There isn't.
So many stories of new barriers to trade between UK and EU, but you might be thinking at some point these will run out. The government is certainly hoping so. Well they may slow down, but trade relations and regulations are not static, and changes will lead to further problems.
There isn't.
Also, wonder what this says about the PM's trust in Michael Gove? https://t.co/7VOJTATToP
NEW: David Frost is joining Boris Johnson\u2019s Cabinet! The peer has been appointed a minister at the Cabinet Office, effective March 1.
— Sebastian Payne (@SebastianEPayne) February 17, 2021
Frost will also chair the partnership council overseeing the UK-EU trade deal and oversee reform to "maximise on the opportunities of Brexit"
And will take over from Michael Gove as UK co-chair of the main committees established in the Withdrawal Agreement and the Trade and Co-operation Agreement. (It had to be done by a minister.) https://t.co/2qhqjJzR1V
— Adam Fleming (@adamfleming) February 17, 2021
Hmmm. Lord Frost\u2019s appointment as a minister a sign of disharmony not harmony, I\u2019m told.
— Sam Coates Sky (@SamCoatesSky) February 17, 2021
- Frost was unhappy with Cummings/Cain going. Now factional tensions revive after Gove allies Henry Newman and Simone Finn arrive in No10, plus Frost miffed at Gove brexit committee role
One of the big questions about \U0001f447shenanigans is what it means for who runs EU-UK relations.
— Sam Coates Sky (@SamCoatesSky) February 17, 2021
Inside the Cabinet Office there\u2019s a new Europe secretariat being set up, under a Director General. It\u2019s the remnants of Taskforce Europe. Frost was due to be involved. https://t.co/SXXU0TLkv7
And I *know* it\u2019s a radical thought, but might it not have been better to have given the Brexit responsibility to someone\u2026 who could look at all of this afresh?
— Jon Worth (@jonworth) February 17, 2021
1/ Northern Ireland protocol
2/ Existing business lost / compensation
3/ Financial services equivalence
4/ Large business asking for stronger EU ties
5/ Potential new EU restrictions
https://t.co/9RBUDEktXE
What the UK government wants to do and what it in reality has the space to do tend to be two quite different things.
— Alexander Clarkson (@APHClarkson) February 17, 2021
Boris Johnson is running out of cake.
Perhaps finally a moment for some more UK commentators to pay a sliver of attention to what the EU did to Switzerland between 2014 and 2016?
— Alexander Clarkson (@APHClarkson) February 17, 2021
Nah. My ball, give it back... https://t.co/kMM1Rtt3Sr
There seems to have been a real Whitehall bunfight over the last 24 hours.
— Sebastian Payne (@SebastianEPayne) February 17, 2021
Some govt officials said Lord Frost was unhappy with Gove's interim role overseeing the implementation of the trade deal. \u201cHe feels the deal is his baby and wants to oversee it.\u201dhttps://t.co/kBbaBPjYcS
More from David Henig
Michael Gove: "Outside the EU, with a good trade deal in place, we can tackle the injustices and inequalities that have held Britain back."
— Jennifer Rankin (@JenniferMerode) December 26, 2020
The UK did not need to leave the EU to tackle injustices and inequalities at home. Not a new point, but true.https://t.co/fE4glUAylc
There has never been level playing field content like this in a trade deal. The idea it is any kind of UK win, when the UK's opening position was no enforceable commitments whatsoever, is ridiculous.
For the lawyers. Night. pic.twitter.com/5XvFMhcaeE
— Sam Lowe (@SamuelMarcLowe) December 25, 2020
The EU can take retaliatory action against the UK if we weaken labour standards, weaken pretty firm climate change targets, unfairly subsidise, or just in general seem to be out of line. There are processes to follow, but it looks like the PM did it again...

Final one for now. Quite how Labour gets itself in such a fuss about whether to support a deal with the strongest labour and environment commitments ever seen in a trade deal is a sign of just how far it hasn't moved on from leaving.
PS well... (sorry DAG). It certainly didn't have a good effect. And I think if we had settled LPF issues with the EU much earlier there is a good chance the conditions would have been far less stringent. By making an issue, we made it much worse.
As a lay person is it fair to say that the \u201cthreat\u201d to break international law in Ireland was possibly a strategic blunder that has now determined the future trajectory of the UK for the next 20 years? I can imagine most countries will study what\u2019s baked into this and replicate?
— Meister 1 (@blueelmacho) December 26, 2020
More from Brexit
It may be Boxing day, but I've had a quick look
Title VIII: Energy is the key section (page 156 onwards)
▶️ Standard stuff on commitment to competition, unbundling and customer choice
▶️ UK Capacity Market no longer needs to try to integrate overseas Capacity providers & vice versa
(Article ENER.6, Clause 3, page. 160)
2/

▶️ Existing "exemptions" for selected interconnectors will continue to apply.
This means that these interconnectors can continue to sell capacity rights ahead of time, rather than all through close to real-time markets.
(Article ENER.11, page 162)
3/

▶️ No network charges on individual interconnector transactions (as now)
▶️ But, UK cannot participate in EU procedures for capacity allocation and congestion management (more on this later)
(Article ENER.13, page 163)
4/

Gas trading: looks like the UK stays in the existing PRISMA gas trading platform.
Not my specialist area, but is this because PRISMA isn't an EU institution (unlike electricity market coupling)?
https://t.co/5GQJtZDpTa
(Article ENER. 15, page 164)
5/