Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

BREXIT

Old 27th Dec 2020, 09:01
  #8241 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 82
Now that the term "Remoaners " has passed into history, along with the UK's beneficial status of being formerly an EU member state, it will be interesting to see how "Returners " is adapted .....

To return to the exclusive JB people trafficking offer, not every contributor will have received this I know, Harwich - Hoek would be fine, ta ! ...I've been on this ferry before, it's very comfortable and quite luxurious, although breakfast is a bit pricey and it's best to stock up at Rotterdam Centraal for the overnight return leg as the dinner options are also a bit pricey, Alas, it appears that this may not be available in my case by virtue of being a former mere engineer on a pilots website ! ....nowt like a bit of casual elitism really, so it looks like a pair of water wings and maybe a rubber dinghy..... as seen in paddling pools... will await me at the docks....

Disclaimer No excess alcohol / "recreational use only " substances or caffeine was involved in compiling the above.

Last edited by Krystal n chips; 27th Dec 2020 at 10:16.
Krystal n chips is online now  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 09:08
  #8242 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 68
Posts: 58
Hardly surprising that the Returners are on 48% already before the ink has dried. June Mummery ex MEP from Lowestoft tweets that the UK share of cod has gone from 9.3% to 10.2%. Not happy fisherfolk.
Effluent Man is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 10:02
  #8243 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 82
This will set the red white and blue corpuscles surging for some....the unlamented deceased no less.

Margaret Thatcher said plan for the euro was 'a rush of blood', archives reveal | Margaret Thatcher | The Guardian
Krystal n chips is online now  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 16:29
  #8244 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 68
Posts: 58
In all the excitement of not getting the fish Tubs de Pfeffel didn't get financial services either! ( ORAC to comment)
Effluent Man is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 17:03
  #8245 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 68
Posts: 412
Oh dear, it seems that Brexit may not cause supermarket prices to increase, after all. Must be a shock to all the Remainers who have been sowing seeds of doom and gloom ever since 2016: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55460948

Any changes to food prices after Brexit are likely to be "very modest indeed" under the deal struck between the UK and the EU, the chairman of Tesco has said.

John Allan told the BBC that it would "hardly be felt in terms of the prices that consumers are paying".

He said the deal was a "good outcome" and far better than no deal.

But he said the main benefit was that it removes a distraction from business and government.

When reports last month suggested that there might not be a post-Brexit trade deal, Mr Allan had warned that food prices could rise between 3% and 5%.

But he told BBC Radio 4's The World This Weekend that the deal agreed this week meant any noticeable changes in food costs for consumers were unlikely.
VP959 is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 17:13
  #8246 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Narnia
Posts: 8
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Oh dear, it seems that Brexit may not cause supermarket prices to increase, after all. Must be a shock to all the Remainers who have been sowing seeds of doom and gloom ever since 2016: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55460948
Your reading comprehension appears to be lacking. Who will cover the cost increases due to NTBs?
Big_D is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 17:17
  #8247 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: France
Posts: 448
Brexit may not cause supermarket prices to increase, after all.
Hmm ... I wonder if the relationship between supply and demand will cause prices to rise through scarcity through lack of EU labour in the seasonal agricultural sector plus delays or shortages caused by logistics hold up at the Channel ports? To be continued methinks ....
Alsacienne is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 17:48
  #8248 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dublin
Posts: 783
Initial analysis coming out on the fisheries element of the deal suggests UK fishermen will get the biggest increase in quota allocation from stocks of fish that the UK public tends to not eat; Megrim, Norway Pout, Saithe (Pollack), Horse Mackerel, with little to no increases in the likes of Cod, Plaice or Sole.

JAS
Just a spotter is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 18:22
  #8249 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lincoln
Age: 68
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Big_D View Post
Your reading comprehension appears to be lacking. Who will cover the cost increases due to NTBs?
If the UK apply NTBs to the EU imports then surely the UK will be a net beneficiary as the EU send more goods to the UK than the UK sends to the EU, so that should cover any cost increases if it actually comes to that, as with everything we will have to wait and see.
Exrigger is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 19:25
  #8250 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,771
Your reading comprehension appears to be lacking. Who will cover the cost increases due to NTBs?
Easy - the supermarkets will expect their suppliers to absorb the extra costs. That's how they usually work.
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 19:37
  #8251 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Oh dear, it seems that Brexit may not cause supermarket prices to increase, after all. Must be a shock to all the Remainers who have been sowing seeds of doom and gloom ever since 2016: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55460948
I believe the primary reason for the potential rise in food prices would have been the imposition of customs duties due to leaving with no deal, and the consequent fall in the value of sterling, caused again by leaving with no deal. Thankfully that hasn't happened, however what we don't know is just how much the delays at port resulting from customs bureaucracy might affect supplies, and that may, possibly also force a price rise.

However as has been pointed out, more likely the supermarkets will simply refuse to pay the suppliers the right price and insulate shoppers from the worst excesses of any cost increases.
ATNotts is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 20:16
  #8252 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 11,281
In all the excitement of not getting the fish Tubs de Pfeffel didn't get financial services either! ( ORAC to comment)
This was always only a bare bones trade deal, because that is what is covered by the single market. The EU has never had a single market in services - which is one of the main aggravations of the UK because it is one of its main areas of expertise.

It is possible that the EU could use regulations to try and disadvantage the UK in services, financial or otherwise. However this where the new level playing field agreement cuts both ways - if either side introduces new rules which disadvantage the other then they can go to independent arbitration and be allowed to impose tariffs in other areas.

Regarding financial services, that is being discussed. In many areas, however, various EU national banking systems need access to the City more than the other way round.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ed-brexit-deal

Sunak suggests EU access for financial services will exceed Brexit deal


Last edited by ORAC; 27th Dec 2020 at 20:32.
ORAC is online now  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 21:02
  #8253 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 11,281
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...suring-reading

The small print of Boris’s Brexit deal makes for reassuring reading

The new UK/EU Treaty is needlessly long and turgid in its prose: this document was not drafted by people who think the law should be understood by all. Close inspection of the small print reveals that none of the details undermine sovereignty. It has been restored and the UK has the power to control its own laws.

To understand what’s happened, consider the last two big treaties. Under the Maastricht Treaty the EU’s ability to control UK law was extended on what came before but was confined to specific areas only. That was called 'spheres of competence'. The 2007 Lisbon Treaty vastly expanded the EU’s power and the idea of restricting EU writ to areas of its competence fell away.

Marina Wheeler has written in The Spectator about the Lisbon power grab and its huge implications: it’s worth re-reading for a sense of what Lord Frost was up against. And what he has successfully uprooted.

The Brexit deal takes things back to where they were before Maastricht. The EU is limited now in any meddling to very specific areas indeed. It ends the oddity where because circa seven per cent of UK business trade with the EU, 100 per cent have their laws made by the EU (although that is a bit more blurred in supply chains).

In the small print of the deal, the remnants of failed EU attempts to fetter British sovereignty can be seen.

Consider the ‘precautionary approach’. This slides in via footnote 49, disguising itself in footnote 52. But by the time it gets in as actual law (article 1.2 page 179) it’s clear that it has lost the battle; its words have no force. British negotiators seem to have seen to that. As long as one side has a plausible scientific argument, it may do as it likes.

There are other failed EU power grabs in the text, none carrying force.

There are parts of the deal that mean that, should Britain wish to diverge, then UK committees will have to talk to EU committees. Requiring the UK to 'consult' on implementation and change of the agreement etc. But how this is done in practice is left free and thus pretty non-enforceable and limited in scope. It is diplomacy now, not law........

The treaty recognises the UK and EU are not harmonising their laws (making them the same). UK courts won’t bind the EU, EU courts won’t bind the UK.

Neither UK/EU can make a law that would let anyone sue the other. So no campaign groups may form to sue the UK government under EU law for deviating from the treaty. The mechanism for doing so does not exist. Article COMPROV.13 makes it clear the UK and EU are equals under International Law.

Whatever creature EU law is (this is still debated) it has gone from our legal system.....
ORAC is online now  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 22:10
  #8254 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Darkest Lincs
Posts: 488
ORAC - I gave absolutely no idea why you posted your last "cut and paste". What is your point?
wowzz is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2020, 23:58
  #8255 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 228
Originally Posted by rogerg View Post
Mr Mac

I don't think there were many brexiteres for the first 20 years but it changed from the "common market" to the EU somewhere along the line. That was not what we had signed up for.
Somewhere along the line was a twerp called Major and a place called Maastricht.

Indeed there were dissenters, but their cause did not prevail because they were unable to convince the majority of the scant probity of their arguments. They certainly were not making their case with the prescience of the forthcoming federalism which, most assuredly, is NOT what we signed up to. But like Heath, Major (and his successor May) were prepared to make almost any sacrifice on the alter of their Europhilia.
Gipsy Queen is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 00:05
  #8256 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EU
Posts: 432
ORAC
You've just signed a deal stating that if you want to export manifactured goods to the EU you'll need to comply with EU laws.
You've put yourself in a position where a trading block of 27 countries is able to apply tariffs on your exports at their will.
The main sector of your economy (services) is not covered by such deal, and there's no recognition of UK professional qualifications in the EU.
You've got a ton of fish that nobody's eating.

Yet you still think you're the smart one...
​​​​​​
Theholdingpoint is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 05:31
  #8257 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 11,281
You've just signed a deal stating that if you want to export manifactured goods to the EU you'll need to comply with EU laws.
And if we sell to the USA the products have to comply with USA law. The point bing that all UK industry will be under UK law, not EU.

You've put yourself in a position where a trading block of 27 countries is able to apply tariffs on your exports at their will.
No, that’s the point of the agreed deal, it ensures a zero tariff agreement where any imposition of tariffs by either side have to be agreed through independent arbitration.

The main sector of your economy (services) is not covered by such deal
Outside the scope of this deal, but as said by the Chancellor, currently being discussed in areas such as equivalence. They aim to agree on a Memorandum of Understanding by March.

and there's no recognition of UK professional qualifications in the EU.
Untrue. There are many areas where qualifications have never been agreed across the EU (Germany being an example with many closed shops), hence the deal stating that, “Doctors, nurses, dentists, pharmacists, vets, engineers or architects must have their qualifications recognized in each member state they wish to practice in," however the deal does create a framework for the recognition of qualifications by member states. (annex SERVIN-6).

You've got a ton of fish that nobody's eating.
It’s being eaten, just not in the UK- but will be exported. Either to the EU tariff free or elsewhere. Or of course the quotas can be exchanged with others fishing nations such as Norway or Iceland under the already signed fishing agreements.

Free trade agreements aren’t zero sum games - both sides benefit otherwise one side or the other won’t sign.
ORAC is online now  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 06:02
  #8258 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EU
Posts: 432
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
And if we sell to the USA the products have to comply with USA law. The point bing that all UK industry will be under UK law, not EU.
Wow, so much independence, so much winning!

Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
No, that’s the point of the agreed deal, it ensures a zero tariff agreement where any imposition of tariffs by either side have to be agreed through independent arbitration.
It's even better: unilateral quotas, not tariffs.

...negotiated a system that will leave the UK free to set its own standards in areas such as environmental standards and labour law but with the risk of having access to the European market restricted if it strays too far.
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
Outside the scope of this deal, but as said by the Chancellor, currently being discussed in areas such as equivalence. They aim to agree on a Memorandum of Understanding by March.
So you're admitting that your main source of revenue will be in a no deal scenario at least until March.

Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
Untrue. There are many areas where qualifications have never been agreed across the EU (Germany being an example with many closed shops), hence the deal stating that, “Doctors, nurses, dentists, pharmacists, vets, engineers or architects must have their qualifications recognized in each member state they wish to practice in," however the deal does create a framework for the recognition of qualifications by member states. (annex SERVIN-6).
From your government website:
You’ll need to have your UK professional qualification officially recognised if you want to work in a profession that is regulated in the EEA or Switzerland.It will need to be recognised by the appropriate regulator for your profession in each country where you intend to work. You’ll need to do this even if you’re providing temporary or occasional professional services
You're not a pilot, aren't you?

Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
It’s being eaten, just not in the UK- but will be exported. Either to the EU tariff free or elsewhere. Or of course the quotas can be exchanged with others fishing nations such as Norway or Iceland under the already signed fishing agreements.
Why weren't you exporting it already then? Nobody forced you to sell your fishing industry to foreigns...
In any case you're getting only 25% of the EU quota. In five years. That's less than 150mil /year.

Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
Free trade agreements aren’t zero sum games - both sides benefit otherwise one side or the other won’t sign.
The weakest side had to compromise. And it did.
Theholdingpoint is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 06:17
  #8259 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Narnia
Posts: 8
It is worth remembering that de Pfeffel's revision of the WA was hailed as a victory, until the ERG finally finished reading in July this year. Then they suddenly realised that it was not a very good deal for the UK, but it was water under the bridge by then.
Big_D is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2020, 07:19
  #8260 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 68
Posts: 412
Originally Posted by Theholdingpoint View Post
ORAC
You've just signed a deal stating that if you want to export manifactured goods to the EU you'll need to comply with EU laws.
You've put yourself in a position where a trading block of 27 countries is able to apply tariffs on your exports at their will.
The main sector of your economy (services) is not covered by such deal, and there's no recognition of UK professional qualifications in the EU.
You've got a ton of fish that nobody's eating.

Yet you still think you're the smart one...
​​​​​​

FWIW, every country in the world has to comply with EU laws if it wants to export to the EU. Best known (and much faked) example is the CE compliance mark required to show compliance with EU Directives. One or two far eastern countries play fast and loose with this requirement, by exporting downright dangerous goods to the EU and supplying false compliance paperwork. The EU does no checking on this, and there have been many cases of dangerous goods finding their way into people's homes. The UK could now choose to re-introduce its safety testing regime it had before the EU system took over, and insist that all goods imported to the UK are independently checked to ensure they are safe.
VP959 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.