BC EU

There is a sense of disbelief about the new trade problems between Great Britain and the EU / Northern Ireland. Which we need to lose. This is the new normal. And we face a difficult period of adjustment - immediate paperwork needs, and to longer term uncompetitiveness.

As we trade folk might have mentioned before, outside of the single market and the customs union of the EU, problems at borders are normal. Delays common. Great job of the Brexit supporters to find supposed experts claiming otherwise, but now back to reality...
Such delays at borders were in fact part of the origin of the single market, in the days when the Conservatives didn't see a contradiction between free markets and sovereignty. Such delays weren't really compatible with a supposed common market. So, the single market...
The delays and individual issues will ebb and flow. There will be new regulatory requirements in EU and UK affecting different products. But for UK and EU business as a whole it will mean UK-EU trade is more costly and less predictable, and there will be economic adjustment.
To put it bluntly, some UK firms will go out of business due to new border barriers. Some EU firms will stop supplying the UK, at a cost increase to UK consumers but a possible new opportunity for firms. This adjustment will take some time though.
For services as for goods, except the effects will be deplayed by covid. But the argument over musicians visas is a good preview. Trade between the EU and UK will get harder, there will be less of it. That's the effect of putting up trade barriers so significantly.
What we're experiencing is those numbers on the Brexit forecast models coming to life. There was already a slowdown in UK-EU goods trade (flat since 2017). It has already been affecting UK jobs and growth. That's going to continue.
And as we're also seeing you can't just substitute other markets for the EU. The logistics aren't set up. Or you have the same challenges of paperwork. And trading globally means global competition, rather than being part of the world's largest single market.
So the UK's raising trade barriers experiment is now well under way. It will be glossed over by a government improbably claiming to support free trade. The same supposed experts as before will claim this is all the EU's fault. But the impacts will be felt.
The new uncertainty - much trade from the UK. Also uncertain, the actual economic impact, we'll need to see a lot of data. And any political response, at the moment the government is still comfortably controlling the narrative. But early post-Brexit days... /end
PS as a reply suggests, an example of the denial of the current situation. The government can't just "resolve EU touring visas". It would have to negotiate with the EU and take into account other issues like haulage and support crews. https://t.co/EkZgFb5b0L

More from David Henig

Morning. And its Groundhog Day today. https://t.co/gRs4Dc8RH2


Some useful threads will follow, first on the Northern Ireland protocol, where unfettered is still being defined...


And on fish and level playing field. The latter seems, has always seemed, the most problematic, because the UK has apparently ruled out any compromise on shared minumum levels even if not automatic. That would be a deal breaker, but seems... unnecessary.


Your reminder closing complex deals is never easy. But there are ways to facilitate and EU is good at doing this if you meet their red lines. But still the biggest concern that the UK never understood level playing field terms are fundamental to the EU.


In the UK, one man's decision. Allegedly backed by a Cabinet who in reality will be quite happy to blame the PM either way. The temptation to send Michael Gove to seal the deal and end his leadership ambitions must be there...
This potential benefit list from CPTPP is not the longest and is still misleading. Those Malaysian whisky tariffs - emilimated over 15 years (if they don't seek any specific exemption for UK). Those rules of origin benefits? Only apply to import / export to CPTPP countries. https://t.co/9TbheOVhsR


Here's my more realistic take on CPTPP. Economic gains limited, but politically in terms of trade this makes some sort of sense, these are likely allies. DIT doesn't say this, presumably the idea of Australia or Canada as our equal upsets them.


As previously noted agriculture interests in Australia and New Zealand expect us to reach generous agreements in WTO talks and bilaterals before acceding to CPTPP. So this isn't a definite. Oh and Australia wants to know if we'll allow hormone treated beef

Ultimately trade deals are political, and the UK really wants CPTPP as part of the pivot to indo-pacific, and some adherents also hope it forces us to change food laws without having to do it in a US deal (isn't certain if this is the case or not).

If we can accede to CPTPP without having to make changes to domestic laws it is fine. Just shouldn't be our priority, as it does little for services, is geographically remote, and hardly cutting edge on issues like climate change or animal welfare.

More from Eu

You May Also Like