BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

1202720282030203220332110

Comments

  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867

    That's stupid. If I was the boat company I'd tell everyone to turn up 4 hours early once i'd taken the customer's money.

    Do a cost-benefit analysis if it's preferable to make it non-refundable or transferable if you miss due to border queues and blame the gov't/

    there is no room for everybody to turn up four hours early.

    They should take their lead from Eurostar and run less ferries so that the infrastructure can cope with the number of passengers.

    Simple enough to work out how many coaches can be processed an hour and sell that number of bookings
  • wallace_and_gromit
    wallace_and_gromit Posts: 3,616
    edited April 2023

    It should be calmly explained to people that this is what they voted for.

    I'm guessing that the majority of folk caught in queues didn't vote for Brexit. I am certain that the kids on ski trips didn't!

  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661

    That's stupid. If I was the boat company I'd tell everyone to turn up 4 hours early once i'd taken the customer's money.

    Do a cost-benefit analysis if it's preferable to make it non-refundable or transferable if you miss due to border queues and blame the gov't/

    there is no room for everybody to turn up four hours early.

    They should take their lead from Eurostar and run less ferries so that the infrastructure can cope with the number of passengers.

    Simple enough to work out how many coaches can be processed an hour and sell that number of bookings
    They want the ticket money. Doesn't matter if people get on the boat or not, no?
  • That's stupid. If I was the boat company I'd tell everyone to turn up 4 hours early once i'd taken the customer's money.

    Do a cost-benefit analysis if it's preferable to make it non-refundable or transferable if you miss due to border queues and blame the gov't/

    there is no room for everybody to turn up four hours early.

    They should take their lead from Eurostar and run less ferries so that the infrastructure can cope with the number of passengers.

    Simple enough to work out how many coaches can be processed an hour and sell that number of bookings
    They want the ticket money. Doesn't matter if people get on the boat or not, no?
    Is there a duty of care involved to not deliberately oversell tickets when you don't have the facilities to accommodate those held up in reasonable conditions? 18 hours in a queue is OK in response to a one-off that seems to have blind-sided those in charge of planning, but as a response to your revenue-maximising ticketing policy it might not be.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    edited April 2023

    That's stupid. If I was the boat company I'd tell everyone to turn up 4 hours early once i'd taken the customer's money.

    Do a cost-benefit analysis if it's preferable to make it non-refundable or transferable if you miss due to border queues and blame the gov't/

    there is no room for everybody to turn up four hours early.

    They should take their lead from Eurostar and run less ferries so that the infrastructure can cope with the number of passengers.

    Simple enough to work out how many coaches can be processed an hour and sell that number of bookings
    They want the ticket money. Doesn't matter if people get on the boat or not, no?
    Is there a duty of care involved to not deliberately oversell tickets when you don't have the facilities to accommodate those held up in reasonable conditions? 18 hours in a queue is OK in response to a one-off that seems to have blind-sided those in charge of planning, but as a response to your revenue-maximising ticketing policy it might not be.
    Oh the boats have the facilities. The border control doesn't. I dunno.

    If I was a boat company, I'd probably keep taking as much money as I can and just keep the pressure on the gov't to change it.

    Boats aren't all that easy to take in and out of service anyway.
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    edited April 2023

    ddraver said:

    yer, in the awkward position of agreeing with Lisa Nandy here. We could/should've built a whole load of extra passport checking points and paid the french a great deal of money to staff them during known busy periods. If the 30s to 2-minute ratio is right then we need 4 times as many. (Personally, I am envisioning a sort of 4 storey building with an artfully designed set of spaghetti-like ramps up to each booth).

    When we thought no-deal was an option (lol) we did spend an awful lot of money building facilities for customs checks. (I wonder if this problem and that solution could be mixed somehow... 🤔)

    The UK side of Eurotunnel must have room to build a solution but I just don't see how it is possible at Dover.

    I was amazed to read a story about a school in Chorley going on a ski trip to Italy by coach. Giving up at Dover and turning back would seem like a blessing in disguise.

    The problem will solve itself by the ferries selling less tickets and/or fewer people travelling
    I know you really don’t like the north but this is hardly unusual.
    It doesn’t even take that long anymore until Dover got screwed up.

    It’s typically less than 20 hours and with a ferry crossing to break up the journey…
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    Interestingly, I suspect it’s the trip my some would have been on had he not given up and taken the refund after the 3rd cancellation.

    Cancelled last 3 years due to covid and finally back on this year only for them to have a Dover disaster.
  • amrushton
    amrushton Posts: 1,312
    So Dover is the real issue. probably not as simple as sell less crossings for Dover and spread the other bookings across some other ports?
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,408

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Have they though?
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,408

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Have they though?
    She was pretty specific about them. Got any evidence to say that she is wrong or lying?
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,408
    And same question to you Rick: forget the EU and Brexit for a minute. Would you go ahead with the CPTPP deal if it were your choice?
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    edited April 2023
    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Have they though?
    She was pretty specific about them. Got any evidence to say that she is wrong or lying?
    As little evidence as you do the civil service did in fact omit those other factors.

    As a general rule, those in whitehall are professionals at this, and though they're not infallible, if I was a betting man I'd put more faith in their analysis than any politician.

    Any minister who has to brief against their own civil service is clearly a f*cking idiot and is ignoring their advice entirely.

    "My advisors are wrong" lol OK.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,554
    edited April 2023
    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.

    Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,408
    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.

    Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
    You know very well I don't have those. What we do have is a clear statement from a minister about factors omitted from the forecasts. Same question to you as I put to Rick above: show me the evidence that says she is wrong or lying.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 61,408

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Have they though?
    She was pretty specific about them. Got any evidence to say that she is wrong or lying?
    But, but, it's the nasty Torwies
    Unfortunately that is not evidence.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.

    Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
    You know very well I don't have those. What we do have is a clear statement from a minister about factors omitted from the forecasts. Same question to you as I put to Rick above: show me the evidence that says she is wrong or lying.
    Sure, neither of us have the paper, so we can't say.

    That's why I was inquiring whether you believed a politician over the civil service.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.

    Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
    You know very well I don't have those. What we do have is a clear statement from a minister about factors omitted from the forecasts. Same question to you as I put to Rick above: show me the evidence that says she is wrong or lying.
    After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.

    CPTTP means a new deal with Brunei/Malaysia and an improved deal with a bunch of other countries on the other side of the planet, it seems reasonable to me that this would add 0.08% (which sounds a lot worse than 0.1%)
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Because gravity of trade, obviously ;)
  • sungod
    sungod Posts: 17,348

    ddraver said:



    The UK side of Eurotunnel must have room to build a solution but I just don't see how it is possible at Dover.

    At the risk of coming over all Stevo the problem there is just british lack of ambition.

    In france there would have been a beautifully designed architectural masterpiece that housed all the booths on top of each other or below each other.

    We can't build a f'kin railway...
    you have obviously never been to Gare du Nord international departures
    beat me to it :smiley:
    my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    morstar said:

    ddraver said:

    yer, in the awkward position of agreeing with Lisa Nandy here. We could/should've built a whole load of extra passport checking points and paid the french a great deal of money to staff them during known busy periods. If the 30s to 2-minute ratio is right then we need 4 times as many. (Personally, I am envisioning a sort of 4 storey building with an artfully designed set of spaghetti-like ramps up to each booth).

    When we thought no-deal was an option (lol) we did spend an awful lot of money building facilities for customs checks. (I wonder if this problem and that solution could be mixed somehow... 🤔)

    The UK side of Eurotunnel must have room to build a solution but I just don't see how it is possible at Dover.

    I was amazed to read a story about a school in Chorley going on a ski trip to Italy by coach. Giving up at Dover and turning back would seem like a blessing in disguise.

    The problem will solve itself by the ferries selling less tickets and/or fewer people travelling
    I know you really don’t like the north but this is hardly unusual.
    It doesn’t even take that long anymore until Dover got screwed up.

    It’s typically less than 20 hours and with a ferry crossing to break up the journey…

    My post is reflects my dislike of coach travel having travelled from London to Spain, I would not have welcomed an extra three hours to Chorley
  • monkimark
    monkimark Posts: 1,928
    I imagine that coach is a pretty standard method of going on school trips - probably a lot simpler logistically than getting 30 odd kids to/through an airport and again at the other side without losing any of them.

    I grew up in Chorley and went on a school trip to the Dordogne/south of France in a coach. I don't especially like coach travel now but aged 14 it was just a load of time sat with your mates with limited adult interference.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,554
    edited April 2023
    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.

    Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
    You know very well I don't have those. What we do have is a clear statement from a minister about factors omitted from the forecasts. Same question to you as I put to Rick above: show me the evidence that says she is wrong or lying.
    Oh, come on, Badenoch is hardly neutral in this and we are way past taking a minister's word at face value. You're making the claim - you back it up.

    I'll do the first bit for you.

    https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/7859/documents/81612/default/#page=13
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • sungod
    sungod Posts: 17,348

    Re Labour's Make Brexit Work stance, not admitting even the most obvious problems did seem to be missing an open goal. Bemusing.

    braverman and her brexiter luvvies are happy to claim that wokery and cancel culture suppress discussion/recognition of the possibility that culture may be a factor in some cases of abuse

    tbh i agree there hasn't been enough public discussion on this, but not convinced that it's for the reasons claimed, there's also the consequences of years of populist/nationalist/polarising rhetoric, with serious issues being trivialised or exploited for political gain (on all sides)

    yet they aren't willing to discuss, let alone accept, the proven harm they've done with brexit, i.e by their own standards they're a bunch of woke snowflake cancelling hypocrites
    my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,152

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.

    Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
    You know very well I don't have those. What we do have is a clear statement from a minister about factors omitted from the forecasts. Same question to you as I put to Rick above: show me the evidence that says she is wrong or lying.
    After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.

    CPTTP means a new deal with Brunei/Malaysia and an improved deal with a bunch of other countries on the other side of the planet, it seems reasonable to me that this would add 0.08% (which sounds a lot worse than 0.1%)
    It's 0.08% after ten years, isn't it?
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    edited April 2023
    sungod said:

    Re Labour's Make Brexit Work stance, not admitting even the most obvious problems did seem to be missing an open goal. Bemusing.

    braverman and her brexiter luvvies are happy to claim that wokery and cancel culture suppress discussion/recognition of the possibility that culture may be a factor in some cases of abuse

    tbh i agree there hasn't been enough public discussion on this, but not convinced that it's for the reasons claimed, there's also the consequences of years of populist/nationalist/polarising rhetoric, with serious issues being trivialised or exploited for political gain (on all sides)

    yet they aren't willing to discuss, let alone accept, the proven harm they've done with brexit, i.e by their own standards they're a bunch of woke snowflake cancelling hypocrites
    Always amuses me the lot who bang on about Muslim grooming gangs get very upset when you explain that the only reason Prince Andrew isn't being done for being a nonce is because his mother, now brother, was/is the head of state. Talk about conspiracies.

    Doubly so when you explain there's nonces *in the family of the head of the church of England"
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.

    Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
    You know very well I don't have those. What we do have is a clear statement from a minister about factors omitted from the forecasts. Same question to you as I put to Rick above: show me the evidence that says she is wrong or lying.
    After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.

    CPTTP means a new deal with Brunei/Malaysia and an improved deal with a bunch of other countries on the other side of the planet, it seems reasonable to me that this would add 0.08% (which sounds a lot worse than 0.1%)
    It's 0.08% after ten years, isn't it?
    I assumed itwas poorly written and must be annual, but I have just found a DIT doc that puts the uplift at £1.8bn so it really is not worth the effort.

    Static economic modelling suggests that
    there could be an increase in UK GDP of £1.8 billion in the long run.7
    However, this increase is not
    an economic forecast: it shows the added growth over and above future trends.


  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,152

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.

    Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
    You know very well I don't have those. What we do have is a clear statement from a minister about factors omitted from the forecasts. Same question to you as I put to Rick above: show me the evidence that says she is wrong or lying.
    After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.

    CPTTP means a new deal with Brunei/Malaysia and an improved deal with a bunch of other countries on the other side of the planet, it seems reasonable to me that this would add 0.08% (which sounds a lot worse than 0.1%)
    It's 0.08% after ten years, isn't it?
    I assumed itwas poorly written and must be annual, but I have just found a DIT doc that puts the uplift at £1.8bn so it really is not worth the effort.

    Static economic modelling suggests that
    there could be an increase in UK GDP of £1.8 billion in the long run.7
    However, this increase is not
    an economic forecast: it shows the added growth over and above future trends.


    Which industries get those benefits in the UK? I assume the farmers lose out again.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Pross said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    monkimark said:

    Over 10 years according the the government's own figures

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65124741

    ‐----------------
    And even with some gains in trading the government only estimates it will add 0.08% to the size of the economy in 10 years.
    -----------------

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    More opinions ;) from the press which paint a positive picture...

    The announcement that the UK is to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership is a huge achievement. It should not be underestimated. This will open up free trade between the UK and 11 economies in the Indo Pacific region. It means free trade not just with Australia and New Zealand but with countries like Japan, Canada and Mexico, as well as Singapore and Vietnam. It will in time prove transformational for the British economy.

    These countries have a population of 500 million and a GDP of $9 trillion. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. Of the others, many are fast growing and progressive economies, and then there are the more traditional, stable, developed economies of Australia, Canada and Singapore.

    The UK will be in a unique position. It already has a free trade agreement with the EU which may not be quite as liberal as being a member of the single market, but nevertheless gives the UK tariff and quota free access to the EU market, as well as being able to import from the EU duty-free. No country has freer trade with the EU than the UK. Add to that free trade with 500 million people in the Indo-Pacific and the UK has amongst the best trading arrangements of any country on earth.

    At the moment, the UK’s trade with the CPTPP countries constitutes just 7.8 per cent of its total trade. Critics may think that is unimportant, but remember: these countries are some of the most economically dynamic on earth. It is estimated that by 2030, 65 per cent of the world’s middle-class consumers will be in the Indo Pacific region. So for the naysayers who think the CPTPP may not be important to the British economy, let me remind them that the growth on trade with those 11 economies is already running at around 8 per cent a year.

    Once trade barriers are torn down, expect that trade to grow a great deal faster. And while we have no idea how well British exporters will fare in those Indo Pacific markets, the opportunities have now opened up as never before. Getting into the CPTPP is not just beneficial in the short-term, it is locking the British economy into the most economically dynamic region in the world. It constitutes a very serious investment in the future.

    Added to the trade statistics, it is important to remember that UK service suppliers are already deeply integrated with the Indo Pacific region. UK service suppliers exported nearly £30 billion worth of services to CPTPP members in 2019.


    Also a reminder that we do have a free trade deal with EU which is better than any other country, according to the article.

    Not bad for a bunch of alleged f***wits :smile:


    I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
    I wish I could predict the future like you Brian. I've already set out the likely long term benefits, but you appear to be stuck in the old 'the only good trade deal is with the EU' mindset. Time to broaden your horizons I think.

    0.08%
    On what basis and over what period?

    Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
    Given that exports to CPTPP countries already exceed £60bn a year its hard to see how that estimate is anything other than conservative. Either that or the estimates of the impact from Brexit of 4% are likely overblown. And the estimate will be before you've taken into account likely new entrants to the CPTPP.

    Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
    The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.

    I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
    I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.
    I appreciate that and tbh, I’m more to your “non-pessimistic” view on the whole thing than many here. But even if the adverse impact of Brexit is over stated 2x and the benefit of the new deal understated 10x then the net impact is -2% plus 1% ie still a net negative.

    So it’s easy to see why folk here do not share your enthusiasm. You can’t simply dismiss leaving the eu as a historical aberration; one of the reasons given for leaving was to be able to do big trade deals elsewhere, so the impact of leaving has to be factored into any assessment of the impact of a new deal.
    But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.

    Forget the EU for a minute, we have done what we have done and it isn't likely to change in the short or medium term. Based on what you know and looking just at the CPTPP, do you think we should go ahead and sign up it?
    Definitely join it.

    Thank you - we agree then. That's really the case I was making, but as expected too many seemed to take this as an assault on the apparently faultless EU arrangements that used to be in place.
    Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.
    He agreed with me on the point I was making.
    Perhaps you can return the favour and acknowledge the caveat I included, namely that the new deal is no more than a rounding error in terms of its upside relative to the downside of Brexit (in GDP terms).

    I'm not so sure about whether that is the case that it is 'just a rounding error, given the recent statement by Kemi Badenoch rubbishing her own departments forecasts on this - as I pointed out upthread, it looked way too conservative ('scuse the pun). I know a few people latched onto that conservative forecast with ill disguised glee, but she is head of the department so knows better than some randoms on a bike forum:
    https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/02/indo-pacific-trade-deal-cptpp-brexit-britain/

    Quote:
    Badenoch rails against a Whitehall forecast, published several years ago, estimating that CPTPP membership will boost UK GDP by a paltry 0.08pc. “I can’t stand this estimate, even though it came from my department,” she says. “It’s a stale, static, out-of-date assessment that assumes growth is linear and businesses won’t use CPTPP to really expand”.

    Warming to her theme, Badenoch perhaps unknowingly paraphrases Wayne Gretzky. “Demand from the CPTPP countries is expected to far outstrip growth from Europe,” she argues. “So this deal will bring the UK significant economic growth if we use it properly – this is all about where the world is heading”.

    What’s clear is that downbeat Whitehall forecasts don’t consider that other countries could soon join the CPTPP – with major economies including Taiwan and South Korea expressing serious interest. And the US could also end up rejoining in the years to come – which, according to Falconer, “could well mean we don’t then need to seek our own bilateral deal with the US”.

    You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?
    They have clearly omitted some important factors there.
    Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.

    Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
    You know very well I don't have those. What we do have is a clear statement from a minister about factors omitted from the forecasts. Same question to you as I put to Rick above: show me the evidence that says she is wrong or lying.
    After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.

    CPTTP means a new deal with Brunei/Malaysia and an improved deal with a bunch of other countries on the other side of the planet, it seems reasonable to me that this would add 0.08% (which sounds a lot worse than 0.1%)
    It's 0.08% after ten years, isn't it?
    I assumed itwas poorly written and must be annual, but I have just found a DIT doc that puts the uplift at £1.8bn so it really is not worth the effort.

    Static economic modelling suggests that
    there could be an increase in UK GDP of £1.8 billion in the long run.7
    However, this increase is not
    an economic forecast: it shows the added growth over and above future trends.


    Which industries get those benefits in the UK? I assume the farmers lose out again.
    Hopefully the benefits will be shared around as then we would get £25 each
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,152
    I think it isn't very clearly written, if it's an uplift of 0.08% in GDP in 10 years, that would be £25 per year by about 2035 I guess.

    Well worth it to be the ones who get the blame for China not being allowed to join the club.