b'5. Falsehood: A country needs to be in a large trade bloc to be able to negotiate trade agreements. The claim is often made that the UK will beis offset by the negotiating disadvantage that more likely to get new trade agreements withcomes from having to ask for more, because non-EU countries if we do it jointly with thethe big trading bloc has more to sell. So, EU, i.e. in a large trading bloc.where does the balance lie? There can be no a priori assumption as to which factor will This restates the dogma that a big tradingprevail. It will vary from case to case. bloc has inherently greater negotiating strength. It follows the EU will be somewhatMoreover, and this is key, a large trading bloc weakened by Brexit, and the UK will behas to negotiate twice. There is a pre- greatly weakened. Ergo, the UK after Brexit isnegotiation stage; this is to establish a in a weak negotiating position.common position for the main negotiation. It is noteworthy that for the UK in the EU, the This dogma has of course always beenpre-negotiation stage with EU member states part of the raison detre of the EU. Howeverhas always been tougher than the main the assumption is likely wrong in principle.external negotiation, (for example getting the Although it is true that a bigger trading blocUruguay Round launched).can use its market as a negotiating card, this5.1. New Zealand, Iceland and Switzerland It should be noted that all of these small countries all have trade agreements with China. 5.1.1. Case Study: New ZealandTable 42 New Zealands trade agreements CountryGDP (adjustedfor PPP) Australia$1,246 billion Hong Kong$454 billion China$23,160 billion ASEAN (Myanmar, Laos, Vietnam, Thailand, Philippines, Cambodia, $7,930 billion Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Indonesia) Korea$2,029 billion Malaysia$930 billion Singapore$527 billion Thailand$1,234 billionP4 Pacific Four (Brunei Darussalem,Chile, Singapore,New Zealand)$1,199 billionSource: World Development Indicators, World Bank, StatisticsNew Zealand, Trading Economics 201792'