Brexit - The UK's EU Referendum & Withdrawal

[Pseudo]

(Nigel Farage) 24th December 2020

The deal is not perfect but it is a big moment. This victory is a tribute to the ordinary men and women who stood up against the Westminster establishment — and won. There is no going back, the war is over.

Damn, man. Are you still listening to that charlatan?

[ArmChairCivvy]

Ohh twitter, chopped up thoughts. At least making a pick from the bite-sized chunks is easy:

Charles Grant
@CER_Grant
Dec 24
4. For past 4.5 years UK governments have seldom been honest about the trade-offs Brexit involves. There is a spectrum between max sovereignty/min economic benefit and min sov'y/max ec gain. Being honest would have required an admission that Brexit carries real economic costs./5

5. May's govt sought a mid-spot on spectrum, Johnson chose an extreme position of maximising sov'y. Future historians will ask why UK disregarded economics during negotiations

... good points there. Especially about honesty coming with a 'price' attached - so why not just discard such an abstract thing. And that was done; how the message was then sold - successfully - is a question for a wider circle than just historians.
"Caveat emptor" though, as "sold as is" means that the buyers assume the risk . And the cheques will not be in the post, but rather will be asked to be paid, for many years to come

[dmereifield]

I see that ACC, Pseudo and Zanahoria still don't understand the motivations of brexit voters....nor apparently does ACC understand the differences that the Swiss style relationship, in respect to soverign and democratic constraints, vs the agreement HMG have reached.

It matters not. Democracy was respected and I need not concern myself with this thread any longer.

So long and thanks for all the fish (+25% more now, and in 5.5 years time the ability to decide how much we are willing to allow foreign fleets to catch; and, hopefully, we'll also see a ban on supertrawlers and more sustainable TAC quotas)

PS there's nothing wrong with negotiations with another nation or bloc....such statements again show a basic misunderstanding of the brexit vote

[ArmChairCivvy]

Luckily opinions and surveys will soon be replaced by facts
... only a week to go

[zanahoria]

I see that ACC, Pseudo and Zanahoria still don't understand the motivations of brexit vote

I voted for Brexit. I’m sure I’m not the only Brexit voter that thinks it’s now a really bad idea.

[zanahoria]

For example:

https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit- ... &r=US&IR=T

[ArmChairCivvy]

And I have been congratulating @D for the stamina to stay and 'fight' - or rather stand the ground - when the Brexiteer brigade in general has melted away
- those in ministerial/ Cabinet roles luckily can't
- ohh, how much fun it will be to watch what kind of explanations and excuses will be concocted

[ArmChairCivvy]

Reading The Telegraph of today it would seem that even fishing is one of those industries that will go into 'continuous' negotiation:

" Frederic Cuvillier, the Mayor of Boulogne-sur-Mer, said: “ It is a relief for our fishermen, but what will be the impact on stocks?

“Who, for example, will be handling the controls? And over what time?"

"The only certainty today is that we need to find, during the transition period, more deals within the deal."["]

[R686]

For example:

https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit- ... &r=US&IR=T

What’s the point in rejoining now, whatever clout you had whilst in is now lost. I don’t see any upside to rejoining all the opt-outs are gone you will be starting afresh. Least being out you have total control of your destiny and future direction irespective of following EU rules or not. The point being you have an opportunity to take and look at laws across the world and apply them as you see fit and not just EU ones

[ArmChairCivvy]

whatever clout you had whilst in is now lost.

Quite, and not just the opt-outs but the rebate, too.

Last night had NATO ex- Sec Gnrls interviewed and they (more free to speak than the one in the post) consistently said that whatever the deal (economically) with Europe, globally the UK has lost clout (respect being a core ingredient in maintaining any such).
- we will see what bold moves (other than the carriers) Global Britain will bring with it (~ damage limitation), now that the deal has done what can be done on the economic front. To put it in perspective, five years up from now and we could have had a tripled defence budget... without any pain. Whether we can avoid cuts after the 4-yr settlement now remains to be seen. Even staying still came from the cheque book which has been opened wide by Covid.

[Zero Gravitas]

Well for better or worse we are where we are now.

What a crazy set of events, accidents and coincidences to end up where we are as well!

At almost any stage if the remainers in Parliament had accepted Brexit in principle and tried to make the best of it, then we would have ended up with a far softer Brexit. Probably ‘Norway’ or some such. “BINO”.

Equally if Gove hadn’t stabbed BJ in the back then we might have avoided the whole May interlude where she tried to take a non-existent middle path between a series of binary strategic decisions...

As I said above, we’ll see whether there is something (or a number of somethings) in the text that will render the whole exercise futile or worse. As it stands the criticisms seem quite milquetoast to me.

Both sides were heavily propagandised by the competing interests of the wealthy elite. For the first time in decades the middle and professional classes on the centre left and centre right had to endure something significant that wasn’t in their interests (and at times they seemed a little cross about this hitherto unappreciated facet of the democratic settlement in the UK.)

I expect that much of these tensions will now slowly dissipate as the funding and focus-grouped messages and slogans that all of us (including me no doubt) have been repeating at each other for four years dry up at source. Certainly it seems that Starmer doesn’t see any mileage in further Brexit arguments, the EU has no more to gain, and it’s hard to see where else the drive will come from now.

I do wonder if some part of the EU will reject the treaty TBH though.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Equally if Gove hadn’t stabbed BJ in the back then we might have avoided the whole May interlude where she tried to take a non-existent middle path between a series of binary strategic decisions...

As I said above, we’ll see whether there is something (or a number of somethings) in the text that will render the whole exercise futile or worse.

I agree that much time (and airtime, rather than intellectual effort) was wasted
- and relating to that, with those non-existent strategic choices, we locked ourselves to a 'goods only' negotiation - where the predetermined winner in trade terms is the EU - and, as can be read also from 'the text' now available, have consequently locked ourselves into 'continuous negotiation' about "just about" everything else.

Nicht gut I say, I say
... but we are where we are

The Spectator - of all places, a double act that makes it possible for The Telegraph to continue to play a ' broad church' role - seems to be exhibiting (unknowingly) Buyer's Remorse:

"sovereignty is not an empty word, but the means of [1]increasing the welfare of its people, [2]finding a role in the world and [3]consolidating the United Kingdom itself."
For [1]
- the very opposite will happen (with this Brexit, which has been worked to be synonymous with 'sovereignty' - a falsity in itself, but @D has waved us goodbye so no point elaborating on that aspect ). Or to put it mildly, the path ahead looks 'suboptimal'
[2] I very much hope for a 'Global Britain' but am much afraid that it is another 'Brexit means Brexit' in disguise
and as for [3] is it looking good? An honest assessment?

[Zero Gravitas]

Equally if Gove hadn’t stabbed BJ in the back then we might have avoided the whole May interlude where she tried to take a non-existent middle path between a series of binary strategic decisions...

As I said above, we’ll see whether there is something (or a number of somethings) in the text that will render the whole exercise futile or worse.

I agree that much time (and airtime, rather than intellectual effort) was wasted
- and relating to that, with those non-existent strategic choices, we locked ourselves to a 'goods only' negotiation - where the predetermined winner in trade terms is the EU - and, as can be read also from 'the text' now available, have consequently locked ourselves into 'continuous negotiation' about "just about" everything else.

Nicht gut I say, I say
... but we are where we are

The Spectator - of all places, a double act that makes it possible for The Telegraph to continue to play a ' broad church' role - seems to be exhibiting (unknowingly) Buyer's Remorse:

"sovereignty is not an empty word, but the means of [1]increasing the welfare of its people, [2]finding a role in the world and [3]consolidating the United Kingdom itself."
For [1]
- the very opposite will happen (with this Brexit, which has been worked to be synonymous with 'sovereignty' - a falsity in itself, but @D has waved us goodbye so no point elaborating on that aspect ). Or to put it mildly, the path ahead looks 'suboptimal'
[2] I very much hope for a 'Global Britain' but am much afraid that it is another 'Brexit means Brexit' in disguise
and as for [3] is it looking good? An honest assessment?

Your 3 is looking bad. But the Scottish will keep voting for a nationalist party. Basically UKIP with better PR (it’s all Brussels/Westminster’s fault and those out of touch Eurocrats/Tories - mirror image arguments every bit as simplistic as each other).

The SNP will continue to use all events to drive the nationalist argument as a wedge issue. It’s not going to stop given the demographics and I can’t see the way out. Brexit will have accelerated these feelings sure, but it’s not the prime cause

[ArmChairCivvy]

Basically UKIP with better PR (it’s all Brussels/Westminster’s fault and those out of touch Eurocrats/Tories - mirror image arguments every bit as simplistic as each other).

The SNP will continue to use all events to drive the nationalist argument as a wedge issue.

I quite agree with that 'acceleration by Brexit' argument, but additionally a much stronger cross-pull has been introduced to Wales and NI - not so much an issue before 2016 (not going as far back as The Troubles).
- at the same time, the SNP independence manifesto was a joke in those circumstances that prevailed before Indyref
- changing the parameters in their (calculations for the) presented scenarios to reflect the world as of now would make the whole case unviable from get-go... I am looking forward to the best efforts of their PR Dept; to even propose Ref2 they would have to present their case (a dry run by May?)

But this thread will have enough 'stuff' as impact projections are morphing into impact measurements, and though devolution and the Brexit x-pull are strongly intertwined, I was only expanding on it to highlight that by now it is no more just a 'Scottish' question.
- We've got the thread for that nation and another for the General Political discussion to track the details as they emerge

[ArmChairCivvy]

BBC's Faisal Islam has got as far in reading through as Rules of Origin and car parts and now reveals why they got a mention (along with fish) in the last days of the negotiation (and we had a lively exchange here, in the early days, about the future of UK mass production cars - I seem to remember).

"On electric cars, an annexe reveals a late compromise.

The EU had sought to offer tariff-free access only to those British cars that are made mostly with European parts. That will now be phased in over six years, but is less generous than the UK ask.

This should be just about enough for Japanese owners of massive UK plants Nissan and Toyota's current production, but raises questions about future rounds of investment."

A leaked Gvmnt briefing paper (seen by The Guardian) says that
" the UK won on this issue as they persuaded Brussels that EU materials and processing should to be counted as British input when the completed products are exported into the European market. A product would therefore only attract tariffs, under the agreement, if more than 40% of its pre-finished value was either not of British origin or from a non-EU country such as Japan."

[ArmChairCivvy]

While awaiting with interest what the ERG 'researchers' will say about the agreement text, and no doubt they will emphasise governance points, which is quite right as the 'deal' is no more than a governance framework for continuous negotiation, let's jot down the most obvious broad points:

The deal does not protect against non-tariff barriers. There is no mutual recognition of standards, so businesses will have produce and certify for both sets of standards. Hard to guess whether the rest of the world will do the EU first, or prioritise the UK (1/6th the size of the former, as a market).
Rules of origins apply. The UK will no longer be the natural bridgehead for a 'Europe Landing'.
What is a partial deal for 20% of the economy, may within months turn into a No-Deal for services(80% of the UK economy; less so in exports, but the sector that produces the surplus for paying the deficit in goods).
There is no equivalence of qualifications; a wait-and-see game could turn out to be more positive, but not necessarily across professions, as has pretty much been the status quo.
In transport, or aviation and haulage more specifically, UK planes and hauliers will have limited access. Onward, intra-EU flight connections will no longer be possible.
We will leave Europol, Eurojust and the European Arrest Warrant. Our access to vital on-line databases will be cut. The streets of Britain will be less safe as a result.
We lose Erasmus, so as to avoid sharing pan-European values even by accident. When doing the next trade deal, the two key players will no longer be sporting the same 'old school tie'.
Asylum seekers we can no longer deport to the first safe country. Will be hard work (try France, for starters) to negotiate bilateral deals for the purpose.
NI will prosper - a new bridge head for entering Europe - despite a plethora of custom declarations to fill in as for the intra-UK trade... this will work wonders for an ever stronger Union (the UK that is) in the long run.
As we lob off 16% of the combined EU GDP, thereby making the relative power of the US, China and Russia on the international scene (which is not all about trade) hgher and demeaning our own say, we will get an extra 16% fish, some time between now and five and a half years from now. A 'fair deal' - no irony .
On sovereignty, we are always in danger of the EU imposing tariffs, customs checks, border inspections and other non-trade barriers if we divert significantly. Not to mention passporting and 'equivalence' for which one can delete 'significantly' .
...This point in particular exposes how Brexiteers in their thinking (more likely: in their propaganda that is not even meant to be believed by those emitting it) have mixed up sovereignty and decision autonomy.
On the level playing field, the deal still binds us... just remains to be seen how much and by when

[R686]

While awaiting with interest what the ERG 'researchers' will say about the agreement text, and no doubt they will emphasise governance points, which is quite right as the 'deal' is no more than a governance framework for continuous negotiation, let's jot down the most obvious broad points:

The deal does not protect against non-tariff barriers. There is no mutual recognition of standards, so businesses will have produce and certify for both sets of standards. Hard to guess whether the rest of the world will do the EU first, or prioritise the UK (1/6th the size of the former, as a market).
Rules of origins apply. The UK will no longer be the natural bridgehead for a 'Europe Landing'.
What is a partial deal for 20% of the economy, may within months turn into a No-Deal for services(80% of the UK economy; less so in exports, but the sector that produces the surplus for paying the deficit in goods).
There is no equivalence of qualifications; a wait-and-see game could turn out to be more positive, but not necessarily across professions, as has pretty much been the status quo.
In transport, or aviation and haulage more specifically, UK planes and hauliers will have limited access. Onward, intra-EU flight connections will no longer be possible.
We will leave Europol, Eurojust and the European Arrest Warrant. Our access to vital on-line databases will be cut. The streets of Britain will be less safe as a result.
We lose Erasmus, so as to avoid sharing pan-European values even by accident. When doing the next trade deal, the two key players will no longer be sporting the same 'old school tie'.
Asylum seekers we can no longer deport to the first safe country. Will be hard work (try France, for starters) to negotiate bilateral deals for the purpose.
NI will prosper - a new bridge head for entering Europe - despite a plethora of custom declarations to fill in as for the intra-UK trade... this will work wonders for an ever stronger Union (the UK that is) in the long run.
As we lob off 16% of the combined EU GDP, thereby making the relative power of the US, China and Russia on the international scene (which is not all about trade) hgher and demeaning our own say, we will get an extra 16% fish, some time between now and five and a half years from now. A 'fair deal' - no irony .
On sovereignty, we are always in danger of the EU imposing tariffs, customs checks, border inspections and other non-trade barriers if we divert significantly. Not to mention passporting and 'equivalence' for which one can delete 'significantly' .
...This point in particular exposes how Brexiteers in their thinking (more likely: in their propaganda that is not even meant to be believed by those emitting it) have mixed up sovereignty and decision autonomy.
On the level playing field, the deal still binds us... just remains to be seen how much and by when

While it’s far from a perfect deal I think it does go to the heart of what Brexit was all about regaining UK autonomy away from EU rule.

Whilst it basically boils down to non-regression to current standards it also does not mean the UK has to follow in the EU footsteps if and when they make amendments, if the EU places tariff on the UK it will be reciprocated in kind. Any thing the EU does in the future is only going to increase the costs between thecEU/UK so unless thecUK does something really stupid it think longer term relations will normalise to a point where mutual recognition will be the norm after 12 or so months

[zanahoria]

David Henig’s article from LinkedIn on the subject of UK - EU trade deal winners and losers.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/uk-eu-tr ... avid-henig

Short version: EU & Conservative Party are the Winners.

[zanahoria]

While it’s far from a perfect deal I think it does go to the heart of what Brexit was all about regaining UK autonomy away from EU rule.

In terms of trade I don’t think there won’t be any real autonomy regarding standards: we either adhere to standards/regulations created by the EU (a joint process we used to be part of) and provide the paperwork proving we have done so or we trade somewhere further away (more expense) that has different standards/regulations that also requires paperwork.

Any thing the EU does in the future is only going to increase the costs between thecEU/UK so unless thecUK does something really stupid it think longer term relations will normalise to a point where mutual recognition will be the norm after 12 or so months

That would be very welcome.

[SW1]

A proper overview of the impacts on aviation

[zanahoria]

The deal does not protect against non-tariff barriers. There is no mutual recognition of standards...

It is depressing. Thank you for taking the time to make all the points that followed the quote above.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Short version: EU & Conservative Party are the Winners.

Rather than looking for the winners, where do we go from here?

1. "their top priorities in some sort of order are to protect the social market from what they would see as undercutting, protect and promote EU agriculture and in particular Geographical Indications, and promote the EU regulatory system as a global leader to emphasise the Brussels Effect, making it easier for EU companies to sell globally"
- as the others have to reckon with the EU 'ticks in the box'... less so for the much smaller UK market
- BTW, I will omit the rest of the quotation marks... and apologies to D. Henning that not all of those who appreciate his reasoning are twitter-warriors

2.When a larger player with a more clearly defined objective goes up against a smaller, newer one without such clarity, and the lead strategy of threatening to walk away which does not convince the other side, the outcome is unsurprising
- Harvard Negotiation 'Project' 101

3. They probably did not particularly win on the lowest priority of promoting the EU regulatory system, with the UK desire for regulatory independence proving strong, but in doing so also denied UK asks such as mutual recognition which contradicted other UK asks.
- this is the funniest (NOT) bit. Use that subheading, and forget that it is the life blood (blood curling?) paragraph for the services business/ exports
- let's not forget that FS/ Big Bang ( a la Thatcher Gvmnts)/ Horizon 92 (1992) were all Wimbledon games; play here... whoever wins, no matter as we will benefit in abundance... and once in a life time we might get excited about ' the Henman effect'. In short order, all the 'old school tie' outfits got bought by American institutions who, at the time , could not play that game at home
- and - whoosh - the streets in the City of London got paved with gold. Just wait for five years and there will be pot holes (just 'another Council' with not enough tax payers )

4. in June, but this reminds us again that the chief negotiator must settle their consensus domestically as soon as possible, and then explore how to deliver this against a counterpart with their own mandate.
- our mandate wobbled all through, from the v beginning when there was none,
- and see what happened, against a 'set in concrete' one

5. UK asks for example on financial services and rules of origin for electric vehicles were not fully granted, though the latter has a transition period.
- the latter, to expire just in time for the market break-thru, as if global companies' investment decicions weren't forward looking
- and the former...? To be held at 30 days' notice forever, and more

Now. Let's celebrate that we have really f@c#d up the most important negotiation in the last 60 years.
- no one needs to be knighted for the achievement, bcz
- BoJo is/has already stuffing/stuffed the Hse of Lords with those who have given him support; so, surely... they will support him when it becomes clear beyond doubt that what was promised, and what was then, as for delivery, clad into this long text, is not going to deliver
- and he will be looking for other incomes than the salary for being the PM
-

[ArmChairCivvy]

Off-shore Britain thinks it is wonderful that they can stay to be ... just that. No Singapore-on-Thames, ie. a competitor on the door step

18:15
Jersey government backs Brexit deal
Ian Gorst, BBC

Jersey's parliament approves the island's participation in the UK's Brexit trade deal.

Posted at 1802
Guernsey backs UK Brexit agreement
Senior Guernsey politicians and civil servants meeting about Brexit deal

Guernsey deputies vote unanimously to include the island in the UK's Brexit agreement with the EU.

[seaspear]

How does state support the industry like the defense industry change or if at all various countries in the E.U provide this can the U.K which I understand will not have the ability to be automatically considered in E.U defense programs be able to continue to do this and export if the E.U considers this uncompetitive

[ArmChairCivvy]

That's a good question. But the existing practice, of the prime customer supporting new solutions by paying for the programme cost element, before unit costs of actually producing the 'thing' kick in, won't change. And UK/ UK-based American companies CAN qualify for the EU prgrms on a case by case basis.

As a side note (totally so !) one must give it to Boris that his sales speeches are always fun to listen to:
"P.S. On fish, we are talking hundreds of thousand of tonnes more even in the transition period! Enough fish to stretch to the South Pole and back!"
- there's not much need for a 'sale' as the country has been painted into a corner, so ratification is the only real option