. weāre then into reinventing the wheel again because of ego and wanting to be different. Thereās no real scientific reason to do that.
Where it could get interesting is with future refinement of the codes. Will we follow or do our own thing?
i hope so too. We donāt want to go anywhere near US design standards as far as Iām concerned.
4 Likes
Our primary view was that we would do as much as we could, to make it so the EU would not give concessions to the UK that in any way makes EFTA less valuable. When the UK didnāt want to join EFTA, protecting EFTA and making sure that the UK got less economic concessions from the EU than we get for giving up some sovereignty in EFTA, became priority for us.
It is a bit tricky for us this divorce. First we were afraid that the UK would join EFTA, make us less powerful (this fear was due to the rhetoric coming from the pro EFTA guys in the UK, who blatantly said that the UK should join EFTA to rule it), which would not be in our interests, so it became important for us that the UK did not get EFTA + but only EFTA in that case. Now it is about protecting EFTA, making sure that the UK does not in any form or way get a better deal. We have threatened the EU with demanding renegotiation if the Eu concedes too much visa vi what we got.
For Norway none of this is fun, we have regarded the UK to be our closest ally and partner since we had a paradigm shift after the Napoleonic wars. (where it was decided that it is imperative for Norway to always side with the UK in the Great Game, due to trade, as the British blockade lead to starvation) .
For us, this is all a loss and there isnāt an upside.
6 Likes