Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

Et alors ? (as we say around here :pac: ) I'm not sure what point you're making, Rob. "Business encourages politicians to act in their interest" - that's not exactly a Brexit exclusive. If anything, it's a sign that Big Industry has already moved into the Brexit-Already-Got-Done phase, and they're now treating the EU's negotiations with Britain in exactly the same way that they treat the EU's negotations with any other third country seeking a trade deal.

The link I provided shows that all carmakers are unhappy with the situation.i haven't tried to selectively present information only showing the hit to any particular side.
As I've said,I'd be happy if the latest negotiations result in a BRINO.

swampgas

RobMc59 wrote: »

The link I provided shows that all carmakers are unhappy with the situation.i haven't tried to selectively present information only showing the hit to any particular side.
As I've said,I'd be happy if the latest negotiations result in a BRINO.

Is BRINO even possible at this stage? It seems that any FTA will be quite limited, more like an FTA in name only?

Leroy42

The key difference is that Brexit is something that is being forced on the EU, and they are being forced to try to deal with the negative consequences but there is only so much they can do to limit the damage of something that is not of their choosing.

The UK, on the other hand, have complete control over the impact. They could sign up for an extremely close relationship, causing the minimum (but still significant) damage to companies. They have chosen not to do that.

I think the recent arguments over support for Manchester moving into Tier 3 shows how caught up in ideologies and being seen to 'win' is the driving force behind this government. The actual outcome isn't nearly as important as them being seen to have been in charge.

They decry the EU for being bullies for not giving into their demands, yet they did the exact same when they were in a strong position.

Peregrinus

RobMc59 wrote: »

The link I provided shows that all carmakers are unhappy with the situation.i haven't tried to selectively present information only showing the hit to any particular side.
As I've said,I'd be happy if the latest negotiations result in a BRINO.

Of course they're unhappy with the situation. Carmakers (both in the UK and in the EU) would obviously prefer no Brexit at all.

But so what? This just tends to reinforce the view that Brexit is a fundamentally bad idea. But since the UK government is unlikely to be responsive to the concerns of EU carmakers, the fact that EU carmakers see it as a bad idea is unlikely to influence the UK government or its Brexit stance in the smallest degree. And the whole thing is driven by the UK's choices; the EU is simply engaged in a reactive damage limitation exercise.

Peregrinus

swampgas wrote: »

Is BRINO even possible at this stage?

Oh, gosh, no. At this point the range of possible outcomes, at least in the medium term, runs from hard brexit to crash-out brexit. After a change of government the UK might try to claw its way back from there, but this will take years.

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

The key difference is that Brexit is something that is being forced on the EU, and they are being forced to try to deal with the negative consequences but there is only so much they can do to limit the damage of something that is not of their choosing.

The UK, on the other hand, have complete control over the impact. They could sign up for an extremely close relationship, causing the minimum (but still significant) damage to companies. They have chosen not to do that.

I wouldn't say the UK has complete control; they can have a frictionless trading relationship with the EU if they want it, but not on any terms they may care to dictate.

But, basically, yeah, the UK is broadly in control. The reason Brexit will be either hard brexit or crash-out brexit is becauase the UK will not contemplate any other kind of brexit. The UK has chosen the range of possibilities that are now open to them.

Pablo Escobar

Peregrinus wrote: »

Oh, gosh, no. At this point the range of possible outcomes, at least in the medium term, runs from hard brexit to crash-out brexit. After a change of government the UK might try to claw its way back from there, but this will take years.

Correct. I also think that the range of outcomes you've stated is completely lost on the vast majority of the UK public.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

The link I provided shows that all carmakers are unhappy with the situation.i haven't tried to selectively present information only showing the hit to any particular side.
As I've said,I'd be happy if the latest negotiations result in a BRINO.

I wasn't suggesting you'd selectively presented any information; if anything, you were very restrained, as even a relatively brief session on Google would throw up dozens of other industries putting their case to the negotiators.

To a certain extent, the car industry - like farmers and airlines - is "always unhappy" with whatever situation in which they find themselves. What we're seeing here is nothing more or less than that industry doing what it always does: attempting to get the best deal for themselves out of a changed economic environment.

What's most relevant in the report is not really that it's about the car industry, but that Brexit is done, Britain is out, BRINO is now impossible, and actors within every industry are re-positioning themselves to take advantage of whatever obstacles to free trade they can use for their own benefit. Britain has decided to compete as a minnow in a giant market; the giant marketeers are preparing a feast of grilled minnow.

rugbyman

\Peregrinus, you have amazed me with your posts, such logic and knowledge
But today you said

"At this point the range of possible outcomes, at least in the medium term, runs from hard brexit to crash-out brexit."

Taking the hard brexit to be the least bad brexit, why call it hard?

Though it could seem unlikely,i believe the Uk will " agree" rather than "concede" on the remaining points ,with a token concession from the EU.
Surely this will be BRINO, an FTA with the UKK paying in as do Swiss,Norway

Perhaps I am only questioning the adjectives ,but to me Hard Brexit and crash out are the same.

Regards

An Ciarraioch

Just on that definition of BRINO, Switzerland has literally dozens of bilateral agreements with the EU, so naturally Brussels wants to avoid a repeat of that bureaucratic nightmare. As for Norway, they, Liechtenstein and Iceland at least have some input into how EU legislation applies in their domestic corpus through the EEA Joint Committee, so the UK would be at a further remove again:

https://www.efta.int/eea/eea-agreement/eea-basic-features

CelticRambler

rugbyman wrote: »

Taking the hard brexit to be the least bad brexit, why call it hard?

Though it could seem unlikely,i believe the Uk will " agree" rather than "concede" on the remaining points ,with a token concession from the EU.
Surely this will be BRINO, an FTA with the UKK paying in as do Swiss,Norway

Because Switzerland and Norway (and others) have access to the Single Market, allow Free Movement, agree rules for trans-national data transfers, coordinate with each other in respect of transport infrastructure projects, and share in a host of EU platforms.

"BRINO" would leave the UK citizens feeling like nothing has changed; but things will change for them in a couple of months - e.g. the freight traffic in Kent, visa waivers needed to go on a stag night in Prague, written authorisations (and documented lists of instruments) needed for British artists performing on continental stages, VAT to be paid/reclaimed on entry as if you were shopping in the Far East ... Brexit is about a lot more than "just" trade.

An Ciarraioch

Interesting poll findings on Irish support for EU policies - generally positive towards FoM, migration, and co-ordination of foreign policy and trade, but cool towards further enlargement, which I presume is largely due to some of the post-2004 member state governments, such as Poland and Hungary:

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1319597299035738112

Pablo Escobar

rugbyman wrote: »

\Peregrinus, you have amazed me with your posts, such logic and knowledge
But today you said

"At this point the range of possible outcomes, at least in the medium term, runs from hard brexit to crash-out brexit."

Taking the hard brexit to be the least bad brexit, why call it hard?

Though it could seem unlikely,i believe the Uk will " agree" rather than "concede" on the remaining points ,with a token concession from the EU.
Surely this will be BRINO, an FTA with the UKK paying in as do Swiss,Norway

Perhaps I am only questioning the adjectives ,but to me Hard Brexit and crash out are the same.

Regards

No, the poster is correct. Any FTA at this stage will be bare bones. That would have initially been regarded as a "hard Brexit". That's the best outcome now. BRINO would basically mean they stay in they SMCU and they're staying in neither. It's not immediately apparent what scenario could lead us there at this stage, but I would suggest a very unlikely one.

In summary, a hard Brexit, or at least the original meaning of a hard Brexit, is now the best case scenario.

druss

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Interesting poll findings on Irish support for EU policies - generally positive towards FoM, migration, and co-ordination of foreign policy and trade, but cool towards further enlargement, which I presume is largely due to some of the post-2004 member state governments, such as Poland and Hungary:

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1319597299035738112

I doubt that it is especially nuanced on current members. There has been a debate on previous pages about UK media and how successful, or not, it has been in adding to Euroscepticism outside of UK.

I would say that making enlargement equate to "letting Turkey join EU" is one such "success".

I think if the question was drilled down to views on Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, North Macedonia, Albania etc the answers would probably differ in positivity.

I think maybe in that order, based on perceived economic/social criteria. And that views on Scotland or NI joining would be very positive. That's aside again from my view that 58% is a pretty good number.

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

I wasn't suggesting you'd selectively presented any information; if anything, you were very restrained, as even a relatively brief session on Google would throw up dozens of other industries putting their case to the negotiators.

To a certain extent, the car industry - like farmers and airlines - is "always unhappy" with whatever situation in which they find themselves. What we're seeing here is nothing more or less than that industry doing what it always does: attempting to get the best deal for themselves out of a changed economic environment.

What's most relevant in the report is not really that it's about the car industry, but that Brexit is done, Britain is out, BRINO is now impossible, and actors within every industry are re-positioning themselves to take advantage of whatever obstacles to free trade they can use for their own benefit. Britain has decided to compete as a minnow in a giant market; the giant marketeers are preparing a feast of grilled minnow.

Everyone knows its not the size of the dog in the fight,it's the size of the fight in the dog...And failing that,have you still got that barn?

ancapailldorcha

RobMc59 wrote: »

Everyone knows its not the size of the dog in the fight,it's the size of the fight in the dog...And failing that,have you still got that barn?

If you're not going to post in a constructive manner then please do not post. You've had plenty of warnings at this stage.

RobMc59

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If you're not going to post in a constructive manner then please do not post. You've had plenty of warnings at this stage.

Can you please confirm if that is a thread ban or a request?I will stop posting here if you want me to.

ancapailldorcha

RobMc59 wrote: »

Can you please confirm if that is a thread ban or a request?I will stop posting here if you want me to.

A request. Please do not respond to mod warnings on thread.

Capt'n Midnight

Britain and Japan sign post-Brexit trade deal

Pro-rata the extra 0.07% boost to the economy would be like a couple (both over 25) on Jobseeker’s Allowance getting an extra sixpence a week.

And that's if it's business as usual for the foreign owned businesses in the UK.

Mr Motegi said a deal between the UK and the EU was still crucial for Japanese business, particularly carmakers such as Nissan and Toyota who use parts from across Europe in vehicles they assemble in the UK.

"It is of paramount importance that the supply chain between the UK and the EU is maintained even after the UK's withdrawal," he said.

An Ciarraioch

Meanwhile it seems Macron is taking a twin-track approach of being publicly bullish on fisheries, but privately telling the industry to prepare for a cut in quotas:

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-france-exclusive/exclusive-macron-lays-ground-for-netting-brexit-compromise-on-fisheries-idUKKBN2781OW

Leroy42

Everyone accepts that there will be changes in the current fishing system. The argument is whether the UK can retain full access to the SM, without having to abide by the rules whilst having full say over the fishing, or whether they are prepared to cede some control of the fishing in return for access to SM.

The UK continue to say they want full control, with yearly renegotiations and ability to make decisions all to themselves. The EU are saying that that is their right, but it is unfair to the other fishing nations and part of any agreement should be concessions on both sides.

That is the bit the UK are having problems with. The EU, for example, want LPF, the UK want full control of fishing. EU will have to concede on some of the highest aspects or processes of the LPF and the UK cede something in fishing (but since fishing is much less economically important the UK will have to cede more to be fair).

fash

swampgas wrote: »

Is BRINO even possible at this stage? It seems that any FTA will be quite limited, more like an FTA in name only?

BRINO ended with May's lancaster speech. We now are at "super hard" or "ultra hard" Brexit

Sam Russell

Because the UK have ruled out ANY involvement of the ECJ after 31st Dec 2021, there is no possibility that the UK will have access to the SM or CU. All that will happen is they might get tariff free and quota free access, but there is still huge paperwork required, which is where the 50,000 customs officers come in.

If you assume the gross cost of employing each customs guy is between £50 k and £100 k, when wages, pensions, accommodation etc is taken into account, that is a cost of between £2.5 billion and £5 billion. Will they use a red bus with this on its side to let people know how much this will cost? Of course, that is direct Gov cost, industry has to pay something similar to prepare the paperwork. This paperwork is needed at this stage whatever the agreement, as they are not in the SMCU. Of course, this is before SPS is taken into account.

They are trying to get foreign companies exporting to the UK to pay the VAT and tariffs directly to HMRC, having first paid to register with them. Well good luck with that - less than two chances for that, I'd say.

An Ciarraioch

The UK has asked for continued access to the EU e-gate queuing system after Brexit - Switzerland and EFTA are allowed because they all participate in Schengen:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/23/uk-presses-for-use-of-faster-passport-gates-at-eu-airports-post-brexit

Geuze

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The UK has asked for continued access to the EU e-gate queuing system after Brexit - Switzerland and EFTA are allowed because they all participate in Schengen:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/23/uk-presses-for-use-of-faster-passport-gates-at-eu-airports-post-brexit

You can't leave the EU, SM, and CU, and then cherry-pick the elements to keep, e.g.

EHIC
and now electronic passport gates

johnnyskeleton

CelticRambler wrote: »

"BRINO" would leave the UK citizens feeling like nothing has changed; but things will change for them in a couple of months - e.g. the freight traffic in Kent, visa waivers needed to go on a stag night in Prague, written authorisations (and documented lists of instruments) needed for British artists performing on continental stages, VAT to be paid/reclaimed on entry as if you were shopping in the Far East ... Brexit is about a lot more than "just" trade.

Would BRINO require them to pay into the EU or to make direct payments to Eastern European states ala the EEA? If so, I would imagine that this will be the first and most obvious sticking point. They did vote to stop sending money to Europe after all

ancapailldorcha

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Would BRINO require them to pay into the EU or to make direct payments to Eastern European states ala the EEA? If so, I would imagine that this will be the first and most obvious sticking point. They did vote to stop sending money to Europe after all

The primary motivations for Brexit were sovereignty and immigration according to the Lord Ashcroft polls with both making up 82% of the vote if I recall correctly. In the event of a BRINO, I can't really see this being the main point of contention.

Shelga

Sam Russell wrote: »

Because the UK have ruled out ANY involvement of the ECJ after 31st Dec 2021, there is no possibility that the UK will have access to the SM or CU. All that will happen is they might get tariff free and quota free access, but there is still huge paperwork required, which is where the 50,000 customs officers come in.

See this is what I don't understand. If they have tariff-free and quota-free access, what else is there to the single market and customs union? If they can send as much as they want of any product, with no tariffs?

Sorry if this is a stupid question, I just still find trade very complex. But at least the 17.4 million Leave voters knew exactly what they were voting for, so I'm sure it will all be fine.

ancapailldorcha

Shelga wrote: »

See this is what I don't understand. If they have tariff-free and quota-free access, what else is there to the single market and customs union? If they can send as much as they want of any product, with no tariffs?

Sorry if this is a stupid question, I just still find trade very complex. But at least the 17.4 million Leave voters knew exactly what they were voting for, so I'm sure it will all be fine.

The issue is non-tariff barriers, ie regulation. The UK used to have a say in how the single market was regulated. It's ceded that privilege for reasons so now any of the EU27 can lobby for protectionist measures which would make either hinder UK producers or service providers, advantage those on the EU or both.

I'm open to correction here but that's one of the main problems as I understand it.

Nody

Shelga wrote: »

See this is what I don't understand. If they have tariff-free and quota-free access, what else is there to the single market and customs union? If they can send as much as they want of any product, with no tariffs?

Sorry if this is a stupid question, I just still find trade very complex. But at least the 17.4 million Leave voters knew exactly what they were voting for, so I'm sure it will all be fine.

Paperwork. Let's say I make a screw. I can now sell that to the EU single market without any tariffs or quotas which is great; however I now need to prove to the EU that the screw I'm selling actually meets EU regulation and requirements. That means I need to show how it's made, the materials in it, how well it holds up to pressure, weather & wind etc. to meet the EU regulation. And all of these needs to be proven in an EU approved facility with EU approved methods and that's not going into areas such as state aid, fair competition etc. which is requirements for EU as well.

Then when I export my screws to EU and the truck arrives at the border I need to have all the paperwork to prove those screws sent now matches the tests done before with them and they will most likely take samples to test (amount of sampling depends on country and type of goods) it before they are allowed to go past the border. I also may need to declare to the UK exactly what I'm exporting, then ensure the appropriate taxes (not to be confused with tariffs) are applied and paid on them as well as part of the import (you pay the taxes at the border or show proof of payment not to be confused with VAT which is paid at the receiver side). If the taxes are not paid the screws are not allowed to leave the border post (and this can delay trucks for days or even weeks...).

Now here comes the real kicker in all of this; these days you rarely send one truck with one type of goods. So if you send 10 different screws in the truck you need 10 different sets of paper works, proof of payments etc. to go with them. Miss any of them and the whole truck stops up until it's fixed. And if you then want to change the material in one of the screws because of a new supplier? Well that's back to retest it all again before they are allowed to be sent over again etc.

So while zero tariffs and quotas is a nice start the real killer in a FTA is in the mutual recognition etc. clauses. That is what will really unlock the potential in a deal rather than the tariffs and quotas in general.