Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

CelticRambler

landofthetree wrote: »

The EU hands over billions every year to farmers who exploit these poor women.

Not in the newly liberated UK, they don't. What relevance does the plight of strawberry pickers in Spain have for Brexit?

landofthetree

Peregrinus wrote: »

Not the Aussies. If the UK wants them picked it will have to open the doors to workers from economies where wage rates are so low that a UK minimum wage job in harsh conditions looks attractive. Australia is not that country.

They can do what Spain,Germany,Italy etc do.

Give temporary visas to Moroccans.

https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/25760/un-calls-out-shocking-abuse-of-migrants-picking-strawberries-in-spain

A UN special rapporteur has called out the "shocking abuse" of migrants picking strawberries in Spain. The migrants are mainly Moroccan women, who come in on seasonal visas to carry out the work. Their treatment has long been criticized by human rights groups working in the field of migrant rights.

peter kern

Peregrinus wrote: »

It's not "such a good deal" for the EU. On the contrary, it's a huge concession on the part of the EU; it's the EU trusting a third country to operate a chunk of the EU's external border, but that doesn't produce any better outcome for the EU than operating the border itself would have produced. Its objective is to avoid a hard border in Ireland, which was a UK red line as well as an EU one.

to add this deal does nothing good for 99 % of the eu population so to say this deal is too good is just total BS.

Quin_Dub

landofthetree wrote: »

Its a pound an hour more. Plus its not Aussies who do the picking in Australia. Its generally foreigners who are exploited by farmers.

All over the EU fruit picking are exploited,physically abused,sexually abuse and many are under the age of 14.

Animals have more rights than they do.

https://www.euronews.com/2020/07/17/invisible-workers-underpaid-exploited-and-put-at-risk-on-europe-s-farms



UN calls out 'shocking' abuse of migrants picking strawberries in Spain
https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/25760/un-calls-out-shocking-abuse-of-migrants-picking-strawberries-in-spain

The EU hands over billions every year to farmers who exploit these poor women.

landofthetree wrote: »

They can do what Spain,Germany,Italy etc do.

Give temporary visas to Moroccans.

https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/25760/un-calls-out-shocking-abuse-of-migrants-picking-strawberries-in-spain

##Mod Note##

This is absolutely a topic worthy of discussion , but it's off topic for this thread , feel free to open a separate thread on this issue if you wish.

Thanks

RobMc59

Sam Russell wrote: »

Australian PM said they were happy to walk away - presumably to get a few more concessions from a desperate UK. It must have worked.

Not good for us though.

From a British point of view Australia which has voluntarily retained very close ties with the UK (the Queen remains head of state,five eyes etc)is a better bed fellow than an EU country for example.

CelticRambler

landofthetree wrote: »

They can do what Spain,Germany,Italy etc do.

Give temporary visas to Moroccans.

The UK government has, this year, considerbly increased the number of seasonal worker visas available, but they're still not getting the applicants. We had this discussion only a few weeks ago (with another poster).

Previously, EU migrants were happy to travel to the UK, were generally well-looked after and enjoyed their work enough to come back year after year; and their employers were happy to have them.

Then the xenophobes decided to make the UK a less attractive environment and those workers chose not to come to the UK any more. IIRC, there are some 40000 visas available this year and almost none of them have been taken up.

So on the one hand, we have EU migrants who don't want to work in the UK, no matter what visas or wages are available; and on the other we have British citizens who don't want to do that work in the UK. And now we have the added complication of a crippling shortage of lorry drivers to deliver perishable produce from UK suppliers to UK customers.

So there's obviously a lot more going on in the post-Brexit UK jobs market than the alleged abuse of strawberry-pickers in Spain. Any chance you could explain your point with real words instead of just lobbing odd links into the discussion?

Edit: writing while mod was posting comment above.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

From a British point of view Australia which has voluntarily retained very close ties with the UK (the Queen remains head of state,five eyes etc)is a better bed fellow than an EU country for example.

Would you, therefore, be in favour of their hormone-treated beef being sold in the UK? Or would you support their wanton destruction of tribal homelands in the name of mining necessary to support British manufacturing and/or nuclear industry?

Seth Brundle

UK emigrants living in a number of EU countries need to apply to regularise their residency in order to keep entitlements, etc.
The deadline for France is fast approaching - June 30th.
The tweet below mentions 1.2million (in EU) but according to Wikipedia, estimates have the number residing in France at 170000 to 400000. That stands to be a lot of disapointed people if they don't sort it out asap.

More info on this page detailing the requirements for UK emigrants in EU countries: https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/residence/brexit-residence-rights/uk-nationals-living-in-eu/index_en.htm

The tweet below translates into the following:

1.2 million British citizens in EU will lose their health residence rights or even their employment if they have not regularized their residency status by the end of the month. A delay is requested. This is the result of #Brexit

https://twitter.com/MartinGenier/status/1404769158949228544

ambro25

After seeing some EU27 stats today about the below issue, can I interject a brief Brexit-related plea in the debate, to any reader with, or who knows of-

(1) British relatives, friends and/or acquaintances
(2) (non-British, non-EU) spouse of above

currently living in France, Latvia, Luxembourg or Malta, to check with them that they have applied for a local residency permit under the WA.

There is 15 days left to do so in these 4 countries, at the risk of losing their rights (residence, healthcare, etc.) otherwise. There is a likelihood of extension by these states (like The Netherlands just did, to 30 October) but this is by no means guaranteed to happen, since this is a national competence and prerogative.

Please pass the word if you can, as the UK government isn’t doing much of anything about it, and neither are individual EU countries. Lisa O’Carrol has a piece about the issue in today’s Guardian, but ofc that’s UK MSM.

Edit: snap Seth and thx for making a bit of noise about it.

Leroy42

RobMc59 wrote: »

From a British point of view Australia which has voluntarily retained very close ties with the UK (the Queen remains head of state,five eyes etc)is a better bed fellow than an EU country for example.

I think you have hit the nail on the head there Rob.

At the core of the entire Brexit mess is the want of the UK to be in charge again. Australia is clearly the lessor in this relationship, and not only that but they recognise the Queen as the head of state, so that places the UK in control, symbolically at least.

They are trying to reqork the old empire, getting the band back together!

It shows why the EU is such a problem for them. They are not in control.

Capt'n Midnight

Sam Russell wrote: »

But will the Ausie trade deal mean more cheese? Truss likes cheese and particularly likes more cheese.

Now that the talks about talks have concluded the actual talks are ready to begin.

We won't know until there is an actual trade deal.


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/15/uk-australia-trade-deal-to-include-15-year-cap-on-tariff-free-imports

No 10 said the reductions in tariffs would save UK households up to £34m a year – about £1.20 per household.

so up to 50p per person

The 15 year cap on tariffs on imports sounds good - but we'll need to see what the caps are set at. Here's the old numbers to compare

Australia’s previous 7,150 tonne EU Hilton beef quota has been split: 3,389 tonnes to the EU and 3,761 tonnes to the UK
Australia’s 19,186 tonne sheepmeat/goatmeat quota has been split: 5,851 tonnes to the EU and 13,335 tonnes to the UK.

Seth Brundle

I don't envisage that the UK will be in control once a deal between themselves and Aus will be signed off. This is why it is believed that UK agriculture will take a massive hit if and when the deal is signed.
It is just more of the nationalistic nonsense where in reality they are more like the drunk looking for a fight with anyone in the street.

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think you have hit the nail on the head there Rob.

At the core of the entire Brexit mess is the want of the UK to be in charge again. Australia is clearly the lessor in this relationship, and not only that but they recognise the Queen as the head of state, so that places the UK in control, symbolically at least.

They are trying to reqork the old empire, getting the band back together!

It shows why the EU is such a problem for them. They are not in control.

The term "head of state" does not appear in Australia's constitution. I wonder if it was just some easy way of facilitating the transition to independence rather than some alleged deep affection for the motherland that they were so desperate to be independent from.

As for controlling the EU, the irony is that they were capable of doing this when they could be arsed. The single market advances during the Delors comission are the cardinal example. Less salubrious examples include Osborne and Cameron vetoing caps on bankers' bonuses.

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think you have hit the nail on the head there Rob.

At the core of the entire Brexit mess is the want of the UK to be in charge again. Australia is clearly the lessor in this relationship, and not only that but they recognise the Queen as the head of state, so that places the UK in control, symbolically at least.

They are trying to reqork the old empire, getting the band back together!

It shows why the EU is such a problem for them. They are not in control.

A very important point. One of the reasons the EU is hated is that the UK cannot control it and is reduced to being a mere "equal partner" (with the likes of France and Germany no less, two horrible countries with a lot of historical baggage). Much of the sovereignty argument centres on this - Britain cannot be equal partners with 'foreigners' who don't even speak English as their first language.

timetogo1

The Australian deal will save £34m a year on imports.
So that's about 1p per head per week.
Well at least it's a Brexit benefit.

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1404778622699905031

Edit: Ah I didn't see the Capt'n Midnight post before I posted this.

Seth Brundle

timetogo1 wrote: »

The Australian deal will save £34m a year on imports.
So that's about 1p per head per week.
Well at least it's a Brexit benefit.

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1404778622699905031

If UK agriculture needs to be subsidised to keep it going then this will cost a lot more than £34 a year!

timetogo1

Seth Brundle wrote: »

If UK agriculture needs to be subsidised to keep it going then this will cost a lot more than £34 a year!

On top of the costs of Brexit so far.

Gerry T

RobMc59 wrote: »

From a British point of view Australia which has voluntarily retained very close ties with the UK (the Queen remains head of state,five eyes etc)is a better bed fellow than an EU country for example.

Yes politically it makes sense, but economically not as much. You can't get much further away on the planet than UK-Aus. That's a massive trade barrier. The SM/CU removes most other trade barriers but I doubt the detail of the UK-Aus deal will include that so there will be more trade barriers.
Just look at the trade deal between UK-EU and you see the amount of difficulty and that's with the UK ignoring most all of their responsibilities (checks etc) under that agreement.
Getting a trade deal is not difficult, in fact if you bend over a lot you will get no shortage of trade deals. Lets see the detail of what's to be agreed before declaring this a monumental brexit success story. I think Aus are far from desperate and will be pickey in the concessions they give to the UK, this is business and "god save the queen" won't carry much weight, if any at all.

BlitzKrieg

Rumor's abound that the deal is not as locked down as the news is making it out to be,

https://twitter.com/Ivan_McKee/status/1404762438717820929


Though it is an msp saying it, so grain of salt to some extent.


but the announcement of the UK Australia deal does seem well timed to move the topic on from the disaster Brexit was at the G7 conference.

Which does seem to be a lot of what the brexit news is like. Everytime there is an issue or a flaw there is a rapid news story pushed out to move the topic on, less to convince the unconvinced but to give the faithful something new to parrot.

Now every article and news story about the Northern Ireland Protocol or the G7 debacle will have hordes of comments about the speed of the australia UK trade deal.


A trade deal that actually doesnt exist yet, it's just been agreed on in principal. To put in context the EU and the USA agreed to a tran atlantic partnership in principal but the actual deal fell apart during negotiations.

We'll see how the australian deal goes over the next few years.

fash

Leroy42 wrote: »

At the core of the entire Brexit mess is the want of the UK to be in charge again. Australia is clearly the lessor in this relationship, /quote]
The points of principle agreed suggest the opposite.

dogbert27

The deal is not expected to be signed until at least July 2022.

As we know from the UK and Brexit, a lot can go wrong in 13 months!

Leroy42

You have to hand it to the UK government, they really know how to play the media. Disaster of a G7 summit, having to cancel the reopening, Johnson saying that NATO would stand up for UK in a trade war going into the NATO summit.

And all forgotten and relegated in the newscycle because of a trade deal that doesn't even exist yet.

swampgas

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The term "head of state" does not appear in Australia's constitution. I wonder if it was just some easy way of facilitating the transition to independence rather than some alleged deep affection for the motherland that they were so desperate to be independent from.

I was living in Australia when they had a referendum on replacing the British monarch as head of state. The status quo was preserved simply because they couldn't agree on a replacement, not because of any great love of the monarchy. The amount of in-fighting was insane, and the fact that various senior Australian politicians were angling to get the kudos of being Australia's first non-royal head of state added to public distaste. I certainly didn't find Australians particularly fond of the English "whinging poms" either, in fact a colleague of mine confided that he had actually been born in England but would never advertise that fact because of the abuse he would get.

ancapailldorcha

swampgas wrote: »

I was living in Australia when they had a referendum on replacing the British monarch as head of state. The status quo was preserved simply because they couldn't agree on a replacement, not because of any great love of the monarchy. The amount of in-fighting was insane, and the fact that various senior Australian politicians were angling to get the kudos of being Australia's first non-royal head of state added to public distaste. I certainly didn't find Australians particularly fond of the English "whinging poms" either, in fact a colleague of mine confided that he had actually been born in England but would never advertise that fact because of the abuse he would get.

I'd heard something like this but didn't want to go stating it as gospel. Thanks.

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

You have to hand it to the UK government, they really know how to play the media. Disaster of a G7 summit, having to cancel the reopening, Johnson saying that NATO would stand up for UK in a trade war going into the NATO summit.

And all forgotten and relegated in the newscycle because of a trade deal that doesn't even exist yet.

Right wing press coverage of the summit was 'awkward' though. It should have been a huge triumph, with Johnson as the international statesman at home fronting up 'Global Britain'. But virtually the only story coming out of the summit was Johnson arguing with everyone and not getting on well with any of them.

It was difficult enough for the press fanboys to conceal that the summit had gone really badly.

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

Would you, therefore, be in favour of their hormone-treated beef being sold in the UK? Or would you support their wanton destruction of tribal homelands in the name of mining necessary to support British manufacturing and/or nuclear industry?

As far as I'm aware the details of any potential deal haven't been disclosed so preempting arrangements would be premature.
I don't know if the general consensus on this thread which seems to be hoping Britain falls flat on its face whilst still wanting its trade is typical of the general attitude towards Britain by Ireland or not.
Australian interests are probably closer to the UK interests than the EU's.

Gerry T

RobMc59 wrote: »

As far as I'm aware the details of any potential deal haven't been disclosed so preempting arrangements would be premature.
I don't know if the general consensus on this thread which seems to be hoping Britain falls flat on its face whilst still wanting its trade is typical of the general attitude towards Britain by Ireland or not.

What IRL wants really isn't being considered by the UK, only for the EU we'd be rightly screwed over by the UK.

RobMc59 wrote: »

Australian interests are probably closer to the UK interests than the EU's.

Only if the UK lowers it's standards, otherwise the EU offers a far larger market.

So are you suggesting that the UK will lower it's standards to trade more with Australia and at the same time loose it's trading relationship with the EU, by far it's biggest export market ?
What is it the UK expects to export to Australia, it's all very well buying Australian wine, but what is it the UK is going to export to Australia ?

Leroy42

RobMc59 wrote: »

As far as I'm aware the details of any potential deal haven't been disclosed so preempting arrangements would be premature.
I don't know if the general consensus on this thread which seems to be hoping Britain falls flat on its face whilst still wanting its trade is typical of the general attitude towards Britain by Ireland or not.
Australian interests are probably closer to the UK interests than the EU's.

It is just that the UK is loudly pronouncing this as a great achievement, without any actual details, so posters are rightly picking holes in its potential given what we already know.

Listen to what Liz Truss is saying. Their main selling point seems to be cheaper products in the UK. (1.50 each per year!). There is no talk about potential new jobs, new investment, increases in trade. Given cheaper goods to UK consumers, that actually means less jobs as domestic producers will lose out.

And the very fact they had to put in a 10 year delay in tariffs reductions (it isn't 15, its 10 with a further 5 years when action 'can' be taken to reduce negative impacts!) means that they already concede that this is going to cause problems for the Agri sector in the UK. THe 10 year dealy is to simply give them time to get out of the sector.

There is a lack of detail, but then the question needs to be asked why the sudden annoncement if there isn't actually anything to announce?

RobMc59

Gerry T wrote: »

What IRL wants really isn't being considered by the UK, only for the EU we'd be rightly screwed over by the UK.
Only if the UK lowers it's standards, otherwise the EU offers a far larger market.

So are you suggesting that the UK will lower it's standards to trade more with Australia and at the same time loose it's trading relationship with the EU, by far it's biggest export market ?
What is it the UK expects to export to Australia, it's all very well buying Australian wine, but what is it the UK is going to export to Australia ?

Until the details of any potential deal are revealed I'm as in the dark as anyone regarding trading conditions and what would be traded.
Are you suggesting that if the UK enters a trading deal with Australia it can't also have a trading relationship with the EU?

RobMc59

Leroy42 wrote: »

It is just that the UK is loudly pronouncing this as a great achievement, without any actual details, so posters are rightly picking holes in its potential given what we already know.

Listen to what Liz Truss is saying. Their main selling point seems to be cheaper products in the UK. (1.50 each per year!). There is no talk about potential new jobs, new investment, increases in trade. Given cheaper goods to UK consumers, that actually means less jobs as domestic producers will lose out.

And the very fact they had to put in a 10 year delay in tariffs reductions (it isn't 15, its 10 with a further 5 years when action 'can' be taken to reduce negative impacts!) means that they already concede that this is going to cause problems for the Agri sector in the UK. THe 10 year dealy is to simply give them time to get out of the sector.

There is a lack of detail, but then the question needs to be asked why the sudden annoncement if there isn't actually anything to announce?

Why do you want to pick it apart?As I've said on numerous occasions I would have preferred the UK to remain in the EU but that's gone.
Hoping my country can do a mutually beneficial trade deal with one of its closest friends and allies is reasonable imo.