Brexit discussion thread IV

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

The pro-Brexit talking heads continually go back to this line about cheaper foods and clothing. But isn't all EU trade zero tariffs and zero customs? So to get cheaper they must be getting it from somewhere else which normally (but not always) means lower quality. The most extreme example being GMO meat from the US.

But the UK public have, as far as I recall, consistently said they don't want lower standards, so I'm not sure how they square that.

And how is that lower pricing going to impact on the domestic farmers (in this instance). Of course they will have lower standards too so their costs will fall, but will they be able to compete against the influx of cheaper products?

Well, we won't know much for a very long time. According to JRM, the benefits of Brexit might not be reaped for 50 years. Still, tally ho.

Professor Moriarty

trellheim wrote: »

slight link error

here's the actual https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/728135/THE_FUTURE_UK-EU_RELATIONSHIP.pdf

Edit : everyone take a few mins to have a read its actually written with some clarity

It took me three minutes. It's a bit like a child's letter to Santa.

brickster69

listermint wrote: »

brickster69 wrote: »

The article was talking about the Irish Beef sector. The UK  Beef industry can only supply 60% of demand hence the need to import.

But we already know there will be problems with Irish Beef to the UK, So we are already looking at the no Tariff European market and markets further afield.

Ireland doesnt have its head buried in the sand with Brexit on the contrary we have been expecting british intransigence because we are used to it.

Of course, everyone has to do that in this situation. When one door closes another opens. But to suggest have some do on this thread the UK will be going back to the rationing era is absurd. 
Normally in any business the buyer is king not the seller because it is easier to find sellers than buyers.

listermint

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It took me three minutes. It's a bit like a child's letter to Santa.

Dear Santa,

Thank you for the gifts, but whilst they are not bad they could be better.

Can you open up all my neighbours back doors so i can have their gifts too.


Thank you

HMG

murphaph

Water John wrote: »

The two big agri worries are beef and cheddar. Others eat beef but there is no alternative market for cheddar. We make cheddar to mainly get the whey, oddly enough.

There are markets to tap. I moved to Germany 10 years ago. When I arrived you could buy Kerrygold butter in most shops but Cheddar was only available in specialist shops. Then Kerry group started pushing cheddar and nowadays it's available in every supermarket more or less. Sometimes it's a UK cheddar but if tariffs kick in that would be displaced by Irish product.

Nowadays Kerry group also sells yoghurt here. The emphasis is always on the green grass producing high quality milk. I genuinely believe Irish companies can come out stronger if compelled to expand into the massive continental market.

WomanSkirtFan8

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It took me three minutes. It's a bit like a child's letter to Santa.

I just had a quick skim through it there and i agree completely. It looks extremely aspirational to me. The question now is how much of that can actually be delievered in reality?

Leroy42

Why are they looking to keep services out of the deal? One of the problems with the white paper, as I understand it, is that whilst the UK has agreed to A customs union for goods, they are kept services out which the EU cannot agree to (or won't).

Bearing in mind that the city of London is such a powerhouse at the moment, what is so terrible about services with the EU?

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why are they looking to keep services out of the deal? One of the problems with the white paper, as I understand it, is that whilst the UK has agreed to A customs union for goods, they are kept services out which the EU cannot agree to (or won't).

Bearing in mind that the city of London is such a powerhouse at the moment, what is so terrible about services with the EU?

Customs union means goods. Single market means goods and services. They're trying to get the goods I guess.

Bit cynical

ambro25 wrote: »

I think diametrically opposite.

Because unity of the EU27 has been the EU’s steadiest line throughout the UK’s Brexit experiment, and nothing would undermine that argument and ideology -and vindicate the hardline Leavers- more than what you suggest.

Politically, the EU simply can’t afford not to help Ireland.

They can say that they have already been helping Ireland by refusing to countenance any change to the existing open border, at Ireland's request. They can argue that if this strategy now leads to a "no deal" scenario and a much harder border, why should the other EU27 have to sort out Ireland's problems. After all, Ireland wanted no deal for the UK unless it was going to be a completely open border. This strategy was certainly supported by posters on this forum.

However it is still possible that there will be some sort of capitulation on the part of the Brits. I think it is quite likely that the UK will opt to stay in the EEA but stay outside the customs union. They will still have to obey some of the EU laws and remain in the jurisdiction of the ECJ but they will have the ability to do trade deals abroad. There will still need to be some sort of border with the North but because there is free trade in goods, issues of smuggling are much reduced.

Silent Running

Bit cynical wrote: »

They can say that they have already been helping Ireland by refusing to countenance any change to the existing open border, at Ireland's request. They can argue that if this strategy now leads to a "no deal" scenario and a much harder border, why should the other EU27 have to sort out Ireland's problems. After all, Ireland wanted no deal for the UK unless it was going to be a completely open border. This strategy was certainly supported by posters on this forum.

However it is still possible that there will be some sort of capitulation on the part of the Brits. I think it is quite likely that the UK will opt to stay in the EEA but stay outside the customs union. They will still have to obey some of the EU laws and remain in the jurisdiction of the ECJ but they will have the ability to do trade deals abroad. There will still need to be some sort of border with the North but because there is free trade in goods, issues of smuggling are much reduced.

Now all they would have to do is get that past Mogg and co. I wouldn't be holding my breath.

kunst nugget

Silent Running wrote: »

Now all they would have to do is get that past Mogg and co. I wouldn't be holding my breath.

That's exactly their tactic. They've given the EU their white paper and now they're going to hold their breath until Barnier and his ilk agree to their terms.

It's a cunning plan…

Bit cynical

Silent Running wrote: »

Now all they would have to do is get that past Mogg and co. I wouldn't be holding my breath.

Then hard border it is for Ireland.

kowtow

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

It will take time for new supply chains to be established, neither will food from another continent be as fresh as next door ,

The uk are leaving one way or another that much was obvious for 2 years now. What Irish food producers need to do is start a massive advertising campaign in uk emphasising the quality of Irish food which follows high quality standards vs chlorinated food from other places.

I'm always a bit bored of the chlorinated thing.

A good deal of the vegetables and salad you eat are chlorinated routinely!

Other than that we do already have big campaigns about the quality of our food, but our own factories have put our offerings squarely in the low grade / low price cuts section of the supermarkets - in fact we breed and produce animals specifically to fit in these specifications - so it would take us a few years to change!!

mickoneill31

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why are they looking to keep services out of the deal? One of the problems with the white paper, as I understand it, is that whilst the UK has agreed to A customs union for goods, they are kept services out which the EU cannot agree to (or won't).

Bearing in mind that the city of London is such a powerhouse at the moment, what is so terrible about services with the EU?

Nothing. But why should the EU accommodate the UK? If theres a benefit to the EU then grand, if there isn't then its up for negotiation. Its just that the UK negotiators are still negotiating with themselves.

mickoneill31

kowtow wrote: »

A good deal of the vegetables and salad you eat are chlorinated routinely!

I thought the main sticking point of chlorinated chicken was that you didn't have to look as much after the animal when it was alive. Isn't it that it's better to keep the chicken healthy while it's alive rather than just killing the bugs after it's dead.
I don't think that's the same argument for salad.

Gerry T

mickoneill31 wrote:

I thought the main sticking point of chlorinated chicken was that you didn't have to look as much after the animal when it was alive. Isn't it that it's better to keep the chicken healthy while it's alive rather than just killing the bugs after it's dead. I don't think that's the same argument for salad.

Exactly and tests done by a UK lab found the clorination cleaning didn't kill salmonella so proper cooking of USA chicken is needed.

kowtow

mickoneill31 wrote: »

I thought the main sticking point of chlorinated chicken was that you didn't have to look as much after the animal when it was alive. Isn't it that it's better to keep the chicken healthy while it's alive rather than just killing the bugs after it's dead.
I don't think that's the same argument for salad.

I get your point and you are right, it is what it is covering up which matters. For vegetables this is true too.. because it reduces the amount of control that has to be exercised in soils and in washing soils off in the field, just as in the US it permits different treatments at slaughter primarily rather than in the poultry house.

If you take Campylobacter related gastroenteritis as an indicator of the health of chicken as sold to the population, which I think is a fair if rough approach, then actually countries like Germany and Denmark seem to have up to three times the incidence at present as the United States does regardless of the claims we make for higher food standards. Interestingly Canada is double the US - I wonder if they have chlorine washing there?

Imreoir2

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why are they looking to keep services out of the deal? One of the problems with the white paper, as I understand it, is that whilst the UK has agreed to A customs union for goods, they are kept services out which the EU cannot agree to (or won't).

Bearing in mind that the city of London is such a powerhouse at the moment, what is so terrible about services with the EU?

There is nothing really wrong with the EU when it comes to services. It's just that the HMG had to face the reality that goods were going to be a total nightmare and as such had to stay close to the EU there. There is no practical reason that they could not do likewise with services, but then you are getting much to close to BINO territory for the likes of JRM.

Imreoir2

Bit cynical wrote: »

They can say that they have already been helping Ireland by refusing to countenance any change to the existing open border, at Ireland's request. They can argue that if this strategy now leads to a "no deal" scenario and a much harder border, why should the other EU27 have to sort out Ireland's problems. After all, Ireland wanted no deal for the UK unless it was going to be a completely open border. This strategy was certainly supported by posters on this forum.

However it is still possible that there will be some sort of capitulation on the part of the Brits. I think it is quite likely that the UK will opt to stay in the EEA but stay outside the customs union. They will still have to obey some of the EU laws and remain in the jurisdiction of the ECJ but they will have the ability to do trade deals abroad. There will still need to be some sort of border with the North but because there is free trade in goods, issues of smuggling are much reduced.

The main reason is that the EU is an enterprise in realism. They could turn around to Ireland an say, well you got what you wanted, good luck with that now, but this would not be in keeping with the values of the Union, that's not how it works. The whole point of the EU is to bring added value to it's members. It is not of value to the EU to see Ireland made weaker and less stable because of the challenges of a hard border. They wont write us a blank cheque, but they will do what they can to minimize the hardship.

kowtow

Imreoir2 wrote: »

There is nothing really wrong with the EU when it comes to services. It's just that the HMG had to face the reality that goods were going to be a total nightmare and as such had to stay close to the EU there. There is no practical reason that they could not do likewise with services, but then you are getting much to close to BINO territory for the likes of JRM.

Or there is more money in permitting a bit regulatory divergence in the City than in all the free trade deals for battery caged widgets and chlorine washed bicycle wheels put together.

Never forget the greatest piece of regulatory divergence in history, the euro-dollar.

Imreoir2

kowtow wrote: »

Or there is more money in permitting a bit regulatory divergence in the City than in all the free trade deals for battery caged widgets and chlorine washed bicycle wheels put together.

Never forget the greatest piece of regulatory divergence in history, the euro-dollar.

No, the reality is that the further away the UK gets from the EU, the worse the economic hit for the UK. If they were to stay in the SM and CU, there would be a hit, but a smaller one. Leaving the SM and CU in favor of a customs arrangement for goods only will result in a much greater hit to the UK economy. A no-deal outcome dwarfs them all when it comes to the damage it will do, obviously.

Leroy42

Imreoir2 wrote: »

No, the reality is that the further away the UK gets from the EU, the worse the economic hit for the UK. If they were to stay in the SM and CU, there would be a hit, but a smaller one. Leaving the SM and CU in favor of a customs arrangement for goods only will result in a much greater hit to the UK economy. A no-deal outcome dwarfs them all when it comes to the damage it will do, obviously.

It is only obvious if you happen to listen to experts or the civil service.

To the likes of JRM, IDS and Boris it isn't obvious at all. In fact, as the Tory MP said on Sky News yesterday, there will be £2,300 pa savings per family from lower food and clothing prices once they leave the EU.

Whats not to like about that?

Trasna1

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The main reason is that the EU is an enterprise in realism. They could turn around to Ireland an say, well you got what you wanted, good luck with that now, but this would not be in keeping with the values of the Union, that's not how it works. The whole point of the EU is to bring added value to it's members. It is not of value to the EU to see Ireland made weaker and less stable because of the challenges of a hard border. They wont write us a blank cheque, but they will do what they can to minimize the hardship.

That is somewhat wishful thinking. The EU pretty much abandoned Greece to deal with the refugees until they were overwhelmed.

The Greeks really should have gotten more help and it should have been tied into debt relief for them too.

When it comes to action and/or money rather than support for policy (which is cheap AND suits wider EU objectives) that kind of help might not be so readily available.

trellheim

Reminder : Joint report from December - what the backstop actually is . This is what got the negotiations out of Phase 1 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf Para 49-56 for NI

Bit cynical

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The main reason is that the EU is an enterprise in realism. They could turn around to Ireland an say, well you got what you wanted, good luck with that now, but this would not be in keeping with the values of the Union, that's not how it works. The whole point of the EU is to bring added value to it's members. It is not of value to the EU to see Ireland made weaker and less stable because of the challenges of a hard border. They wont write us a blank cheque, but they will do what they can to minimize the hardship.

Well the forecasts are that Ireland will lose about 4% of its GDP over the ten years after Brexit. Assuming there's some truth to that, would you care to provide a figure for the sort of compensation we'll see from the EU?

My own view is that the EU27 will have a lot of private sympathy for Ireland but that it won't translate into money. Part of the problem will be that Ireland never officially voiced concern at the EU's strategy as it was ongoing. We fully backed the strategy that there could be no deal unless the Irish border issue was fully resolved. Only then could trade discussions begin. But the UK leaving the customs union meant that a fully open border was impossible. Therefore no trade discussions were possible.

I have sympathy for our Government in this. Once the EU decided to make the border a red line issue, what could Varadkar do but support it? To do otherwise would be to seem as if he did not care about the Irish border even though the strategy nevertheless put the border itself at much greater risk. Of course Varadkar can say that if the strategy fails, then the UK are to blame for exercising their right to leave the EU and its institutions, not Ireland's policy.


But having said all this, I still think it is likely that there will be some sort of capitulation on the UK side. This is what our strategy depends on for its success. Like I said, this will take the form of the UK leaving the customs union but staying in the EEA.

Bit cynical

Bit cynical wrote: »

But having said all this, I still think it is likely that there will be some sort of capitulation on the UK side. This is what our strategy depends on for its success. Like I said, this will take the form of the UK leaving the customs union but staying in the EEA.

Wonder if they might be flexible and allow the border to be re-designated for structural funds. Not too long since the BMW region all fit into it.

Capt'n Midnight

Bit cynical wrote: »

Well the forecasts are that Ireland will lose about 4% of its GDP over the ten years after Brexit. Assuming there's some truth to that, would you care to provide a figure for the sort of compensation we'll see from the EU?

The UK need to realise that it's not going to be a disaster for us. And the other EU/EFTA countries will be affected even less.

NI would qualify for EU grants. Finally get the A6 sorted.

Growth last year was 7.2% so it's about 7 months worth of missed growth rather than a contraction. FF and FG have pretty much pushed back an election till after Brexit.

NI had negative growth first quarter so their 12% hit won't be sorted in a few months.

It's a united front and we doing well enough economically to ignore any carrot the UK is likely to actually give.

flutered

Leroy42 wrote: »

What is the purpose of him saying that? Does he think that the German guy is going to "oh really, well we wouldn't want the UK to think the EU is a terrible idea,, that might end up with you guys leaving...oh wait"

Its a pointless, petty little remark, but shows the UK for the position they have. They have already started to try to work out how to blame someone else for this mess.

Their decision, yet it is other people to blame.

they have people going to most eu countrys this week, in an effort to side step barnier, they now see him as the devil articulate

Anita Blow

Has there been any talk of how health services will be impacted by a border? The HSE half-funded a cancer centre in Derry for to serve the north-west on both sides of the border, and both Derry & Belfast send patients down to Dublin for certain surgeries. This is ignoring also that ambulances often operate across the border with EDs in the border counties accepting patients from both sides

LeinsterDub

kowtow wrote: »

I'm always a bit bored of the chlorinated thing.

If chlorinated chicken was the only issue I'm sure some sort of work around could be found the chlorinated thing is just shorthand for hundreds if not thousands of issues like this that have to be worked out in these sort of deals.