BC BREXIT
Saved by @Jacobtldr

Brexit. UK-EU talks. Let's try to explain why we're in such a state, of increased risk of no deal, moving away from the fish and playing fields which are the detail but not the answer, to differing philosophies and divorce parallels that might just help... 1/

 First, with apologies to those concerned, we need to go beyond those saying this is the inevitable path to deal / no-deal. Half of them will be right and I'll definitely be wrong (don't worry, I'm hedged in wine bets), but it wasn't inevitable, typical, or necessary. 2/
I'll also ignore the content of any deal, which has been clear for months, the UK compromises on level playing field, the EU on fish. Something so obvious really isn't the fundamental issue. Could, as some not noted for their perspicacity have said, be done in an afternoon. 3/
Some truth in the idea that flounces and playing the tough cop are a part of trade negotiations. But equally as we're in about the 5th pass of these, I think it has ceased to be helpful. Either side could already have cut the deal having shown their toughness. 4/
Some fundamentals then, that we've forgotten. First, the trade deal that will lead to much less free trade than before. The incentive structures, the ability to create a win-win, are inevitably going to be different to a normal deal. 5/
Next, trade deals are a closer binding based on trust, they may not even seem to provide much greater access than WTO, but are a symbol of both sides intention to work together. Both parties accept the rules as part of the trust. To put it mildly, absent between UK and EU. 6/
Next, UK oscillation on preferred outcome (a mild preference for a deal) compared to the EU as a process driven trade negotiating machinery, which assumes both siudes want a deal that can be done. I think this contrast explains a lot of friction. 7/
Odd one, but UK treaty literalism versus EU agreement concepts. Not that the EU don't want good treaty text, but in operation it is the framework for what happens, not the last word. Whereas the UK seem to be concerned about exact text pinning us down. 8/
I'm afraid the approach of the UK government to the Northern Ireland protocol, leading to the Internal Market Bill, has shown the problem of the selective literal reading. Instead of assuming we can suitably fudge operations we are trying to pin down exact meanings. 9/
Perhaps most of all we need to be thinking of post divorce emotions. An EU wanting to go through a careful process to arrange all the details. The UK wanting it all over as quickly as possible, with as few future constraints as possible to show it really is all over. 10/
Yesterday's PM letter a classic emotional outburst you could imagine in a divorce situation, sort of "I have done everything you asked and you are still not being in any way fair so I am going to go my own way and I will be fine and I really don't need you" etc... 11/
The EU cannot I would suggest deal with such UK emotions except by reverting to process, which probably isn't very helpful. But the UK is so emotional that it is struggling to accept that the EU really does have the right to request some rules for the future. 12/
So should the UK and EU abandon the trade talks and go for intensive divorcing couples therapy instead? Given peacekeepers in international diplomacy tend to be associated with ending wars we probably don't want to go there. 13/
However if the problem is more about significant differences in philosophy that led to the divorce in the first place, then the answer probably isn't just to have another conversation about fish. Or another row. It is going to be something different. 14/
Last year we had Leo Varadkar sweet-talking Boris Johnson, the main difference to now being that there was only one real issue to resolve, and both parties had strong grounds for an agreement. Result, deal. Not sure it could work again. 15/
Ultimately what we seem to need is the UK to be reassured the EU doesn't want to set our rules, and the EU to be reassured that the UK isn't going to cheat. And that won't come in the text, it can't. Because these are the deep seated fears with truth in them. 16/
I don't know how you provide these levels of assurance in a couple of weeks, sufficient to overcome the not insignificant challenges of a UK government overturning planned legislation and the European Parliament approving a deal. But that is what is needed. 17/
Right now if the UK and EU signed a trade deal it wouldn't last. You couldn't insulate it against mutual suspicion. At the same time no deal increases the mutual suspicion and is costly for both sides, and let's not get into who bleeds more, pointless conversation. 18/
So as far as I can see it is 2 weeks for the UK and EU, or frankly someone else they trust if there is anyone, to find a new way to communicate. Actually Johnson was right, this is the end of the road without change. But wrong, as it needs both sides. Over to... someone? 19/ end

More from David Henig

David Henig
David Henig
@DavidHenigUK
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...
FOR LATER READ
David Henig
David Henig
@DavidHenigUK
Small business in particular struggling with new Brexit red tape. Entirely predictable, and a function of a world trade system distorted against smaller traders. Stay with me a short while as Brexit threadmeister and story author @pmdfoster may say... 1/

The nub of the issue is the extra costs for most exports, whether this is paperwork or meeting different regulatory requirements. A fixed cost per exported load inevitably adds a higher percentage cost to small than larger business... and they may lack expertise. 2/


You'll note that in the EU, with virtually no paperwork or differing regulations, the costs of exports are similar for smaller and large companies - though even there there is a big company bias, because who can afford to lobby for friendly regulations? 3/

The same unfortunately typically applies to trade deals. If you are Nissan and threaten to leave the country without the right deal you have more clout than a small cheesemaker. As we see. But is it just the EU that is over-bureaucratic? Sadly not... 4/


One of the best UK business groups on trade policy @BritAmBusiness (and yes you can quote me @EmanueAdam) has a new report out on a UK-US trade deal and SMEs. It shows opportunities. But unfortunately problems unlikely to be solved. 5/
BREXIT
Advertisement
David Henig
David Henig
@DavidHenigUK
Breathless accounts of brilliant negotiating are oddly unaccompanied by statements of UK wins.

Twice the PM has signed up to deals he previously said no PM could sign up for. The level of self-deception in turning these into triumphs is off the scale.

A wise man has suggested that Johnson's self delusions are good for the UK in the way he folds under EU pressure but denies it - that this actually delivers the best result.

But it doesn't do much for the country's politcal debate to have such delusions at the heart of the most important economic relationship. And they don't have such delusions in Belfast.

Perhaps it is the way of UK politics that no leader can be seen to be pro-EU, that the UK must be seen to be bigger than the EU, even though the UK is obviously smaller and needs the EU for trade.
BREXIT
David Henig
David Henig
@DavidHenigUK
Plenty of talk this morning about how UK sovereignty is what is stopping an EU deal, that the EU want to impinge on this.

Sorry, the argument is totally bogus. It is a combination of EU hatred and cakeism dressed up in respectable clothing. 1/ n

How do we define sovereignty in trade deals? Complex question, so let's just look at this government. It believes in trade deals and membership of the WTO. These contain binding rules. Therefore for this government sovereignty and binding rules are compatible. 2/

Therefore sovereignty in terms of trade rules for this government is a relative concept either in content or partner terms. So when they say the EU proposals go too far is that because of what is proposed, or who it is proposed with? 3/

We haven't been told the detail. But with regard to the level playing field it is suggested that no country could sign up to a situation where not following the rules leads to tariffs being imposed. However we agree to this in the WTO and FTAs. So that is untrue. 4/

Fish is a slightly different matter, and it is being said that the EU proposal would deny the UK control of our waters. But definitionally that can't be true. We're showing our control through the discussion. We don't have to do a deal. 5/
UK & EU
David Henig
David Henig
@DavidHenigUK
Not the easiest to follow, but for those interested in the big picture of trade relations between US, EU and China this exchange between @alanbeattie and @IanaDreyer is an essential read. Real debate on key issues, and good points on both sides.


Also reading this from @gideonrachman on EU-China. My view (cynically?) - that EU-China is a deal that makes a lot of sense given a probably unresolvable trade policy superpower triangle with the US, and best for the EU to move while China will.

The US and EU roughly agree on China that it should do some things differently, but not really the details of what those are. Meanwhile the EU and US have long standing trade policy differences, which neither (or their key stakeholders) prioritise resolving.

For the EU, the China deal has sent a message to the new US administration, you can't just tell us what to do. And delivered some (probably marginal in reality) benefits to business. For China, this is the 3rd deal with EU or US in 12 months. Pretty clear strategy there.

The key assumption that lies at the heart of too much writing on EU-US relations is that the two should cooperate on trade. After 25 years of largely failing to do so, I'd suggest we might want to question that a bit more deeply.
ECONOMY

More from Brexit

John Lichfield
John Lichfield
@john_lichfield
Fish thread.
Having read the Brexit deal, I believe B. Johnson misled the nation on Thurs when he said Britain could catch “all the fish that it wants ” in UK waters in 5 years’ time. The clear presumption in the text is that EU fleets will have similar access after 2026.1/12

The UK fish industry will have to pay a high price in EU import tariffs if that access is withdrawn. Overall… the deal falls far short of the exaggerated “sea of opportunity” promises made to UK fishermen. 2/12

The headline quota compromise - reducing EU catches in the UK 200 mile zone by 25% over five and a half years – is balanced enough. But different fishers will study the small-print with delight OR anger. Some EU quotas will be cut more than others. 3/12

Fisheries, we were told, would be a big Brexit winner. No it won’t. On this deal, the UK industry will certainly lose more from Brexit (no more frictionless access to the EU market) than it gains (incremental, extra quotas over the next 5 years). 4/12

First…the length of the deal. The 5 and 1/2 years of cuts in EU quotas/increases in UK quotas, are laid out in annexes to the main treaty. The last column says “2026 onwards” In other words, the presumption is there will be no further cuts in EU quotas after that date. 5/12
BREXIT
David Henig
David Henig
@DavidHenigUK
Today's UK-EU trade deal reflection - what is rarely stated in discussions about the deal's shortcomings is that they reflect UK government policy choices - in particular that control of immigration and a US trade deal are a higher priority than an EU deal.

Thus, why was it not a UK government priority to secure for UK musicians the rights to tour the EU? Because that would probably have required a reciprocal right to be given to those in the EU, which we didn't want to give. Choice.

Meanwhile why did the UK government not seek or secure a reduction in food inspections for GB products going to the EU? Because that would probably have required fixing food regulations in a way that might have been an obstacle to a US trade deal.

Works the other way as well. Why did the EU refuse UK requests on mutual recognition of industrial testing? In part at least because of UK lack of commitment on maintaining the previous EU system of standards and conformity assessment which might be a problem in a US deal.

One of the strangest opinions in the London politics bubble is that the UK government isn't that bothered about a US trade deal, as it so obviously goes against the evidence. There might be domestic opposition, but this was to be Brexit Dividend Number 1.
BREXIT
Advertisement
David Allen Green
David Allen Green
@davidallengreen
They have started in the Scottish case

Looks like a near-concession that the side letter is Padfield-compliant
BREXIT
Holger Hestermeyer
Holger Hestermeyer
@hhesterm
It is time to talk Brexit and standards again. (thread)


Let's start off with: I don't think any trade experts are surprised by this. It is why the TCA did not do much on SPS. It is why the EU did not offer much on SPS. It is why the UK did not ask much on SPS.

But it also shows that the popular slogan "after Brexit we'll have the same standards as before, so why would anything change in trade" was wrong - and worse, it was purposefully trying to stifle a necessary debate.

And this leads me to the next point: I have no issue with changing the rules, I have a massive issue with how it is done. Here's what we should discuss:

The decisive question: What are the standards the UK as a country wants. To inform this debate, we need the following information:
BREXIT
Anand Menon
Anand Menon
@anandMenon1
IT’S HERE The new bumper @ukandeu report that tells you all you need to know – or at least all the questions you need to ask – about the UK after Brexit. https://t.co/S1lHP6TBJ1 1/27


A disclaimer. What follows is a selection of randomly selected highlights, nothing more nothing less. There’s far, far more in this report than I can possibly cover here. And the cricket got exciting so I ran out of steam. 2/27

It is made up of 70-odd pieces (I counted twice and came up with diff numbers) by an eye watering collection of eminent social scientists . Explaining the big issues from housing to dealing with China, from prospects for the economy to the prospects for the Labour Party 3/27


It’s intended as a guide to the key questions that will confront us over the years to come. Each contributor ponders,where we’ve come from, where we are now and where we’re headed. And because we’re really kind, we’ve divided things up into a number of sections. First: 4/ 27


And oh, my Lord do we have a stellar line up of people, including inter alia, @_Paul_Tobin_ @tcstvns @watsonjim2 @CharlieBEU @drsarah_hall @BD_Stew @AntovaIvanka @PRT1969 @IvanRajicUK @cartelsman
Download it, tell your boss your wifi has crashed, and have a read. 5/27
BREXIT

You May Also Like

Vigilant AFA
Vigilant AFA
@AfaVigilant
One fascist to watch in 2021 is Joseph Charles "Oakman" Golinske of SE MI. He's been a Proud Boy for a couple years, but took a break recently from the group and promotes himself through the "Oak Nation" channel on Telegram.


Most people may be familiar with him as the tall guy in the Proud Boys bridge shot, from their August 17, 2019 attack on Portland, which featured an American Guard bus trying (and failing) to bludgeon antifascists with hammers.


He was also with his g/f at the time (Dominique Tota, left of Tarrio), and that's definitely a twitter account folks will want to block/report because he posts on it.


He's been plenty active at the pro-Covid/anti-mask/ReOpen protests in Lansing MI, seen here with Jerry Wayne and an effigy of Gretchen Whitmer, who his militia friends tried to kidnap and publicly execute.


Outside of the Proud Boys, his solo "career" with Oak Nation features the same misogyny, classism and gateway to far-right domestic terrorism the Proud Boys themselves feature. Here's him peddling oxychlorinque and bragging about harassing service workers.
FOR LATER READ
raina douris
raina douris
@RahRahRaina
fascinated by this man, mario cortellucci, and his outsized influence on ontario and GTA politics. cortellucci, who lives in vaughan and ran as a far-right candidate for the italian senate back in 2018 - is a major ford donor...


his name might sound familiar because the new cortellucci vaughan hospital at mackenzie health, the one doug ford has been touting lately as a covid-centric facility, is named after him and his family

but his name also pops up in a LOT of other ford projects. for instance - he controls the long term lease on big parts of toronto's portlands... where doug ford once proposed building an nfl stadium and monorail... https://t.co/weOMJ51bVF


cortellucci, who is a developer, also owns a large chunk of the greenbelt. doug ford's desire to develop the greenbelt has been

and late last year he rolled back the mandate of conservation authorities there, prompting the resignations of several members of the greenbelt advisory
WORLD
Advertisement
SK
SK
@sk_diary1
Andhakasuravadha Samharamurti -#story #Thread
Sculpture of Bhagwan Shiva as the destroyer of the Asura Andhaka - Cave 29,Ellora caves

Asura Andhaka hangs on to a trishula held by 6-armed Shiva.

Once Parvathi & Shiva were relaxing in the pleasant gardens of Mount Mandhara.


Bhagwan Shiva sat down there to enjoy the happiness.Parvati closed the eyes of Shiva playfully & darkness covered the whole universe.Parvati was perplexed & her palms were wet with perspiration.A few drops of her sweat mixed with sweat from Shiva’s body& fell to the ground.

From this sweat,a fierce creature was born,it started to roar.Child was born blind as Shiva's eyes were closed so was named as Andaka.Andha means darkness&also ignorance.Around the same time Asura Hiranyaksha was performing rigorous tapas Shiva for a boon of powerful son.

Bhagwan Shiva was pleased by tapas of Hiranyaksha & blessed him with darshan.Hiranyaksha asked for a powerful son,Shiva told him that he cannot have his own son,but can adopt a blind child who would become very powerful later.Shiva gave child Andaka to Hiranyaksha.

Hiranyaksha returned to his kingdom with Andaka.Later after the vadh of Hiranyaksha, Andaka is said to have lived with his cousins.He was ridiculed,so dejected Andaka went to forest.He did severe tapas for over many years towards Brahma Dev. Brahma dev appeared before him.
ALL
Homestays & Villas
Homestays & Villas
@thehomestays
Best resort on the Ganga at Rishikesh
TRAVEL , TRAVELINDIA , PLACES 2TRAVEL
Noah Smith
Noah Smith
@Noahpinion
1/Politics thread time.

To me, the most important aspect of the 2018 midterms wasn't even about partisan control, but about democracy and voting rights. That's the real battle.

2/The good news: It's now an issue that everyone's talking about, and that everyone cares about.

3/More good news: Florida's proposition to give felons voting rights won. But it didn't just win - it won with substantial support from Republican voters.

That suggests there is still SOME grassroots support for democracy that transcends

4/Yet more good news: Michigan made it easier to vote. Again, by plebiscite, showing broad support for voting rights as an

5/OK, now the bad news.

We seem to have accepted electoral dysfunction in Florida as a permanent thing. The 2000 election has never really
POLITICS