BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
there is no room for everybody to turn up four hours early.rick_chasey said: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/
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 bookings0 -
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!surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:surrey_commuter said:It should be calmly explained to people that this is what they voted for.
0 -
They want the ticket money. Doesn't matter if people get on the boat or not, no?surrey_commuter said:
there is no room for everybody to turn up four hours early.rick_chasey said: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/
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 bookings0 -
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 said:
They want the ticket money. Doesn't matter if people get on the boat or not, no?surrey_commuter said:
there is no room for everybody to turn up four hours early.rick_chasey said: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/
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 bookings0 -
Oh the boats have the facilities. The border control doesn't. I dunno.wallace_and_gromit said:
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 said:
They want the ticket money. Doesn't matter if people get on the boat or not, no?surrey_commuter said:
there is no room for everybody to turn up four hours early.rick_chasey said: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/
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
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.0 -
I know you really don’t like the north but this is hardly unusual.surrey_commuter 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.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... 🤔)
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
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…0 -
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.0 -
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?0
-
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Have they though?Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.0 -
She was pretty specific about them. Got any evidence to say that she is wrong or lying?rick_chasey said:
Have they though?Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
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]0
-
As little evidence as you do the civil service did in fact omit those other factors.Stevo_666 said:
She was pretty specific about them. Got any evidence to say that she is wrong or lying?rick_chasey said:
Have they though?Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
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.0 -
Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
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 coalition0 -
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.rjsterry said:
Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Unfortunately that is not evidence.rick_chasey said:
But, but, it's the nasty TorwiesStevo_666 said:
She was pretty specific about them. Got any evidence to say that she is wrong or lying?rick_chasey said:
Have they though?Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Sure, neither of us have the paper, so we can't say.Stevo_666 said:
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.rjsterry said:
Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
That's why I was inquiring whether you believed a politician over the civil service.0 -
After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.Stevo_666 said:
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.rjsterry said:
Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
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%)0 -
-
beat me to itsurrey_commuter said:
you have obviously never been to Gare du Nord international departuresddraver said:
At the risk of coming over all Stevo the problem there is just british lack of ambition.surrey_commuter 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.
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...
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
morstar said:
I know you really don’t like the north but this is hardly unusual.surrey_commuter 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.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... 🤔)
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
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 Chorley0 -
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.
0 -
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.Stevo_666 said:
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.rjsterry said:
Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
I'll do the first bit for you.
https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/7859/documents/81612/default/#page=131985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
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 abusebriantrumpet said:Re Labour's Make Brexit Work stance, not admitting even the most obvious problems did seem to be missing an open goal. Bemusing.
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 hypocritesmy bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
It's 0.08% after ten years, isn't it?surrey_commuter said:
After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.Stevo_666 said:
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.rjsterry said:
Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
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%)0 -
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.sungod said:
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 abusebriantrumpet said:Re Labour's Make Brexit Work stance, not admitting even the most obvious problems did seem to be missing an open goal. Bemusing.
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
Doubly so when you explain there's nonces *in the family of the head of the church of England"0 -
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.kingstongraham said:
It's 0.08% after ten years, isn't it?surrey_commuter said:
After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.Stevo_666 said:
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.rjsterry said:
Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
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%)
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.
0 -
Which industries get those benefits in the UK? I assume the farmers lose out again.surrey_commuter said:
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.kingstongraham said:
It's 0.08% after ten years, isn't it?surrey_commuter said:
After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.Stevo_666 said:
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.rjsterry said:
Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
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%)
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.
0 -
Hopefully the benefits will be shared around as then we would get £25 eachkingstongraham said:
Which industries get those benefits in the UK? I assume the farmers lose out again.surrey_commuter said:
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.kingstongraham said:
It's 0.08% after ten years, isn't it?surrey_commuter said:
After decades of close integration of CU/SM with our nearest neighbours, leaving the EU reduced our annual rate of growth by 0.5%.Stevo_666 said:
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.rjsterry said:
Show us the calculations and where you think they are wrong with supporting evidence.Stevo_666 said:
They have clearly omitted some important factors there.rick_chasey said:
You trust Badenoch more than her advisors?Stevo_666 said:
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:wallace_and_gromit said:
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).Stevo_666 said:
He agreed with me on the point I was making.Pross said:
Love the way you ignore the rest of the response.Stevo_666 said:
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.wallace_and_gromit said:
Definitely join it.Stevo_666 said:
But you are still connecting the two deals when it is not an either/or decision.wallace_and_gromit said:
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.Stevo_666 said:
I am simply trying to bring a bit of perspective to it in terms of potential scale, if that helps to clarify the point.wallace_and_gromit said:
The quoted 0.08% of gdp benefit is the incremental impact not the overall value of trade with the countries concerned post-deal.Stevo_666 said:
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.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:
On what basis and over what period?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
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.briantrumpet 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
I wish I could get as glowing a report for improving my performance by 0.1% over the next decade.
0.08%
Alternatively can I borrow your time machine and travel to the future?
Also worth noting that it covers services which is a plus point given the size of the UK services sector.
I suspect you know this already though, being a bright “numbers man”.
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.
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?
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”.
Imagine it was Starmer making the claim if it helps 😀
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%)
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.0 -
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.0
