Talk:Trade negotiation between the UK and the EU: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:31, 1 June 2020

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
	This article was accepted from this draft on 7 March 2020 by reviewer DGG (talk · contribs).

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

European Union Mid‑importance

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics of the United Kingdom High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

International relations: Law Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject International law.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United Kingdom Top‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Economics High‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Globalization

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Globalization, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Globalization on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.GlobalizationWikipedia:WikiProject GlobalizationTemplate:WikiProject GlobalizationGlobalization
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Trade

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trade, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Trade on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TradeWikipedia:WikiProject TradeTemplate:WikiProject TradeTrade
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Already covered?

Why do you say:

"Undue weight to a specific topic that would be relatively minor within the scope of this proposed article."
"Further, this topic is already well covered by existing Brexit articles."

It looks like fisheries issue is a key point for both the EU and Johnson.

Also, which exact article cover both topics: fisheries and Trade deal negotiation between the UK and EU?

Too much weight on the "Fisheries issue"

What's about creating a dedicated article: "Fisheries issues" or "Brexit fisheries issues"?

In fact, fisheries only count for 2871 bytes out of 15081, that's only 18% of the article.

I have trimmed the fisheries part with unimportant things. Fisheries are a big part of the negotiations, as EU have linked them to trade talks, but that one part of the article is better that the others should not harm the article. There is no other articles covering the ongoing negotiations, Brexit negotiations ends in October 2019. ― Hebsen (talk) 00:16, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not trimmed enough for the lead. It will be a flashpoint yes because it has totemic importance in the UK but its economic significance is trivial, <0.5% of trade. The material I deleted belongs in the body. John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also remember that, per wp:LEAD, the lead should only be a summary of the body. So a new sentence needs adding to the lead that actually summarises the fisheries issue. The sentence that I deleted didn't do that. John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The thorny issue of fishing rights has been allocated the most time" EU has no legal duty to give UK trade privileges, document says, The Guardian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.136.209.92 (talk) 17:29, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar, language

For such a high profile topic, this article should have had a lot more copyediting before coming out of draft space. I don't have time to do it now. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Negotiations in April 2020

Some citations in a holding pattern to be used (or not) at the end of April when the month can be summarised

Weizhen Tan (7 April 2020). "Brexit trade deal gets tougher as coronavirus strikes officials on both sides". CNBC. Retrieved 15 April 2020. "In all circumstances it's very difficult to imagine how some sort of large scale trade deal between the U.K. and the EU gets done by the end of the year," said Amanda Sloat, a senior fellow at Brookings Institution.
Daniel Boffey (8 April 2020). "Brexit: UK plan to agree trade deal by December is fantasy, says EU. Leaked letter reveals scale of bloc's inability to function during coronavirus outbreak". The Guardian. Retrieved 15 April 2020.
Jim Brunsden (14 April 2020). "Brexit negotiators try to pick up pieces as talks resume". Financial Times. Retrieved 15 April 2020. The goal of the call will be to fix dates for rounds of virtual negotiations on the future partnership. Videoconference planned for 15/4/20.
"Joint statement by UK and EU negotiators following the videoconference on 15 April 2020" (Press release). Government of the United Kingdom. 15 April 2020. Retrieved 19 April 2020.
Faisal Islam (16 April 2020). "IMF head warns on Brexit trade deal failure". BBC news. Retrieved 19 April 2020. The IMF has suggested [that] the UK and the EU should not "add to uncertainty" from coronavirus by refusing to extend the period to negotiate a post-Brexit trade deal.
William Gritten (Apr 16, 2020). "Brexit: the state of affairs as negotiations restart: Virtual negotiations will begin next week, but time is running out to agree a deal". The Week. Retrieved 19 April 2020. On the table are the crucial issues of the future trade relationship, including security policy, trade rules and the contentious issue of fishing rights. Westminster has yet to produce any proposals on the politically charged issue of access for EU boats to UK waters - and it could yet prove an intractable issue.
Alain Tolhurst (16 April 2020). "Downing Street rules out extension to Brexit transition period - even if Brussels asks for it". Politics Home. Retrieved 19 April 2020. Despite the disruption to the negotiations caused by the coronavirus outbreak, Number 10 has repeatedly said the 12-month implementation period would remain in place.

As we prepare for the next Rounds of negotiations, I want to reiterate the Government's position on the transition period created following our withdrawal from the EU. Transition ends on 31 December this year. We will not ask to extend it. If the EU asks we will say no. Extending would simply prolong negotiations, create even more uncertainty, leave us liable to pay more to the EU in future, and keep us bound by evolving EU laws at a time when we need to control our own affairs. In short, it is not in the UK's interest to extend.
— David Frost^[1]

Philip Oltermann; Daniel Boffey (23 April 2020). "UK making 'impossible demands' over Europol database in EU talks". Retrieved 23 April 2020. As talks between the two sides resumed via video calls this week, Britain's negotiators not only refused to extend the transition period because of the Covid-19 pandemic, but also stated the UK side's eagerness to continue taking part in EU-wide data-sharing arrangements and even expanding their reach.
Katya Adler (24 April 2020). "Brexit: Disappointing progress in trade talks, says Michel Barnier". BBC News. Retrieved 24 April 2020. Fishing, competition rules, the form of an eventual deal and what kind of mechanism would be used for disputes between the two sides. Those have been the screaming areas of disagreement between EU and UK negotiators from the start. And if they can't be resolved, the EU insists there will be no trade deal at all.
Philip Oltermann; Daniel Boffey (24 April 2020). "Britain running down the clock in Brexit talks, says Michel Barnier. EU negotiator expresses frustrations at UK refusal to discuss key issues of transition". Retrieved 24 April 2020. A UK spokesman [...] openly questioned the value of the deal being offered by Brussels when compared with a no-deal outcome.
Daniel Boffey (26 April 2020). "Post-Brexit trade talks with EU on course to fail, Johnson warned. Prime minister expected to press EU leaders to dedicate attention to faltering negotiations". The Guardian.

References

^ Naomi O’Leary (16 April 2020). "Britain rules out extension to clinch post-Brexit deal". Irish Times. Retrieved April 20, 2020.

Negotiations in May

Another round of citation collection, to use or not when writing the section at the end of the month: John Maynard Friedman (talk) 07:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer Rankin (2 May 2020). "UK seeks access to EU health cooperation in light of coronavirus. Government now wants close links with early warning system despite Brexit, source says". The Guardian. Retrieved 2 May 2020.
Jim Brunsden (May 6, 2020). "Brussels and Britain clash over climate conditions in trade deal. EU push to incorporate Paris agreement adds to tension over post-Brexit relationship". Financial Times. Retrieved May 6, 2020.
Jim Brunsden; Sam Fleming (10 May 2020). "Brussels says Britain must engage in full scope of post-Brexit talks. UK will be pushed to take part in detailed discussion on fishing waters and other EU priorities". Financial Times. Retrieved 10 May 2020. Brussels will push Britain to engage in detailed talks on access to UK fishing waters and other top EU priorities this week, warning that the two sides' negotiations on a future relationship will stall unless work on all key topics advances in parallel.
Jennifer Rankin (13 May 2020). "UK-EU trade deal with tariffs impossible in six months, say diplomats. EU officials dismiss Michael Gove's suggestion deal could be done without longer transition". The Guardian. Retrieved 13 May 2020. Giving evidence to the House of Lords EU committee last week, Gove said the government could "modify our ask" by giving up on a "zero-tariff, zero-quota" trade deal in order to keep the UK free from a duty to adhere to European standards on workers' rights, environmental protection and state aid.

Late May

Jennifer Rankin (26 May 2020). "Brexit talks 'risk stalemate' if no progress on key issues. EU sources say union needs to see movement from Britain in terms of fair competition". The Guardian. Retrieved 27 May 2020. Adding to pressure on Barnier not to concede on fishing rights, on Monday night the European parliament's fisheries committee threatened to veto any deal with the UK that did not include a "balanced" agreement on fish quotas, allowing EU fleets continue access to British waters."No fisheries agreement means no post-Brexit agreement," said François-Xavier Bellamy, the French centre-right MEP – and member of Barnier's Les Républicains party – who drew up a report that was adopted with near unanimity by the committee.

Translation to other languages?

This article only exists in English! It should also be translated in the languages of the European Union.

[1] Naomi O’Leary (16 April 2020). "Britain rules out extension to clinch post-Brexit deal". Irish Times. Retrieved April 20, 2020.

[1]

@@ Line 75: / Line 75: @@
 ===Late May  ===
 * {{cite news| url= https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/26/brexit-talks-risk-stalemate-if-no-progress-on-key-issues | title= Brexit talks 'risk stalemate' if no progress on key issues. EU sources say union needs to see movement from Britain in terms of fair competition | work = The Guardian | author= Jennifer Rankin | date= 26 May 2020  | accessdate= 27 May 2020 | quote= Adding to pressure on Barnier not to concede on fishing rights, on Monday night the European parliament’s fisheries committee threatened to veto any deal with the UK that did not include a “balanced” agreement on fish quotas, allowing EU fleets continue access to British waters.“No fisheries agreement means no post-Brexit agreement,” said François-Xavier Bellamy, the French centre-right MEP – and member of Barnier’s ''[[Les Républicains]]'' party – who drew up a report that was adopted with near unanimity by the committee.}}
+== Translation to other languages? ==
+This article only exists in English! It should also be translated in the languages of the European Union.