Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

black forest

reslfj wrote: »

1. The EU need not introduce any blockade. The EU just need collect the WTO required full MFN tariffs and maybe some 'WA non compliance' extra tariffs on arriving UK goods.
This is something the EU Commission knows all about and surely has the support for in both the Council and the EP. )note 1

2. The Irish soft power in the US comes - at least until November - mostly from Congress and is likely focused on breach of the GFA. Much slower process.

note 1: As the WA is an A50 treaty, I believe, the Council will use QMV to agree on non compliance actions ? Not sure the EP needs to be involved at all ?

And if the UK thinks it will be easier on the WTO side this from end of March...


https://twitter.com/philhoganeu/status/1243493283860529152?s=21


Today’s result...


https://twitter.com/eucouncilpress/status/1250404636256862208?s=21


..and the EU press release. The full text as pdf.

Guess who is waiting there already. Phil Hogan and especially Sabine Weyand. This is no coincidence as Sabine Weyand is very well into the matter already. By the way she is still working with Barniers team as well.

In future it can be expected that more and more blocks and/or countries will join this alternative panel. Nobody at the WTO wants their arbitration panel be at the whim of Trump. Who is still blocking the original. The US will just get sidelined.

The tale of the hare and the hedgehog comes to mind.:rolleyes:

Roanmore

This doesn't bode well for the UK negotiating deals in the future.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/16/world/middleeast/coronavirus-antibody-test-uk.html

This is probably why they were so bullish about meeting their test targets in the early days.

reslfj

Leroy42 wrote: »

If they do go out with No Deal, why did they bother to sign the WA at all? It makes absolutely no sense. They could have got No deal last year,....

The UK needed and needs the WA at least as much as NI and Ireland.

• Without an agreed WA, an identical deal would have to be agreed before any trade deal could even be negotiated.
• Without an agreed WA, the GFA would have been broken and all US goodwill gone.
• Without an agreed WA, UK citizens living in EU27 would have been legally in 'uncharted waters'
• Without a WA the money owed by the UK, might have to be paid in an 'uncontrolled' way.
• and
• Until the WA it was the 2017 Parliament and 'No Deal' was outlawed.

Leroy42 wrote: »

What will actually happen if they fail to abide by the WA? Practically I doubt very much, it really isn't something the EU are going to go to 'war' over.
....

The EU27 does not go to war. We do not punish. But the EU doesn't give out any sweets to developed 3. countries.
In case of 'No Trade deal' the EU27 will just follow the rules, check country of origin, limits financial passports (to those needed by the EU27) and collect the WTO required full MFN tariffs in continental EU harbours and airports. It may upward adjust some MFN tariffs too (e.g. on some fish spices).

Leroy42 wrote: »

I don't think any consequences will happen overnight. It will be a slow death. They won't continue to recognise FS passporting. They won't allow UK freight drivers licence to EU (or make it very difficult).

Fast or slowly? - Not immediately, but likely not for very long.
Car factories will likely stay open until replacements are operational or possible as long as current assembly line tooling can produce marketed models.
The current corona economical slow down will however likely generate spare capacity on most continental assembly lines.

UK has pre-EEC international 'freight drivers licences' but not very many (5% max 10% of current traffic). EU will surely respect these licenses.

The EU will allow some FS passporting or equivalencing that support not yet fully EU27 transferred FS. However only for a limited time (e.g. as announced by EU in 2019H2, iirc)

Lars

Seth Brundle

black forest wrote: »

Guess who is waiting there already. Paul Hogan and especially Sabine Weyand. This is no coincidence as Sabine Weyand is very well into the matter already. By the way she is still working with Barniers team as well.

Crocodile Dundee is on the negotiating team?
(The big knife could be handy!)

black forest

You got me. Corrected and highlighted.:D

May be even the Donk would be handy.:pac:

Nody

Well now China looks to be ruled out to cozy up with Trump so no deal with China, no deal with EU and praying that Trump is still around to make a deal with I guess (and it will be a glorious deal, the best deal with the best people, everyone says so).

Britain cannot go back to “business as usual” with China after the end of the coronavirus crisis, foreign secretary Dominic Raab has warned.

Mr Raab said the UK will want an international “deep dive” investigation into the causes of the pandemic and the reason why it was not stopped earlier.

He was speaking amid growing calls from Conservatives for a reset of the UK’s relationship with Beijing, with former Tory leader William Hague saying Britain needs to take a “tougher” line on issues like the involvement of Huawei in 5G telecoms networks in order to avoid becoming strategically dependent on the communist state.

Sam Russell

Nody wrote: »

Well now China looks to be ruled out to cozy up with Trump so no deal with China, no deal with EU and praying that Trump is still around to make a deal with I guess (and it will be a glorious deal, the best deal with the best people, everyone says so).

Britain cannot go back to “business as usual” with China after the end of the coronavirus crisis, foreign secretary Dominic Raab has warned.

Mr Raab said the UK will want an international “deep dive” investigation into the causes of the pandemic and the reason why it was not stopped earlier.

He was speaking amid growing calls from Conservatives for a reset of the UK’s relationship with Beijing, with former Tory leader William Hague saying Britain needs to take a “tougher” line on issues like the involvement of Huawei in 5G telecoms networks in order to avoid becoming strategically dependent on the communist state.
Nody is online now Report Post

This line that Britain does not want to be beholden to a communist state is a bit of a dog whistle.

Who supplies their strategic nuclear weapons to the UK - USA.
Who controls the social media used in the UK- Facebook, Twitter, Google, Microsoft, and Apple, - USA.
Who is going to supply them with chlorinated chicken and hormone fed beef that will soon be available in the UK? - USA.

It appears that anything from the USA is fine, but not China. I wonder where they got that idea from - as it is a beautiful idea, one of the best ideas, everyone thinks so.

Leroy42

The US has many issues, but it is far more open than China. The companies that you deal with in the US are largely, independent of the state itself. Everything in China is controlled by the state.

There is simply no comparison between the two.

Sam Russell

Leroy42 wrote: »

The US has many issues, but it is far more open than China. The companies that you deal with in the US are largely, independent of the state itself. Everything in China is controlled by the state.

There is simply no comparison between the two.

That is largely true but large companies pay lobbyists that have a huge influence on federal Government in the USA and can direct policy decisions that are very beneficial to those companies. That level of influence is such that it even reaches us in Ireland.

Now some of the large tech companies have ploughed their own way against USA Government policy with mixed success, but the older companies, like aerospace, oil, and auto industries have been able to get their own way with their own sectoral interests.

I do not know how much the CCP actually influences Huawei, but is it as much as Boeing has on the FAA? I doubt that Huawei has any influence on the CCP. Huawei is a successful tech company, just as Apple is.

The only thing we can be sure of, is that when the COVID-19 crisis is over, the economic landscape will be very different to the one we had at the start of the year.
Globalisation will be questioned by many in politics, decisions will be made as to how important it is to retain local manufacturing as opposed to importing stuff thousands of kms just to save a few pennies/cents on the retail price while inflating the importers profits.
Today for example Ireland Imported some fruit pickers from Bulgaria, probably using the same excuse that the UK used the other day.
These types of import & export will be seriously questioned by many over the next few weeks, so trade talks will be very different that what they would have been without the COVID-19 pandemic.

Gerry T

Deleted User wrote: »

The only thing we can be sure of, is that when the COVID-19 crisis is over, the economic landscape will be very different to the one we had at the start of the year.
Globalisation will be questioned by many in politics, decisions will be made as to how important it is to retain local manufacturing as opposed to importing stuff thousands of kms just to save a few pennies/cents on the retail price while inflating the importers profits.
Today for example Ireland Imported some fruit pickers from Bulgaria, probably using the same excuse that the UK used the other day.
These types of import & export will be seriously questioned by many over the next few weeks, so trade talks will be very different that what they would have been without the COVID-19 pandemic.

You also have the other side of the coin, as more people will have the opportunity to work at home employers may see the benefit in having that job done in a low cost country. Large multinationals do this all ready with engineering outsourced to India. Now medium size firms may follow suit.

Sam Russell

Deleted User wrote: »

The only thing we can be sure of, is that when the COVID-19 crisis is over, the economic landscape will be very different to the one we had at the start of the year.
Globalisation will be questioned by many in politics, decisions will be made as to how important it is to retain local manufacturing as opposed to importing stuff thousands of kms just to save a few pennies/cents on the retail price while inflating the importers profits.
Today for example Ireland Imported some fruit pickers from Bulgaria, probably using the same excuse that the UK used the other day.
These types of import & export will be seriously questioned by many over the next few weeks, so trade talks will be very different that what they would have been without the COVID-19 pandemic.

That is quite true.

It will actually call into question the whole Brexit argument.

Why revoke a very good local free trade agreement that allows trade to be continued without impediment with a neighbouring market of 440 million consumers only to be replaced with a potential of FTA with distant places across the world like China, SE Asia, South and North America?

The replacement FTA brings with it unknown risks relating to food standards, product standards, and the risk of importing human and animal diseases and the devastating consequences of so doing.

Why would anyone propose such an action?

Why would anyone go ahead with such an action when the world has experienced crisis caused by the current pandemic?

Perhaps someone, who was close to death from the Covid 19 virus, might have a damascene conversion when considering his close brush with mortality.

Perhaps he regrets leaving the Gov in the hands of an idiot that did not know how close Dover was to Calais, or had not read the GFA despite it being fundamental to the backstop he so vehemently opposed, but clearly did not understand the importance of the GFA.

briany

Leroy42 wrote: »

If they do go out with No Deal, why did they bother to sign the WA at all? It makes absolutely no sense. They could have got No deal last year, they will have paid a very high price for what was effectively 11 months of, due to Covid, nothing.

What will actually happen if they fail to abide by the WA? Practically I doubt very much, it really isn't something the EU are going to go to 'war' over. But, just like during the WA negotiations, the EU will stick to the position that any future trade deal needs to first put in place the WA already agreed.

I don't think any consequences will happen overnight. It will be a slow death. They won't continue to recognise FS passporting. They won't allow UK freight drivers licence to EU (or make it very difficult).

Look to the example of the US. They is no 'war' going on, it is (or was until Trump) all very pleasant and conciliatory, but they won't give in on standards.

The Conservatives couldn't have gotten a no-deal by campaigning on that basis, or at least they had little confidence in this approach. In fact there was little chance of them getting an election called if they'd taken a firm no-deal position.

Therefore the plan was to campaign on the basis of a deal. Then feign effort at coming to terms on the actual FTA. When these efforts collapse, blame the EU. No parliamentary mechanism to stop this like there was in the WA negotiations.

It was a mistake for Ireland and the rest of the EU to really believe that UK negotiators were acting in good faith, but at the same time very difficult to call them on it as this would only have soured relations further.

Leroy42

Whilst I agree on the good faith issue, and also that the EU had little choice, the WA gave the EU pretty much all they were looking for and got the UK 11 months additional time. Seems like the EU won on that one.

I fully agree on why the UK government did it, for political reasons, but they have boxed themselves into a very tight spot for little real gain. Labour were never going to win any election, the numbers were always showing that.

So whilst the Tories might believe that have gotten away with it, the truth is that they signed an international agreement and the EU will have a very strong case to not only demand it from the UK, but also that other 3rd parties (Japan, Australia etc) do not enter into agreements unless the UK lives up to their agreement.

It won't stop future agreements, but it will result in other countries looking for more from the UK to offset any negatives

Nody

Deleted User wrote: »

The only thing we can be sure of, is that when the COVID-19 crisis is over, the economic landscape will be very different to the one we had at the start of the year.
Globalisation will be questioned by many in politics, decisions will be made as to how important it is to retain local manufacturing as opposed to importing stuff thousands of kms just to save a few pennies/cents on the retail price while inflating the importers profits.
Today for example Ireland Imported some fruit pickers from Bulgaria, probably using the same excuse that the UK used the other day.
These types of import & export will be seriously questioned by many over the next few weeks, so trade talks will be very different that what they would have been without the COVID-19 pandemic.

That's the wrong question; the right question are people willing to pay more for the same products. That's less money they can spend on "luxuries" as their food costs will go up, their basic products will go up in price etc. leaving less money in the pocket of people. There was a reason why Walmart won against local mom & pops stores as people were whinging their hands and being outraged about it closing because in reality they went shopping at Walmart instead. It's always been an option to shop local but at the end of the day cost tends to trump all when it comes to actual actions.

How willing are politicians going to be to tell people "look you're going to lose 15% of your salary but we'll be safer in the future" in essence? Sure; first year or three after Corona it works but 5 years, 10 yeas, 15 years from now? Talk about a free win election promise...

briany

Nody wrote: »

That's the wrong question; the right question are people willing to pay more for the same products. That's less money they can spend on "luxuries" as their food costs will go up, their basic products will go up in price etc. leaving less money in the pocket of people. There was a reason why Walmart won against local mom & pops stores as people were whinging their hands and being outraged about it closing because in reality they went shopping at Walmart instead. It's always been an option to shop local but at the end of the day cost tends to trump all when it comes to actual actions.

How willing are politicians going to be to tell people "look you're going to lose 15% of your salary but we'll be safer in the future" in essence? Sure; first year or three after Corona it works but 5 years, 10 yeas, 15 years from now? Talk about a free win election promise...

Yeah, it's not just the CEOs who are concerned about the contents of their wallet. That's an attitude that is found from the bottom up in society. It's what capitalism is based on - getting the most output from the least input.

So if you want more local manufacturing, you're probably going to have to pay more, or else reduce wages, or else reduce profit margins or companies. None of these things are the affected people willing to accept, but they would have to accept at least one or else stop going on about the evils of globalism.

Nody

Nody wrote: »

That's the wrong question; the right question are people willing to pay more for the same products. That's less money they can spend on "luxuries" as their food costs will go up, their basic products will go up in price etc. leaving less money in the pocket of people. There was a reason why Walmart won against local mom & pops stores as people were whinging their hands and being outraged about it closing because in reality they went shopping at Walmart instead. It's always been an option to shop local but at the end of the day cost tends to trump all when it comes to actual actions.

How willing are politicians going to be to tell people "look you're going to lose 15% of your salary but we'll be safer in the future" in essence? Sure; first year or three after Corona it works but 5 years, 10 yeas, 15 years from now? Talk about a free win election promise...

People are in general being misled by the lower prices, mainly due to globalisation that has created a situation where products are deliberately sold at unrealistically low prices to kill off the local manufacturers. Then they're made to fail after a short time, so you're forced to buy again. Traders call the shots in all these transactions, they really don't care what the trade agreements are, they still get their cut.


Consumers need to be educated in what value is, pay 30% more and get something that lasts 12 years is far better value than buying the cheaper one that will fail (as designed) after only five years and then buy another cheap one.

Sam Russell

briany wrote: »

Yeah, it's not just the CEOs who are concerned about the contents of their wallet. That's an attitude that is found from the bottom up in society. It's what capitalism is based on - getting the most output from the least input.

So if you want more local manufacturing, you're probably going to have to pay more, or else reduce wages, or else reduce profit margins or companies. None of these things are the affected people willing to accept, but they would have to accept at least one or else stop going on about the evils of globalism.

Well, I think it is Norfolk in the UK (but it might be somewhere else) who have successfully prevented major supermarkets setting up in their locality for precisely the reasons you argue against. They want the small local shops and not the supermarkets, and are prepared to pay for it.

We have supermarkets setting up outside towns here that get approval be promising hundreds of jobs that result in many times that number of jobs being lost in small shops in the local town. The local town gets hollowed out and dies.

It is happening in Ireland, the UK, in France, in the USA, etc. It is not a good future.

briany

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, I think it is Norfolk in the UK (but it might be somewhere else) who have successfully prevented major supermarkets setting up in their locality for precisely the reasons you argue against. They want the small local shops and not the supermarkets, and are prepared to pay for it.

We have supermarkets setting up outside towns here that get approval be promising hundreds of jobs that result in many times that number of jobs being lost in small shops in the local town. The local town gets hollowed out and dies.

It is happening in Ireland, the UK, in France, in the USA, etc. It is not a good future.

It is not a good future, but by and large it's the system us people generally accept.

Your case study obviously bucks this trend, but it's worth wondering whether in this place the people have a certain level of affluence and education where they're able to step back, see the bigger picture and act accordingly. People who have a strong conscious idea that the small shops contribute so much to the life of the community. A lot of people aren't operating on that level, though. Be it through financial pressures or lack of education, they're just going to go to the cheapest and most convenient place.

Sam Russell

briany wrote: »

It is not a good future, but by and large it's the system us people generally accept.

Your case study obviously bucks this trend, but it's worth wondering whether in this place the people have a certain level of affluence and education where they're able to step back, see the bigger picture and act accordingly. People who have a strong conscious idea that the small shops contribute so much to the life of the community. A lot of people aren't operating on that level, though. Be it through financial pressures or lack of education, they're just going to go to the cheapest and most convenient place.

Norfolk is very rural so that might inform them.

Cheap food might sound a good policy, but supermarkets take heir cut at the expense of the supplier whatever the price. Our beef farmers have always suffered because of this - they are price takers and hardly make a profit, with many losing money year on year. Supermarkets always make profits.

Seth Brundle

I see that the drama Brexit: The Uncivil War
starring Benedict Cumberbatch is now on Netflix...
https://www.netflix.com/title/81072012?s=a&trkid=13747225&t=cp

It is still available on the All4 app.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote:

Cheap food might sound a good policy, but supermarkets take heir cut at the expense of the supplier whatever the price. Our beef farmers have always suffered because of this - they are price takers and hardly make a profit, with many losing money year on year. Supermarkets always make profits.

In the 1950's food took a third of the average family income. Today it is less than 10% and the range available is much wider.

Efficient supply chains work. In the 1950's local suppliers had control. Not now.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote:

Cheap food might sound a good policy, but supermarkets take heir cut at the expense of the supplier whatever the price. Our beef farmers have always suffered because of this - they are price takers and hardly make a profit, with many losing money year on year. Supermarkets always make profits.

In the 1950's food took a third of the average family income. Today it is less than 10% and the range available is much wider.

Efficient supply chains work. In the 1950's local suppliers had control. Not now.

54and56

Sam Russell wrote: »

Norfolk is very rural so that might inform them.

Cheap food might sound a good policy, but supermarkets take heir cut at the expense of the supplier whatever the price. Our beef farmers have always suffered because of this - they are price takers and hardly make a profit, with many losing money year on year. Supermarkets always make profits.

You reap what you sow.

Beef farmers used to be organised, own co-ops etc.

They sold all that out for a once off bribe payment years ago and now moan that they are price takers.

Why don't they organise themselves into co-ops who build/buy and operate meat factories in a co-operative manner so they get to produce value added product supermarkets want to buy (and effectively control the supply of same) thus removing the Larry Goodman type middle man much the same as French vineyards all use a community owned facility to process their grapes before each of them produces their own label wine or contribute their grapes to a single regional production which they then get their proportional share of the revenue from?

Our farmers are world class at two things:-

1. Producing high quality product.
2. Getting fcuked over by the meat factories.

It's always amazed me that they can't just club together, open their own factories and move up the value chain. What, apart from inertia, is stopping them?

54and56

Sam Russell wrote: »

Supermarkets always make profits.

That just shows they now how to operate their business. It's a compliment to them that they always make a profit. Who gets into business to make losses?

Sam Russell

54and56 wrote: »

You reap what you sow.

Beef farmers used to be organised, own co-ops etc.

They sold all that out for a once off bribe payment years ago and now moan that they are price takers.

Why don't they organise themselves into co-ops who build/buy and operate meat factories in a co-operative manner so they get to produce value added product supermarkets want to buy (and effectively control the supply of same) thus removing the Larry Goodman type middle man much the same as French vineyards all use a community owned facility to process their grapes before each of them produces their own label wine or contribute their grapes to a single regional production which they then get their proportional share of the revenue from?

Our farmers are world class at two things:-

1. Producing high quality product.
2. Getting fcuked over by the meat factories.

It's always amazed me that they can't just club together, open their own factories and move up the value chain. What, apart from inertia, is stopping them?

It was the dairy farmers who sold out not the beef guys. The beef guys were never organized. They currently suffer from the dairy farmers producing calves that are unfit for beef fattening.

They actually do not need to run their own meat factories - they can get contract killing, and then sell the product where they can. What they need is a marketing co=op that can make use of their quality to get premium prices for the producer.

With the NI in and out of the EU, it might be beneficial if they could take advantage of that for selling into the UK market.

Capt'n Midnight

On 29 July 1014, at the Battle of Kleidion, Byzantine Emperor Basil II defeated the Bulgars. There were fifteen thousand prisoners and one man in a hundred had an eye removed.

The rest were blinded and had to be guided home by the half blind.



The UK are heading for a similar half blind leading the blind as 403 of 878 companies that have received money from the customs paperwork training fund are existing customs intermediaries.

There's about 200,000 UK companies that trade with the EU who will be filling out customs forms for the first time. So far they've got just 1% of the extra customs agents they need.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52287926

Enzokk

Ian Dunt thinks Cummings is back from his isolation,

Week in Review: A govt fixated on Brexit while covid runs rampant

This is what happens when you select for dogmatism instead of competence. Yesterday, the drumbeat of refusal over extending Brexit transition grew in volume. Probably Dom Cummings got out of self-isolation and took control of comms. The messages had that easy staccato dimwit certainty which we have come to expect from him.

"We will not extend the transition period, and if the EU asks we will say no," the prime minister's spokesperson said. Classic Dom sentence, all false simplicity and posturing - a drunken bloke in a pub picking a fight with the bouncer. "Extending the transition period would simply prolong the negotiations, prolong business uncertainty, and delay the moment of control of our borders. It would also keep us bound by EU legislation at a point where we need legislative flexibility to manage the response to the coronavirus pandemic."

It is, as usual, the most godawful unseemly hogwash. Everything in the world has stopped. The planes no longer fly, national borders are closed, sport has been cancelled, TV programmes aren't made, films aren't released, shops have closed. And yet somehow Brexit talks are the one part of the old world which slides ahead regardless.

So back to normal regarding Brexit. With my cynical hat on, the UK agreed to the WA because they knew they were going to have to do it at some point. If they wanted to leave the EU with the Tory party in charge they were going to need to gamble getting a deal, no matter how bad, before going for an election. So accept the deal no PM would ever accept to win the election and then as Gove has told us before,

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Gove said: “The British people will be in control. If the British people dislike the agreement that we have negotiated with the EU, the agreement will allow a future government to diverge.”

He said that after a transition period, the UK would have “full freedom to diverge from EU law on the single market and customs union”.

Michael Gove: voters can change EU deal if they don't like it

This is a absolute disaster for the UK, they have a government in place for the next 4 and a half years where their flagship achievement will be a disaster and the country will have to live with it. Add in a pandemic and the same chaotic response you would expect from the government that brings you Brexit, then there will be hard times coming for your average tax payer in the UK. But they voted for Johnson and I cannot feel too much sympathy when you decide to dance with the devil.

Enzokk

I found this article very interesting,

Muddled thinking punctures plan for British ventilator

Now this is a Covid-19 article but the twitter thread from the journalist makes some interesting comparisons to what we are discussing here,

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1251445356874870784?s=20

Basically the same thinking that has allowed the UK to sleepwalk into a disaster of a Brexit has meant they have wasted time of companies designing ventilators that has no use because they messed up the specs from the start.

We have seen it with Brexit, "how hard can it be?" has been said many times regarding customs or checks or most anything really. Well if this is a guide then it is very hard and the UK will waste time and not get it right.

These issues are more to do with the embracing of globalism and losing the technical knowledge as to how to make stuff like this.
If nothing else, the pandemic will focus minds on developing a resilient industry that can use locally sourced materials whenever possible as opposed to depending on others to produce and sell it to you.

This is a lesson that all countries are learning the hard way, just look at the quality of PPE that arrived here from China in recent weeks.