BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
I can understand that. But every time you mention the north it is with the same disdain Rick attaches to the word Boomer.surrey_commuter said: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 Chorley
Fwiw, I did multiple school ski trips as a teenager. The first by coach and all others we flew. The price difference was significant percentage wise. The 24 hr coach trip was actually not bad but the rough crossing was an experience. But it’s much quicker nowadays with most only taking 18 hrs.0 -
It’s pretty compelling when it comes to lying.Stevo_666 said:
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”.0 -
-
the major difference is that I am 50% northernermorstar said:
I can understand that. But every time you mention the north it is with the same disdain Rick attaches to the word Boomer.surrey_commuter said: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 Chorley
Fwiw, I did multiple school ski trips as a teenager. The first by coach and all others we flew. The price difference was significant percentage wise. The 24 hr coach trip was actually not bad but the rough crossing was an experience. But it’s much quicker nowadays with most only taking 18 hrs.
I think you are being over-sensitive so have edited it to remove any northern references but retain my dislike of long distance coach travel
I was amazed to read a story about a school in Penzance going on a ski trip to Italy by coach. Giving up at Dover and turning back would seem like a blessing in disguise.0 -
surrey_commuter said:
I was amazed to read a story about a school in Penzance going on a ski trip to Italy by coach. Giving up at Dover and turning back would seem like a blessing in disguise.
Having done European school trips on both plane and coach, having them all on the same coach from home to destination is 100x easier. I absolutely loathe the journey, as I cannot sleep a wink, even on a 30-hour journey, but having all children and luggage in a dedicated charabanc reduces the safeguarding stresses massively. Usually, pre-Brexit, they'd just check the passports of the adults and count the number of children, to make sure it matched the manifest.
Unlikely we'll be doing another one any time soon: the first trip I organised (2010), the coach cost about £3,500 for the week, the last (cancelled, 2020 pandemic) one was going to be £6,500, and we asked for a quote for 2024, which was £12,000.0 -
Which half?surrey_commuter said:
the major difference is that I am 50% northerner0 -
the half that owns a whippet and likes George Formby and brass bandsmonkimark said:Which half?
surrey_commuter said:
the major difference is that I am 50% northerner0 -
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times, it's not like they don't know there's going to be a lot of people trying to get to France to spend money at the start of the holidays.surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
That's a benefit, not a risk...ddraver 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..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I can see your logic and it never ceases to amaze me that teachers take on the responsibility of school tripsbriantrumpet said:surrey_commuter said:
I was amazed to read a story about a school in Penzance going on a ski trip to Italy by coach. Giving up at Dover and turning back would seem like a blessing in disguise.
Having done European school trips on both plane and coach, having them all on the same coach from home to destination is 100x easier. I absolutely loathe the journey, as I cannot sleep a wink, even on a 30-hour journey, but having all children and luggage in a dedicated charabanc reduces the safeguarding stresses massively. Usually, pre-Brexit, they'd just check the passports of the adults and count the number of children, to make sure it matched the manifest.
Unlikely we'll be doing another one any time soon: the first trip I organised (2010), the coach cost about £3,500 for the week, the last (cancelled, 2020 pandemic) one was going to be £6,500, and we asked for a quote for 2024, which was £12,000.0 -
So there will be some evidence that she has lied then? Let's see it.Pross said:
It’s pretty compelling when it comes to lying.Stevo_666 said:
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 -
Yay, the Telegraph ignored Dover for three days, but now it's all Brussels' fault, they've discovered!!
0 -
Stevo_666 said:
So there will be some evidence that she has lied then? Let's see it.Pross said:
It’s pretty compelling when it comes to lying.Stevo_666 said:
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”.
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?
0 -
But we took back control to have the choice of putting ourselves in that positionwallace_and_gromit said:
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?0 -
Sorry. I forgot just how much fun shooting yourself in the foot can be!surrey_commuter said:
But we took back control to have the choice of putting ourselves in that positionwallace_and_gromit said:
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?0 -
Border checks are literally what we asked for in the deal with the EU. Even Frosty has admitted as much.surrey_commuter said:
But we took back control to have the choice of putting ourselves in that positionwallace_and_gromit said:
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Through a mixture of English exceptionalism and stupidity I suspect that they only considered the impact on foreigners coming here.rjsterry said:
Border checks are literally what we asked for in the deal with the EU. Even Frosty has admitted as much.surrey_commuter said:
But we took back control to have the choice of putting ourselves in that positionwallace_and_gromit said:
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?
Edited to add that most people will never have travelled to non-EU countries so will not have realised the hassle they were creating0 -
DECEMBER 16 2020
According to a person familiar with the matter, Dover applied for £33m to double the number of French government passport booths from five to 10 in anticipation of more stringent requirements including stamps in passports after January 1.
The application was rejected, however, with Dover receiving just £33,000 for an unrelated project, according to a list of the PIF awards seen by the Financial Times.0 -
A classic response when someone can't answer the question, although ìn this case it wasn't even directed at you, so something seems to have bothered you herepangolin said:Stevo_666 said:
So there will be some evidence that she has lied then? Let's see it.Pross said:
It’s pretty compelling when it comes to lying.Stevo_666 said:
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 factorsthere.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”.
Anyhow, you are ddraver and ICMFP
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
It's no different to when they go on strike, which has happened for decades and seems to happen more often than school holidays.wallace_and_gromit said:
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Bit rich given how much you like to answer a question by just demanding evidence to the contrary. Found anything in that paper I posted earlier?Stevo_666 said:
A classic response when someone can't answer the question, although ìn this case it wasn't even directed at you, so something seems to have bothered you herepangolin said:Stevo_666 said:
So there will be some evidence that she has lied then? Let's see it.Pross said:
It’s pretty compelling when it comes to lying.Stevo_666 said:
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 factorsthere.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”.
Anyhow, you are ddraver and ICMFP1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Every organisation should use that argumentStevo_666 said:
It's no different to when they go on strike, which has happened for decades and seems to happen more often than school holidays.wallace_and_gromit said:
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?
Customer - "where is my parcel/train/operation this service is awful"
Organisation - "fvck off it is no worse than when we are on strike"1 -
Ah yes, "bothering" people as a metric of success.Stevo_666 said:
A classic response when someone can't answer the question, although ìn this case it wasn't even directed at you, so something seems to have bothered you herepangolin said:Stevo_666 said:
So there will be some evidence that she has lied then? Let's see it.Pross said:
It’s pretty compelling when it comes to lying.Stevo_666 said:
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 factorsthere.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”.
Anyhow, you are ddraver and ICMFP- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
True. But as a nation, we can't control the Frenchies going on strike. But as a nation, we had the right to unfettered passage across the border when the Frenchies were working, but we gave away that right, seemingly just so we could get angry more often.Stevo_666 said:
It's no different to when they go on strike, which has happened for decades and seems to happen more often than school holidays.wallace_and_gromit said:
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?
What's good about increasing the number of things that can blow up and leave folk stranded in massive queues when trying to go on hols? Frenchies on strike = bad. Frenchies on strike or passport checking process overwhelmed => even badder, surely.0 -
That should be something you're familiar with. Try another thread if you can't do better than some half arsed trolling.pangolin said:
Ah yes, "bothering" people as a metric of success.Stevo_666 said:
A classic response when someone can't answer the question, although ìn this case it wasn't even directed at you, so something seems to have bothered you herepangolin said:Stevo_666 said:
So there will be some evidence that she has lied then? Let's see it.Pross said:
It’s pretty compelling when it comes to lying.Stevo_666 said:
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 factorsthere.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”.
Anyhow, you are ddraver and ICMFP
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The French aren't our organisation.surrey_commuter said:
Every organisation should use that argumentStevo_666 said:
It's no different to when they go on strike, which has happened for decades and seems to happen more often than school holidays.wallace_and_gromit said:
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?
Customer - "where is my parcel/train/operation this service is awful"
Organisation - "fvck off it is no worse than when we are on strike""I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
There were pluses and minuses to the whole thing. Some queues at Dover a couple of times a year are one of the minuses, which tbh should be something that can be mitigated.wallace_and_gromit said:
True. But as a nation, we can't control the Frenchies going on strike. But as a nation, we had the right to unfettered passage across the border when the Frenchies were working, but we gave away that right, seemingly just so we could get angry more often.Stevo_666 said:
It's no different to when they go on strike, which has happened for decades and seems to happen more often than school holidays.wallace_and_gromit said:
The question for Brexiteers is thus "Why put yourselves in the position of being reliant on the French for favours at busy times?"Stevo_666 said:
Better ask them. Maybe the French border force should staff up a bit in busy times...surrey_commuter said:
My memory must be playing tricks with me as I would have said that by the mid/late '80s you needed to do no more that wave a passport in the general direction of passport control. ie nobody under 40 appreciated the EU as they could not remember life before it.rick_chasey said:On the Dover queues.
Do people not remember that having to stamp all your passports and having a "hard border" slows everything down?
This was always going to be the scenario. Everyone who had done more than 3 minutes of reading could see that, as did the government, hence all the additional parking spaces for lorries all over Kent.
@Stevo_666 how did Brexiteers think the borders were going to remain seamless for Brits?
What's good about increasing the number of things that can blow up and leave folk stranded in massive queues when trying to go on hols? Frenchies on strike = bad. Frenchies on strike or passport checking process overwhelmed => even badder, surely."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
