BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

kingstongraham

john80 said:

kingstongraham said:

john80 said:

kingstongraham said:

john80 said:

briantrumpet said:

john80 said:

We just need to be a bit more inventive. Things like banning foreign bottled water as it has not been bottle by a guy called Dave to our new British standard. After all the EU could not possibly complain as a third country. Sounds about as sensible as banning shellfish exports that are treated for human consumption in an EU country. Brits are funny we could consider it just a massive piss take. An eye for an eye and all that.

So trade wars it is then. Do you notch this up as a Benefit of Brexit?

We are an independent state dealing with a group of countries that want to impose non tariff barriers for their benefit and the UK's disadvantage. Is it unreasonable to in response say produce a rule that only bottles water bottled in the UK to UK standards by UK owned companies paying tax in the UK should be allowed. It makes as much sense as the shellfish rule? There are literally a hundred things that we could target to show the point without making any material difference to a British person unless that is you just can't live without Evian.

If we take the old USA they have imposed tariffs on Whisky prior to us leaving the EU as punishment for the EU's prior action. They have not removed those tariffs from a friendly state that has not imposed tariffs and wants more reciprocal trade. Is it not reasonable to expect these to be removed in a sensible timeframe. If they are not is it not reasonable to impose some punishment for that lack of flexibility? For sure consumers don't win from trade wars however sometimes there has to be some pain for some gain unless your plan is to persuade them with kind words for the next 20 years.

The rules of the game have changed so I would suggest that not defending the UK's interests as an independent state to get to where you want to be is at best naive.

This is a rule that the EU has for all non-EU countries where an overriding agreement is not included in a trade deal. Which it isn't for the UK.

As I understand it, under WTO rules, if we wanted to impose a similar requirement on bottled water, it would need to be imposed for imports to the UK from all countries.

The tariffs the USA imposed followed a ruling from the WTO on a trade dispute regarding Airbus. If we want to do that under the same rules, we'd need a ruling from the WTO.

You would not be imposing a tariff on bottled water. You are merely writing a standard that all water needs to be bottled in the UK so that it can be certified as suitable for human consumption or each bottle needs a test certificate to prove it is carried out by a test lab in the country of origin with a million pound fine for non compliance rigorously enforced. See where I am going with this. Quite often nations only change their ways when confronted by a return of the favor. If you want to just suck it up as a independent state then maybe put that in your manifesto and see how you get on in 2025. Brexit does not mean we can't challenge what the EU does.

I didn't say we would be imposing a tariff, you mentioned the tariffs on whisky.

And what I am saying is that any additional requirement would also need to apply to all countries outside the UK, not just the EU. Bottled water's probably quite a good way to do it, because we get most from the EU anyway.

Would need to see how that change to our non-tariff barriers works with the agreement we've just signed, though. I think it's a bit of a weird thing to start a trade war over though.

As is shellfish given the EU are doing a large amount of the processing. But it would appear that common sense does not apply to the EU.

I mean bivalve molluscs from class B waters is a weird thing for us to start a trade war over.

Lookie here at a workshop from 2019: https://thefishsite.com/articles/shellfish-sector-braced-for-brexit

LBMs from class B waters have a different system from food exports. How it will work.

And this from 2019: https://fishingnews.co.uk/news/eu-mussel-exports-threat/

Apart from worries about the effects of border delays on its live product, a week after the Brexit day deadline, on 8 April, the sector was informed by government and other relevant statutory bodies that, in fact, any live bivalve molluscs produced in anything other than Grade A waters would not be able to be exported to the EU. This would exclude the vast majority of waters around England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland, which are Grade B.

It's not been a secret, as far as I can tell. To whinge about it being sprung on us is perverse.

Pross

Brexiter in refusing to take ownership of problems caused by Brexit shock.

pangolin

Stevo will be along to tell him off for whinging

elbowloh

I can't believe that Brexiters are still expecting the EU to give us special treatment.

We are not part of the EU, we are outsiders now and are going to be treated as such.

Despite Boris's promises to the contrary, we were never going to have our cake and eat it.

briantrumpet

elbowloh said:

I can't believe that Brexiters are still expecting the EU to give us special treatment.

I can. It's all they ever had.

surrey_commuter

Obviously we would not be allowed to introduce non trade barriers on the EU under the terms of the deal that we signed less than two months ago. I guess even if illegal we could tear it up and accept the slap on the wrist from the WTO.

As mentioned by others it would seem strange to do that so that we could impose an enormous number of barriers to trade with everybody we did not have a comprehensive FTA with so that we could suggest a new FTA to the EU which would allow us to export live shellfish from our mucky water.

Over Boeing/Airbus the EU was granted retaliatory tariffs by the WTO, the UK as a gesture of goodwill dropped their against the US to ease the ending of the crippling duties on Scotch, their reciprocation is still pending

surrey_commuter

elbowloh said:

I can't believe that Brexiters are still expecting the EU to give us special treatment.

We are not part of the EU, we are outsiders now and are going to be treated as such.

Despite Boris's promises to the contrary, we were never going to have our cake and eat it.

If outside the FTA the EU would legally have to offer those terms to all other countries.
Many other FTAs they have signed will have an uplift in them so that the other party has parity with any future deals that offer better terms. You could find that if they gave in to us the Japanese and Vietnamese could be parking super tankers of shellfish in Boulogne

rjsterry

One could look at CETA to see what we could have done about shellfish, as they are covered by that FTA. Would seem that we went for Canada minus in the end of our own volition.

elbowloh

rjsterry said:

One could look at CETA to see what we could have done about shellfish, as they are covered by that FTA. Would seem that we went for Canada minus in the end of our own volition.

But I thought we were told we had made a great deal? And you're telling me we've done worse than Canada? Surely not.

john80

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

I can't believe that Brexiters are still expecting the EU to give us special treatment.

We are not part of the EU, we are outsiders now and are going to be treated as such.

Despite Boris's promises to the contrary, we were never going to have our cake and eat it.

If outside the FTA the EU would legally have to offer those terms to all other countries.
Many other FTAs they have signed will have an uplift in them so that the other party has parity with any future deals that offer better terms. You could find that if they gave in to us the Japanese and Vietnamese could be parking super tankers of shellfish in Boulogne

That is some supertanker you are running there to keep that product alive on a multi week voyage.

john80

surrey_commuter said:

Obviously we would not be allowed to introduce non trade barriers on the EU under the terms of the deal that we signed less than two months ago. I guess even if illegal we could tear it up and accept the slap on the wrist from the WTO.

As mentioned by others it would seem strange to do that so that we could impose an enormous number of barriers to trade with everybody we did not have a comprehensive FTA with so that we could suggest a new FTA to the EU which would allow us to export live shellfish from our mucky water.

Over Boeing/Airbus the EU was granted retaliatory tariffs by the WTO, the UK as a gesture of goodwill dropped their against the US to ease the ending of the crippling duties on Scotch, their reciprocation is still pending

What is your timeframe for reciprocation. After a year do you think it's still all fair does.

ddraver

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

I can't believe that Brexiters are still expecting the EU to give us special treatment.

We are not part of the EU, we are outsiders now and are going to be treated as such.

Despite Boris's promises to the contrary, we were never going to have our cake and eat it.

If outside the FTA the EU would legally have to offer those terms to all other countries.
Many other FTAs they have signed will have an uplift in them so that the other party has parity with any future deals that offer better terms. You could find that if they gave in to us the Japanese and Vietnamese could be parking super tankers of shellfish in Boulogne

That is some supertanker you are running there to keep that product alive on a multi week voyage.

By Jove! I (almost) think he's got it!

john80

ddraver said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

I can't believe that Brexiters are still expecting the EU to give us special treatment.

We are not part of the EU, we are outsiders now and are going to be treated as such.

Despite Boris's promises to the contrary, we were never going to have our cake and eat it.

If outside the FTA the EU would legally have to offer those terms to all other countries.
Many other FTAs they have signed will have an uplift in them so that the other party has parity with any future deals that offer better terms. You could find that if they gave in to us the Japanese and Vietnamese could be parking super tankers of shellfish in Boulogne

That is some supertanker you are running there to keep that product alive on a multi week voyage.

By Jove! I (almost) think he's got it!

I think you might be dumb enough.to believe ships of live shellfish from the other side of the world being an option. Each to their own.

rjsterry

And that is why online sarcasm doesn't work. 😂

briantrumpet

rjsterry said:

And that is why online sarcasm doesn't work. 😂

Oh, I think it worked in one way...

ddraver

surrey_commuter

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

Obviously we would not be allowed to introduce non trade barriers on the EU under the terms of the deal that we signed less than two months ago. I guess even if illegal we could tear it up and accept the slap on the wrist from the WTO.

As mentioned by others it would seem strange to do that so that we could impose an enormous number of barriers to trade with everybody we did not have a comprehensive FTA with so that we could suggest a new FTA to the EU which would allow us to export live shellfish from our mucky water.

Over Boeing/Airbus the EU was granted retaliatory tariffs by the WTO, the UK as a gesture of goodwill dropped their against the US to ease the ending of the crippling duties on Scotch, their reciprocation is still pending

What is your timeframe for reciprocation. After a year do you think it's still all fair does.

I honestly don’t know, trade is a phenomenally complicated subject. I suspect more so than any other subject that might is right and in this example the US will do what they want.

ddraver

Edit - wrong thread

rjsterry

@tailwindhome have you seen the story about the DUP having lobbied for Swiss-style alignment on SPS to avoid a lot of the headaches arising from the Protocol?

Yet more evidence that the most of the problems are deliberate choices/were known issues rather than unforeseen results.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry said:

@tailwindhome have you seen the story about the DUP having lobbied for Swiss-style alignment on SPS to avoid a lot of the headaches arising from the Protocol?

Yet more evidence that the most of the problems are deliberate choices/were known issues rather than unforeseen results.

What theories does anybody have as to why he cares so little for the well being of business?

The best I can come up with is that he is an old school Trot and believes in the power of the State to replace and improve the workin
gs of the free market.

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rjsterry said:

@tailwindhome have you seen the story about the DUP having lobbied for Swiss-style alignment on SPS to avoid a lot of the headaches arising from the Protocol?

Yet more evidence that the most of the problems are deliberate choices/were known issues rather than unforeseen results.

What theories does anybody have as to why he cares so little for the well being of business?

The best I can come up with is that he is an old school Trot and believes in the power of the State to replace and improve the workin
gs of the free market.

I see more as a variant of British exceptionalism - Britain is somehow innately very commercial and business has done well because they are British - not because the gov't has created the right conditions for that.

He ultimately thinks all this stuff won't really affect business, rather than being anti-business.

briantrumpet

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rjsterry said:

@tailwindhome have you seen the story about the DUP having lobbied for Swiss-style alignment on SPS to avoid a lot of the headaches arising from the Protocol?

Yet more evidence that the most of the problems are deliberate choices/were known issues rather than unforeseen results.

What theories does anybody have as to why he cares so little for the well being of business?

The best I can come up with is that he is an old school Trot and believes in the power of the State to replace and improve the workin
gs of the free market.

I see more as a variant of British exceptionalism - Britain is somehow innately very commercial and business has done well because they are British - not because the gov't has created the right conditions for that.

He ultimately thinks all this stuff won't really affect business, rather than being anti-business.

This does seem more plausible, and is behind the whole cake & eat it delusion that somehow a UK without its unfettered access to the EU will be as attractive a place for international businesses as one that has deliberately cut its ties.

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rjsterry said:

@tailwindhome have you seen the story about the DUP having lobbied for Swiss-style alignment on SPS to avoid a lot of the headaches arising from the Protocol?

Yet more evidence that the most of the problems are deliberate choices/were known issues rather than unforeseen results.

What theories does anybody have as to why he cares so little for the well being of business?

The best I can come up with is that he is an old school Trot and believes in the power of the State to replace and improve the workin
gs of the free market.

I see more as a variant of British exceptionalism - Britain is somehow innately very commercial and business has done well because they are British - not because the gov't has created the right conditions for that.

He ultimately thinks all this stuff won't really affect business, rather than being anti-business.

I suspect it is more basic than that. He has delegated the details to ideologues who have dismissed the requests from various industries before they've even got to his desk. The trade press is full of stories of industry lobbyists being shut out of consultations for daring to suggest that maybe there were some benefits to agreeing common rules with a trading partner. Johnson just craves adulation from the cultists.

rick_chasey

UK agrees to EU delay to ratification of the trade deal till April 30th.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

UK agrees to EU delay to ratification of the trade deal till April 30th.

Other than passing up the chance to tear it up what it is the significance?

ddraver

It's not like the UK had any real choice in the matter...for all the reasons...

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

UK agrees to EU delay to ratification of the trade deal till April 30th.

Other than passing up the chance to tear it up what it is the significance?

Tacit admission it’s not going well

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

UK agrees to EU delay to ratification of the trade deal till April 30th.

Other than passing up the chance to tear it up what it is the significance?

Tacit admission it’s not going well

You have lost me

briantrumpet

This article hits the nail on the head, and skewers the lie the Brexit is the end of the endless whingeing about Brussels.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/23/brexit-machine-perpetual-grievance-britain-brussels

"Euroscepticism is a machine for generating perpetual grievance. It works by making Brussels the enemy, spoiling relations and serving up the soured mood to a domestic audience as proof that the other side does not want to be friends.

"There is no defence of Johnson’s deal if the ambition was serious advancement of the national interest. But there is another test. It is the one that matters most to the architects of Brexit, although they never admit it, even to themselves.

"For the true believers, a good Brexit is one that keeps the grievance alive; that makes foreigners the scapegoat for bad government; that continues to indulge the twin national myths of victimhood and heroic defiance. Measured for that purpose, Johnson’s pointless Brexit is perfect."

rjsterry

Nationalism and victimhood. What a surprise.