Brexit matters

[Journeyman]

Arguably, being Canada would be a bearable alternative, however it seems it's not to be.

Canada was never on the table. The EU said it wouldn't work due to the nature and volume of trade, and the geographical proximity.

 

[yorksrob]

Canada was never on the table. The EU said it wouldn't work due to the nature and volume of trade, and the geographical proximity.

I think that's a silly position:

Geographical proximity - a nonsense, given we all import so much from the other side of the planet.
Volume - the point of any set of trade rules is to generate the maximum level of trade possible within those rules, so the whole point would be to eventually end up with a similar level of trade.

In truth, I don't believe either side has ever been acting in good faith. There's too much at stake.

I do hope that at some stage soon we will reach a diplomatic entente cordiale with the EU, even if an economic one isn't possible.

 

[Chester1]

I think that's a silly position:

Geographical proximity - a nonsense, given we all import so much from the other side of the planet.
Volume - the point of any set of trade rules is to generate the maximum level of trade possible within those rules, so the whole point would be to eventually end up with a similar level of trade.

In truth, I don't believe either side has ever been acting in good faith. There's too much at stake.

I do hope that at some stage soon we will reach a diplomatic entente cordiale with the EU, even if an economic one isn't possible.

If there is an economic break then there will be a diplomatic and security break. Our location makes isolationism a viable policy and standing with the EU will not be politically viable in event of no deal. The real geopolitical risk from brexit (from the perspective of EU and US) comes not from any direct effect but from the risk that the UK drifts into an unaligned status and focuses its diplomatic efforts on global trade.

 

[najaB]

I think that's a silly position:

Geographical proximity - a nonsense, given we all import so much from the other side of the planet.
Volume - the point of any set of trade rules is to generate the maximum level of trade possible within those rules, so the whole point would be to eventually end up with a similar level of trade.

It's not a silly position. Geographic proximity factors into the nature of trade and the documentation required for trade. Goods traded with Canada are going to (for the most part) spend a week on a ship, and are almost always going to be entering through a small number of ports. The longer(er) lead times means that importers aren't likely to include Canadian suppliers in their just-in-time workflow and they know that they'll have a few days to complete any customs paperwork. This is completely different to the nature of trade between the UK and EU which involves many more ports of entry and, until now, has been a seamless border with many items being ordered and delivered overnight/second day. Maintaining this will require a lot closer alignment of customs systems than the Canada deal caters for.

As to volume, it's not just overall volume in terms of value, but also the sheer number of different items that we trade with the EU. As noted above, go into just about any supermarket in the UK and you'll see hundreds (if not thousands) of items that are either made in the EU or are made with ingredients from the EU. Contrast that with the number of items of Canadian origin.

As I said in an earlier post, you can't just copy-paste a deal negotiated with one country and say "Job done". Each deal is bespoke and is tailored to the specific trade that exists between the two countries and also has to consider how that trade is likely to evolve over time.

 

[yorksrob]

If there is an economic break then there will be a diplomatic and security break. Our location makes isolationism a viable policy and standing with the EU will not be politically viable in event of no deal. The real geopolitical risk from brexit (from the perspective of EU and US) comes not from any direct effect but from the risk that the UK drifts into an unaligned status and focuses its diplomatic efforts on global trade.

That's an interesting perspective. From my personal opinion on the matter, I believe that we rely on the western global order, and from that perspective we need to have a diplomatic entente with both rhe USA and the EU, regardless of trading position. Personally, I can't see the country drifting into an unaligned status.

It's not a silly position. Geographic proximity factors into the nature of trade and the documentation required for trade. Goods traded with Canada are going to (for the most part) spend a week on a ship, and are almost always going to be entering through a small number of ports. The longer(er) lead times means that importers aren't likely to include Canadian suppliers in their just-in-time workflow and they know that they'll have a few days to complete any customs paperwork. This is completely different to the nature of trade between the UK and EU which involves many more ports of entry and, until now, has been a seamless border with many items being ordered and delivered overnight/second day. Maintaining this will require a lot closer alignment of customs systems than the Canada deal caters for.

As to volume, it's not just overall volume in terms of value, but also the sheer number of different items that we trade with the EU. As noted above, go into just about any supermarket in the UK and you'll see hundreds (if not thousands) of items that are either made in the EU or are made with ingredients from the EU. Contrast that with the number of items of Canadian origin.

As I said in an earlier post, you can't just copy-paste a deal negotiated with one country and say "Job done". Each deal is bespoke and is tailored to the specific trade that exists between the two countries and also has to consider how that trade is likely to evolve over time.

And is this greater volume of trade down to geographical position, or down to the rules existing between countries perchance ?

The fact that there are fewer Canadian products on the shelves isn't because Canada is so far away, it's because the rules haven't allowed for it until now.

And as for bulk goods, what about the far east ? nI go past a container yard on my daily commute, and half of them are from the far East anyway.

The reason this deal isn't happenning is because it's too politically awkward.

It will be interesting to see what sort of deal the EU manages to hammer out with communist China. If they can't agree a level playing field with us, I can't see one emerging with Beijing

 

[Chester1]

That's an interesting perspective. From my personal opinion on the matter, I believe that we rely on the western global order, and from that perspective we need to have a diplomatic entente with both rhe USA and the EU, regardless of trading position. Personally, I can't see the country drifting into an unaligned status.

We don't rely on it any more than neutral Ireland, Switzerland and Sweden. We are in a very safe spot, tucked away in the North West corner of Europe. I don't think we would go completely unaligned but give extremely apathetic support on major issues. Perhaps copying De Gaulle and withdrawing from NATOs command structure but staying a member. Our level of engagement with NATO and on other security stuff is partially done to obtain influence. If its clear that we have little or none in Europe after brexit them passing the buck on security to force the EU to pick up the slack will appeal to brexiteers. The Government sent a message at the last Munich security conference. Instead of sending a cabinet minister or the Prime Minister as per normal they sent a junior minister who had been in his job two days. Macron, Pelosi and the US Secretary of State for defence attended. It was seen as a deliberate snub to indicate a lack of British interest after Brexit.

 

[yorksrob]

We don't rely on it any more than neutral Ireland, Switzerland and Sweden. We are in a very safe spot, tucked away in the North West corner of Europe. I don't think we would go completely unaligned but give extremely apathetic support on major issues. Perhaps copying De Gaulle and withdrawing from NATOs command structure but staying a member. Our level of engagement with NATO and on other security stuff is partially done to obtain influence. If its clear that we have little or none in Europe after brexit them passing the buck on security to force the EU to pick up the slack will appeal to brexiteers. The Government sent a message at the last Munich security conference. Instead of sending a cabinet minister or the Prime Minister as per normal they sent a junior minister who had been in his job two days. Macron, Pelosi and the US Secretary of State for defence attended. It was seen as a deliberate snub to indicate a lack of British interest after Brexit.

Touche.

In terms of defence, Europe's not been carrying it's weight for decades. Could be an option if both the USA and EU annoyed us enough. And to be fair, there is an historical precedent. While we were spending what little wealth we had left after WWII building Vulcans and Victors to defend Western civilisation, the Germans were concentrating on developing their industry. It's about time Europe coughed up for its defence.

It's not a position I naturally incline towards though. More of a last resort perhaps.

 

[Dave1987]

So the "Oven ready deal" wasn't oven ready, and the "easiest negotiation in history" wasn't either. The EU have played their hand quite magnificently. Calm and organised. Old BoJo bluffed and bluffed and bluffed and they called it. I read an opinion column a few months ago that said that the EU knows that BoJo knows that the UK really does need a trade deal to prevent an economic catastrophe pandemic or no pandemic and that if he was truly going to walk away he would have done it at his first ultimatum. Wasn't it something along the lines of "I'd rather be lying dead in a ditch than allow the negotiations to go on longer than June" or something along those lines. Then it was September that we would definitely walk away and accept no deal if the EU did not capitulate to British demands, then I lost track of the number of times we were definitely going to walk away. There are some very interesting details that Britain will be bound by under no deal. People have been so busy talking about fishing and the such that many little details of other restrictions are now coming to light that will make things far more difficult for the UK post no deal Brexit. I will never change my mind that leaving the EU was a bad idea, but people who voted for Brexit now have to own the mess that has resulted!

 

[brad465]

The disaster capitalism gains and tax avoidance potential of the ERG and other no deal backers must be significant to want to pursue no deal at this stage. It's also worth pointing out that the talk seems to be if a deal is agreed and put to a Parliamentary vote, it will be extremely difficult for Labour to vote on it and have an outcome of net help to them (on the basis of things being worse off come next month). Given this you would think that the Tories would love to get a deal just to score points over Labour, but clearly the disaster capitalist interests are worth more than that. For all the trouble no deal will cause if it happens, Labour will secretly be relieved about their position being less open to criticism.

 

[dgl]

The disaster capitalism gains and tax avoidance potential of the ERG and other no deal backers must be significant to want to pursue no deal at this stage. It's also worth pointing out that the talk seems to be if a deal is agreed and put to a Parliamentary vote, it will be extremely difficult for Labour to vote on it and have an outcome of net help to them (on the basis of things being worse off come next month). Given this you would think that the Tories would love to get a deal just to score points over Labour, but clearly the disaster capitalist interests are worth more than that. For all the trouble no deal will cause if it happens, Labour will secretly be relieved about their position being less open to criticism.

That's the problem, the people who are happy with no-deal and who pushed the whole Brexit nonsense are the people who will either be only slightly affected by no deal or will actually make money out of it, just the extra red tape/paperwork for exporting/importing goods is going to make someone a pretty penny.
Plus the cynic in me says that part of the reasons a lot of these people wanted us to leave the EU was so that they could turn us into the sweat shop of Europe where pay is greatly reduced and workers rights are nil again using this situation to make themselves lots of cash at our expense.

Also I would like the likes of Boris Johnson, JRM, Nigel Farrage Etc. to go to all the car factories, European headquarters Etc. that are now set to close and personally apologise to every employee, you'd probably need a decent police presence though (though they might end up looking the other way).

 

[brad465]

Also I would like the likes of Boris Johnson, JRM, Nigel Farrage Etc. to go to all the car factories, European headquarters Etc. that are now set to close and personally apologise to every employee, you'd probably need a decent police presence though (though they might end up looking the other way).

That's if they haven't run away to Europe (ironically). Farage would be the most likely to do that as he both got his kids EU Passports and admitted on Radio that not only would Brexit not solve any of our domestic problems, but that if it doesn't go well he'll move abroad.

Rees-Mogg would probably move his investment firm back to the UK from Dublin and claim he's supporting our interests/economy by doing so, but actually it'll be because we'd change our taxation and regulation to ensure moving here makes him more money, when if he was really patriotic his firm wouldn't have spent a single day based in another country.

 

[birchesgreen]

We're going to send the gunboats in to protect "our fish", am i the only one to find this rather embarrassing?

 

[Spamcan81]

We're going to send the gunboats in to protect "our fish", am i the only one to find this rather embarrassing?

No you're not. To threaten our neighbours and NATO allies with the Royal Navy over a few fish is both foolhardy and embarrassing. Maybe somebody need to point out to Bozo that this is the 21st, not the 19th Century. What if other nations send their navies to protect their fisherman, do we declare war?

 

[ainsworth74]

We're going to send the gunboats in to protect "our fish", am i the only one to find this rather embarrassing?

Well we do have a dedicated fisheries protection squadron within the Royal Navy (actually the oldest formation in the Royal Navy potentially even predating the existence of the Royal Navy itself!) so using them to do their job I don't think is particularly embarrassing. What is embarrassing is the barely restrained glee or indeed near orgasmic euphoria which seems to be permeating certain places at the news that "we're sending in the gunboats!"...

 

[najaB]

Well we do have a dedicated fisheries protection squadron within the Royal Navy (actually the oldest formation in the Royal Navy potentially even predating the existence of the Royal Navy itself!) so using them to do their job I don't think is particularly embarrassing.

I thought their job was to protect our fishing fleet, rather than to protect "our" fish?

To paraphrase something I saw earlier: how comes when fish cross a line on a map they become "our fish" and we send gunboats to protect them, but if people cross the same line they don't become "our" people?

 

[birchesgreen]

Well we do have a dedicated fisheries protection squadron within the Royal Navy (actually the oldest formation in the Royal Navy potentially even predating the existence of the Royal Navy itself!) so using them to do their job I don't think is particularly embarrassing. What is embarrassing is the barely restrained glee or indeed near orgasmic euphoria which seems to be permeating certain places at the news that "we're sending in the gunboats!"...

That's what i was referring to, i'm well aware of the RN. The Mail and Express splashes today are far beyond parody.

 

[Spamcan81]

Well we do have a dedicated fisheries protection squadron within the Royal Navy (actually the oldest formation in the Royal Navy potentially even predating the existence of the Royal Navy itself!) so using them to do their job I don't think is particularly embarrassing. What is embarrassing is the barely restrained glee or indeed near orgasmic euphoria which seems to be permeating certain places at the news that "we're sending in the gunboats!"...

I think we have four River Class patrol ships for EU and UK fisheries protection. Now maybe they'll only have UK waters to worry about but that's not a lot of ships for an awful lot of ocean.

 

[37424]

I am increasingly alarmed by the whole situation I'm concerned about the supply of drugs to the NHS not only from an availability viewpoint but also cost even though there is generally no tariff if your part of the WTO tariff elimination zone, I understand that if its a recent drug and its not on the WTO list you may even have to pay a tariff on it as well as any cost increase from an alternate supply.

I'm not going to say much on how we got to to this state other than I think its a disgrace, I dont believe there is a mandate for it in terms of the numbers of people who think we should leave without a deal, but the Tory party isnt the Tory party anymore, moderate Tory's have largely gone and are politically homeless like myself and the Tory party is a form of UKIP now.

From their demands of No Deal arrangements that the EU are making, I think the EU will really start to show their teeth and the idea that they need us more than we need them will soon be another Brexiteer myth. A Bloc of 450 million can potentially cope better than 66 million and the majority of our trade tends to be with the larger countries that can handle it better.

 

[ainsworth74]

I thought their job was to protect our fishing fleet, rather than to protect "our" fish?

Yes indeed I was addressing the reality (such as it is!) rather than the actual headline

To paraphrase something I saw earlier: how comes when fish cross a line on a map they become "our fish" and we send gunboats to protect them, but if people cross the same line they don't become "our" people?

Yes strange that isn't it? Far more worry about fish and their "protection" (considering as their being protected for future consumption!) rather than the people in danger...

That's what i was referring to, i'm well aware of the RN. The Mail and Express splashes today are far beyond parody.

Fair enough, hopefully someone else will find my comment of interest though

Regarding the Mail in particular (where they explicitly say to protect the fish) a friend remarked they were surprised to see the Mail turning vegan

I think we have four River Class patrol ships for EU and UK fisheries protection. Now maybe they'll only have UK waters to worry about but that's not a lot of ships for an awful lot of ocean.

Seven at the moment and shortly to be eight. We've kept the original three built in the early 2000s in service (two actually recommissioned having being decommissioned prior to expected disposal or sale) alongside the further five built since 2014 with the last one currently on sea trials ahead of commissioning next year. Though you are right that there still a lot of ocean out there for them to cover.

 

[Richard Scott]

I am increasingly alarmed by the whole situation I'm concerned about the supply of drugs to the NHS not only from an availability viewpoint but also cost even though there is generally no tariff if your part of the WTO tariff elimination zone, I understand that if its a recent drug and its not on the WTO list you may even have to pay a tariff on it as well as any cost increase from an alternate supply.

I'm not going to say much on how we got to to this state other than I think its a disgrace, I dont believe there is a mandate for it in terms of the numbers of people who think we should leave without a deal, but the Tory party isnt the Tory party anymore, moderate Tory's have largely gone and are politically homeless like myself and the Tory party is a form of UKIP now.

From their demands of No Deal arrangements that the EU are making, I think the EU will really start to show their teeth and the idea that they need us more than we need them will soon be another Brexiteer myth. A Bloc of 450 million can potentially cope better than 66 million and the majority of our trade tends to be with the larger countries that can handle it better.

Agree, what a mess. Seems all common sense has gone out of the window. Why some people in this country thought we had the winning hand here I don't know? We're the ones who want to leave and, in reality, are small fry compared to the rest of the nation's who form the EU.

 

[Dave1987]

Can someone please clarify that we are not at war with the EU? Or have I missed something? BoJo‘s inflammatory language is making this whole thing even harder as it will harden positions and make a deal even less likely. Rumours that BoJo’s willingness to break international law before has made the negotiations harder as the EU wanted greater assurances that they could trust a trade deal would held to. Makes us look a laughing stock on the international stage.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I honestly think its interesting the left aern't all pro-Brexit. It's literally the working class revolution that they've been pining for for generations.

Brexit hasn't made me ashamed to be British, but it did on the morning of the vote, when I saw that blue/yellow map showing the leave/remain areas, make me ashamed to be a Londoner. For too long has the political establishment ignorned the pains and beliefs of the people of leave voting England and Wales. Almost immediately after the referendum, every Tom, Dick and Harry that had a mouthpiece began writing and speaking about the "left behind" areas-couldn't we of had this interest in the society of Dudley and Hartlepool 20 years ago? In essence, Brexit is a success, it did exactly what it intended to do and completely flip-flop the sociological and political power of this country almost on its head.

Sure, everytime I read the papers and see the doom and gloom of our impending departure, I do worry. But then I just look back at that BBC results graphic of the morning of the referendum and know that, somehow, those Brexiteers knew exactly what they were doing. I only wish I could change my vote from remain and join them.

 

[brad465]

I honestly think its interesting the left aren't all pro-Brexit. It's literally the working class revolution that they've been pining for for generations.

Yes it's interesting that there is a strong left-wing perspective to Euroscepticism; journalists Grace Blakeley and to an extent George Monbiot are of this position, while demanding the downfall of capitalism.

The reason I believe a left-wing orientated Brexit never came to being is because the "warlord/disaster capitalism" argument for leaving received tonnes of campaign/bribery money from those who would benefit from Brexit via that form of capitalism, so that's where all the campaigning for leaving was. George Monbiot revealed this recently in a vlog of why we are where we are, and called himself a "Eurosceptic Remainer": he doesn't like the EU's principles, but he'd much prefer staying in to letting the disaster capitalists dictate leaving.

 

[edwin_m]

I honestly think its interesting the left aern't all pro-Brexit. It's literally the working class revolution that they've been pining for for generations.

Brexit hasn't made me ashamed to be British, but it did on the morning of the vote, when I saw that blue/yellow map showing the leave/remain areas, make me ashamed to be a Londoner. For too long has the political establishment ignorned the pains and beliefs of the people of leave voting England and Wales. Almost immediately after the referendum, every Tom, Dick and Harry that had a mouthpiece began writing and speaking about the "left behind" areas-couldn't we of had this interest in the society of Dudley and Hartlepool 20 years ago? In essence, Brexit is a success, it did exactly what it intended to do and completely flip-flop the sociological and political power of this country almost on its head.

Sure, everytime I read the papers and see the doom and gloom of our impending departure, I do worry. But then I just look back at that BBC results graphic of the morning of the referendum and know that, somehow, those Brexiteers knew exactly what they were doing. I only wish I could change my vote from remain and join them.

Brexit may reveal the problem it does nothing to solve it. It actually makes it worse because a smaller economy overall makes it more difficult to fund the sort of investment that the "left behind" areas need, and because much of the damage will fall on areas least able to withstand it (some but not all of them being the most strongly Brexit-voting).

And the Brexiters cynically exploited that divide to secure the result they wanted, whether disaster capitalists or those who've never outgrown the Eton debating society or the Oxford Union and relish winning above all else. If they really cared about the economic and social divides within the UK they would have found a better way of bringing them to everyone's attention.

 

[najaB]

Brexit may reveal the problem it does nothing to solve it. It actually makes it worse...

This, printed on T-shirts please.

 

[jonty14]

What's the point of having a fishing fleet if the UK can't sell the fish. Most fish caught is exported to the EU.

 

[Mag_seven]

Makes us look a laughing stock on the international stage.

We have been that ever since we voted to leave the biggest free trading area on the planet.

 

[najaB]

What's the point of having a fishing fleet if the UK can't sell the fish. Most fish caught is exported to the EU.

Shh... Don't tell the arch pro-Brexit people that we're letting Europeans eat our lovely British fish!

 

[alex397]

I’m finding this obsession with fish, to the point where we are using gunships to protect us from an ally, beyond parody.

 

[najaB]

I’m finding this obsession with fish, to the point where we are using gunships to protect us from an allie, beyond parody.

As a reminder, fishing accounts for 0.1% of our GDP.