Thread

1. neom · 1789557380 · focus · HN ↗

   No idea what this actually means, if it means easier trade, I'm all for anything that reduces our dependency on the yanks, as long as we don't need to be involved in their regulatory or legal regimes. The Americans are no longer our friends, Salut, mes amis Européens. :)

   1. FabCH · 1789557897 · focus · HN ↗

      Carney was asking for freedom of movement of goods, people and services, but without full monetary and legislative integration.

      So, easier to sell stuff, easier to buy stuff, free to just travel to/from Canada/EU and work there with no extra paperwork, free to buy and sell service from Canada to EU and vice versa.

      No Euro, no vote in EU, no ECJ, no payments into each others budget.

      Tighter integration than UK, not as tight as Norway/Switzerland/Iceland.

      Common defense was already agreed anyhow.

      I can tell you this enjoys broad support in the EU public. Although, no joke, a lot of peoples first reaction is: "They need to compete in Eurovision first. Otherwise they should wait for Australia to join first."

      1. mytailorisrich · 1789561198 · focus · HN ↗

         It has to be like Norway/Switzerland/Iceland or more to get any free movements of goods and services. Level of access goes hand in hand with integration in term of regulation, etc.

         "Associate member" actually sounds like TIGHTER integration than Norway/Switzerland/Iceland, which are not members at all. Switzerland is not even in the EEA. It is a very bad term, actually as Canada cannot be an EU member (it isn't in Europe) and if they don't want or can't join the EEA then that leaves a Switzerland-like deal, which is purely bilateral.

         1. b3lvedere · 1789563464 · focus · HN ↗

            “Canada cannot be an EU member (it isn't in Europe)”

            I think the construct of geographical location should not be that big of an issue in these times. Plenty of EU countries have overseas properties.

            1. mytailorisrich · 1789564006 · focus · HN ↗

               It's the law and it should be very strictly enforced because otherwise it'd open the door for the Middle East and North Africa... But I don't think Canada would want to join the EU, it's anti-Trump bluster.

               1. coffeebeqn · 1789567082 · focus · HN ↗

                  Middle eastern or North African countries can’t join because the member states don’t want them to join and they need unanimous agreement. See Turkeys failed bid for example. Even a country with positive general public appeal like Ukraine is very unlikely to join in the next 10 years

                  1. mytailorisrich · 1789567792 · focus · HN ↗

                     Yes, unanimous agreement is required once a country has applied as part of the process of accepting the application.

                     However Article 49 of the European Union states: "Any European State which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union".

                     So Middle Eastern and North African countries (and Canada) cannot apply in the first place.

                     I think Turkey is in the grey area that allows some wriggle room as it spans both Europe and Asia.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.